"The Central Competitions Control Committee [CCCC] considered the matter and it will not be going any further, " said the Kilkenny native. "In the various cases the referee acted, be it awarding a free or a yellow card. As a result of the Ryan McMenamin DRA case in 2005, we don't have the authority to revisit the matter."

But the President is wrong in maintaining that the issue cannot be re-examined. It can be re-opened under Rule 144 (d, e and f) which only came in to being last January.

The new law allows the CCCC to write to the referee, send a video of a particular incident and ask him for clarification as to whether he is still satisfied the correct decision was made.

This could not be done before the rule was introduced because once the referee dealt with an incident in the course of the game, the player could not get a suspension subsequently. However that no longer applies and if the referee, on seeing the new evidence from the CCCC, agrees he has made a mistake, then the CCCC can propose a penalty.

So if the referee sees the new evidence and writes back saying he should have issued a red instead of a yellow, then the player is charged and the CCCC propose a penalty which the player can either accept or reject. If he accepts it, he is suspended as appropriate but if he doesn't accept, he can seek a hearing.

If the referee writes back though, to tell the committee that he is still satisfied, despite the additional evidence furnished to him that the yellow card he gave is sufficient, then that is the end of the matter and the player will not suffer any further consequence.

However in a case where there is obvious striking and the referee refuses to budge from his original decision of a yellow to a red, it would be hard to see him getting further big game down the line.

The GAA wanted to give the referee final discretion on whether an incident could be re-opened so that they could not be accused of taking his authority away and giving it to the committee room.