Rules hinder rather than help referees

Seán Moran on Gaelic Games: Another Sunday and another referee on the run. The rhetorical question about who in their right minds would want to officiate at matches is once again raised.

It's surely about time that more searching questions were asked about the apparently perpetual problems of enforcing playing rules.

Discipline and rules interact at three levels: the Official Guide, the referee and the committee in charge. At inter-county level - the focus of most weekly discontent - all three are flawed but it's the referee who bears the brunt of the hostility.

In fact the referee is caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of a wilfully outdated rulebook and an administrating committee all but guaranteed to fail.

An interesting document, Disciplinary System - The Need for Change, put into circulation by Pat Daly, the GAA's Head of Games, two months ago considers this whole question.

It makes the point that there are two problem areas: "Defective system for classifying offences. The differences between the various categories of offence, e.g., rough play, dangerous play and striking or kicking, etc. are so vague as to be practically non-existent.

"The fact that set penalties are imposed for specific offences, e.g., rough play (caution/yellow card); dangerous play (one month suspension) and striking/kicking (three month suspension) makes a bad situation worse, particularly when it is a judgment call on the part of the referee that determines the offence and when this, in turn, determines whether sanctions will apply at club and or county level."

The nebulous concepts of rough play and behaving dangerously were probably intended to allow referees a little welcome flexibility but as they are entirely a matter of interpretation they merely create confusion and invite charges of inconsistency.

Pat McEnaney, one of the best football referees, told the Irish Independent that he distinguished between fouls as follows: "If a player is making a genuine attempt to tackle but gets it slightly wrong I will award a free against him but won't tick or book him. I think that's a fair way of doing it but I will act if I think his foul was in any way deliberate."

As a jurisprudence that's very reasonable and as a referee McEnaney is obviously trusted by players to make those sort of calls. But it's not what the Official Guide says. There is no express latitude for officials to interpret the intention of fouling players (with the obvious exception of attempted fouls). Either it's a foul or it's not.

Referees with McEnaney's natural authority can play the whistle a bit free-form but for most officials the rule book is all they have. It has to be more use than it's currently proving.

These reservations emerge even before we look at the playing rules and whether the perennially troublesome tackle needs to be reviewed. This traditionally causes mayhem, with advocates of the current tackle on the ball insistent that properly policed it is more than adequate both for the game and for defenders.

Not everyone agrees. Donegal manager Brian McEniff said on radio earlier in the week he favoured the introduction of the International Rules tackle - a specific entitlement to grab opponents between shoulder and hip, upon which the ball must be immediately released.

Then there are all the current ideas concerning the adoption of sin bins and allowing players dismissed for two yellow cards to be replaced.

What makes the overall situation so depressing is that twice in the past three years GAA Congress has voted not to allow any experimental changes to the playing rules to be conducted for the best part of 10 years. It's like throwing out the fire extinguisher because it's causing an inconvenience.

That, then, is the raw material, with which referees are meant to shape order and fairness during matches.

Then look at what happens afterwards. Referees' reports are the responsibility of the Games Administration Committee. This is one of the most important committees - if not the most important - at national level. Yet the president gets to appoint only one member, the chairman, who is entirely at the mercy of the other members. They are a combination of the elected and the representative - neither quality ideal for taking hard decisions.

For instance, few believe that John McEntee will be brought to book for his elbow on Barry Monaghan.

Because were that to happen, the GAC would have to rule Armagh's centre forward out of the All-Ireland final, which would cause uproar. If the referee had red carded him that would be different; the referee would be to blame.

But the GAC have the power to review Michael Monahan's incorrect decision to treat the foul with a yellow card. Ironically, this power was exercised in the case of the man who will mark McEntee at the end of the month.

Tyrone's Gavin Devlin received a yellow after stamping on Laois's Colm Parkinson in the NFL final.

This was over-ruled and a 12-week suspension imposed.

But even this apparently decisive act was a sleight of hand. During his lengthy ban the player was allowed play for his club - something that would be ruled out had Devlin been sent down for a Category B offence, such as stamping.

Instead he was given four weeks in respect of "dangerous play" - a Category C offence - and that minimum suspension was then trebled.

The chief significance of this was to allow Devlin play for his club and consequently spring back into action with the county as soon as his 12 weeks were up.

Such baffling decision making places in context GAA president Seán Kelly's proposal that the GAC's remit be eventually split into fixtures and discipline. Pat Daly's discussion document proposes that the latter function be the responsibility of: ". . . a small group of independent people - chaired by a solicitor or barrister - are appointed and meet each Monday or Tuesday evening to deal with disciplinary issues from the weekend senior inter-county games."

Hard to argue with that. So bear in mind the next time a lynch mob gathers around a referee that there's plenty that needs to be done at administrative level before referees can be said to operate in anything approaching reasonable conditions.