2010 Newstalk Provincial Towns Cup

[Helium54]

Considering how the game was played out, Ashbourne were well within their rights to complain. The rules say you can only have five subs. This means that the coach must make a decision on how to split the three subs they carry in addition to the front row. Do they take a second row and a back row and a utility back. Do they split it 2 front rows, a utility forward, and two backs. And so on.

If Ashbourne travelled to the game with five subs, having made that decision, that will have an impact on how the match. For example, Mullingar by having four subs probably had in addition to the two front rowers, a second row, back row, scrum half, out-half and outside backs cover on the bench. The fact that they only used four of them is irrelevant. It meant that at key moments in the match, they were able to choose from seven subs to make their changes, while Ashbourne could only choose from five.

[Dublinner]

Considering how the game was played out, Ashbourne were well within their rights to complain. The rules say you can only have five subs. This means that the coach must make a decision on how to split the three subs they carry in addition to the front row. Do they take a second row and a back row and a utility back. Do they split it 2 front rows, a utility forward, and two backs. And so on.

If Ashbourne travelled to the game with five subs, having made that decision, that will have an impact on how the match. For example, Mullingar by having four subs probably had in addition to the two front rowers, a second row, back row, scrum half, out-half and outside backs cover on the bench. The fact that they only used four of them is irrelevant. It meant that at key moments in the match, they were able to choose from seven subs to make their changes, while Ashbourne could only choose from five.

Well within their rights to complain. Does affect the game. But Ashbourne definitley, definitley should have mentioned it beforehand. Slyly photographing the bench etc?? I mean FFS thats just not cricket or rugby

Hope Mullingar win the replay despite their sloppy mistake. Team manager should be shot. Ref should also have copped it

[Armchair]

Considering how the game was played out, Ashbourne were well within their rights to complain. The rules say you can only have five subs. This means that the coach must make a decision on how to split the three subs they carry in addition to the front row. Do they take a second row and a back row and a utility back. Do they split it 2 front rows, a utility forward, and two backs. And so on.

If Ashbourne travelled to the game with five subs, having made that decision, that will have an impact on how the match. For example, Mullingar by having four subs probably had in addition to the two front rowers, a second row, back row, scrum half, out-half and outside backs cover on the bench. The fact that they only used four of them is irrelevant. It meant that at key moments in the match, they were able to choose from seven subs to make their changes, while Ashbourne could only choose from five.

Well within their rights to complain. Does affect the game. But Ashbourne definitley, definitley should have mentioned it beforehand. Slyly photographing the bench etc?? I mean FFS thats just not cricket or rugby

Hope Mullingar win the replay despite their sloppy mistake. Team manager should be shot. Ref should also have copped it

They were correct to photograph the bench a very smart move which helped them get a replay. Too many teams name "dodgy" subs as well, Using a registered name but not a registered player, I hope it is not as widespread as it used to be but have no doubt it does go on. Every player should have a photo id with his reg number as the mins & youths do, it will take a few years before it works its way up to the senior teams but it will bring fairness to the whole process.

[Broken Wing]

They were correct to photograph the bench a very smart move which helped them get a replay.

If they had won they would of course have insisted the game be replayed due to the administrative error that they were just documenting.

They spotted it before kick off and rather than pointing it out then they played the game knowing they could cry to the organisers if they were beaten. Very poor show.

[Armchair]

They were correct to photograph the bench a very smart move which helped them get a replay.

If they had won they would of course have insisted the game be replayed due to the administrative error that they were just documenting.

They spotted it before kick off and rather than pointing it out then they played the game knowing they could cry to the organisers if they were beaten. Very poor show.

I have no affiliation for either club but the rules are the rules you live and die by them end of story, Ashbourne knew them Mullingar didn't and in my experience the branch send rule reminders to each club before cup games as sometimes there are a few different rules between league games and area cup games. As I said earlier I think the ref should have brought this to the team managers attention when the team sheet was handed to him but he didn't and Ashbourne were perfectly within their rights to do what they did and the comittee agreed with them. Just because we don't like the outcome we shouldn't criticise a team when they exercise their right to object to another team breaking the rules, I would safely say Mullingar will never make that mistake again.

[Broken Wing]

I'm not affiliated to either club but I am from Mullingar so naturally I'd be leaning towards them when they're facing a side from Eastwestmeath.

[Armchair]

I'm not affiliated to either club but I am from Mullingar so naturally I'd be leaning towards them when they're facing a side from Eastwestmeath.

Fair enough, if they beat Ashbourne once they can do it again! They need to chanell their sense of anger and injustice and inflict a valentines massacre! Best of luck to them

[Durkah Durkah]

Everyone is being a little naive here. The majority of teams do this in all competitions. Refs are given the team sheet of registered players before the game. The 6th or 7th sub is used under the name of one of the 5 subs listed. How is the ref supposed to know the difference between John Smith and Joe Bloggs. It usually favours the home team more than the away team as the home team has everyone there.

Having identy cards is not really going to help during the match unless the player runs up to the ref as he comes on, shows him his ID and the ref checks the A4 size cardboard teamsheet for his name. He is not going to remember 40 faces before he leaves the changing rooms.

Neutral, qualified touch judges would help solve this issue, but that is just not practical at this level as there is a shortage of referees as it is.

Being allowed 7 subs might help.

For Ashbourne, or any other team for that matter, to notice there must have been very obviously a loaded bench. Stupid mistake to be so obvious to get punished for something almost everyone does. For all any of us know Ashbourne could have had 7 subs too, but kept there guys behind the railings.

[Broken Wing]

The Mullingar team list given to the ref had 7 subs named. The number sitting on the bench wasn't really the issue.

[the spoofer]

Everyone is being a little naive here. The majority of teams do this in all competitions. Refs are given the team sheet of registered players before the game. The 6th or 7th sub is used under the name of one of the 5 subs listed. How is the ref supposed to know the difference between John Smith and Joe Bloggs. It usually favours the home team more than the away team as the home team has everyone there.

Having identy cards is not really going to help during the match unless the player runs up to the ref as he comes on, shows him his ID and the ref checks the A4 size cardboard teamsheet for his name. He is not going to remember 40 faces before he leaves the changing rooms.

Neutral, qualified touch judges would help solve this issue, but that is just not practical at this level as there is a shortage of referees as it is.

Being allowed 7 subs might help.

For Ashbourne, or any other team for that matter, to notice there must have been very obviously a loaded bench. Stupid mistake to be so obvious to get punished for something almost everyone does. For all any of us know Ashbourne could have had 7 subs too, but kept there guys behind the railings.

The identity card system would work fine as it does at junior level.

Both teams present the other team with the team sheet and book of id cards, the manager of each team can check the player to the card. If they dont match then cheating team loses game. Quite simple really and no reason why it shouldn't happen unless we have the council of civil liberties compalining that it infringes peoples rights to have to carry id!

[silly punt]

If 7 subs were named on the team sheet as has been suggested above, the referee should not have allowed the game to start. He should have asked Mullingar to nominate their 5 subs. If ashbourne noticed before or shortly into the game they should heave brought it to the refereees attention and not had an each way bet on whether they won the game.

As I see it they are the 3 issues, firstly clubs are told ignorance of the rules is no defence, but in my opinion if the referee doesn't know the rules we are all screwed. Therefor this guy should be admonished and regraded to a lower level until he learns the relevant rules.

Mullingar clearly broke the rules and can have no complaints and Ashbourne can count themselves lucky as they clearly were aware that Mullingar had broken the rules. But their actions hardly cover them in glory either.

[groundhog]

The facts of this case are simple :-

The issue was Mullingar were un-prepared and didn't submit the team sheet until the ref was preparing to leave the dressing room, assuming all was correct the ref did not want to delay kick off and left the team sheet in his bag.

So at this stage the ref nor Ashbourne were aware of any team sheet violations.

But as the game progessed it was pretty obvious Mullingar had 7 subs togged out. When the game finished Ash asked to see the Mullingar team sheet as is their right, which remember wasn't available prior to the game and at this stage the anomaly was discovered.

Mullingar made an administrative error and in light of the branch reiterating last Thurs the 5 named replacements rule they really have no excuse.

[Durkah Durkah]

I find it strange that the ref did not check the sheet as from a safety point of view he has to know if two replacement front rows (hooker and prop) have been nominated. Having said that you really would have to be a complete plonker to enter 7 subs on the sheet. Lack of communication between club secretary and manager perhaps?
If 7 were written down I have no sympathy.
I have heard, admittedly through a densely populated grape vine covered in Chinese whispers, that the manager has now resigned and the President is stepping down. Don't believe the pres one obviously but manager I can believe. Anyone know have their been knock on effects within the club, or just want to add fuel to a small fire?!!

[Armchair]

I find it strange that the ref did not check the sheet as from a safety point of view he has to know if two replacement front rows (hooker and prop) have been nominated. Having said that you really would have to be a complete plonker to enter 7 subs on the sheet. Lack of communication between club secretary and manager perhaps?
If 7 were written down I have no sympathy.
I have heard, admittedly through a densely populated grape vine covered in Chinese whispers, that the manager has now resigned and the President is stepping down. Don't believe the pres one obviously but manager I can believe. Anyone know have their been knock on effects within the club, or just want to add fuel to a small fire?!!

Any talk of resignation would be a bit pre mature ahead of the replay, I would think. Don't know the people involved but like any other club I am sure the people involved do their best to make sure they do the right thing and gives loads of their free time in trying to improve Mullingar RFC they will have learnt from this and it will only make them stronger and more experience some of the best make mistakes now and again

[hands away]

mullingar won the replay 20-8, fair play to them, rather than feeling sorry for themselves seem to have accepted it and if anything used it as motivation.

same 2 playing in the league next week also in mullingar, given the fact it was a replay would they not have played one game for both?? either way doesnt hold well for Ash's promotion hunt.

[r e seeding]

what would happen if a serious injury happened during this game and it was the sub who was named in 6th or 7th place on the team sheet ?

[Armchair]

what would happen if a serious injury happened during this game and it was the sub who was named in 6th or 7th place on the team sheet ?

The same as if he was named 1st or 2nd

[r e seeding]

so if you named 20 subs on the card they would all be insured ?
surley the club needs to name the players not only for the competition rules but also from an insurance side

[Armchair]

so if you named 20 subs on the card they would all be insured ?
surley the club needs to name the players not only for the competition rules but also from an insurance side

Yeah if you named 20 subs on the card they would all be insured if they are paid up members. It is club membership that entitles you to insurance cover (as limited as it is) or if your policy is up to date if you are contributing to a private scheme, I think the team sheet is irrelevant really as regards insurance cover.

[silly punt]

The provincial towns cup draw will be broadcast on Newstalk this Saturday afternnon just after 4pm, for anybody who is interested.