|
Speaking of Fethard v Bunclody, I've only now read the Bulletin that went up on the Wexford GAA website yesterday.
Seems it was technical reasons all right that caused Leinster Council to set aside Wexford CCC's ruling, and now Wexford have brought in some big guns to consider the matter again - Chairman of the Rules Committee, Secretary of the Munster Hearings Committee, and a former President of the Association.
You can be fairly sure they won't make any technical errors, and that even if whatever they decide ends up going to DRA, their decision would more than likely be found to be in order. So whatever they decide on Wednesday night may well be the start of the end of it, if you know what I mean.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 22/10/2024 09:04:46
2576300
Link
0
|
|
It beggars belief that we are still talking about refereeing errors , appeals and so on and another fresh one from last weekend. Unfortunately this has been the theme of the championship in hurling particualrly and thats a desperate shame. A review of the overall officiating of the games is badly needed.
On the field the Martins were impressive again on Sunday, much hungrier and smarter than Gorey in the conditions. Gorey's defence of their crown peetered out badly in the end, steeped to get over the 14 men of the Harriers in the quarter and well beaten on Sunday.
While the Annes will certainly fancy a cut off the Martins, if the Martins perform they win. Barry O C a huge addition to them this year in every way. Darren Codd/Kyle Firman/Philly Dempsey/Joe Barret hurling very well, throw in the obvious brilliance of ROC and JOC on his day and they are a very well balanced team now.
OasisorBlur (Wexford) - Posts: 48 - 22/10/2024 12:10:39
2576331
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Viking66: "The referee on the day didn't allow the point. That can't be overturned on video evidence." I'm of the understanding that the referee claimed in his report that he didn't allow the point in the Fethard Bunclody game?
WEX98 (Wexford) - Posts: 474 - 22/10/2024 13:32:07
2576349
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: "No it can't. I've explained this already. They're two different things.
The Fethard v Bunclody match is a case where it's believed the referee didn't properly record the scores he awarded.
Clongeen v Monageer would be a case of where the referee properly recorded the decisions he made, even if one or more of those decisions was incorrect. He may have been wrong in not awarding that last "point", but if the score he declares in his report matches the number of scores he awarded on the day, then there's no comeback from that.
The net result may seem the same, but honestly, they're two very different things." But who's keeping track what what he did or didn't award on the day only the referee himself. The most important thing is we have a level playing field for all competitions, levels and ages. The referees report is final. End of story!
No video evidence should be used for selective games. Mistakes happen. Sometimes it's in your favour, sometimes it's not. My issue with this saga is using video evidence to overturn the referees full time score. I don't care why it may be incorrect.
WEX98 (Wexford) - Posts: 474 - 22/10/2024 13:36:54
2576350
Link
0
|
|
Replying To WEX98: "But who's keeping track what what he did or didn't award on the day only the referee himself. The most important thing is we have a level playing field for all competitions, levels and ages. The referees report is final. End of story!
No video evidence should be used for selective games. Mistakes happen. Sometimes it's in your favour, sometimes it's not. My issue with this saga is using video evidence to overturn the referees full time score. I don't care why it may be incorrect." This shows that you still don't get it, and your last sentence really shows it. I'm not explaining it any more.
I will say though that it doesn't matter what you think should or shouldn't happen in different circumstances. The important thing is what the Rule Book says can and can't happen in those circumstances.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 22/10/2024 14:37:56
2576366
Link
0
|
|
Replying To WEX98: "I'm of the understanding that the referee claimed in his report that he didn't allow the point in the Fethard Bunclody game?" Arra feckit, for the sake of it.....
Referee from that game contradicts both himself and reality. Brief outline:
Most observers at the match, including a very diligent newspaper man, had the real final score at Fethard 1-27 to Bunclody 3-20 after extra time.
Referee's report instead declared 1-27 to 3-21 - i.e., rather than ruling out or not giving a Fethard point, he actually somehow awarded Bunclody an extra one.
Referee then doubled down on this in his so-called "clarification", repeating that so far as he was concerned, final score was 1-27 to 3-21. And he attempted to explain the controversy by saying he ruled out a Fethard "point", rather than explaining where Bunclody's 21st point had come from.
Wexford CCC then erred in adding an extra point to Fethard to make it 1-28 to 3-21, rather than removing one of the Bunclody points. I'm guessing this might be one of the technical reasons why Leinster set aside the Wexford decision and sent it back to be heard again.
So, yet again -
This is a case where it's strongly believed the referee did not keep a correct record of decisions made on the day, and scores awarded.
The Monageer v Clongeen case is very different. Referee there didn't award a point, and nobody thinks he awarded a point. The fact that he maybe should have awarded a point is neither here nor there.
Here's the relevant section from the Rule Book, if this helps you understand:
An Objection or Counter-Objection may only be upheld on the grounds (i) that an Infraction has been committed rendering the Defending Party liable to the penalty of Forfeiture, with Award of the Game to the Objector, or (ii) that a score allowed by the referee was not recorded by the Referee or that a score was incorrectly recorded by the Referee, thereby affecting the result of the Game; however no Objection or Counter-Objection may be submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 22/10/2024 15:47:10
2576389
Link
0
|
|
Replying To WEX98: "I'm of the understanding that the referee claimed in his report that he didn't allow the point in the Fethard Bunclody game?" "Claimed" being the important word there.
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 13852 - 22/10/2024 15:51:51
2576391
Link
0
|
|
Replying To WEX98: "But who's keeping track what what he did or didn't award on the day only the referee himself. The most important thing is we have a level playing field for all competitions, levels and ages. The referees report is final. End of story!
No video evidence should be used for selective games. Mistakes happen. Sometimes it's in your favour, sometimes it's not. My issue with this saga is using video evidence to overturn the referees full time score. I don't care why it may be incorrect." The referee couldn't add up the indicated scores in this case. As is shown in the video evidence. It's not a case of him allowing or disallowing scores. If what you are saying should apply did apply, any referee could award any game to whichever team he chose to.
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 13852 - 22/10/2024 15:54:07
2576393
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: "Again....spoken like somebody with absolutely no idea of what's involved in the running of games, especially at Wexford Park. Do I need to spell it all out for you?
- Stewards.
- Gate people.
- Car park attendants.
- Match officials.
- The professional security firm they've had there lately.
- Resetting the ticketing system.
- No doubt dealing with demands from people saying 'I bought a ticket for Sunday but I can't go on Saturday, how do I get a refund?'
- Clubs saying 'Tommy is working on Saturday, he could have gotten it off if he'd known sooner, but it's too late for him now'.
I could go on.
It was Friday before the Status Yellow wind warning for Sunday was issued. All those arrangements would already have been in place for Sunday. How easy do you think it would have been to re-arrange them all in time for the matches to start at 2 p.m. Saturday instead?" I'm not disputing the logistics work involved in rearranging the two games at all but if the alternative is playing senior semi finals in a storm, then I suspect all involved would pull together for the games to happen a day earlier. Who is the priority here, fair play for the players and clubs involved or the stewards, car park attendants etc? Or worst case scenario, postpone the games to hell and forget the Leinster club championships if it comes to it.
Timbertony (Wexford) - Posts: 301 - 22/10/2024 19:44:35
2576443
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Viking66: "The referee couldn't add up the indicated scores in this case. As is shown in the video evidence. It's not a case of him allowing or disallowing scores. If what you are saying should apply did apply, any referee could award any game to whichever team he chose to." Viking66 makes a valid point here. If it really was the case that there was no way ever of questioning the scoreline as recorded and reported by the referee, then any referee could award any match to any team.
You could be hammered by 40 points on the field, but if the referee wrote down that you won by 0-10 to 0-9, then that would be that, and you'd be one getting the two points or going through to the next round.
The old thing about "the referee's report is final" is only true sometimes.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 22/10/2024 20:35:53
2576454
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: "Arra feckit, for the sake of it.....
Referee from that game contradicts both himself and reality. Brief outline:
Most observers at the match, including a very diligent newspaper man, had the real final score at Fethard 1-27 to Bunclody 3-20 after extra time.
Referee's report instead declared 1-27 to 3-21 - i.e., rather than ruling out or not giving a Fethard point, he actually somehow awarded Bunclody an extra one.
Referee then doubled down on this in his so-called "clarification", repeating that so far as he was concerned, final score was 1-27 to 3-21. And he attempted to explain the controversy by saying he ruled out a Fethard "point", rather than explaining where Bunclody's 21st point had come from.
Wexford CCC then erred in adding an extra point to Fethard to make it 1-28 to 3-21, rather than removing one of the Bunclody points. I'm guessing this might be one of the technical reasons why Leinster set aside the Wexford decision and sent it back to be heard again.
So, yet again -
This is a case where it's strongly believed the referee did not keep a correct record of decisions made on the day, and scores awarded.
The Monageer v Clongeen case is very different. Referee there didn't award a point, and nobody thinks he awarded a point. The fact that he maybe should have awarded a point is neither here nor there.
Here's the relevant section from the Rule Book, if this helps you understand:
An Objection or Counter-Objection may only be upheld on the grounds (i) that an Infraction has been committed rendering the Defending Party liable to the penalty of Forfeiture, with Award of the Game to the Objector, or (ii) that a score allowed by the referee was not recorded by the Referee or that a score was incorrectly recorded by the Referee, thereby affecting the result of the Game; however no Objection or Counter-Objection may be submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score." So the assumption is that referee recorded an extra point to Bunclody. It could be the case that he overruled the umpire and gave a point on one occasion?
I went back through the Fethard twitter account for that match and they mentioned that the scoreboard had Bunclody also on another score (same as referee) than what they themselves had as the score.
So I'm still going to question how video evidence proves that the referee recorded the score incorrectly unless they have RTE quality video with various camera angles. Focusing on the umpire is irrelevant as it's the referee that records the score.
As I understand it the Fethard players were aware that they were one point behind (after asking the referee) when they were looking for an equaliser.......... and thats from a Fethard player.
WEX98 (Wexford) - Posts: 474 - 22/10/2024 20:56:16
2576457
Link
0
|
|
Replying To WEX98: " Replying To Pikeman96: "Arra feckit, for the sake of it.....
Referee from that game contradicts both himself and reality. Brief outline:
Most observers at the match, including a very diligent newspaper man, had the real final score at Fethard 1-27 to Bunclody 3-20 after extra time.
Referee's report instead declared 1-27 to 3-21 - i.e., rather than ruling out or not giving a Fethard point, he actually somehow awarded Bunclody an extra one.
Referee then doubled down on this in his so-called "clarification", repeating that so far as he was concerned, final score was 1-27 to 3-21. And he attempted to explain the controversy by saying he ruled out a Fethard "point", rather than explaining where Bunclody's 21st point had come from.
Wexford CCC then erred in adding an extra point to Fethard to make it 1-28 to 3-21, rather than removing one of the Bunclody points. I'm guessing this might be one of the technical reasons why Leinster set aside the Wexford decision and sent it back to be heard again.
So, yet again -
This is a case where it's strongly believed the referee did not keep a correct record of decisions made on the day, and scores awarded.
The Monageer v Clongeen case is very different. Referee there didn't award a point, and nobody thinks he awarded a point. The fact that he maybe should have awarded a point is neither here nor there.
Here's the relevant section from the Rule Book, if this helps you understand:
An Objection or Counter-Objection may only be upheld on the grounds (i) that an Infraction has been committed rendering the Defending Party liable to the penalty of Forfeiture, with Award of the Game to the Objector, or (ii) that a score allowed by the referee was not recorded by the Referee or that a score was incorrectly recorded by the Referee, thereby affecting the result of the Game; however no Objection or Counter-Objection may be submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score." So the assumption is that referee recorded an extra point to Bunclody. It could be the case that he overruled the umpire and gave a point on one occasion? I went back through the Fethard twitter account for that match and they mentioned that the scoreboard had Bunclody also on another score (same as referee) than what they themselves had as the score. So I'm still going to question how video evidence proves that the referee recorded the score incorrectly unless they have RTE quality video with various camera angles. Focusing on the umpire is irrelevant as it's the referee that records the score. As I understand it the Fethard players were aware that they were one point behind (after asking the referee) when they were looking for an equaliser.......... and thats from a Fethard player."
Timbertony (Wexford) - Posts: 301 - 23/10/2024 01:22:25
2576480
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: "Arra feckit, for the sake of it.....
Referee from that game contradicts both himself and reality. Brief outline:
Most observers at the match, including a very diligent newspaper man, had the real final score at Fethard 1-27 to Bunclody 3-20 after extra time.
Referee's report instead declared 1-27 to 3-21 - i.e., rather than ruling out or not giving a Fethard point, he actually somehow awarded Bunclody an extra one.
Referee then doubled down on this in his so-called "clarification", repeating that so far as he was concerned, final score was 1-27 to 3-21. And he attempted to explain the controversy by saying he ruled out a Fethard "point", rather than explaining where Bunclody's 21st point had come from.
Wexford CCC then erred in adding an extra point to Fethard to make it 1-28 to 3-21, rather than removing one of the Bunclody points. I'm guessing this might be one of the technical reasons why Leinster set aside the Wexford decision and sent it back to be heard again.
So, yet again -
This is a case where it's strongly believed the referee did not keep a correct record of decisions made on the day, and scores awarded.
The Monageer v Clongeen case is very different. Referee there didn't award a point, and nobody thinks he awarded a point. The fact that he maybe should have awarded a point is neither here nor there.
Here's the relevant section from the Rule Book, if this helps you understand:
An Objection or Counter-Objection may only be upheld on the grounds (i) that an Infraction has been committed rendering the Defending Party liable to the penalty of Forfeiture, with Award of the Game to the Objector, or (ii) that a score allowed by the referee was not recorded by the Referee or that a score was incorrectly recorded by the Referee, thereby affecting the result of the Game; however no Objection or Counter-Objection may be submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score." ***********
The whole notion that he added an extra point to Bunclody is irrelevant because he also would have added one to Fethard as well
From the referee
"So here is what I have to add for information is,
Full time score was , St Mogues Fethard: 1-21 Halfway House Bunclody 2-18.
After Extra time score: St Mogues Fethard 1-27 Halfway House Bunclody 3-21."
Nobody disputes the fact that it was a draw after normal time. What is claimed is that Fethard scored 7 points in extra time and Bunclody 1.3. If the final score was 1.27 to 3.20 doing the maths that would have Fethard on 1.20 and Bunclody on 2.17 at the end of normal time - the referee has it as 1.21 and 2.18 hence each had a point added in normal time. So please stop with the - he added an extra point to Bunclody as if that proves anything as regard to what happened in extra time.
The referee has made it clear what he believe happened in extra time "in the first half of Extra time that I The Referee cancelled out a point that was Flagged by the umpire as a point to St Mogues Fethard as I the Referee seen as wide"
zinny (Wexford) - Posts: 1900 - 23/10/2024 01:48:37
2576482
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: "Viking66 makes a valid point here. If it really was the case that there was no way ever of questioning the scoreline as recorded and reported by the referee, then any referee could award any match to any team.
You could be hammered by 40 points on the field, but if the referee wrote down that you won by 0-10 to 0-9, then that would be that, and you'd be one getting the two points or going through to the next round.
The old thing about "the referee's report is final" is only true sometimes." So when is it not true?
Like all other sports (outside of professional sports where video comes into play) the referee is given powers to allow them to manage the game within the rules - there would be no games without that - and when it comes to the scores the referees score is the final one. With that comes trust and the trust that referees act honestly and without bias. Perhaps thousands of games are played each weekend where that trust is put to the test and it has passed the test over the years. Just because some people now how what powers the referee has won't change that.
If someone has a better solution to the referees report being the final say please yell out and put forward something that will work for all those thousands of games that go on - its not just the GAA that would like to hear about it but other sports as well.
zinny (Wexford) - Posts: 1900 - 23/10/2024 02:02:31
2576483
Link
0
|
|
Replying To zinny: " Replying To Pikeman96: "Viking66 makes a valid point here. If it really was the case that there was no way ever of questioning the scoreline as recorded and reported by the referee, then any referee could award any match to any team.
You could be hammered by 40 points on the field, but if the referee wrote down that you won by 0-10 to 0-9, then that would be that, and you'd be one getting the two points or going through to the next round.
The old thing about "the referee's report is final" is only true sometimes." So when is it not true? Like all other sports (outside of professional sports where video comes into play) the referee is given powers to allow them to manage the game within the rules - there would be no games without that - and when it comes to the scores the referees score is the final one. With that comes trust and the trust that referees act honestly and without bias. Perhaps thousands of games are played each weekend where that trust is put to the test and it has passed the test over the years. Just because some people now how what powers the referee has won't change that. If someone has a better solution to the referees report being the final say please yell out and put forward something that will work for all those thousands of games that go on - its not just the GAA that would like to hear about it but other sports as well."
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 13852 - 23/10/2024 06:23:44
2576484
Link
0
|
|
Replying To zinny: " Replying To Pikeman96: "Arra feckit, for the sake of it.....
Referee from that game contradicts both himself and reality. Brief outline:
Most observers at the match, including a very diligent newspaper man, had the real final score at Fethard 1-27 to Bunclody 3-20 after extra time.
Referee's report instead declared 1-27 to 3-21 - i.e., rather than ruling out or not giving a Fethard point, he actually somehow awarded Bunclody an extra one.
Referee then doubled down on this in his so-called "clarification", repeating that so far as he was concerned, final score was 1-27 to 3-21. And he attempted to explain the controversy by saying he ruled out a Fethard "point", rather than explaining where Bunclody's 21st point had come from.
Wexford CCC then erred in adding an extra point to Fethard to make it 1-28 to 3-21, rather than removing one of the Bunclody points. I'm guessing this might be one of the technical reasons why Leinster set aside the Wexford decision and sent it back to be heard again.
So, yet again -
This is a case where it's strongly believed the referee did not keep a correct record of decisions made on the day, and scores awarded.
The Monageer v Clongeen case is very different. Referee there didn't award a point, and nobody thinks he awarded a point. The fact that he maybe should have awarded a point is neither here nor there.
Here's the relevant section from the Rule Book, if this helps you understand:
An Objection or Counter-Objection may only be upheld on the grounds (i) that an Infraction has been committed rendering the Defending Party liable to the penalty of Forfeiture, with Award of the Game to the Objector, or (ii) that a score allowed by the referee was not recorded by the Referee or that a score was incorrectly recorded by the Referee, thereby affecting the result of the Game; however no Objection or Counter-Objection may be submitted on grounds that a referee had incorrectly allowed or failed to allow a score." *********** The whole notion that he added an extra point to Bunclody is irrelevant because he also would have added one to Fethard as well From the referee "So here is what I have to add for information is, Full time score was , St Mogues Fethard: 1-21 Halfway House Bunclody 2-18. After Extra time score: St Mogues Fethard 1-27 Halfway House Bunclody 3-21." Nobody disputes the fact that it was a draw after normal time. What is claimed is that Fethard scored 7 points in extra time and Bunclody 1.3. If the final score was 1.27 to 3.20 doing the maths that would have Fethard on 1.20 and Bunclody on 2.17 at the end of normal time - the referee has it as 1.21 and 2.18 hence each had a point added in normal time. So please stop with the - he added an extra point to Bunclody as if that proves anything as regard to what happened in extra time. The referee has made it clear what he believe happened in extra time "in the first half of Extra time that I The Referee cancelled out a point that was Flagged by the umpire as a point to St Mogues Fethard as I the Referee seen as wide""
james2011 (Wexford) - Posts: 615 - 23/10/2024 09:39:32
2576508
Link
0
|
|
Replying To zinny: " Replying To Pikeman96: "Viking66 makes a valid point here. If it really was the case that there was no way ever of questioning the scoreline as recorded and reported by the referee, then any referee could award any match to any team.
You could be hammered by 40 points on the field, but if the referee wrote down that you won by 0-10 to 0-9, then that would be that, and you'd be one getting the two points or going through to the next round.
The old thing about "the referee's report is final" is only true sometimes." So when is it not true? Like all other sports (outside of professional sports where video comes into play) the referee is given powers to allow them to manage the game within the rules - there would be no games without that - and when it comes to the scores the referees score is the final one. With that comes trust and the trust that referees act honestly and without bias. Perhaps thousands of games are played each weekend where that trust is put to the test and it has passed the test over the years. Just because some people now how what powers the referee has won't change that. If someone has a better solution to the referees report being the final say please yell out and put forward something that will work for all those thousands of games that go on - its not just the GAA that would like to hear about it but other sports as well."
1 - If he reports an incorrect scoreline. Again, this is different from making an incorrect decision about whether a shot was a score or not. Consider the hypothetical example I give above. If Team A hammers Team B by 40 points, but the referee submits a report showing that Team B actually won the match, and there's sufficient evidence that this is not true, then the referee's scoreline can be overruled. So, the referee's report is not final.
2 - Disciplinary action where the referee didn't act on the day. Take the Richie Kehoe v the Rapps incident. Referee's report made no mention of anything that would necessitate action or suspension. Yet Kehoe ended up suspended anyway, after the video evidence was reviewed. So, the referee's report is not final in a case like that either.
And going back to Point 1, in particular reference to your claim that "the referee's score is the final one" - if this was true, then Fethard would have no grounds for appeal at all. There'd still have been controversy, but no appeal. Even if they'd tried to submit one, it would have been ruled out of order.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 23/10/2024 10:06:28
2576511
Link
0
|
|
@zinny - and in your other post above, where you include bits from the referee's "clarification", you've actually helped to further explain the problem with this one.
The 60-minute score he reports there is not in accordance with what others had.
Nor is the scoreline he reports after extra time.
He seems to have made a real unholy mess of it.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2617 - 23/10/2024 10:11:44
2576512
Link
0
|
|
What is the most crazy part about all of this is
1. The game was played 11 days ago and they are no nearer a resolution.
2. The other county finalist is already decided
3. The long delay could hurt either these 2 teams or Rathnure in the final
4. Rathnure have no idea when the final will be
5. This could cost Rathnure (likely winners) a proper shot at the Leinster club hurling championship.
If an objection is lodged in GAA it needs to be dealt with within a few days and all avenues exhausted. Due process, fair enough, but due process also needs to be expedient. Not a long drawn out process where one team is also trying to prepare for an Intermediate football final with this going on and they have no idea what is coming afterwards.
From my Antipodean and unbiased viewpoint, the best thing to do is to have a replay. You can't say how teams would play out the end of a match had the score been different. It is just too open to what aboutery.
What is the feeling on the ground in general, aside from the "who is wrong" argument is local opinion that there should be a replay?
StoreysTash (Wexford) - Posts: 1784 - 23/10/2024 12:48:06
2576538
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Pikeman96: " Replying To zinny: "[quote=Pikeman96: "Viking66 makes a valid point here. If it really was the case that there was no way ever of questioning the scoreline as recorded and reported by the referee, then any referee could award any match to any team.
You could be hammered by 40 points on the field, but if the referee wrote down that you won by 0-10 to 0-9, then that would be that, and you'd be one getting the two points or going through to the next round.
The old thing about "the referee's report is final" is only true sometimes." So when is it not true? Like all other sports (outside of professional sports where video comes into play) the referee is given powers to allow them to manage the game within the rules - there would be no games without that - and when it comes to the scores the referees score is the final one. With that comes trust and the trust that referees act honestly and without bias. Perhaps thousands of games are played each weekend where that trust is put to the test and it has passed the test over the years. Just because some people now how what powers the referee has won't change that. If someone has a better solution to the referees report being the final say please yell out and put forward something that will work for all those thousands of games that go on - its not just the GAA that would like to hear about it but other sports as well."
1 - If he reports an incorrect scoreline. Again, this is different from making an incorrect decision about whether a shot was a score or not. Consider the hypothetical example I give above. If Team A hammers Team B by 40 points, but the referee submits a report showing that Team B actually won the match, and there's sufficient evidence that this is not true, then the referee's scoreline can be overruled. So, the referee's report is not final.
2 - Disciplinary action where the referee didn't act on the day. Take the Richie Kehoe v the Rapps incident. Referee's report made no mention of anything that would necessitate action or suspension. Yet Kehoe ended up suspended anyway, after the video evidence was reviewed. So, the referee's report is not final in a case like that either.
And going back to Point 1, in particular reference to your claim that "the referee's score is the final one" - if this was true, then Fethard would have no grounds for appeal at all. There'd still have been controversy, but no appeal. Even if they'd tried to submit one, it would have been ruled out of order."]"Sufficient evidence" is what I'm questioning.
I couldn't care less who gets the game.
I'm thinking of the implications in the future for one score games.
WEX98 (Wexford) - Posts: 474 - 23/10/2024 13:33:31
2576553
Link
0
|