Central Disciplinary Committee: Players caught on video committing red-card offences will in future be liable for suspension regardless of whether a referee has already taken action against them.

Whereas the Gaelic Athletic Association's old disciplinary body, the Games Administration Committee, had in recent times shown a reluctance to revisit refereeing decisions by reviewing yellow cards, the newly-installed Central Disciplinary Committee has indicated it will revert to the policy of the previous GAC, which on a number of occasions suspended players for red-card offences despite a match referee having issued only a yellow card.

The issue arose at the weekend in Sunday's Leinster championship match between Westmeath and Kildare. The Westmeath centrefielder Rory O'Connell was shown a yellow card by referee Michael Daly, despite being seen to strike an opposing player, Dermot Earley, in the 33rd minute.

There was a further incident 10 minutes later in the second half when O'Connell's team-mate Dessie Dolan was seen stretched on the pitch, but there was no camera footage of what had happened to him.

Should any unseen film surface to prove that Dolan was fouled the case is straightforward as fouls missed by referees are punishable on the basis of video evidence. But in the case of players whose fouls are noticed by a match official and who are then punished by the referee there has been an argument that committees shouldn't intervene.

But, in July 2002, the then GAC asked Central Council for a ruling on the matter and the authority to revisit referee's decisions was formally confirmed.

The succeeding GAC, however, took the view it would not interfere with the decisions of a referee and refused to exercise the power. Con Hogan, chair of the incoming CDC, says that his committee will be taking a different view.

"Our position is that normally we will not be using that power, but if we feel the need to take action we will do so.

"We don't want to re-referee every match, but there will be a sanction for serious foul play and, ultimately, that will be the message."

There are no guidelines for deciding when it's appropriate to intervene and Hogan believes it is best if such decisions are left to the discretion of the CDC.

"I think you can only play it by ear so we won't be writing down a definition and trying to work out why one foul is more aggressive than another. We also want to be careful not to undermine referees who have to make split-second decisions and have very little time to consider the implications."

Another reason for being sparing in the exercise of the power is that there are now so many matches being played during the summer keeping track of all incidents would be extremely time-consuming.

"If you look at the number of fixtures now being played between championship and the qualifier series. At the same time, the purpose of the committee (CDC) is to deal with these things and when there is clear intent to commit aggressive fouls it's important that this is followed up. Video evidence can be very helpful and some of it isn't that helpful so it's sometimes difficult to be hard and fast about a case."

Hogan isn't in a position to pass comment on the Kildare-Westmeath match and the report of referee Michael Daly hasn't yet been received, but he did point out the logistical problems involved in keeping track of all missed fouls given the number of matches. "You would almost need a staff of people going through videos to make sure that you caught everything."

One of the difficulties in processing video evidence is that there is no set procedure for incidents to be brought forward. In rugby, independent citing commissioners are appointed to rugby internationals by the IRB.

They tend to have a refereeing or disciplinary committee background and respond to highlighted situations or can entertain complaints from either side as well as reviewing the video themselves. If they decide there is a case to answer it is then sent forward.

Such procedures don't exist within the GAA and it is likely they would require a rule change before being introduced.