WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE Breaffy and Tourmakeady players get overheated during last Saturday evening’s Mayo SFC match in Tourmakeady. Pic: Michael McLaughlin
Rules made to follow
Kevin McStayIF you give up on the rules of any organisation you might as well join the pack. But I continue to be surprised by the number of bright, well-informed and intelligent observers of our games who are simply not bothered by the rules. Until of course they pertain to their club or their team! But attempting to be reasonable about how we regulate our affairs as an association very often leads to accusations of being a crank. We must soldier on regardless.
It is agreed that the rules and regulations governing our game form the basis of any analysis reflecting on matters of indiscipline or foul play. Indeed technical subjects such as constitutions, membership, committees, transfers and a myriad of other matters are very well catered for in the Official Guides — Part 1 and 2.
This week I want to deal with two controversial subjects; the ‘Square Ball’ and revisiting foul and aggressive play that a referee may have missed. Part 2 (Playing Rules: Hurling and Football) help us with the ‘Square Ball’ rule and we need to examine Part 1 for the regulations dealing with CCC’s and their deliberations.
We are not going to resolve the matter of the ‘Square Ball’ this week but it might be helpful if we all have a better understanding of it. The ‘Square Ball Rule’ is poorly named for in fact a Gaelic football pitch does not contain a single square in all its geometry. We are dealing with a small rectangle so called to differentiate it from its first cousin, the large rectangle.
The rule pertaining to this area of play is a technical rule (Rule 4.9) and states simply: ‘For an attacking player to enter opponents’ small rectangle before the ball enters it during play’ is deemed a technical foul and a free kick is awarded to the opposition from where the foul occurred.
The rule has two exceptions: one where an attacking player is unable to leave the small rectangle in time but does NOT interfere with the play and a second, where the ball is sufficiently high over the crossbar as to be out of reach of the players. It is, in theory, a simple rule but three matches in the 2007 championship took major turns when referees set about implementing and interpreting it.
Air Traffic Controllers have sophisticated radar but are still awaiting technology that might solve this problem for the GAA. It cannot be removed from the rulebook without some type of replacement rule; because it is essentially our offside rule, we will end up with every forward in the country ‘goal-hanging’ and the early retirement of every goalkeeper in the land. Voluntary or otherwise!
It takes a couple of replays, various camera angles, slow motion and stills before anybody involved in detailed analysis can give an informed opinion. And even then, you will get plenty on the other side to disagree.
There is only one place to resolve these great philosophical debates and my local hostelry provided the perfect forum last weekend. All agreed that a rule that is difficult to enforce is, essentially, a bad rule. What is one to do in terms of a replacement?
When the ball is kicked, referee, umpires and linesmen should check to see if anybody other than the goalkeeper and his own team-mates are in the small rectangle. If this is the case, then it’s game on and any member of the opposition can enter to go for the ball so long as a foul on any opponent is not committed.
No sooner had we agreed on a way forward and I notice the next day one of our most respected referees, John Bannon, has suggested something similar. Was he in his local that same weekend?
Mr President muddies waters with comment
TO a more serious subject now. The following quote is attributed to GAA President, Nickey Brennan: ‘If you look back at the TV he (Graham Geraghty) was booked in relation to the (Cosgrove) incident. In relation to the other two incidents, there was a free given against Geraghty on all occasions.’ All checked and correct so far. He then goes on to say: ‘On that basis the referee has dealt with the matter by giving a free and we do not have the authority to revisit the matter’. Not true dear President, not true.
Nickey Brennan went on to quote the Ryan McMenamin (Tyrone) Case (2005) when the DRA allowed his appeal on the basis that the referee had dealt with the incident and the GAA could not revisit it. This is true but that was 2005! The new Part 1 was issued in January of 2007 and the rules got a complete makeover in an attempt to rid the rulebook of such escape clauses.
Before I summarise the new rule in question (Rule 144) let me emphasise this regulation covers all players engaging in foul play and should not be viewed only with Graham Geraghty in mind.
The rule deals with the initiation of disciplinary action and the investigation and processing of matters relating to the Enforcement of Rules and how they shall be dealt with. In the case of matters arising from competitions or games, the Competitions Control Committee of the Council or Committee in Charge take over. Okay then, we have established who takes the lead in these matters: it is the appropriate CCC.
The Competitions Control Committee may make a written request for clarification from a referee where the CCC is in the course of investigating a possible infraction not stated in the ref’s report (even if the incident itself is disclosed).
Disciplinary action alleging misconduct at games infractions may ONLY be commenced by the Competitions Control Committee where clarification of the referee’s report is received stating that the referee did not adjudicate upon the subject matter of the request. Or indeed, where the report ought to have stated that the infraction concerned did occur.
Could the rule be any clearer? By Sunday lunchtime our top referee had joined the ill-informed by wondering aloud why these matters could not be revisited.
Let me conclude by reminding readers that the Central Competitions Control Committee is a very high-powered group indeed. Chaired by the very experienced Jimmy Dunne from Wicklow, it numbers among its membership the four provincial secretaries and a member from each province appointed by the GAA’s Management Committee. One wonders where they were when the President went on a poorly judged solo run.
I accept the rules are the best we can do for now and one cannot overturn all the diligent work of the Rules Task Force which has recently published their findings. But it must concern all of us when those same rules are either misunderstood or just blatantly ignored.
The column will finish with an example and a final comment. The example concerns a run of the mill foul on a player. Say I fouled a player by pushing him in the back, had a free awarded against me and in the same movement stamped on the players’ head unknown to the referee but captured on camera?
Can you imagine the outcry if the GAA announced the award of the free (for the push) precluded the CCC from investigating the stamping incident? Sure lads, that is just plain daft and totally unacceptable in any sport.
And a comment: the rules of Gaelic football are often regarded much as a teenager regards the speed limit; more or less optional.
