ragingbull
Well-Known Member
I think Kevin McStay is on one of them not sure if it's ccccccc thoWho are the members of CCCCCCC?
I think Kevin McStay is on one of them not sure if it's ccccccc thoWho are the members of CCCCCCC?
This is Clutching at straws but I would like to point out, I am sure there is another camera angle because there is a cherry picker sitting behind the Armagh goal in the second half and that would have likely had a camera man on it. Can't see any other reason for why a cherry picker would be at that height if it wasn't being used.Want to explain that one?
I wasn’t at the match but given it’s their ground and we play them in the championship I would imagine Donegal put a camera up there to monitor our kick outs and positioning. It would be pretty amateurish if Donegal did not do that. That camera would not be available to penalise or exonerate Armagh. Whether Donegal could bring it forward to defend one of their own is not something i am not qualified to say. But it’s not something we can influenceClutching at straws perhaps but I would like to point out, I am 90% certain there is another camera angle because there is a cherry picker sitting behind the Armagh goal in the second half and that would have likely had a camera man on it. Can't see any other reason for why a cherry picker would be at that height if it wasn't being used.
However, I was trying to find what was happening with Grugan at the end of the game. Some fans have said Murphy did something to Grugan but it was not captured on the TV camera. However, on TV you can clearly see the linesman spotted something going on so much so he jogged a good 30 yards to put an end to it. I am wondering despite seeing this and having to intervene, did the linesman report this? In addition to this, there is possibly another camera angle that has not been shown.
Part of me does not want to probe this considering what has happened but if there is other video evidence surely Armagh management have the right to see it.
You’d like to think so!No evidence that he was involved though. I would imagine there are rules that require him to recuse himself in this instance
CCCC current members: Derek Kent Wexford (Chairperson)
Mary Judge Galway
John Halbert Cork
Seamus Kenny Meath
Martin McHugh DONEGAL
Still hell of a team to have based on league form. If anything 1-9 then 10/12 possibly 13 are going to get much better.Trying to look forward rather than back.
Should all bans remain what 15 are we potentially looking at?
Few ifs and buts in here. Basically if Oisin O'Neill and Turbitt were going well in training I'd start them. A fit Oisin could easily play at 11 (or 14 for that matter).
1. E. Rafferty/ B.Hughes
2. J. Morgan
3. A. Forker
4. A. McKay/ P.Burns
5. C.Mackin/ C. O'Neill
6. G. McCabe
7. J Og Burns
8. Crealey
9. Grimley/ O. O'Neill
10. R. Grugan/ C. O'Neill
11. O.O'Neill/ R. Grugan
12. T. Kelly/ J. Hall
13. J. Duffy
14. A. Murnin
15. C. Turbitt
Bench: ( 4 of the above), R. McQuillan, C. O'Hanlon, C. McConville, S. Sheridan, M. Shields, N. Rowland, C. Higgins.
Think that would be the 26 if all injury free. No doubt I'm forgetting someone obvious.
Considering the 4 suspended that is by no means a bad team. Shows the depth we have.
You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.It's not like you to be angry
That’s the GAA equivalent of having an Orangeman on the Parades Commission.Surely to god even the GAA wouldn't allow someone representing a county involved in the incident to help rule on the outcome?!?!!
The man can't even be impartial when commentating on a match involving his own county!
Yeah you have a point. Wasn’t it strange that RTE could find mobile phone footage of the Tyrone melee, but couldn’t find any of Rian’s penalty?What was the source of the video evidence? I understand first set of rulings based on ref report-but the second from the CCC based on video evidence? Do games have official video footage/recordings that are looked at properly to get some type of context for an action and events leading up it-as in Rugby? is there a clear official recording of the whole 'melee' that shows how it developed, everyone who was involved and how it progressed? Or did the CCC look at a few seconds of mobile phone footage? If that is the case, then amateur hour. Such footage obtained from phone/social media is selective in nature, depending on the intent and interest of the person recording, only going to capture a fraction of what happened and focusing on a particular group of players or an individual-no sense of overall context. The inconsistency and amateur application of these processes.....
I can't be 100% that this is exactly right, but trying to remember back a few years and maybe even in the old forum, I think that video evidence "may" be used if recorded in full by either an official county camera or a broadcaster - RTE as an example.What was the source of the video evidence? I understand first set of rulings based on ref report-but the second from the CCC based on video evidence? Do games have official video footage/recordings that are looked at properly to get some type of context for an action and events leading up it-as in Rugby? is there a clear official recording of the whole 'melee' that shows how it developed, everyone who was involved and how it progressed? Or did the CCC look at a few seconds of mobile phone footage? If that is the case, then amateur hour. Such footage obtained from phone/social media is selective in nature, depending on the intent and interest of the person recording, only going to capture a fraction of what happened and focusing on a particular group of players or an individual-no sense of overall context. The inconsistency and amateur application of these processes.....
Thanks Big man for a considered and informed reply. Just case my post suggested otherwise- I didn't think the Rians citation arose from as a result of the appeal process, I was just clarifying for myself in the first part of my post that the two sets of citations had come through separate processes.I can't be 100% that this is exactly right, but trying to remember back a few years and maybe even in the old forum, I think that video evidence "may" be used if recorded in full by either an official county camera or a broadcaster - RTE as an example.
These are done with permission from HQ (I think) and have to be provided in full and unedited on request. Only an unedited and verifiable version of video evidence may be used. Mobile phone or unofficial recordings have to be disregarded as they are easy to manipulate.
Couple of things on that though:
I can't be sure if that is for defence only or if it was to be used for retrospective bans after a game.
I was fairly sure that there was quite a debate about using video evidence to "accuse" a player not mentioned in a refs report, but think it was still a grey area.
I think if we use video evidence to allow an appeal, then we should have to have it used against us too (that's the royal us and not just Armagh)
I again can't be certain, but to say that we got another citation because of an appeal is bit far fetched. It really takes us far into the realms of paranoia - I know I have joked about the nordie thing many times, but lads.........
hmmmmThat’s the GAA equivalent of having an Orangeman on the Parades Commission.
Never doubted your integrity or sincerity for a single second. Apologies! The bit in bold didn't refer to you (an example of quoting someone's post and being used by me incorrectly) but it was suggested, in fact mentioned as a fact by some.Thanks Big man for a considered and informed reply. Just in case my post suggested otherwise- I didn't think the Rians citation arose from as a result of the appeal process, I was just clarifying for myself in the first part of my post that the two sets of citations had come through separate processes.