GALIC GAMES/Munster SHC Competitions/Control Committee's proposed suspensions and fines:Some of the biggest names in hurling each face a one-month suspension arising from last Sunday's pre-match scuffles in Thurles - Donal Óg Cusack, Seán Óg Ó hAilpín, Diarmuid O'Sullivan and John Gardiner from Cork and Colin Lynch, Alan Markham, Barry Nugent and Andrew Quinn from Clare.

If imposed it would rule the Cork players out of their Munster hurling semi-final against Waterford on June 17th and the Clare players out of their first All-Ireland qualifier on June 30th, as the suspensions also carry an automatic one-match ban.

The Cork and Clare county boards also face €5,000 fines for their role in Sunday's incidents, which provided an ugly prelude to the Munster hurling championship.

Both counties were, however, quick to announce their intention to contest the proposed penalties - "strenuously" and "to the hilt" - and thus the new disciplinary process of the GAA will itself go on trial in the coming days. In other words, the GAA are about to find out how swiftly and fairly the new process can work.

Though effective since the start of the year, that disciplinary process only now comes across its first high-profile case, and Cork and Clare are determined to let it run its full course.

The GAA confirmed yesterday their Competitions Control Committee (CCC) had proposed the various suspensions and fines, which under the new process must then go to the Central Hearing's Committee (CHC) before being enforced, provided the counties request it. Cork and Clare have three days to submit that request.

The Clare County Board met last night to discuss their response and press officer Des Crowe explained they were awaiting "full facts of the matter", claiming the four players had been informed individually.

"Obviously we will be appealing," he said. "We feel very hard done by here with these proposed suspensions, but they all will be appealed and, hopefully, common sense will prevail. But whatever is necessary, whatever can be done, will be done to pursue the appeal process."

Cork county chairman Mick Dolan also confirmed that his county board and four players had been notified: "We will be appealing," he said, "and defending the players to the hilt."

A statement from the county board added: "The Cork county hurling team management and panel of players will be strenuously defending the proposed suspensions. We will be going through due process."

Dolan also suggested a hearing before the CHC would be sought as soon as possible, "possibly before the end of the week, or else at the weekend", but that some time would also be needed "to prepare a case".

Neither county would make the players facing suspension available for comment, nor were they contactable by The Irish Times last night.

It all means last Sunday's incident, which had both teams running on to the pitch at exactly the same time, resulting in scuffles and melees, will put the GAA's new disciplinary process under a keen spotlight. The GAA's press officer, Danny Lynch, admitted it would be a testing time.

"Without a doubt this will test the new process," said Lynch. "But it is pointless to speculate on the outcome of that at this stage, because it is a whole new vista for the GAA. We will know fairly quickly, but the intent is there to apply the disciplinary process as rigorously as possible."

That new disciplinary process was outlined in some detail by the GAA president, Nickey Brennan, last February, accompanied by the Cork county secretary, Frank Murphy, who acted as chairman of the rule-book task force that designed it. It's not without some irony that Cork are one of the first counties now putting that process to the test.

Interestingly, Sunday's other disciplinary incident, which involved a pre-match mill at the Leinster hurling game between Offaly and Laois, wasn't pursued by the CCC as the referee dealt with the situation at the time by issuing yellow cards.

Under the revised GAA rule book, striking with a hurl with minimal force and contributing to a melee on, or in the vicinity of, the field of play immediately before, during or after a game is listed as a four-week minimum ban for a first offence under Rule 143.

Striking with force gets eight weeks. Suspension includes the next game in the same competition, even if it falls outside the time frame of the suspension. This was clearly the rule applied by the CCC.

The new disciplinary process was aimed at the speeding up of investigations, reducing the various appeal processes and "technicalities" and also increasing the use of video evidence. There are three components to the process - the CCC, the CHC, and the Central Appeals Committee (CAC). The existing Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA) also remains as the last point of appeal, which has already proved effective in keeping cases out of the legal system.

Brennan made a telling comment at the rule-book launch, which expresses now as it did then the reliance on a certain amount of goodwill on the part of the counties and players involved in disciplinary infractions: "What we're doing is being extremely fair to the players at all levels, and (we) have gone to extraordinary lengths for them to have their case heard, appealed, and even going to arbitration . . . People should start taking the penalty handed down to them.

"But I'm not going to contemplate whether or not this won't work, because quite frankly it has to work."

New Disciplinary Committee Structures and Procedures

Stage One: Competitions Control Committee - In matters of discipline, a Competitions Control Committee proposes a penalty. If the unit/member accepts the proposed penalty, it is imposed. If the unit/member does not accept the proposed penalty, the case goes to a Hearings Committee (at appropriate level).

Stage Two: Hearings Committee - No member of the Management Committee or Competitions Control Committee, at any one level, may be a member of that level's Hearings Committee. A case is tried before the relevant Hearings Committee - the case against being presented by representatives of the Competitions Control Committee and defended by the unit/member charged.

Stage Three: Appeals - An appeal against a county's Hearing Committee goes to a provincial Hearings Committee. An appeal against a provincial Hearings Committee goes to a Central Appeals Committee. In all appeals, representatives of all parties to the previous hearing(s) shall have the right to participate in an appeal hearing.