GAC to conduct a fresh inquiry into McCartan case

The case against Down's James McCartan arising from an incident in which Westmeath's Kenny Larkin sustained a broken jaw is to be completely re-investigated.

And no action will be taken until the conclusion of the criminal trial concerning the same incident is heard at the beginning of next month.

This has emerged in the wake of last week's Games Administration Committee (GAC) meeting, which ordered the new inquiry. There was some confusion about the outcome of the GAC meeting when it was announced that the investigating committee had been asked to interview two further witnesses.

The Down County Board queried this position, given the assurances they had received that the matter would be completely reviewed, and GAC secretary Seán Ó Laoire has confirmed this is correct.

"The decision taken was that the whole thing should be looked at again," he said.

The difference isn't just semantic. There were concerns in the GAC that a committee of investigation, which had already reported to its parent body (in this case, GAC), could not simply reopen a case.

It is expected that the reconstituted committee of investigation will meet quickly to rehear evidence. At the heart of this review is the testimony of two witnesses who were not heard as part of the original investigation. They are believed to be two of the umpires who officiated at the Westmeath-Down challenge last May.

Played in Newcastle, Co Dublin, with a referee from Down, the match featured local umpires who were among the mere handful of neutral observers.

It will strike many as strange that in those circumstances the committee of investigation didn't talk to the umpires, but it was obviously felt that sufficient evidence had been gathered to establish a case for McCartan to answer.

The current development is just the latest in a long line of delays that have beset the case since the incident in the match nearly nine months ago. For a start, the referee's report went missing and the matter went unconsidered for two months.

Then there was controversy in September when detectives arrived in Croke Park hoping to interview McCartan, who was attending a meeting of the committee of investigation. It was nearly Christmas by the time the GAC had established that there was a case to hear.

Despite a resolution that the matter would be dealt with in early December, there were growing misgivings about conducting the hearing in the absence of McCartan, who by that stage wasn't expected to attend the meeting.

Last week's meeting was supposed to put the matter to bed, but McCartan and Down appeared and asked why the umpires hadn't been invited to give evidence, which prompted the re-investigation.

Because the matter has been running for so long it is now being overtaken by the parallel criminal proceedings. It is now felt that with the court case imminent, it would be inappropriate for the GAC to be delivering a verdict on the matter virtually on the eve of the hearing.

That rules out any action being taken at next month's meeting, March 2nd.

Overall, the long-running controversy raises questions over the current disciplinary procedures. In as much as the GAC acts as a tribunal, there is no facility for the prosecution case to be heard. The committee of investigation looks at the evidence and decides if there is a case to answer.

The committee, comprised of GAC members, takes no part in the subsequent hearing and the defence is the only side heard.

There are suggestions that the GAC's remit may be split between disciplinary and fixture-making functions. Another proposal is that a separate body be established to prosecute cases before the GAC or its disciplinary arm.