HoganStand GAA Football and Hurling

National Forum

T.V. Evidence

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

Iarlaith Daly is getting a one match suspension for kicking out at the end of the Limerick game. I noticed it at the time and said he deserves to be disciplined for it. A nasty thing to do. However I have a problem with trial/suspensions by t.v. and pundits. If the GAA are going to use video to discipline players they need to get their own camera's in there and review every thing that went on in the game. If they did they would have found examples of faking that in my opinion should be dealt with the same. The broadcast station or pundits are not the disciplinary authority in the GAA but can exert as much power playing it back and back in slow motion. The NHL have their own cameras and their own footage is what is used to make a decision. In fact now decisions are made at normal speed because they found by slowing down the frames players were suspended in the wrong because it was their moment that caused the collision. If the GAA can not afford their own cameras then they should abide by the officials in charge of the game. RTE (any station) or its pundits are not the forth, fifth or any official. Refs miss lots of things and player get away with things. Daly deserves what he is getting but others deserve censorship also but don't get it because of the camera work. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 27/05/2021 15:51:52 2345929 Link
Big hands jimbodub (Dublin) - Posts: 20600 - 27/05/2021 16:19:47 2345937 Link
I noticed largely RTE stopped highlighting foul play like the did previously. One upon a time they would have gone frame by frame. Must be an editorial decision. At the same time I have noticed a lot less cases bring taken by disciplinary authorities after the fact. I think I am not alone in thinking the were just a reactive body to whatever was on the Sunday Game rather than independently reviewing all the games available. This probably underlines that point! Anyone notice the Waterford lad run into the row leading with his knee last week?? To be fair if a frame by frame analysis was done of that row a few lads would be getting a month off. Obviously hear no evil see no evil approach anymore with the odd token suspension. Mayonman (Galway) - Posts: 1826 - 27/05/2021 18:11:22 2345965 Link
Replying To Mayonman: "I noticed largely RTE stopped highlighting foul play like the did previously. One upon a time they would have gone frame by frame. Must be an editorial decision. At the same time I have noticed a lot less cases bring taken by disciplinary authorities after the fact. I think I am not alone in thinking the were just a reactive body to whatever was on the Sunday Game rather than independently reviewing all the games available. This probably underlines that point! Anyone notice the Waterford lad run into the row leading with his knee last week?? To be fair if a frame by frame analysis was done of that row a few lads would be getting a month off. Obviously hear no evil see no evil approach anymore with the odd token suspension." Iarlaith definitely kicked a Limerick player in that melee. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 27/05/2021 18:43:03 2345974 Link
That's the problem with TV evidence. RTE decide what gets highlighted. tyroneed (Tyrone) - Posts: 753 - 27/05/2021 19:19:01 2345980 Link
What about games that RTE don't have cameras at? johnocarroll17 (Limerick) - Posts: 408 - 27/05/2021 19:29:20 2345981 Link
Replying To tyroneed: "That's the problem with TV evidence. RTE decide what gets highlighted." Who else would decide? BBC ? catch22 (USA) - Posts: 2148 - 27/05/2021 19:32:51 2345984 Link
Just to throw this into the mix, then: If it's not okay to use video evidence for disciplinary procedures if the referee misses an incident....then surely it shouldn't be okay either to use video evidence in an appeal to try overturn a referee's decision? Goose and gander, and all that. :) Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2229 - 27/05/2021 21:43:33 2346002 Link
Replying To Pikeman96: "Just to throw this into the mix, then: If it's not okay to use video evidence for disciplinary procedures if the referee misses an incident....then surely it shouldn't be okay either to use video evidence in an appeal to try overturn a referee's decision? Goose and gander, and all that. :)" Definitely, or even use to penalise players who have been shown to take a dive. Bon (Kildare) - Posts: 1898 - 27/05/2021 22:34:26 2346010 Link
Replying To Pikeman96: "Just to throw this into the mix, then: If it's not okay to use video evidence for disciplinary procedures if the referee misses an incident....then surely it shouldn't be okay either to use video evidence in an appeal to try overturn a referee's decision? Goose and gander, and all that. :)" Fair point. I know it would be extremely hard to do with the size of a GAA pitch but static camera is the most accurate. Technology is getting better and hopefully the GAA will have it some day. A ball crossing the line can be called incorrect by the angle of a hand operated or different from one to the other. A camera looking straight down will be accurate. Like I said probable not feasible yet. However when it comes to suspensions I would be a little worried about ones given because of t.v. coverage. No t.v. no action taken. Joe gave Pat the butt end with the camera following play and the officials miss it. However John clips Mick in a row, again the officials miss it but t.v. gets him suspended. Your point is also very valid. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 27/05/2021 22:52:08 2346012 Link
Exactly. Referee wrongly thinks Joe hit Pat, and sends him off. Cameras at the game show Joe was innocent. Joe is cleared. Referee wrongly thinks Joe hit Pat, and sends him off. No cameras at the game. Poor oul' Joe serves a suspension. I just think you can't have it both ways. By the way, didn't actually spot it was yourself who started the thread. Thanks for saying I at least make a decent point. :) Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2229 - 28/05/2021 13:13:10 2346072 Link
Replying To Pikeman96: "Exactly. Referee wrongly thinks Joe hit Pat, and sends him off. Cameras at the game show Joe was innocent. Joe is cleared. Referee wrongly thinks Joe hit Pat, and sends him off. No cameras at the game. Poor oul' Joe serves a suspension. I just think you can't have it both ways. By the way, didn't actually spot it was yourself who started the thread. Thanks for saying I at least make a decent point. :)" The way it works in hockey is the referees call or non call stands if the video is inconclusive. For example the the puck crossing the line. The referee calls no goal. The review does not clearly show it crossed the line even though the goal tenders hand is inside the line but covering the puck. Or the opposite the ref does not take any action when the player hits his opposition on the numbers into the boards. The video clearly shows the opposite it was a dangerous hit. The player is suspended. There are 30 teams who play 80 games with more than 10 games three times a week. While nothing is perfect there are a very small number of controversies. Most seasons none at all. Of course none of this is based on what the t.v. camera said but may confirm it. Our sport is similar in ways but different in ways also. Mainly greater playing area to control. I will tell you we are constantly looking for grey area in the rules that they don't tolerate. The players themselves hate simulations and the ones that do it have a target on their back. Mouthing off by players or coaches to the ref will get you dealt with. The refs themselves will acknowledge a mistake and correct it there and then. We could learn a lot from them but they could learn from us also. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 28/05/2021 15:47:54 2346097 Link
Replying To Canuck: "The way it works in hockey is the referees call or non call stands if the video is inconclusive. For example the the puck crossing the line. The referee calls no goal. The review does not clearly show it crossed the line even though the goal tenders hand is inside the line but covering the puck. Or the opposite the ref does not take any action when the player hits his opposition on the numbers into the boards. The video clearly shows the opposite it was a dangerous hit. The player is suspended. There are 30 teams who play 80 games with more than 10 games three times a week. While nothing is perfect there are a very small number of controversies. Most seasons none at all. Of course none of this is based on what the t.v. camera said but may confirm it. Our sport is similar in ways but different in ways also. Mainly greater playing area to control. I will tell you we are constantly looking for grey area in the rules that they don't tolerate. The players themselves hate simulations and the ones that do it have a target on their back. Mouthing off by players or coaches to the ref will get you dealt with. The refs themselves will acknowledge a mistake and correct it there and then. We could learn a lot from them but they could learn from us also." I have to say I've always admired the officiating and the way things are dealt with in Ice Hockey. They just seem to do things right. I know its a professional sport with vast amounts of money tied up in it and it demands things to be done right, I don't think its too far fetched to get the GAA to follow a similar line, especially at inter county level where there is so much put into it. As you said there could be learning from both sides, especially in relation to the 20 minute intervals imo. Bon (Kildare) - Posts: 1898 - 28/05/2021 18:04:20 2346123 Link
It's my believe that natural justice goes out the window when video evidence get involved, I would accept video evidence for investigating a serious breach of security or serious injury, full stop. Div. 3 and 4 games hurling and football are subject to the same scrutiny for whatever reason there may be, but their games are rarely if ever televised, is plan B to call for radio evidence. supersub15 (Carlow) - Posts: 2907 - 28/05/2021 18:05:39 2346124 Link
Look at sports that have brought in Video reviews and other technologies....and has it reduced controversies etc??? No. Bit old school but unless there is a serious injury let it slide.....sport is sport....it, like life, is not meant to be fair! witnof (Dublin) - Posts: 1604 - 28/05/2021 20:00:06 2346140 Link
Replying To supersub15: "It's my believe that natural justice goes out the window when video evidence get involved, I would accept video evidence for investigating a serious breach of security or serious injury, full stop. Div. 3 and 4 games hurling and football are subject to the same scrutiny for whatever reason there may be, but their games are rarely if ever televised, is plan B to call for radio evidence." Supersub15 I would be on the same page with you. There is value in video but tightly defining on when and how. Like if a player is injured from a foul strike and the officials missed it.I did agree with Pikeman96 about not having it both ways using it in defence of a player. However is a totally wrong call against a player worse that an inconsequential missed call ? In the last minute of a game like the Limerick one when the ball was deflected should it be reviewed as opposed to it happening in the first 5 minute when there are going to be many more influences in the game. ? All good questions. People will say you can't have different calls at different times. Of course you can. Again referencing hockey. With 20 seconds to go and a face off in the attacking zone the ref will check that the clock did not run on and there should be 25 seconds. This is because of the difference 5 seconds might make on tying the game up. If the team are three goals behind no point. Common sense often is lacking. I don't want our games taken up with video replays but it is possible to use discreetly as laid out based on common sense as to where a call has a defining effect on the games result or a players health, safety and ability to play the next game. Your point about the lower divisions is well taking and scruting may be different while giving lip service to wanting them to climb the ladder. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 28/05/2021 20:11:39 2346142 Link
Replying To witnof: "Look at sports that have brought in Video reviews and other technologies....and has it reduced controversies etc??? No. Bit old school but unless there is a serious injury let it slide.....sport is sport....it, like life, is not meant to be fair!" I would have to disagree with you. It has reduced controversies considerable but there will always be some. Would agree with you about on how it should be used and not taking over the game. Everyone player, officials and supporters put so much into our sport we should at least aspire to be fair. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 28/05/2021 20:17:31 2346146 Link
Replying To Canuck: "I would have to disagree with you. It has reduced controversies considerable but there will always be some. Would agree with you about on how it should be used and not taking over the game. Everyone player, officials and supporters put so much into our sport we should at least aspire to be fair." Reduced controversies considerably Canuck? Have you heard of VAR? There's a controversy every week. Greengrass (Louth) - Posts: 6031 - 28/05/2021 20:52:19 2346150 Link
There's a world of difference between using instant video replays in the way that soccer and rugby do, and using video evidence after the fact, like we were first talking about. Also, not often that I've been involved in a GAA discussion that turned to talk of ice hockey! Am actually a fan of the game myself, ever since spending some time in Canada as a young lad back in the early 1990s. Even played a bit (goalkeeper) in what would basically be the equivalent of a five-a-side soccer league. Tough game! One rule I always liked in it is the "third man in" rule, where if a fight breaks out, they let the first two at at, but the third man in and anybody else who joins in too all are automatically sin-binned. I think of it every time I see a brawl breaking out in a GAA match. Think the same rule here would soon "put manners" on hurlers and footballers everywhere! Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2229 - 28/05/2021 20:58:40 2346155 Link
Replying To Greengrass: "Reduced controversies considerably Canuck? Have you heard of VAR? There's a controversy every week." Have you heard about Hawk Eye that is a form of video replay ? Remember them controversies about which side of the pole the ball went at. Again using ice hockey as an example the "the war room" as it is called in Toronto who are monitoring every game as it is played is hugely successful and very seldom disrupts a game. I agree that is probably way too expensive for the GAA. I also don't want our games to be be taken over by video replays but used in a sensible way that where a significant incident has caused injury, influenced a result like Limerick's in the last minute of play and Austin Gleeson's ghost goal where the ref did not have an opinion or the lines men and the two umpires disagreed. A bit of common sense that seems to be hard to find. I know nothing about VAR and shame on them if they can not use a technology properly. Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2655 - 29/05/2021 15:11:28 2346297 Link