TheEarlofPearl
Full Member
Glen not Kilcoo
Glen not Kilcoo
It wasn't, if it was then 16 players wouldn't have been on the field.
What he means is referee felt the outcome of a free would have been the same and as such the 16th man had no impact on the field, tend to agree having watched back the footage on rebels tv
The 16 players issue was dealt with by the ref rightly or wrongly at the time as well. The linesman brought it to the refs attention and the ref restarted with the free.Irrelevant. Those issues were dealt with by officials at he time, rightly or wrongly. Its the linesman you should be questioning not Blarney
My mistake. Fixed now. You get my point though. There will be a replay here and anything less would be surprising.
Afterwards. Damage had been done.
You can't put yourself inside the mind of any Blarney player who may have made a decision about what they did due to extra player on the field. He shouldn't have been there, totally unfair on Blarney players on pitch at the time. Its called sport - once things are done fairly have to take your beating, unfortunately in this instance there is a clear unfairness in what occurred and it needs to remedied.
Just like the damage of the wrongful mark Coleman sideline. Damage of the wrongful paudie power 65 and the wrongful free against Brian Roche. Damage was done in all of them too which was also highlighted by Curran mulcahy and fraggy
Agreed, all very poor decisions by the officials concerned and picked up on by anyone watching it at the time and as you say, by the commentators - however, not against the rules of the game so irrelevant.
This would be true I agree but look back at the footage, not one blarney player takes any notice of the player no one goes anywhere near him or even looks at him
