Enough nonsense about the rules, at the end of the day it's a sport and if you can't display good sportsmanship, then forget about it. Peake Villa's honour is gone.
No, I have moved on from that, and I accept that the game re-started normally after the throw in, which makes me wonder even more why the Clonmel players effectively stopped playing.Originally Posted by Quietman
Again I still don't think you understand!!!! The referee didn't stop play because of the injury. Play was stopped when Clonmel Towns keeper put the ball out of play. Play then correctly restarted with a throw in to Peake. Fogarty then scored and the goal was allowed........................So how do you now accuse the referee of not firmly sticking to the rules????? The match was abandoned because of the behaviour of both teams afterwards....................
What I meant by the referee sticking to the rules, was that he should have carried the game on to its conclusion. Though, I also accept that the behaviour of both teams afterwards meant this may not have been possible.
I do however still feel, that the game should not begin again from the start, but should resume where it finished i.e. 1-0 to Peake with Clonmel down to 10 men
Enough nonsense about the rules, at the end of the day it's a sport and if you can't display good sportsmanship, then forget about it. Peake Villa's honour is gone.
It would have been impossible to continue, control had been lost through no fault of the officials....and player safety is then of concern...........
The only possible outcome imo is a full replay.......with the strongest referee possible!!
"There is no pressure at the top. The pressure's being second or third."
No, it would not be within the laws of the game. Any re-scheduled game must be played in its entirety.
Where's the fairness in that, considering that the action which ultimately lead to the abandonment was the inability of Clonmel Town player to control himself i.e. Moroneys sending off ?
Won't any outcome depend on refs report and who he blames for abandoning game.if he blames a particular club surely they will forfeit the game??
What's baffling as well is that a draw wouldnt have been a bad result for Villa in the match....It would have meant that a win over Saints this Sunday (at home) would have won them the league!
Now even a win might not do it, as they will still have to replay against Town, who will be more than up for it, even if they do have a fixture congestion!
I note your use of the word 'fairness' with interest. You're the one that keeps banging on about the rules. For the record the rule books says that if a referee abandons a game it shall be replayed unless specific rules applying to this competition state otherwise. I am not aware of a distinct set of rules that apply to the TSDL Premier League so this match will be replayed.
I don't think Moroney was the reason the game was abandoned. The referee made the decision to abandon the game on health & safety grounds primarily due to an unsporting incident that could have resulted in a competitive game turning violent. The referee has a duty of care to the people involved and I say fair play to him (Now I can praise referees).
Remember this is SPORT. Do you not think that at any stage during his uncontested run towards the goal that the Villa player thought something is not quite right here. By continuing he threw the concept of sport out the window. Shame on him and those who condone him. I'd hate to be involved in the sport if that is the way we play it.
Last edited by Roberto; 29/04/2010 at 8:38 AM.
I'm sorry Roberto, but you are wrong in what you are saying. The game wasn't abandoned after the Villa goal. The game was re-started after the goal. As it should have been. Then the tackle by Moroney lead to a free for all, at which time the referee decided against re-starting on the basis of health and safety. The violent tackle ultimately lead to the abandonment.I note your use of the word 'fairness' with interest. You're the one that keeps banging on about the rules. For the record the rule books says that if a referee abandons a game it shall be replayed unless specific rules applying to this competition state otherwise. I am not aware of a distinct set of rules that apply to the TSDL Premier League so this match will be replayed.
[i]I don't think Moroney was the reason the game was abandoned. The referee made the decision to abandon the game on health & safety grounds primarily due to an unsporting incident that could have resulted in a competitive game turning violent.[i] The referee has a duty of care to the people involved and I say fair play to him (Now I can praise referees
Remember this is SPORT. Do you not think that at any stage during his uncontested run towards the goal that the Villa player thought something is not quite right here. By continuing he threw the concept of sport out the window. Shame on him and those who condone him. I'd hate to be involved in the sport if that is the way we play it.
And I stick by my position. Under the rules of the game, Villa did nothing wrong. Why should the Villa player have stopped his run, even if the Clonmel players weren't contesting his run.
Don't get me wrong here. I fully understand where the majority of people are coming from, and see why they might be angry about what happened. But it's a bit like being angry at the Henry handball. You suck it up and play on.
Just a note. I discussed the incident this morning with a former Clonmel Town player. Long rtired by the way, but played with them as far back as the Munster Senior League team 30 odd years ago. And in his opinion, the Villa player did the right thing. He had no sympathy for his old club. His first rule of football... play the whistle
We'll agree to disagree. Hopefully Celtic can sneak in undetected now and win the League!
Not really Roberto.. because to do so, would be to imply that I could potentially be as wrong as you could potentially be.
Wheras I have fact on my side. The game was not abandoned over the goal incident. It was abandoned over the violent tackle which precipitated more violence afterwards.
And by the way, yes, I would love to see Celtic win the league. They are a fine team with a fine management structure which deserves some success.
You are wrong Rock, It was the manner in which the goal was scored that caused the whole incident. The Peake players acknowledged this and admitted that they were wrong, and said that they would allow Town to score. Barry Ryan ran past several Peake players with the ball on route to goal, as they had agreed to leave him pass. One player then tackled Barry Ryan. This inflamed an already heated incident and It was then Moroney stupidly tackled a Peake player and the brawl ensued. So if you were there on the night you would have seen that it was Peake Villas behaviour that started the whole incident and while Moroney was, as I said stupidly behaved, it wasn't he who caused the incident. And for the record I'm not a Town supporter.....................
"There is no pressure at the top. The pressure's being second or third."
If what you say is correct then Peake villa must be awarded the points.ie match abandoned because of dangerous tackle which led to melée.if not what's stopping any club that's losing a game getting it abandoned in order to get a replay.don't agree what happened during the game but it happened and the tsdl and refs society are going to have to sort this out.
Absolute rubbish, just because a player is guilty of serious foul play, it doesn't warrant BOTH teams to act in the way they did. Both Teams are at fault for the melee as they should have left the referee deal with it. Furthermore the only responsibility of the referee society after this game is for the referee on the night to submit his report on the match to the league. It is solely the Leagus responsibilty to deal with the aftermath!!
"There is no pressure at the top. The pressure's being second or third."
I've followed this since the outset and it looks to me that it will be the incident immediately preceeding the abandonement of the game that will be the deciding factor , not what caused the tackle.
That is the way it works. To do otherwise would not make sense.
Last edited by smasher; 29/04/2010 at 11:47 AM.
I was over at the game and have been talking to a few players since.....there seem to be a number of things which have not been mentioned by supporters but which the players have said themselves and from talking to them i have gathered.
1. Richie Ryan did not see Tony Scully down injured and it was only when the Peake manager shouted to him to put the ball out he then did so - admittedly the keeper said he would have put it out once he saw tony himself but at the time he didnt.
2. Ye refer to peake being on the attack. When the ball was kicked out the attack had clearly ended as it was a hopeless ball over the top which the keeper collected easily at the edge of the box with no villa player within 10 yards of him. To suggest villla were on the attack at the time was wrong.
3. When Fogarty came and took the ball he was saying to those around him he was giving it back but when he ran in along he changed tune and then said that he didn't have to give it back (which as some have posted already he did not - but at the end of the day that was his choice). By saying he was giving it back the town players had moved out hence the reason none of them were near him when he recieved it and would not have been able to challenge it. For those saying 'why weren't the town players trying to stop him' it was apparently clear to everyone in the complex (in that moment) that the done thing to do is give the ball back in these circumstances and not even nostradamus himself could have seen what was coming so how were the town players expected to?
4. From talking to the villa players after they thought he was just going to kick the ball over the end line instead of knocking it back into the keepers hands. They said even when he proceeded to go around the keeper they thought it was for a joke and that he would leave it there on or near the line and never imagined that he would do what he did - even at that stage.
5. Yes people can say 'well anyone other than Barry Ryan would have been let score'. It is too late to say this once the game was over - and had never indicated this before hand. They had made the mistake in the first place and should have just swallowed their pride and let whoever it was to be knock the ball into the net. Are people really that petty? Would letting barry ryan be the one to knock it into the net be worse than what had happened 2 minutes before.
6. Yes what insued was totally wrong but this is junior football and to incite players in this manner who are not paid to keep their cool or to play football is totally wrong. Because it is Clonmel Town some think this is a typical reaction. However you have to ask yourself if you were playing in a game with such meaning for both teams and this happened to you how would you react????honestly....in the exact same infuriated manner i would imagine...no one could blame them.
I feel sorry for everyone involved and alot of the Peake players. The rivalry will be tarnished i fell in the future, to the degree that if i could get a few bob on a player getting sent off in the next meeting i wouldIts a really sad way to end what has been an excitiing season for the tsdl. Lets hope things dont get worse before they get better whatever the outcome and fallout may be from this.
I think you misunderstood me.what I mean to say is if the referee blames one of the clubs for causing melée will they not forfeit the game. A lot will depend on refs report so they have a big say in the outcome of the decision.was there members of tsdl at the game?
The best post so far and 100% accurate,that is to a tee exactly what happenedI was over at the game and have been talking to a few players since.....there seem to be a number of things which have not been mentioned by supporters but which the players have said themselves and from talking to them i have gathered.
1. Richie Ryan did not see Tony Scully down injured and it was only when the Peake manager shouted to him to put the ball out he then did so - admittedly the keeper said he would have put it out once he saw tony himself but at the time he didnt.
2. Ye refer to peake being on the attack. When the ball was kicked out the attack had clearly ended as it was a hopeless ball over the top which the keeper collected easily at the edge of the box with no villa player within 10 yards of him. To suggest villla were on the attack at the time was wrong.
3. When Fogarty came and took the ball he was saying to those around him he was giving it back but when he ran in along he changed tune and then said that he didn't have to give it back (which as some have posted already he did not - but at the end of the day that was his choice). By saying he was giving it back the town players had moved out hence the reason none of them were near him when he recieved it and would not have been able to challenge it. For those saying 'why weren't the town players trying to stop him' it was apparently clear to everyone in the complex (in that moment) that the done thing to do is give the ball back in these circumstances and not even nostradamus himself could have seen what was coming so how were the town players expected to?
4. From talking to the villa players after they thought he was just going to kick the ball over the end line instead of knocking it back into the keepers hands. They said even when he proceeded to go around the keeper they thought it was for a joke and that he would leave it there on or near the line and never imagined that he would do what he did - even at that stage.
5. Yes people can say 'well anyone other than Barry Ryan would have been let score'. It is too late to say this once the game was over - and had never indicated this before hand. They had made the mistake in the first place and should have just swallowed their pride and let whoever it was to be knock the ball into the net. Are people really that petty? Would letting barry ryan be the one to knock it into the net be worse than what had happened 2 minutes before.
6. Yes what insued was totally wrong but this is junior football and to incite players in this manner who are not paid to keep their cool or to play football is totally wrong. Because it is Clonmel Town some think this is a typical reaction. However you have to ask yourself if you were playing in a game with such meaning for both teams and this happened to you how would you react????honestly....in the exact same infuriated manner i would imagine...no one could blame them.
I feel sorry for everyone involved and alot of the Peake players. The rivalry will be tarnished i fell in the future, to the degree that if i could get a few bob on a player getting sent off in the next meeting i would
Please dont turn this post in to the FAI Thread! If game is to be re-played, then let that happen. Villa will have to put in a huge effort to beat Town and Saints to win the league - as someone already said, you need a strong Ref, (but to be honest, there isnt too many of them in the TSDL League), P Keane is a good referee in my opinion but is from Clonmel Town, so he wont be doing it.
Town and Saint Michaels have had some really tough games over the years and often went off the boil. This is what happens when there are things at stake. Good luck to all teams left who have a chance in winning the league and let's hope we can look forward to an FAI semi final in Cahir in Sunday week who ever Town will be against.
Right a couple of points to make with regards what may happen now,
1. What fogarty did was the most unsporting thing a player could do, disgusting and embarrassing. I wouldnt want to be involved in anything like that at any time. But if we go by a rule book he has no case to answer. Please dont confuse this with me condoning it as i think it was distastefull in the extreme. However he actually broke no rule.
2. With regards to what happened after i can understand Clonmel Towns fury at peake not allowing them to score (regardless of who the player was) and while i'm not saying it was right for moroney to put the tackle in that he did i can only imagine how incensed he was at the previous actions that provoked him into it. Again the tackle was not right and he was correct in being sent off.
3. It seems to me at this point after the tackle that things got very heated, again understandably so. Now this is the real kicker anyone with any sense of social decency or moral ethics or even a degree of sportsmanship can see that Fogarty scoring the goal he did and peake preventing town from equalising actually caused the problems. However if this were to go to a meeting i fail to see how a committee can punish peake villa. From a a legal stand point did fogarty do anything wrong? the answer is no (unfortunately) Did they do anything wrong by stopping town score? again in theory no. Any official can only look at things from this point of view no matter how they may feel as individuals about the situation. So this brings us back to the Moroney tackle and from here on in is where any committee or body will have to start to look at the situation. It seems that after the tackle the scuffles broke out that led to the abadonment. Now we all now what caused Moroney to react the way he did but again in theory and in the rule book peake did nothing wrong ( however disgusting it was)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks