Congress may plug ‘alleged’ disciplinary loophole

The GAA hope to plug one of the biggest loopholes in their disciplinary system at next week’s Congress.

Central Council have already adopted the organisation’s rule advisory committee recommendation allowing the Central Hearings Committee (CHC) to alter an ‘alleged’ infraction to a lesser or different one.

A number of cases have been thrown out by the CHC because a player has either been alleged to have struck or kicked an opponent when they have actually made an attempt to. The same has happened when players might have been cited for striking or kicking and done neither but still contributed to a melee or behaved dangerously to an opponent, both of which are also category three offences and carry minimum one-match bans.

Last year, Mayo footballer Lee Keegan succeeded in having his proposed one-match ban overturned by the CHC.

Keegan had been shown a red card by David Coldrick for kicking out at Johnny Buckley in the drawn All-Ireland semi-final. Coldrick penalised him for kicking and the CCCC in turn recommended a one-match ban.

However, Mayo were able to highlight video evidence where Keegan didn’t actually make contact with Buckley and the defender was allowed to play in the replay in Limerick.

Attempting to strike or kick carries the same penalty as making contact but there have been situations where players have escaped sanction as a result of the technicality.

Conor Gormley was sent off for his involvement in a half-time altercation in the 2013 All-Ireland quarter-final against Monaghan.

Tyrone succeeded in proving to the CHC the alleged infraction was unproven. Clare’s Cratloe also have a motion on the clár of Congress calling for video evidence to be the only type admissible to contest an alleged infraction.

They propose the rule now reads as “a referee’s report, including any clarification thereto, shall be presumed to be correct in all factual matters and may only be rebutted where unedited video evidence contradicts it”.

It previously allowed “other compelling evidence” and video be taken into consideration.