News round-up:The long-running saga of the disputed Wicklow championship match between St Patrick's and Shillelagh goes to Leinster Council tonight, as the county board will be called on to justify their decision to ignore the match referee's report and set a date for a refixture.

It's over two months since the clubs played out what was deemed a draw in their round-robin championship encounter. According to referee Liam Cullen's report the match ended 2-7 to 1-10 but a dispute arose over one of Shillelagh's points. St Patrick's, having failed to overturn the official score at county and provincial level, took the matter to the Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA).

The DRA in a decision due to be publicly released by today recommended the match be refixed if the parties after consultation could agree but made no direction on the matter. Failing that, it directed the Wicklow CCCC to reinvestigate the dispute, this time allowing Shillelagh to be represented.

With the county championship so far behind schedule that the eventual champions' participation in Leinster "was under threat", pressure on Shillelagh intensified to agree to a refixture, something the club said that it was unable to do.

Eventually Wicklow CCCC refixed the match for this Saturday. That decision has been appealed to tonight's hearing on the grounds Shillelagh weren't consulted about the refixture apart from the request to agree to one.

According to the club, tonight is the first opportunity it has had to put its side of the story, which is that there was no doubt about the final score at the time of original fixture's final whistle and that referee Cullen's report has been accepted and not so far overturned.

The DRA is emphatic it has made no ruling in relation to the referee's report but rather has suggested the refixture having been impressed by the evidence, including that of a local reporter, that the match had ended in a win for St Patrick's.

The recommendation was in keeping with a footnote to a decision two years ago (Fr Casey's v Limerick County Board) when the DRA expressly declined to get involved in passing judgment on refereeing decisions unless corruption, which hadn't been alleged in that case, had been involved.

The exception stated: "This should not be taken to govern situations where teams agree to replay a game for one reason or another. The matter has not been argued, but there are situations where a genuine error by a referee is of such import that the teams - in the spirit of sportsmanship - might agree a replay. We assume (without ruling on the question) this can be facilitated by committees in charge."

In the current case there has been no agreement. It is important to note also the rules have changed since the above case to allow review of the "recording of a score" as opposed to the awarding of one.

As things stand the matter may be back before the DRA for a definitive decision once the various avenues of appeal have been exhausted.