National Forum

Gum Shields

(Oldest Posts First)

Watching Cavan v Dublin. I see quite a few players ain't wearing one, are they not compulsory ?

THE_SNAPPER (Louth) - Posts: 2019 - 05/02/2017 14:53:59    1952072

Link

Replying To THE_SNAPPER:  "Watching Cavan v Dublin. I see quite a few players ain't wearing one, are they not compulsory ?"
Pain in the arse for refs we have enough to be doing

Dellboypolecat (Tyrone) - Posts: 15069 - 05/02/2017 15:45:56    1952084

Link

Replying To THE_SNAPPER:  "Watching Cavan v Dublin. I see quite a few players ain't wearing one, are they not compulsory ?"
Strictly speaking, you can be cautioned for not wearing one and not be let back on to the pitch until you wear one. Have never seen it and hate the things myself, have to drain the damn thing every 30 seconds.

Gleebo (Mayo) - Posts: 2208 - 05/02/2017 15:51:24    1952088

Link

Don't see the issue with having them compulsory and they can be annoying at times but id rather an annoying gumshield through a game than not having one and losing a few teeth

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 05/02/2017 16:51:48    1952139

Link

Replying To Dellboypolecat:  "Pain in the arse for refs we have enough to be doing"
If it's compulsary and the ref is letting it go then he is not doing his job. It was clear today many players weren't wearing one, Dublin's free taker and at least one of their mid-field players amongst others weren't wearing a shield and that was clearly obvious today. I quite recently witnessed a Louth player getting a yellow card and being sent to the side line for failing to wear his gum shield.

THE_SNAPPER (Louth) - Posts: 2019 - 05/02/2017 17:07:32    1952157

Link

The fact that some players are not complying with the rule might suggest that wearing one may be a distraction and or inconvience to them, therefore is it right that the players who rightly comply with the rule suffer that distraction and or inconvience for the duration of a game when others who fail to comply do not ?.

The rule needs to be enforced or the compulsory rule abolished and just left to individuals as to wear or not, just my opinion.

THE_SNAPPER (Louth) - Posts: 2019 - 05/02/2017 17:24:45    1952173

Link

Replying To THE_SNAPPER:  "The fact that some players are not complying with the rule might suggest that wearing one may be a distraction and or inconvience to them, therefore is it right that the players who rightly comply with the rule suffer that distraction and or inconvience for the duration of a game when others who fail to comply do not ?.

The rule needs to be enforced or the compulsory rule abolished and just left to individuals as to wear or not, just my opinion."
This will be enforced when you lose your teeth and apply for insurance - you simply won't get any end off, easiest "rule" to enforce, shouldn't be the ref's concern at all.

arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4896 - 05/02/2017 17:28:48    1952176

Link

for once I fully agree with you snapper. Also nothing worse than a teeth injury, very painful and expensive to fix. Also if it happens with out a gumshield I don't think your insured.

NAIL_BAR (Meath) - Posts: 457 - 05/02/2017 17:34:16    1952182

Link

Replying To arock:  "This will be enforced when you lose your teeth and apply for insurance - you simply won't get any end off, easiest "rule" to enforce, shouldn't be the ref's concern at all."
Surely the ref is the one person who has the most contact with the players, along with the other match officials they should be able to marshall it and were a breach occurs they should enforce the rule and apply the relevant penalty.

THE_SNAPPER (Louth) - Posts: 2019 - 05/02/2017 18:21:12    1952219

Link