'What are they supposed to do? Not go for it?' - Cleary criticises mark rule after defeat to Kerry

Cork manager John Cleary during the game at SuperValu Páirc Uí Chaoimh. Picture: David Fitzgerald/Sportsfile

John Cleary has said the rules governing the kickout mark need to be reviewed after Cork were thrice penalised for interfering with the Kerry ball-winner, infractions that cost them six second-half points at a time when the sides were level.

Within the space of seven second-half minutes in the third quarter, referee Derek O’Mahoney brought the ball forward 50 metres when deeming Cork players to have intentionally halted the Kerry kickout winner. 

Kerry brought all three frees back outside the arc for successful orange flag conversions.

The respective rule, in brief summation, is that a player cannot be interfered with for four steps after claiming a kickout mark. If they are deliberately stopped or delayed during those four steps, the ball is brought forward 50 metres.

O’Mahoney’s application of the rule at Páirc Uí Chaoimh early on Saturday evening significantly hurt Cork.

“They are going for the ball initially and next thing they land down in front of the player and next thing it is 50 metres brought forward. What are they supposed to do? Not go for it? It was on both sides, but I thought we were hit particularly hard on it after half-time,” Cleary remarked.

“The ball going out to the wing, Kerry guy caught it, [Cork] fella came down, just stood there because of his momentum, or [momentum] took him into the player. Completely unintentional.

Jack O'Connor also criticised the rule after the game. Picture: David Fitzgerald/Sportsfile

“Not an excuse, it is just a general comment that the rule has to be looked at. Surely it has to be intentional. If the player is going for the ball with the intent of trying to win it and his momentum takes him [into the ball winner], surely the referee can see if it is intentional or not. I do think it needs to be looked at.” 

While the third quarter was match-defining, Cleary knew they had failed to make the opening half similarly defining when supported by a near gale.

“Disappointed. We got off to a bad start. We had a bit of a breeze and giving away a goal like that unsettled us for a bit. But we settled then and up to half-time I thought we did play well.

“Now, we missed two gilt-edged goal chances, maybe they missed one as well. And we had to fight very hard to get up three points at half-time. With that wind there, we needed more of a cushion probably at half-time.

“After half-time, we added one from a free and then they caught maybe three or four kickouts. You won't make excuses but I thought our lads made a genuine attempt to go for the ball, came down, stopped, and the next thing they were deemed to be in front of the player or whatever. There were some awfully strange decisions there on that. What's a fella supposed to do? You go for the ball and the next thing three of them are over the bar, six points, and we were two points down.

“If we had any chance, we had to hang on to it for a bit longer than that. Kerry kicked some great scores, particularly they kicked six or seven two-pointers. The game was going away from us then. We were eight points down, missed a penalty then and whatever chance we had of taking it into the last ten minutes then... look, beaten by 11 was maybe a small bit harsh on us but Kerry scored wonderful two-pointers particularly and that's why they won the game.” 

Meath and Roscommon finishing level means a Cork victory over Roscommon in two weeks’ time will send them through in third place and into an away preliminary quarter-final.

“Tomorrow is another day. We'll have to brush things down. At least we will have two weeks now. Traveling up and down to Meath, and only a week's break, was pretty tough. Not an excuse. But I did think we tired there in the second period. It was maybe as a slight result of last week.”

So what is the rule?

It's not that penalising a player for obstructing an opponent taking a Mark is new - it's the 50m penalty that has caught everyone's attention. However the interpretation of what constitutes an infringement does appear to have changed. Players taking a Mark are taking advantage of the proximity of an opponent when they begin their four metres allowance.

Playing on immediately - the kick out Mark (i) A player who makes a kickout mark may play on immediately and, in this circumstance, the player may not be challenged within four metres of the position from where the kickout Mark is made.

(ii) If the player is illegally challenged, within four metres of the position from where the kickout Mark is made, a free kick shall be awarded 50m more advantageous than the place of the original mark - up to the opponents' 13m line. The player taking the free may choose to take the free from outside the 40m arc though the application of this rule would otherwise result in a free kick frm inside the 40m arc.