National Forum

Diarmuid Connolly to appeal his ban after all

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Great, another appeal farce revolving around Connolly, he's not appealing now he is appealing and I wouldn't be surprised if he turns up at an appeal hearing with Joe Brolly in gowns and wig and carrying a gavel. No matter what this man does someone tries to turn it about and make him out to be the victim. This is a bad move for Connolly himself and for the Dublin team, attention that a team seeking three in a row could well do without

Richieq (Meath) - Posts: 3734 - 12/06/2017 14:20:19    1998480

Link

Could it be we suddenly could meet Mayo in a 1/4 that has swayed this?? Also I wonder if the gaa would allow DC train with the panel if he accepts playing ban....

Liamwalkinstown (Dublin) - Posts: 8166 - 12/06/2017 14:21:55    1998482

Link

Didn't agree with the length of the ban in the first place, he would have got the same for pushing him on his backside as there is no grading system for this type of incident???.
Would not appeal it as he is going to get some suspension anyway, maybe miss up to and including the Leinster final as opposed to up to the semi-final. Not worth the risk logically for playing one game more maybe

mhunicean_abu (Monaghan) - Posts: 1044 - 12/06/2017 14:25:13    1998487

Link

Replying To hill16no1man:  "KILDARE73
im no expert either but surely it looks as suspicious as they come how the incident went unpunished by two officials and then ended up in a match report, they cant make up their own rules just because the officials didnt take action at the time when they seen it"
One question, simple answer required, do you think Connolly committed an offence? I only ask because you never seem to think he did any wrong and it's the officials who did everything wrong. So again, did Connolly commit an offence?

kildare73 (Kildare) - Posts: 854 - 12/06/2017 14:30:46    1998493

Link

Well its a minimum of a 12 week ban so in reality DC is in a no loose position in appealing it. Can't really see it being increased and don't think it will be dismissed either though, as the video evidence is fairly clear. Now why the ref didn't take action at the time is questionable. Maybe he felt it wasn't as serious until the de-briefing after the game and then included it in his report. But what I think is more likely the case, the ref was afraid to send off DC in-front of 15,000 Dublin fans and then decided to do it on the sly in a back room which wasn't fair on either Dublin or Carlow..... But I think Dublin County Board should have taken this one on the chin as it will lead to a distraction for a few weeks and later on in the year when they are in front of the CCCC again for something else this issue will be remembered and they may not get the soft approach they have previously enjoyed.

anto_meath (Meath) - Posts: 108 - 12/06/2017 14:34:36    1998497

Link

Funny Mr Brolly wasn't as interested in Evan Comerford. He was very quiet on that one. Maybe not enough column inches in it......

kildare73 (Kildare) - Posts: 854 - 12/06/2017 14:34:43    1998498

Link

Replying To hill16no1man:  "KILDARE73
im no expert either but surely it looks as suspicious as they come how the incident went unpunished by two officials and then ended up in a match report, they cant make up their own rules just because the officials didnt take action at the time when they seen it"
You keep going on about this but you do know that there's nothing suspicious about a referee including in their report after the game something they missed which was brought to their attention by one of the other officials after the game or something they dealt with incorrectly don't you.

It's pretty standard practise actually.

tearintom (Wexford) - Posts: 1351 - 12/06/2017 14:40:50    1998508

Link

Replying To Richieq:  "Great, another appeal farce revolving around Connolly, he's not appealing now he is appealing and I wouldn't be surprised if he turns up at an appeal hearing with Joe Brolly in gowns and wig and carrying a gavel. No matter what this man does someone tries to turn it about and make him out to be the victim. This is a bad move for Connolly himself and for the Dublin team, attention that a team seeking three in a row could well do without"
you don't be stressing out about the well being of the dublin footballers. We're in a good way with or without this appeal and don't let yourself be fooled that this will have a negative impact ...

waynoI (Dublin) - Posts: 13650 - 12/06/2017 15:24:01    1998542

Link

Replying To anto_meath:  "Well its a minimum of a 12 week ban so in reality DC is in a no loose position in appealing it. Can't really see it being increased and don't think it will be dismissed either though, as the video evidence is fairly clear. Now why the ref didn't take action at the time is questionable. Maybe he felt it wasn't as serious until the de-briefing after the game and then included it in his report. But what I think is more likely the case, the ref was afraid to send off DC in-front of 15,000 Dublin fans and then decided to do it on the sly in a back room which wasn't fair on either Dublin or Carlow..... But I think Dublin County Board should have taken this one on the chin as it will lead to a distraction for a few weeks and later on in the year when they are in front of the CCCC again for something else this issue will be remembered and they may not get the soft approach they have previously enjoyed."
distraction ?? will you ever stop with that nonsense lol

distraction for who ? Jim Gavin? the dublin panel ?

as I mentioned already we've been through appeals before running up to all ireland semi finals and finals and haven't let it distract us..

why the sudden insistence among posters that it will upset us now.

it'll have absolutely zero impact in training.. it'll have zero impact on management and panel.. as far as they are concerned they will motor on without him until if told otherwise and that's that

waynoI (Dublin) - Posts: 13650 - 12/06/2017 15:27:24    1998546

Link

Replying To waynoI:  "Only the 4th Diarmuid Connolly topic on the national forum in 8 days...

Listen.. I was very harsh on Connolly on the Dublin page. Fairly laid into him. The jist of my points haven't changed with regards his discipline.

Irrespective of what happens here, The GAA simply have to do something with regards the rules be it game ban or week ban.

If we are going by the letter of the law, Should Connolly get a 12 week ban ? Absolutely.

However there is a grey area for me.

If Diarmuid Connolly gets sent off at the time, he misses Dublins next game against Westmeath/Offaly. As far as I know he can still train with the team am I right in saying that ?

Where this stinks for me, is the fact that if a referee clearly sees and decides not to act in real time (and If its a case that somehow he didn't despite cameras showing he did, the linesman didn't speak up either) .. They can take Connolly to task afterwards, and instead of a one game ban for a red card, Its a 12 week ban which also includes training with your team mates. A much, much more serious punishment.

Irrespective what happens, that rule absolutely has to change, or at least have consistent punishments... weeks or games, but it cant be both. Its either black, or its white.

As Joe Brolly rightly asked in his column on Connolly yesterday, There is just something suspicious about this. Forget all Diarmuids actions before and treat this incident on its individual merits.


Why did the standby referee not deal with it at the time? Why did he not say to the referee (who was standing beside him), "Dublin number 11 has just laid a hand on me, it's a red card". How did the referee not see it himself? How could it be that the linesman only realised after the game that an offence had occurred? After all, there was a natural break in the play as the incident unfolded. There was a delay before the sideline was taken. All the protagonists were on the spot. It was an unmistakeable event.


So, why didn't the officials react? When did the linesman recall the incident? When did he first form the view that Connolly's conduct crossed the line? Why was it only discussed for the first time after the game was over? When exactly was it discussed? Were the officials in contact with anyone else about the issue prior to the allegation ending up in the referee's report? Had they been made aware of the media furore?


They are fair questions to ask. Connolly should have seen red in real time, But if the ref/linesman decide not to act, its not fair to give the guy a much more serious punishment afterwards.

The talk of a witch-hunt is silly, There is no DC witch hunt, But there is absolutely reason enough for Diarmuid to ask those questions.

Will he win the appeal ? Well, he wont be cleared of wrong doing, he may get the ban reduced, but not overturned."
I think you sum that up for most there are questions that need to be asked re the officials but certainly a 12 week ban or a 12 game ban it is a bit of a farce.

arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4898 - 12/06/2017 15:36:54    1998553

Link

Replying To tearintom:  "You keep going on about this but you do know that there's nothing suspicious about a referee including in their report after the game something they missed which was brought to their attention by one of the other officials after the game or something they dealt with incorrectly don't you.

It's pretty standard practise actually."
True, there is absolutely no problem with the referee acting on the word of another official on something they missed during the game. The problem in this instance is that it wasn't missed during the game, it was observed by both the ref and the linesman at the time. Your second point about acting on something they dealt with incorrectly would be acceptable if it was included in the referees report, but not tacked on to the end of said report as an after thought. That's where the issue is. I'm not saying Connolly didn't do wrong, but as I said in an earlier post a 12 week ban from ALL gaa activities, including all sanctioned training sessions, effectively rules him out for the season, so why not roll the dice.

AHP (Dublin) - Posts: 323 - 12/06/2017 15:37:56    1998555

Link

Replying To tearintom:  "You keep going on about this but you do know that there's nothing suspicious about a referee including in their report after the game something they missed which was brought to their attention by one of the other officials after the game or something they dealt with incorrectly don't you.

It's pretty standard practise actually."
I think you are wrong there you cannot simply write a ref's report based on what you might see in TV highlights or hear on a radio commentary after the game. If ANY official saw it they should have flagged it and no that doesn't absolve Connolly of wrong do'ing but ref's surely can't have it every way this is nonsense.

arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4898 - 12/06/2017 15:41:11    1998556

Link

Replying To arock:  "I think you are wrong there you cannot simply write a ref's report based on what you might see in TV highlights or hear on a radio commentary after the game. If ANY official saw it they should have flagged it and no that doesn't absolve Connolly of wrong do'ing but ref's surely can't have it every way this is nonsense."

tearintom (Wexford) - Posts: 1351 - 12/06/2017 15:48:59    1998567

Link

Replying To arock:  "I think you are wrong there you cannot simply write a ref's report based on what you might see in TV highlights or hear on a radio commentary after the game. If ANY official saw it they should have flagged it and no that doesn't absolve Connolly of wrong do'ing but ref's surely can't have it every way this is nonsense."
No a referee can include in their report incidents they missed which were brought to their attention by another and also incidents on reflection they dealt with incorrectly.

The same happened with mattie Forde p in a stamping incident with an Offaly player. The referee done nothing at the time, it was actually a free to wexford and he allowed wexford play on with the free. But he got banned after the game.

The referee simply states in his report that he failed to deal with the incident correctly. In fact if he had actually failed to mention the incident wasn't dealt with properly it would be highly suspicious.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime here but that's not the fault of the referee. I can't see the ban being reduced, it's already at the minimum. The ban will either be lifted completely or will stand, it won't be increased either.

I personally think he will end up getting off.

tearintom (Wexford) - Posts: 1351 - 12/06/2017 15:58:46    1998570

Link

I wonder if it was clarified over the weekend that 12 week ban includes 12 week ban from training with the team.
In that case, making an appearance at semi-final would be impossible. And appearing in the final would be a challenge at best having missed 12 weeks training with the team.

BlastCalyle (Mayo) - Posts: 206 - 12/06/2017 16:02:10    1998573

Link

Replying To AHP:  "True, there is absolutely no problem with the referee acting on the word of another official on something they missed during the game. The problem in this instance is that it wasn't missed during the game, it was observed by both the ref and the linesman at the time. Your second point about acting on something they dealt with incorrectly would be acceptable if it was included in the referees report, but not tacked on to the end of said report as an after thought. That's where the issue is. I'm not saying Connolly didn't do wrong, but as I said in an earlier post a 12 week ban from ALL gaa activities, including all sanctioned training sessions, effectively rules him out for the season, so why not roll the dice."
But who said it was tacked on at the end of a report as an afterthought?

It would been highly suspicious had he not actually put it in the report at all to be honest.

But yeah it makes sense for Dublin to take a chance, can't see it being increased at all so why not and it is a pretty harsh punishment but that's the fault of the rule book in reality.

tearintom (Wexford) - Posts: 1351 - 12/06/2017 16:03:32    1998576

Link

Replying To BlastCalyle:  "I wonder if it was clarified over the weekend that 12 week ban includes 12 week ban from training with the team.
In that case, making an appearance at semi-final would be impossible. And appearing in the final would be a challenge at best having missed 12 weeks training with the team."
Course he will train with the team, I've never heard of a player being banned and stopped training because of it this is not a issue.

Yourjoking (USA) - Posts: 706 - 12/06/2017 17:44:28    1998654

Link

Replying To kildare73:  "Funny Mr Brolly wasn't as interested in Evan Comerford. He was very quiet on that one. Maybe not enough column inches in it......"
Neither was half the country , HS just look at the topics , its not right but that's the way it goes , personally sick to my teeth hearing/talking about it at this stage

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 12/06/2017 17:55:44    1998661

Link

Replying To waynoI:  "Its to do with Diarmuid Connolly and the DCB.

Dublin management and players will just get on with preparing for their next game ? Why would you think its any distraction on the rest of the team/management ?

Diarmuid is a brilliant player, But Dublin aren't exactly lacking quality players.

Just cause the media are talking about it and us on public forums doesn't mean it affects the mentality of the group. Its lazy to suggest it would just because it suits some peoples agenda that Connolly appeals is some kind of huge distraction. It isn't.

Absolute myth to think the Dublin panel will let stuff like this make them lower their guard.

And with the greatest of respect in the world, Connolly has appealed suspensions before ahead of much much bigger games against much better teams in a more pressurized environment, and not only have we went on to win the games thereafter, but we done so with a swagger.

Irrespective of this appeal, Everybody in the Dublin camp will just continue as normal, and none of this outside business will bother them.

Its Offaly/Westmeath next. Potentially Kildare/Meath 3 weeks after that"
My thoughts precisely

realdub (Dublin) - Posts: 8596 - 12/06/2017 18:26:51    1998674

Link

Replying To waynoI:  "you don't be stressing out about the well being of the dublin footballers. We're in a good way with or without this appeal and don't let yourself be fooled that this will have a negative impact ..."
Believe me Wayne I have never stressed about the well being of Dublin footballers and I know well they would be well able to cope with Diarmuid as I alluded to in a previous post. I would imagine, and many of my Dublin friends agree with me, that several Dublin players will have a pain in their backside with this by now and that the continued interest in Connolly will become not just a distraction but a cause of resentment , even the best footballers and tightknit units around can suffer occasional cracks, and Connolly is a crack as he has already caused a divide of opinion amongst many supporters with his latest indiscretion. Dublin have shown potential signs this year that they may not be the team of 12-24 months ago which would only be natural, I can't see how a scenario like this could be anything but a total unwanted distraction and annoyance to them.

Richieq (Meath) - Posts: 3734 - 12/06/2017 18:35:59    1998676

Link