(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post
The thing I constantly hear people saying is massed defenses and constant handpassing are destroying the game and the GAA are doing nothing. I think its great they may be trying to do something about it.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1347 - 03/10/2018 08:58:47 2144906 Link 0 |
A goal like Meath v. Dublin 1991 would not be scored in a modern game because of massed defensives.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1347 - 03/10/2018 09:15:43 2144907 Link 0 |
I'm talking about brollys idea of the attacking zone where the attacking team decided how many defenders are allowed into the zone. After considering the kickout rule it does have some merit but have they taken into account the time wasting that will come with that, you score and have several players upfield who can now slow down the opposing teams kick by not getting back to their own 45 going down injured etc if someone is down between the two 45s the ref can't restart the game
Barrowsider (Carlow) - Posts: 1592 - 03/10/2018 10:07:45 2144911 Link 0 |
How many scores would Dublin have put up against Tyrone in the All-Ireland Semi-Final in 2017 had they been limited to 3 handpasses in a row? They wouldn't have gotten near 2-17 against as well an organised defence as Tyrone's that day. Limiting hand passing takes away a team's best weapon in counteracting mass defences. I seriously cannot understand how people still can't see this. It's nearly 20 years since the advent of mass defences yet people still think that it can be beaten by kicking the ball into it! That's something that has literally never worked yet people still think it can work if only teams weren't hand passing instead! MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13707 - 03/10/2018 10:11:35 2144912 Link 4 |
I understand it's aim, all of them focus on a symptom of the blanket defence, not the cause. The kick out will be a farce. Once the ball is dead, the six in the full line just scratch. No marking by the forward, no runs by the backs. The 6 in the half line will mass on the 45, waiting for the ball to fly over/past/bobble, then run like madmen for a break, or to defend in their own 45. The kick out will be won by the fastest man. No skill there. No more kicks to the wing foward moving in to space, no more kicks to the wing back running forward(McCaffery), no more kicks to the corner back because the forward is too dozy to mark up, no more kicks to your playmaking center back. No more chances of f-ups by the keeper. I am a keeper. No more fun. Boring, boring, boring. m_the_d (None) - Posts: 1099 - 03/10/2018 10:15:07 2144913 Link 1 |
I think it's terrible that the people in charge of this have given things zero thought what so ever. These rule changes have been picked apart and destroyed since they've been announced. People giving out about hand passing so they limit it it with considering the consequences.
tipp11 (Tipperary) - Posts: 353 - 03/10/2018 10:38:29 2144918 Link 0 |
Just to state I'm not against rule changes at all but just that limiting handpasses is literally stupid. There is so much wrong with it that you'd really have to question people's motives for suggesting that handpasses be limited. MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13707 - 03/10/2018 10:39:27 2144919 Link 2 |
All these proposed changes will do sweet penny farthing all to the game in my opinion. For the three handpass rule - what you will see is lads falling exuberantly to the ground after the second handpass for no reason, then pick it off the ground and repeat. Some craic that would be watching lads run into the tackle on purpose well played. WaitingInTheLongGrass (Roscommon) - Posts: 165 - 03/10/2018 11:07:23 2144923 Link 0 |
I'm sorry but have you any idea what you are saying? This only encourages mass defence!!! Drop everyone into your own 45 and wait for clock to run down. Boom possession regained.
Kingofthehill100 (Mayo) - Posts: 68 - 03/10/2018 11:08:38 2144924 Link 0 |
I am not sure what these guys are at with so many changes. The rule changes should be made in such a way as to simplify the job of the Ref-not the other way around. As previous posters have said the match time should be done in the same way as proven in the ladies football. The sin bin is an obvious choice but all the other ones are changing for the sake of changing. Anything that slows down the game is not going to improve viewing. My view is that these rules changes have been poorly thought out just as the black card has been proven difficult to implement properly and fairly. There is nothing in the new rules to properly penalise a tug of the person/jersey slowing down a player going at full speed past an opponent. browncows (Meath) - Posts: 2342 - 03/10/2018 11:38:08 2144927 Link 3 |
Better if the attacker tries to catch in one-on-one, than six-on-one. It's only a mark when it's possible to execute.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2581 - 03/10/2018 11:46:52 2144929 Link 0 |
What momentum ? The game is clogged.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2581 - 03/10/2018 11:51:38 2144933 Link 1 |
Most sense I've seen written about the limit on hand passes rule I've read yet. People need to think about how it actually will work to the way they hope it will. Limiting the number of hand passes will not stop teams from passing the ball over and back the field as it is very easy to throw in a kick pass on every 3rd or 4th pass when the speed of the game is at a near standstill. What limiting the number of hand passes will do is bring an end to fast free flowing attacks where teams work the ball through the hands to create an overlap and potentially end up with a goal scoring chance. I'm thinking scores that are easy on the eye that the likes of a Jack McCaffrey or Ryan McHugh get a lot of will become a thing of the past. Is that what people want? You could end of with the farcical situation of having someone free in front of the goals for a palm into an empty net with a player coming in the end line not being able to pass to him and having to shoot from an acute angle....where is the sense in that? Then we have the new kickout rule....what is wrong with the current kickout rules? The introduction of mark and kicks having to go beyond the 21m line in recent years have left us with the best feature of a match in modern day football which is the kickout battle. Most teams now push up on kickouts putting severe pressure on keepers to get their kick right and the 2 best in the business, Cluxton and Beggan, are really a joy to watch at their best. How are refs supposed to organise the new structure and how do you stop teams killing the clock near the end of a game if ahead if everyone has to be in their proper position for the kickout? I do like the idea of the sin bin and the new mark but if you limit the number of hand passes then the introduction of the new mark won't be as effective because defending teams will know when the kick is coming and will get the blanket set up rather than attacking teams having the possibility to either kick it in or run at the extra space that should be there if defending teams decide to drop back on the full forward to stop the mark opportunity. Mobot (Donegal) - Posts: 459 - 03/10/2018 11:51:44 2144934 Link 2 |
What about Corofin' s goal earlier this year? 15 hand passes finished with a goal. One of the greatest goals you will ever see. 9 different players involved with lads running off at different angles at speed. A truly unbelievable goal. Watch Ryan McHugh's goal v Dublin in 2016. Not one kick pass between them, 6 or 7 hand passes later they had sliced their way through the Dublin defense and finished off a brilliant move. This is how you beat a defensive structure and it is a skill to be applauded, not discouraged. I just find the 3 hand pass rule one of the most ridiculous things ever proposed. No foresight whatsoever. HandballRef (Donegal) - Posts: 520 - 03/10/2018 12:08:14 2144936 Link 3 |
Precisely this, I can guarantee there are defensive coaches out there this morning rubbing their hands with glee. What I'm predicting you will see now is 3 hand passes then a backwards kick to a safe option then start again
Barrowsider (Carlow) - Posts: 1592 - 03/10/2018 12:46:13 2144943 Link 0 |
By momentum i meant the momentum of an individual game. As we know the game exists across a spectrum of momentum at different points and is ultimately determined by those who captilise on that momentum and minimize the momentum of the opposition. I think you can implement rule changes to gerrymander any particular outcome in a game that you want. Two things stand out for me, a lot of people want an awful lot of different things out of the game and secondly i think it calls into question sporting integrity if too many rules are brought in to have a direct outcome or the game funneled a particular way. There is of course a place for rule changes,but there is also a limit where you aren't funneling outcomes. TheUsername (Dublin) - Posts: 4445 - 03/10/2018 13:43:41 2144960 Link 3 |
I think funnelling the type of game spectacle we want is ok. I'd rather start with Brolly's exclusion zone idea and tweak as necessary from there. It directly attacks the blanket defence - and should return the game to catch and kick. Two tweaks I'd make - allow up to 2 players per team in the exclusion zone, marked oe unmarked. This cuts out a one-on-one tussle by a strong full forward. And, given extra non-zone congestion, cut teams to 13-a-side. omahant (USA) - Posts: 2581 - 03/10/2018 13:58:55 2144962 Link 0 |
Just one thought form reading all the posts is that there are lots of suggestions and everybody has different ideas on how to make gaelic football more attractive. I just wonder are we in danger of introducing a lot of rules, completely changing the game and making things worse. Surely introducing 5 rule changes like this in one foul swoop is a step too far. I am all for rule changes if they help the game but not sure about introducing them all at once. Green_Gold (Donegal) - Posts: 1874 - 03/10/2018 14:31:02 2144965 Link 1 |
Any rule change should be thought of in terms of average club level. Are these changes feasible for an average club level referee to implement. That's a very important consideration. 890202 (Wexford) - Posts: 1278 - 03/10/2018 15:03:24 2144975 Link 0 |
I think rules need to be simplistic and without loopholes, i like two of the new rules namely the sin bin and the sideline ball. I think Brolly's exclusion zone is by far well worth trialing as i think it would impact almost every team and cause a rethink, it would create a more attacking free flowing game without, multiple marks and stops, while i think it doesnt discriminate against players who would be disenfranchised under the new rules, for example the forward mark disenfranchises players of a different skillset like McBerearty, Geany, O Donoughue - im talking in the main not exclusively here, if high fielding isnt in their highest natural skillets but are pacey, good ball carriers, angle makers and technical finishers. It also means someone like David Clifford wouldn't have 10 fellas hanging out of him fielding a ball, or someone like Bernard Brogan or Con O Callaghan being triple marked. In all honestly the rest of the new rules would be horendous in my honest opinion. TheUsername (Dublin) - Posts: 4445 - 03/10/2018 15:34:31 2144978 Link 3 |