Ten minutes from the end of the Kilkenny-Galway Leinster hurling round-robin game in UPMC Nowlan Park last June, Johnny Coen scored a goal which extended the visitors’ lead to six points.
It was their last score. Pinned into their defensive half for most of the closing stages, they conceded five points, four from TJ Reid frees. Crucially though, they gave away no goals and left with a one-point win.
Having had their grip prised away, Galway's reaction to Kilkenny's relentless recovery storm centred on protecting their goal at all costs, which involved committing a string of cynical fouls.
After that, it was a question of whether they had enough on the board to survive Reid's points flow from frees. It worked and, in the process, inflicted a first home championship defeat on Kilkenny for 70 years.
Galway had four players booked and one sent off in the final ten minutes. It didn't matter, though, as the cynical card won the important trick.
If a sanction were in place for deliberate fouling, Galway would have been forced into a different approach, one which didn't involve repeatedly hauling down opponents as they tried to manoeuvre towards goal.
Galway are no more, or less, cynical than any other team. They too have been victims of chicanery (how many deliberate fouls – on and off the ball – has Joe Canning been hit with in his 12 years as a senior player?) when the occasion called for it.
I'm merely using last June's game as a specific example of how cynical play can prosper in hurling too.
I'm also addressing the matter because Brian Cody, whose Kilkenny team were the victims that day, has described a proposal to introduce a 'black card – sin bin' rule as 'hilarious'.
Cody said last Sunday that he had 'absolutely no understanding of why a black card is even being talked about'.
"The rules are the rules – you are fouled, you get a free, end of story."
Well maybe it shouldn't be. Kilkenny got a string of frees against Galway, but deliberately destructive play prevented them – at least in a few instances – from creating the goal opportunities that might have won the game.
Cody urged the GAA to 'leave a very good game alone', a view shared by Wexford boss, Davy Fitzgerald.
"Let’s not pass the motion (black card), no matter what the story is. We don’t need that. I really, really hope the (Congress) delegates don’t go near that motion," he said.
Limerick's John Kiely expressed equally strong opposition a few weeks ago.
"The game is absolutely 100 per cent fine. Nobody is giving out about the game, really, apart from one or two and they're going to be giving out anyway. Leave the game alone, please," he said.
There will, no doubt, be other managers too who unload themselves of similarly dismissive views before Congress. And how do we know that?
Because it's what managers – both in football and hurling – do. For reasons that are difficult to fathom, they almost always become extremely defensive when rule changes are proposed.
Many of them are happy to criticise a referee when their interpretation of a situation doesn’t go their way in a particular game, but when it comes to suggesting a rule change, even one with a solid basis in logic, they unite in opposition.
Quite why the managerial classes oppose a rule designed to prevent their players from being victim of cynical play is difficult to figure out, unless of course they reckon that, on balance, it works out better for their teams in the end.
Managers are, of course, quite entitled to oppose rule changes, but the danger is that decision-makers will allow themselves to be overly-influenced by such high-profile interventions.
It has happened before and there's a real risk of a recurrence at Congress later in the month.
The hurling world tends to feel that it pays for the more grievous sins of its football counterpart.
However, when it comes to cynical play, it's not just a football/hurling issue, but extends across most major teams sports.
In rugby, cynical play can attract a yellow card (ten minutes in the sin-bin) and, in cases where it's repeated by the defending side close to their line, it's punishable by a penalty try.
The argument that 'hurling is fine' works off the nonsensical premise that its players never indulge in any form of cynicism. Of course they do.
That's perfectly understandable in the heat of the moment, but opposing any sanctions is effectively stating that deliberate fouling is the same as a mis-timed tackle or an illegal pick-up.
This is hardly appropriate for the oft-proclaimed 'greatest field game in the world'. Delegates to Congress might reflect on that, rather than taking their lead from team managers.
Of course, even if the black-card sanction is introduced, it's unlikely to be used very often since hurling referees tend to ignore rules.
After all, if they won't penalise illegal handpassing and over-carrying, can you see them waving many black cards?