Blow the whistle on inconsistent refereeing

WITH two rounds of the 2008 National Hurling League behind us already it’s beginning to grate.

I’m talking about the refereeing, the lack of refereeing in some cases, the over-refereeing in others.

Let’s take the lack of first.

How many times in games of hurling now (football is even worse) do you see a free being awarded, or a line ball, and the ball being moved forward again, then again, then yet again, with up to 10 yards sometimes gained. What is it with players that they feel they absolutely must move the ball forward before they can take the free/sideline?

The first thing they do is take up a position forward of the ball, reach back, and bring it forward; then, bent over, examining the grass for a suitable patch on which to place the ball, they find none, and move forward yet again. Nine times out of 10 they get away with it. And if the angle is a little steep they edge towards the centre. All the while the referee has turned his back and is already tuning himself into the next possible breakdown.

Why are players allowed to consistently infringe like this? There are two linesmen, one on each side; when a line-ball is awarded. Why doesn’t the linesman stay there until the ball is placed, insist that if a suitable ‘set’ isn’t found, the player can then move back a few yards, but not forward?

Why is it that when a free is awarded, the linesman who is nearest the spot doesn’t stand there and insist the ball is placed on or behind the spot?

This is not a problem that is impossible to police. Stamp out the cheaters now. If the ball is moved forward even a foot, a throw-in should result.

In the first league game I saw this year, Galway/Clare in Galway, Seamus Roche of Tipperary — one of the best referees around — penalised the Clare free-taker for pausing with the ball on his stick, just before the strike.

Roche was absolutely right; this practice is now becoming endemic in hurling, at every level. However, the player is fouling the ball. The ball is meant to be picked in the air, or rolled then flicked in the air, in a single fluid movement. Holding it on the stick while moving forward, for even a split second, is a free and should be penalised every time.

Then there’s the amount of unpenalised holding going on by defenders; forwards get blown for it, every time, but defenders?

In around the square you’ll often see forwards being mugged — pulled, dragged and held. But how often do you see the free.

To the over-refereeing. How many times, game after game, do we see referees blowing for a free when the man who has been fouled is already clear and in the act of striking? Too often. How many times do we see a player penalised for pulling on a ball but making contact with a player who has failed to protect himself?

As far as I’m concerned the first duty of care for any player is to himself; if you’re going to try to catch a high ball, make sure you are protecting your hand from anyone who is about to pull — as any player is entitled to do — on the same ball. If you haven’t, and you get hit, then it’s your own fault. And, it’s no free.

It is the same deal on a low ball. If you’re going out to catch, again, make sure you protect yourself from the first-time pull; again, if you’re hit, no free. Finally, the clash ball. Why is it called the clash? Two players stand shoulder to shoulder, hurleys on the ground, the referee/linesman throws in the ball, both are meant to pull.

Often though we see one player take a step forward, bend and try to catch the ball. I often did this myself, sacrificed the leg to the pull for the chance of gaining clean possession and suffered whatever punishment came my way. Yet often, in today’s game, you see a free given against the man who did what he was supposed to do, pulled on the throw-in ball. .

This is not to condone dirty play. A deliberately malicious pull, one which was nowhere near the ball but was meant solely to injure, that I would penalise, and a lot more severely than is being done at the moment. But a pull on the ball, no.

The advantage rule would take care of some of the refereeing problems such as the premature blast on the whistle, or the blast not heard at all because the ref allowed play to run; a time-clock would take care of others.

Why we have neither in the GAA is still beyond me.

On the refereeing, however, a bit of consistency, please, and a bit of common-sense.

[e-mail]