As a rule, referees give mixed blessing

GAELIC GAMES/EXPERIMENTAL RULES:IT'S GETTING close to Judgement Day on the GAA's experimental rules and last year's two All-Ireland referees have given them a sort of mixed blessing ahead of Congress on April 17th. Martin Duffy of Sligo, who refereed the 2009 football final, believes all the rules should be made permanent, whereas Cork's Diarmuid Kirwan, referee for last year's hurling final, believes some of them should definitely go.

Both men were speaking in Dublin yesterday as recipients of the Vodafone referees of the year awards for 2009, and Duffy surprised us by giving his full support to all the rules as they apply to football – including the controversial fist pass.

“I think overall they have been a good thing,” said Duffy. “And I believe the main body of football referees also would like to see them all go through. It hasn’t made the referee’s job any different really.

“I think the players and the management bought into the likes of the mark and the hand pass and the square ball. They were the three big ones really from a football point of view. And all have worked well.”

Duffy was adamant the fist-pass rule could only improve the game: “If I was asked for one rule change, before this came in, that would have been it. The hand pass was nearly un-policeable. Managers were coaching quick hands and quick hands turned into very quick hands, and it was very hard to tell whether there was a striking action. Now it is clearly defined, you close your fist and I feel players have bought into it fantastically well.”

The introduction of the so-called “mark” in football is something Duffy also agreed with: “Basically now when somebody catches the ball clean they come down and expect their free. The opposing team get on with it because they have a job to do. If anything I’ve found there’s less melee type things happening. As soon as the guy comes down with the ball everyone is nearly scattering around him straight away. So you have less to actually adjudicate on at that stage.

“It has worked very well and in cases where there’s clear advantage most referees have got the hang of it and are letting guys go. I don’t think there’s been too many complaints over the last few rounds.”

Asked if there has been some inconsistency around these rules Duffy replied: “If you can show me a referee or a manager or a player that hasn’t got a call wrong then I’ll show you God.”

As far as hurling is concerned, Kirwan reckoned it was a case of keeping some rules, and throwing out the others: “There are four main rules here, really, that apply to hurling, and two of the rules we’ve no problem with is the bringing in the throw-in ball 10 metres from the sideline, which takes away a lot of the tension with the managers and substitutes or whatever along the sideline which is a big help.

“And the other one of course is defining the definite striking action of the hand pass. That has been a plus as well because it was getting to the stage where it was just impossible to judge it.

“But the two most contentious rules in hurling are, we’ll say, the goalkeeper’s puck out outside the square (the penalty for which was changed from a 65-metre free, to a throw-in on the 20-metre line). I would have been all for the throw-in ball, doing away with the 65, but you know the throw-in ball at this stage in hurling is getting so unmanageable for referees.

“The other big one that came into hurling was the forwards being allowed into the square before the ball arrived.

“They reckoned it was going to be a help to referees and umpires but unfortunately not. I can tell you the unanimous decision from referees is that we stay as status quo because it’s gone to the stage now that you’re just trying to judge is the player going for the ball?

“Was he going for the goalkeeper?

“Was he in there?

“Was he out there?

“How many were in on top of the goalkeeper?

“But the big plus this year is that each rule is going to go individually before Congress. They aren’t going to be put in as a package and I think that’s going to help. But from a referees’ perspective, and I’m talking about what came out of our meeting, we are in favour of two of the rules.”

Duffy, meanwhile, didn’t sound entirely convinced about the merits of the experimental rule whereby the game can only end when the ball goes out of play, but he rejected the suggestion it was causing problems or ambiguity – and that ultimately there was no reason why the rule shouldn’t stay.

“No, I don’t think so. If you look at it again, the one or two cases where there was a problem have been honed in on. But like the majority of games it’s been an advantage and everybody knows how it’s going to work. So I don’t think it’s been a problem.”