Well at least most of them involved were playing the actual game. It’s the lads that come in from off the sidelines that usually escalate these situations. Can you imagine what would have happened if a Galway lad did that do an Armagh lad? They’d have been down from the stands.
Not Matt Cooper anyway. He was deadly serious. When pointed out to him that this happens in rugby all the time he accused the person of whataboutery.
The difficulty with a criminal prosecution in this particular case if the DPP is minded to press charges, is that the alleged miscreant lives in the United Kingdom. Might have to go down the extradition route.
3 Likes
yeah, are we comparing an incident here of an attempted eye gouge to someone who by all accounts was lucky to survive being struck by a hurl and never played again?
There are definitely incidents on a field that should be prosecuted. This one doesnt come close to it.
Hopefully we don’t end up with Tiarnan Kelly spending the bones of a decade in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to try and prevent that.
A Section 2 assault, maybe even in the District Court, probably more proportionate here than the old grevious bodily harm charge that Mr Cregan faced.
I would agree with this. It was a very scummy thing to do; I’m sure he regrets it now but that’s not the point. But a 6-month ban or whatever, throw the book at him, that should be it dealt with.
2 Likes
If a spectator did that to Comer on Sunday he’d be prosecuted. There’s a leeway given to players/squad members for that sort of act.
If Comer had suffered an eye injury then Kelly would be prosecuted. As he didn’t he won’t be. The consequences of a physical assault almost always determine how seriously it is pursued. You can kill somebody with one punch or you can give them a bruised cheek - the outcome may be luck but it determines what would happen to you before a court.
I’d expect he’ll be banned for 6 months and possibly longer. It was a nasty attack by somebody not on the pitch. He knew what he was at, he reached in to do it and I’d hope he gets a year ban to reflect it.
There’s legal precedent going back to the Ulster semi-final of 1929 (venue Belturbet) where Jamesy Kernan of Armagh died after an incident involving Jim Smith of Cavan and himself.
Smith was charged and brought before the court but it was dismissed.
See things I learned today thread of about a week ago.
1 Like
I think the rule is a red for striking or attempting to strike. Tis for the ladies anyway.
Regret after the event by an alleged perpetrator of an assault shouldn’t be a factor as to whether or not to prosecute. Eye gouging is the wrong side of the dividing line and is the type of conduct that merits criminal prosecution.
I thought he should be prosecuted when my e blood was up yesterday. I’m less sure now, but it’s a grey area, and I’m certainly not against criminal prosecution for sporting thuggery.
That would have been great fun. What we all want to see.
It’s actually an interesting and unsettling area of law, where the trial and punishment is based on the consequence rather than the act.
I am not saying you are trying to condon anything TK did. I know you are not.
But it is highly dangerous to go mainly by effect. Three months, in my view, for what saying so is worth, would be a light penalty.
1 Like
This is what I don’t agree with. His only regret is that it was caught on camera. Only tramps do what he did.
Egg shell skull rule innit.
People can commit the exact same act and be lucky/unlucky as to what consequences that act has.
If Comer’s eye was damaged on Sunday then it’s a very different conversation. Kelly is a lucky lad.
As is comer.
1 Like
A big hefty lad from Naomh Barróg got jail over 20 years ago for an assault in a junior football match. Cc @Big_Dan_Campbell