GAA should consider TMOs

George Hook

There is a code of etiquette in the sport of golf that says players participating in the same group should always help a fellow golfer if/when their ball goes missing. The logic behind this is simple: It is a lot easier to find a ball with four pairs of eyes searching for it, over one person hacking away in a bunch of trees on their own.
Sometimes the ball doesn’t turn up. That’s just tough luck. But just because four people searching together can’t come up with the goods does not mean that the etiquette should be scrapped altogether. After all, nothing is ever completely fool-proof.
I have heard every ridiculous excuse under the sun as to why the GAA won’t see fit to introduce television match officials (TMO) in their games over recent years and each one is dafter than the next.
Just last week, a report in the Irish Examiner offered that “as long as there are grey areas associated with a TV match official, the GAA won’t consider it.”
Have you ever heard such rubbish in your entire life? The crux of this argument is that, if there is a chance that a TV camera won’t pick up a decision, either way, then what’s the point in having it?
It is this dark-age approach to conventional wisdom that sometimes sets the GAA apart from the rest of the world. Nobody has ever insisted that a television match official will get every decision correct, 100 percent of the time. But to dismiss the idea that GAA referees should get the help they need to do their job to the best of their ability because of the odd ‘what if’ scenario is crazy.
Let’s look at rugby as the example. There are a couple of simple questions that I would put forward as a guide for anyone querying the effectiveness of the TMO.
Has the introduction of the TMO improved the accuracy of refereeing decisions across the board in rugby union?
Does the role of the TMO increase the likelihood of referees and officials arriving at the correct decision during games?
Is the time lost during matches, in order for the TMO to review a play, worth it when weighing up the balance of the decision?
The answer to all three questions is a most definite yes. The result of which means a fairer, more transparent process for players, coaches and fans. And, most importantly of all, it results in the right decisions being awarded on the field of play.
This is not to say that everything is right and rosy within the game of rugby union. There are occasions when the TMO gets it wrong, when camera angles do not provide sufficient views to make a definitive decision either way. But no technology is perfect. And there will always be debating points around decisions. That’s just the nature of sport.

Improving the game
Anything that allows referees to increase their accuracy regarding match decisions must be welcomed. And scraping the bottom of the barrel to find excuses not to use such technology is Stone Age stuff and infuriating to say the least.
So, why won’t the GAA look at using technology to make the referee’s job easier? Is it a cost issue? Is it an ingrained stubbornness against change, for the sake of it? I have yet to hear a single valid argument on this point.
I wouldn’t mind, but some of the umpires might as well be in Timbuktu for all the help they provide during games. Some of them can’t make a decision from all of three feet away.
GAA referees have a difficult job to do and they are the first ones hauled over the coals when they make a mistake. It’s all well and good for Donal Óg and the boys to go through forty different slo-motion replays, highlighting how badly wrong a referee got it from the comfort of their television studio. Why don’t the GAA make the referee’s job easier? The technology is there and ready to be used. It wouldn’t take much to introduce it for Championship games.
Speaking of change, the Association has published a report on the long-standing problem of player burnout. The report makes some interesting recommendations, though, personally speaking, I would have liked to have seen it go further.
One thing is clear; if the GAA doesn’t act soon on the issue of player burnout, it will have a big problem on its hands. A friend of mine recently went through his son’s commitments in his attempts to break through to the Dublin senior football panel, while also lining out for his club and college. I was exhausted just listening to the schedule. As it stands, most top level inter-county players are playing and training for twelve months of the year, without a break. The ‘winter break’ is nothing but a fallacy and any player worth his salt is expected to be in strict training routines from November through to January.
Fergal Duffy’s report goes some way towards addressing the problems, but more needs to be done. And it will be interesting to see if Congress sees fit to pass the majority of the recommendations proposed. If it doesn’t, we will all know exactly where the association stands when it comes to protecting its most valuable commodity.