Its a start and has to be welcomed, im sure it could easily be evolved to see whether a player was or was not in square etc, but good start and all positive moves must be welcomed and given chance to see how it works.
I don't have a single problem with the system my only problem is that say a goal keeper sees a ball going wide however umpire feels it went over and ref agrees then hawkeye will not br called upon "yet sg could show it with hawkeye and prove it was wide, am i reading the rules wrong? But thats my understanding of it, .
IMO each team should be given two calls for its use in match and ref unlimited

royaldunne (Meath) - Posts: 19449 - 16/05/2013 12:27:39    1385040

Again, a praise worthy solution from the GAA and its members have found every reason under the sun to complain about it. The introduction of a TMO would be the next step though.

ahsure. (Galway) - Posts: 1779 - 16/05/2013 12:27:50    1385041

kikfada County: Louth Posts: 910

1385036

How would Halkeye interpret a Joe Throw

More importantly, how would it help solve not giving a penalty on 4 occasions as he was pulled, draged.,kicked and bundled over before joe scored the rightful goal?? At least give all aspects of argument,
No one denies joe threw ball, despite best efforts to kick it, yet no one from louth ever point out that it should have been penalty " and dont start with square ball thing as kenny was outside square when ball came in add to that joe only entered square after ball.

royaldunne (Meath) - Posts: 19449 - 16/05/2013 12:40:37    1385052

Reckon it is a utter waste of money. It's for points only and when you balance the costs against the % of actual controversies in a year (tiny against games played) I reckon there is no return to be had.

Money is better spent elsewhere.

witnof (Dublin) - Posts: 1604 - 16/05/2013 12:49:03    1385061

royaldunne it was clearly meant as a joke, get over it.

PK57 (Louth) - Posts: 1664 - 16/05/2013 13:08:57    1385077

royaldunne
County: Meath
Posts: 3666

More importantly, how would it help solve not giving a penalty on 4 occasions as he was pulled, draged.,kicked and bundled over before joe scored the rightful goal?? At least give all aspects of argument,
No one denies joe threw ball, despite best efforts to kick it, yet no one from louth ever point out that it should have been penalty " and dont start with square ball thing as kenny was outside square when ball came in add to that joe only entered square after ball.

Jaysus RD.

That is some way to view that incident.

The 'penalty' claims were weak. So embarrassingly weak that most Meath people at the time didn't even bother to spout them at the time, let alone come back almost 3 years later and try and rewrite history.

Poor effort.

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13846 - 16/05/2013 13:11:09    1385079

Give me 1 challenge per half any day as PK57 says.only for square balls and penalties.and better umpires.500k saved.

perfect10 (Wexford) - Posts: 3929 - 16/05/2013 14:12:21    1385134

Mesamis. Penalty claim was always there and always as you say spouted by majority in meath.
facts are even ref said after he should have awarded the penalty. And by jasus if you don't see it as penalty then I wouldn't like to see what you think would have been a penalty.

royaldunne (Meath) - Posts: 19449 - 16/05/2013 14:43:25    1385152