Westmeath says no to hurling sin bin but Congress says yes

Prominent Westmeath GAA figures were involved in a vigorous debate over cynical fouling in hurling at the recent county committee meeting.

Delegates were debating a Congress motion which proposed punishing certain fouls (on players with a goalscoring opportunity) by introducing a ten-minute spell in the sin bin and a penalty to the attacking team.

Tom Hunt (Westmeath’s Central Council delegate) and referee Barry Kelly, who has overseen a number of All-Ireland hurling finals, spoke in favour of the motion. On the other hand, Westmeath GAA operations manager Pat Doherty was among those who expressed strong opposition.

The motion was subsequently passed by a 61-39 per cent majority at the national GAA Congress.

Under the motion, a penalty shall be awarded in hurling and the offender yellow-carded and sent to the sin-bin for ten minutes if a cynical foul is committed on a player with a goalscoring opportunity either inside the 20-metre line or the semi-circular arc.

Additionally, the offending player will be ordered off for the remainder of the game if the foul is a second caution (a yellow card offence) or one that merits a red card.

In football, a penalty will be awarded if a cynical foul is committed on an attacking player with a goalscoring opportunity inside the 20m line or the semi-circle (the ‘D’).

These changes will only apply to the All-Ireland SHC and SFC and the Allianz Leagues in 2021, but they could be extended to other competitions at a later stage.

At the Westmeath county committee meeting, Damien Keogh (Turin) said such a rule change would lead to many “grey areas” and “headaches”, adding “I’m thinking of a referee’s sanity”.

Tom Hunt explained that the reasoning behind the motion was to curb the growing number of blatant fouls in hurling when a player has a goalscoring opportunity. He pointed to examples from last year’s championship such as one involving Seamus Callanan, when Tipperary were chasing a goal in the closing moments against Galway, saying the “advantage was lost” when he was fouled outside the ‘square’. Hunt contended that there has been an increase in such fouls in recent years, and that the motion was seeking to reduce deliberate and cynical fouling.

Three fouls were specified in the motion - a deliberate pull down, a trip and careless use of the hurley. If any of these fouls are committed inside the designated area of the field to prevent a clear goalscoring opportunity, a penalty would be awarded and the offending player sent to the sin bin for ten minutes.

“It’s designed to give back the advantage to the attacking player,” said Hunt, adding that a yellow card is not a sufficient deterrent for such fouls.

Shane Brody (Ballycomoyle) said the rule would be “an awful burden for referees” who wouldn’t have the benefit of video replays as apply in the case of VAR in soccer and the TMO in rugby. “I think referees have enough to be dealing with at the minute without this,” he said.

Speaking in favour of the rule change, Barry Kelly (St Oliver Plunkett’s) said “the main aim of our games should be to protect skilful players”. He stressed the need to deal with what he sees as a growing problem of cynicism in hurling.

“If you want to pull and drag, you should go to Cullion (where Mullingar rugby club is based) or Buccaneers (the Athlone-based rugby club) to play a different game,” said Kelly.

Agreeing with Hunt and Kelly, Aiden McGuire said cynical tackling in hurling was akin to the “elephant in the room” in the GAA.

McGuire said an attempt to reward the attacking player was overdue and that it was “certainly worth a try at inter-county level”. As to the difficulty in referees applying the rule, McGuire said: “Referees are not infallible but they get a lot right.”

In opposing the rule change, Pat Doherty stressed that he’s not in the camp who thinks hurling is “perfect” and that no changes at all are required. However, the Westmeath GAA operations manager went on to say that the motion is “fundamentally flawed”.

“I don’t think we should be trialling it at the top level. I think that’s wrong,” he said.

Doherty said he would be “extremely concerned” about the referee being the “sole arbiter” of what constitutes a goalscoring opportunity. He also questioned the three fouls listed in the motion, stating that possibly more serious infractions such as rough play would be punished with an “ordinary free” rather than a penalty.

He contended that there were a “huge number of contradictions” in the motion and noted that it would mean a major difference in the size of the ‘penalty area’.

“There is no need to take a sledgehammer to crack a nut,” said Doherty, highlighting the difficulties the motion would present for referees.

“It’s a fundamental change to the game,” added Doherty, who suggested withdrawing the motion from Congress to allow it to be debated at a subsequent Special Congress.

Hunt said the motion was on the clár at Congress because a number of hurling figures, including Kilkenny’s Ned Quinn and Tipperary’s John Gleeson, felt it was too important to leave off it.

In response, Doherty said that Quinn and Gleeson are “no more or less knowledgeable on hurling” than Westmeath people involved in the sport. He said more evidence of such fouling is needed before making such a change.

JP Reynolds (Cullion) contended that the motion was for “the betterment of the game”, adding that “rugby style tackling” on players bearing down on goal was a common feature in the 2020 championship.

Brendan Shaw (Westmeath assistant secretary) expressed the view that “a few media darlings” appeared to be driving the calls for this change in hurling. "I don’t think there is enough evidence that this sanction is required," he said.

Aidan Keogh (Ballycomoyle) and Alfie Devine (Castlepollard) were also against the motion, but Des Maguire (Mullingar Shamrocks) felt there was a danger of “running away from the problem by putting it on the long finger” instead of dealing with it.

A consensus eventually emerged that the majority of Westmeath delegates would be in favour of the Congress postponing debate on the matter until the autumn.

However, Westmeath GAA chairman Frank Mescall said that a vote on the motion itself would have to be taken, in case Westmeath’s “first option” (postponing the motion) would be defeated.

A clear majority of Westmeath delegates then voted against the motion. As things transpired, however, the motion was passed at the national GAA Congress last Saturday week.