National Forum

Tadhg De Burca's red card

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

What are people's opinions on this? I see his appeal was redused again and looks like he's going to the DRA now. Kehoe even spoke up for him in his hearing and asked for leniancy.

So.. is the ban correct or should it be overturned? There doesn't seem to be much conclusive footage out there of the incident but the linesman must be pretty sure it was intentional.

GaaGaa78 (UK) - 04/08/2017 08:37:02    2028739

Link

The notion that the Wexford player pleaded for leniency on De Burca's behalf is ironic- considering the same player brought the incident to the linesman's attention in the first place!

football first (None) - 04/08/2017 09:16:02    2028755

Link

I think it's a real tragedy Tadgh will miss the semi-final. At the end of the day we are an amateur organisation and these players have put their lives on hold for the last 9 months to get to days like these. I can't understand why they don't give him the benefit of the doubt. If there was conclusive evidence that he had pulled the faceguard (deliberately) I could understand a ban being placed on the player but there doesn't seem to be any such thing. They seem to be taking the word of linesman but Harry Kehoe has since given a contrasting view. It's just a real shame on the player and Waterford.

the_post (USA) - 04/08/2017 09:30:46    2028759

Link

The video footage from the day doesn't look to damning. It looks like he just grabbed him to get him out of the way, not hard, not malicious. When you see some of those that get off you have to wonder why he isn't?

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - 04/08/2017 09:43:13    2028764

Link

We'd be calling for a 12 week suspension and there would be multiple threads open if he was a certain county...

In all seriousness though he isn't at this sort of thing week in week out. If he pulled at Kehoes face guard during the game then it should be a straight red as that is the rule but I think missing the next game is a joke for the offense committed.

UsernameInvalid (Meath) - 04/08/2017 09:45:37    2028767

Link

Replying To football first:  "The notion that the Wexford player pleaded for leniency on De Burca's behalf is ironic- considering the same player brought the incident to the linesman's attention in the first place!"
He did,but in the heat of battle.

He's rightly trying to have the slate cleaned now.

KK1926 (Kilkenny) - 04/08/2017 11:21:10    2028816

Link

Im glad to see a suspension finally standing after all the appeals. There are too many suspension getting overturned on appeal as it is. Makes a joke of the whole system.

Whether the suspension/red card was harsh is irrelevant. There was contact made with the helmet at the time as the guard became loose. If you look at the replay you will clearly see the linesman contacting the ref before kehoe says anything.

This general comment that he shouldn't miss an all Ireland semi final because if it doesn't stand with me. He did something stupid so has to suffer the appropriate suspension i.e 1 match. Similar to that of Bennett earlier in the season. You cant have one being suspended because of when the offence was committed or what match they will miss.

juicy (Meath) - 04/08/2017 11:33:14    2028823

Link

Replying To GaaGaa78:  "What are people's opinions on this? I see his appeal was redused again and looks like he's going to the DRA now. Kehoe even spoke up for him in his hearing and asked for leniancy.

So.. is the ban correct or should it be overturned? There doesn't seem to be much conclusive footage out there of the incident but the linesman must be pretty sure it was intentional."
he had his faceguard broken,he needed a replacement helmet,da burca was deservedly sent off.
harry kehoe probably felt tadhg da burca didn't deserve to miss an AI semi final over it,and there is a lot of healthy respect between the 2 camps.
but the suspension should stand,the rule is there,i hate this "ah he shouldnt miss a semi over it" nonsense,when are gaa people going to start taking responsibility for their actions and respecting officaldom?
we have a broken disciplinary system,which can be summed up as "ah lads,please,ah lads,please,ah lads,please,ah lads,please".
i think i have been consistent on my stance re davy fitz,jason forde,etc breaking rules and deservedly being suspended.

perfect10 (Wexford) - 04/08/2017 11:37:50    2028828

Link

Replying To the_post:  "I think it's a real tragedy Tadgh will miss the semi-final. At the end of the day we are an amateur organisation and these players have put their lives on hold for the last 9 months to get to days like these. I can't understand why they don't give him the benefit of the doubt. If there was conclusive evidence that he had pulled the faceguard (deliberately) I could understand a ban being placed on the player but there doesn't seem to be any such thing. They seem to be taking the word of linesman but Harry Kehoe has since given a contrasting view. It's just a real shame on the player and Waterford."
so why cant we take the word of the linesman when it happened right in front of him?if an off the ball incident happens in a club game,we take the word of umpires/linesmen.why shouldn't we here?
how do you know what harry kehoe said?

perfect10 (Wexford) - 04/08/2017 11:40:17    2028831

Link

If he did it (pictures i saw were hazy and hard to make out) then he should be suspended irrespective of his record. If he didn't he should be cleared. Very straight forward really!

If the rule is too severe then it should be changed going forward, but he knew the rules when he togged out the last day so retrospectively whatever the rule is on the day should be enforced.

I like the way rugby grade offences into 3 levels of seriousness. i.e. a punch could be graded 1, 2 or 3 depending on how hard or bad a slap it is. Suspension is then based on this. Time can be taken off suspension based on past record. Would be ideal situation although it might be open to political influence......so maybe bin that thought!!

Mayonman (Galway) - 04/08/2017 11:43:00    2028836

Link

If it was for making contact with the face guard then they need a serious rethink.
There should be grades of seriousness. Was it reckless? Was it intentional? Was it incidental?
No one (even in Waterford) argued against the Stephen Bennett retrospective ban. But for De Burca to get the same punishment for something not even in the same townland as that is just not good enough.
There is no black and white in any situation.
The GAA have made a rod for themselves by not fully thinking through the initial rule.

FootblockREF (Monaghan) - 04/08/2017 13:09:33    2028891

Link

Since his name is.not Dermo he should get off.....not that type of player....but if his name was Dermo hang him :)

witnof (Dublin) - 04/08/2017 13:19:00    2028901

Link

In spite of my view possibly being deemed tainted by bias I will add my opinion. I actually think that unfortunately the ban has to stand. The rule is there black and white to protect the players and if an official writes a report saying the incident took place, that is it and final.

It is up to video evidence to prove the official wrong, not to prove De Burca's guilt. Officials are appointed as impartial referees and their report is final. It's only now with the event of tv that there can be doubt. If the pictures are inconclusive and do not prove innocence, then I'm afraid there is no case here. Waterford and the player need to suck it up and take responsibility.

Anyway that's my view and it would have been the same whether the next game was against Cork or not.

BaldyBadger (Cork) - 04/08/2017 14:00:00    2028922

Link

Replying To perfect10:  "so why cant we take the word of the linesman when it happened right in front of him?if an off the ball incident happens in a club game,we take the word of umpires/linesmen.why shouldn't we here?
how do you know what harry kehoe said?"
Because he is the worst Hurling official out there. He sent off Seamus Callanan against Offaly in a league quarter final based on a few groans from a bunch of Offaly fans in the far stand. Everyone in the main stand knew there and then it wasn't a red card. Tipp appealed it and it was obvious on the video evidence that it wasn't a red card so it was rescinded.

So like that incident, Keenan seems to be easily swayed by some protestation. Officials are supposed to be impartial and make up their own mind.

The video evidence doing the rounds is inconclusive and to the rules of the game state it is a red if deliberate. So how can anyone say with certainty it was deliberate.

Tyrell and O'Grady threw De Burca under the bus that night. Horgan's red against Limerick in 2013 was worse and Cork got that overturned.

This rule came in after Banville of Wexford nearly ripped the ear of Declan Fanning in 2010. I saw that incident at the ground and that was dangerous whereas this was mild in comparison.

As for Kehoe. He knew what he was doing blocking De Burca's run, that was very cynical play be him. De Burca wanted to stop him impeded his run and Kehoe went crying to the official. Typical bull boy tactics, when I don't get my way "I'll tell teacher on you".

Kehoe getting commended for pleading leniency on De Burca's behalf, hilarious stuff altogether. I'd describe it as saving face and tutting tk

Killarney.87 (Tipperary) - 04/08/2017 14:10:57    2028929

Link

Replying To perfect10:  "so why cant we take the word of the linesman when it happened right in front of him?if an off the ball incident happens in a club game,we take the word of umpires/linesmen.why shouldn't we here?
how do you know what harry kehoe said?"
Because he is the worst Hurling official out there. He sent off Seamus Callanan against Offaly in a league quarter final based on a few groans from a bunch of Offaly fans in the far stand. Everyone in the main stand knew there and then it wasn't a red card. Tipp appealed it and it was obvious on the video evidence that it wasn't a red card so it was rescinded.

So like that incident, Keenan seems to be easily swayed by some protestation. Officials are supposed to be impartial and make up their own mind.

The video evidence doing the rounds is inconclusive and to the rules of the game state it is a red if deliberate. So how can anyone say with certainty it was deliberate.

Tyrell and O'Grady threw De Burca under the bus that night. Horgan's red against Limerick in 2013 was worse and Cork got that overturned.

This rule came in after Banville of Wexford nearly ripped the ear of Declan Fanning in 2010. I saw that incident at the ground and that was dangerous whereas this was mild in comparison.

As for Kehoe. He knew what he was doing blocking De Burca's run, that was very cynical play be him. De Burca wanted to stop him impeded his run and Kehoe went crying to the official. Typical bull boy tactics, when I don't get my way "I'll tell teacher on you".

Kehoe getting commended for pleading leniency on De Burca's behalf, hilarious stuff altogether. I'd describe it as saving face and trying to restore credibility.

As for appeals in general, I agree with, players should serve their suspensions, especially the one who finally took his medicine this year.

This one is different though,
Waterford would rightfully appeal regardless of the time in the season.

Killarney.87 (Tipperary) - 04/08/2017 14:12:59    2028930

Link

Replying To perfect10:  "so why cant we take the word of the linesman when it happened right in front of him?if an off the ball incident happens in a club game,we take the word of umpires/linesmen.why shouldn't we here?
how do you know what harry kehoe said?"
It happened to Harry Kehoe so why shouldn't we take his point of view? This whole thing of punishing lads for innocuous incidents is harming the game in my opinion. Maybe you want a soccer style system where everything last thing is punished but I don't. I'd prefer to back the guys that are putting in the effort year on year and deserve their chance on the big stage. As I said in my first post, if it was conclusively deliberate then yes he should serve the suspension, the fact that there is one word against the other (linesman v player) means its not conclusive.

the_post (USA) - 04/08/2017 14:14:56    2028933

Link

Replying To witnof:  "Since his name is.not Dermo he should get off.....not that type of player....but if his name was Dermo hang him :)"
Who's Dermo?

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - 04/08/2017 14:39:04    2028949

Link

Replying To the_post:  "It happened to Harry Kehoe so why shouldn't we take his point of view? This whole thing of punishing lads for innocuous incidents is harming the game in my opinion. Maybe you want a soccer style system where everything last thing is punished but I don't. I'd prefer to back the guys that are putting in the effort year on year and deserve their chance on the big stage. As I said in my first post, if it was conclusively deliberate then yes he should serve the suspension, the fact that there is one word against the other (linesman v player) means its not conclusive."
One word against another! I think you have been watching too many courtroom dramas. The fact is you have a supposed neutral unbiased official there to uphold the rules of the game and officiate when he or she thinks they have been breached. The player obviously has a vested interest in not being sent off or suspended, so he is bound to say the opposite. That's why we have officials.

Now in saying that, officials are human and mistakes can be made, so in this era of to replays we can have the chance to review this if an error has taken place. However there is no evidence the official made a mistake, so calling him a crap official is not fair here.

Perhaps De Burca is unlucky here, but unless you can see that what the linesman saw was wrong on the TVs replays, how can you challenge it?

BaldyBadger (Cork) - 04/08/2017 17:33:52    2029036

Link

He pulled the helmet under rule it's fairly clear cut.....you can argue about intent, seriousness etc but that's not covered in the rule book but interfering with the helmet is.......to be fair Bennet got away with one against Cork and was caught retrospectively so swings and roundabouts a bit here for Waterford......is anyone denying he actually pulled the helmet, looked fairly conclusive on TV

PaudieSull1 (Down) - 04/08/2017 17:49:37    2029045

Link

If he pulls the faceguard at 20% he gets a yellow. If he pulls it at 50% straight red......if he says a prayer after doing it back to a yellow. If he gets someone on the Sunday game to say he should get off then no suspension. If he is a nice guy then...............

Rules are rules. He pulled the face guard with the linesman looking directly at him. This should be all the evidence that's needed unless you gave further evidence to prove otherwise. If there is a problem with the quality of the officials that is a problem for the gaa to sort.
Keohe going in with him is the equivalent of rounding up your friend to back you up in front of the parents after planting a ball through the sitting room window.

With a Cork hat on I would still prefer if he was playing as Cork need to be able to face up head on to a full Waterford outfit if they have any aspirations this year. Also if he gets off on the last round of appeal it will have been a very disruptive few weeks for Waterford and will largely level out with Corks 5 week break. Very hard for Tadhg de Burca, the rest of the team & more importantly the fella replacing him to prepare with all this going on in the background. If they cut their losses now and focus on the game in hand and develop a siege mentality they would be a lot more dangerous and driven.

Cornerback1977 (Cork) - 04/08/2017 19:40:17    2029081

Link