OF all the delightful skills displayed by the hurling All Stars in Buenos Aires last Saturday, the one which appeared to dazzle native Argentinians and those of Irish descent the most was Joe Canning's line-cut which sailed over the bar from around 55 metres out.

They were amazed by the manner in which the laid-back young sniper teed up the hard, ridged ball and, using what is effectively a flat stick, found the target with an effortless flick of the wrists. The ball was still rising as it arced between the posts into a golden South American sky.

They looked at each other as if to say: 'How the hell did he do that?'; but then there are many back home too who marvel at Canning's sublime striking, whether off hand or ground.

He is the best in the business when it comes to striking sideline cuts but, in fairness to his contemporaries, it's a skill which has improved dramatically everywhere in recent years.

Presumably, more advanced design of the sliotar and hurley has helped, but hardly in proportion to the overall improvement rate.

No, this is an area where clearly more time and effort is being spent. Understandably so, given that a line ball anywhere inside the opposition half becomes a scoring opportunity. Striking a line ball well is such a spectacular art that there are many who believe that its scoring value should be increased to two points.

At face value, that looks reasonable as it would reward a special skill. It was experimented with during the National League a few years ago but failed to win enough support to be retained. It's not on the latest trial list but still has many supporters.

Personally, I'm not among them for one simple reason: good sideline striking is an art which should definitely be encouraged, but to value it at two points overlooks the fact that it comes about without the opposition committing a foul.

They may have played the ball out over the sideline but it's the merest of technical errors which, quite often, can result from an unlucky bounce or a slip. Why then should the reward for the attacking team be a possible two points whereas a free awarded for a nasty, sneaky foul can only yield a point? It would be totally disproportionate to the offence and, would in effect, tell a player he faced possible heavier punishment when the ball bounced off his shin near the sideline than if he flattened an opponent with a calculated foul.

That could be the trouble with what looks like a good idea. It may appear to have a certain logic but it comes up short when properly X-rayed. And, in fairness to the concept of doubling the score for a line ball, it does have some merit, unlike the proposals which are emerging to introduce technology to determine controversial calls in hurling and Gaelic football.

Apart altogether from the prohibitive costs of assembling a system for sports played in one small country, what would it be used for? Would referees be expected to go to the video official to decide if a penalty or a free out should have been awarded?

Soccer has always shied away from the video review while rugby uses it to decide if the ball is properly grounded for a try or if a player had a foot in touch as he sped towards the line. It's not used to adjudicate on whether a player was offside or knocked the ball or any other offence.

It has become fashionable in the GAA to talk about the players who put in a year's work only to have it undermined by a questionable decision, but to think that the video ref would bring a whole new sense of fairness is pure fantasy.

clarity

In the majority of borderline cases, the video brings very little clarity since it's still a matter of opinion. If a video ref was to be used, would his opinion outweigh that of the actual ref?

Who would ask the video ref to examine an incident? If the real ref was happy with his own call, would that be the end of the matter? In which case, why have a video man at all?

And what should he look out for? Would he be allowed to call back play for an offence that happened a few seconds previously?

Remarkably, the video idea seems to be gaining support despite the fact that it would cause more problems than it would solve. It serves a specific purpose in rugby which it could never do in GAA.

The current system may be stark and harsh when it goes against you but it's still the best there is, not least because it ensures that games are completed. Introduce video referees and we would all be there until midnight as borderline calls were replayed and reviewed.

Hand of Henry has

far-reaching impact

THE dark exploits of Thierry Henry and his sleight of hand remains world news, it seems. Accompanied by sympathetic gestures, it has been mentioned several times to the Irish party on the All Stars' tour in Buenos Aires over the past week.

Now, given Maradona's goal against England in the 1986 World Cup, one might have thought the Argentinians would understand exactly what Henry was at.

Incidentally, they still can't figure out whether Tommy Doyle was pushed before Seamus Darby scored that famous goal for Offaly against Kerry in the 1982 All-Ireland final. Come to think of it, neither can we.

- Martin Breheny

Irish Independent