|
Replying To neverright: "Perhaps a good place to start would be stop the 'swarm' tackle. No need to change the rules, just apply the rules that are there. In a one on one situation the ref will penalise a player if the put a hand on the player in possession, to ether pull him, push him, to try to knock the ball away. Yet, in the swarm tackle, they stand back and allow the tacklers to pull, push, etc the man with the ball and then penalise him for over carrying. If this was referreed properly it would open up the game considerably and maybe cut down on the system of having so many players back to do this type of tackling" 100% correct.
s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 19/07/2016 12:51:00
1886205
Link
0
|
|
Replying To TheMaster: "They did remove passing back to the keeper to stop similarly defensive tactics to be fair. They also introduced the offside rule to keep people from crowding in around the goals all the time.
Brolly's suggestion is similar to the offside rule. I think it holds promise." There are many incidences where a sporting governing body introduces radical changes to their games to try to combat tactics against the spirit of their games…
Rugby in the 1970's changed the value of a try from 3 points to 4 points and later to 5 points to encourage teams to prioritise scoring trys rather than to play for penalties, Rugby also constantly reviews and changes the rules concerning how players compete at the breakdown to try to keep that aspect of their game competitive.
Rugby league changed from 15 to 13 man game when the conditioning of players meant little space on the pitch, also to try to move away from the monotony of their attacks they introduced a fifth tackle rule to bring some urgency to attacking.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1360 - 19/07/2016 12:52:30
1886210
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Offside_Rule: "lol - the irony of my post has obviously escaped some poor unfortunate.... :-)" Probably a dub offside!!!
bumpernut (Antrim) - Posts: 1852 - 19/07/2016 13:00:02
1886222
Link
0
|
|
Replying To neverright: "Perhaps a good place to start would be stop the 'swarm' tackle. No need to change the rules, just apply the rules that are there. In a one on one situation the ref will penalise a player if the put a hand on the player in possession, to ether pull him, push him, to try to knock the ball away. Yet, in the swarm tackle, they stand back and allow the tacklers to pull, push, etc the man with the ball and then penalise him for over carrying. If this was referreed properly it would open up the game considerably and maybe cut down on the system of having so many players back to do this type of tackling" Good post
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 19/07/2016 13:05:09
1886234
Link
0
|
|
Replying To bdbuddah: " Replying To ormondbannerman: "It seems to me from talking to people (and from posts to this website) a lot of GAA people are unhappy with the way Gaelic football is evolving in the last 5 to 10 years, mainly people not liking the massed defence approach and the increased level of handpassing (many of them lateral/ backwards) and the decreasing level of kicking.
Just say for a minute that the GAA decided they were going to amend the rules to try and move the game back more towards a more traditional form of the game what rule changes do people on here think might actually achieve this and what rule changes might have unforeseen consequences or would not practically work?
With the increased levels of player conditioning and fitness at inter county level is the massed defence approach now inevitable and will any rule changes will only have minimal impact?
To me the most obvious rule changes the GAA could bring in if they wanted to go down this route would be a minimum number of players in oppositions half for kickouts, a minimum distance a kickout must travel and a limit on the number of consecutive handpasses.
Would the idea of a limit put on consecutive handpasses work in practice? or even would a rule that a player receiving a handpass cannot handpass it on be workable and would it make current massed defence tactics far less effective?
Any thoughts?
Maybe someone here could think outside the box and come up with a less obvious rule change which would weaken the effectiveness of the current defensive tactics in inter county Gaelic football.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts:169 - 18/07/2016 18:43:14What would you define as a more traditional form of the game? There is a rule already about kickouts is there not? They must travel at least 13 metres. I would limit handpasses but how many do you limit it to?
I don't see how a limit on hand passes would help. How else are you supposed to beat when they have 15 players inside their 45? It's just punishing the attacking team even more by limiting their weapons.
benjyyy (Donegal) - Posts:1251 - 18/07/2016 19:26:55Stop teams from putting 15 players inside their 45 then. Make it a rule you must keep at least 1/2/3/4(whatever) number of players up the far end of the pitch." I would define a more traditional game as one with more kicking, not having forwards way outnumbered by defenders and quicker movement of the ball upfield to the scoring area. If they limited the number of hand passes what number is hard to say. The more you reduce it maybe the more you force teams to get better at kicking. An inter county team has the pick of the best players and could probably cope easier with a smaller limit where as a club team with a much smaller pick of players would want a higher limit."
gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 19/07/2016 13:05:52
1886236
Link
0
|
|
I think increase steps to 5-6 and actually enforce it. Then enforce the rule where you are only allowed to tackle with one hand. Finally add in a rule where a player can be tackled by no more than 3 players using 1 hand and you eliminate a lot of the issues we are seeing. At present there is no downside to cramping the D with loads of bodies. If they could foul the ball by doing so it would go some ways to eliminating it, or at least making it less effective.
TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 19/07/2016 13:12:36
1886243
Link
0
|
|
You wont need to change rules. Give it another 3 seasons or so and we will see the rewards of mass defenses yielding little or nothing.
Donegalman (None) - Posts: 3830 - 19/07/2016 13:13:58
1886244
Link
0
|
|
There are problems in the game being caused by the blanket defense.
Hand passing is not a problem though. Don't touch hand passing.
I really enjoy hand passing moves up the pitch. Good combination runs, men linking off the shoulder.
Our game would lose variety if that were targeted.
The big problem is that the game isn't getting contested between the 45s.
Correctly policing the swarm defence as neverright states would improve that a lot as teams would be forced to defend beyond their 45.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 19/07/2016 13:14:47
1886246
Link
0
|
|
Im actually alright with most of the rules if im being honest.
The issue for me isn't the rules, it's the approach of the teams. Most teams set up not to lose a game rather than actively going out to win a game if that makes sense. Teams go up against other teams knowing they will take a beating and try to ensure the beating isn't that bad that it ruins their next game in the qualifiers. Leinster football with Dublin being a prime example.
Maybe going back to straight knockout might be an option. Teams with nothing to lose might at least then give it a go. Trying to encourage teams to actively attack more would sake sense for me. Make a point scored from outside the 45 worth double might be an option, ban the hand pass point might be another. Make any score scored within 30 seconds of your teams kick out worth double. Stop keepers taking free kicks and short kickouts might be another option
Who knows? For me it's not that the hand pass is killing the game per se it's just trying to tease teams out to attack more is the answer. If teams want to be defensive then so be it but some extra rewards for those teams who choose to actively attack to win the game might be an option
tearintom (Wexford) - Posts: 1351 - 19/07/2016 14:10:12
1886309
Link
1
|
|
I like this suggestion as the swarm tackle is a nightmare for forwards, only 1 defender should be able to tackle at any one time.
Green_Gold (Donegal) - Posts: 1876 - 19/07/2016 14:13:16
1886316
Link
0
|
|
Replying To bdbuddah: "There are many incidences where a sporting governing body introduces radical changes to their games to try to combat tactics against the spirit of their games…
Rugby in the 1970's changed the value of a try from 3 points to 4 points and later to 5 points to encourage teams to prioritise scoring trys rather than to play for penalties, Rugby also constantly reviews and changes the rules concerning how players compete at the breakdown to try to keep that aspect of their game competitive.
Rugby league changed from 15 to 13 man game when the conditioning of players meant little space on the pitch, also to try to move away from the monotony of their attacks they introduced a fifth tackle rule to bring some urgency to attacking." I've played rugby now for 14 years and there's only been 1 rule change to the break down and that's that you can't make the tackle and then jackal the ball instantaneously you have to clap your hands to show your aren't part of the ruck, then reengage. It's convoluted and frankly the better jackals just do what they always did as they do it that fast and efficiently it's very hard for a ref to see it happening in a pile of bodies.
Rugby has been altered many times in the scrum but then again that's just the engage instructions and cynicism still happens in basically every scrum.
You're looking for it but there is no special example of a sport that's so beautifully pure and flowing that cynicism doesn't exist
Seansy48 (Tyrone) - Posts: 237 - 19/07/2016 14:15:55
1886323
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Green_Gold: "I like this suggestion as the swarm tackle is a nightmare for forwards, only 1 defender should be able to tackle at any one time." I don't. Surely if two men are tackling one player there should be a free man somewhere on the pitch?
gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 19/07/2016 14:19:22
1886326
Link
1
|
|
Replying To gotmilk: "I don't. Surely if two men are tackling one player there should be a free man somewhere on the pitch?" Unfortunately for a lot of teams he's back in his own 45 picking his hole with 5 teammates "marking" 1 forward.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 19/07/2016 14:47:28
1886358
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Seansy48: "I've played rugby now for 14 years and there's only been 1 rule change to the break down and that's that you can't make the tackle and then jackal the ball instantaneously you have to clap your hands to show your aren't part of the ruck, then reengage. It's convoluted and frankly the better jackals just do what they always did as they do it that fast and efficiently it's very hard for a ref to see it happening in a pile of bodies.
Rugby has been altered many times in the scrum but then again that's just the engage instructions and cynicism still happens in basically every scrum.
You're looking for it but there is no special example of a sport that's so beautifully pure and flowing that cynicism doesn't exist" I watch international rugby and some provincial rugby matches on TV and hear some Leinster season ticket holders at work/ rugby analysis's talking rugby and the rule changes that are brought in to combat various issues but to be honest the minute of detail goes over my head as while I enjoy watching rugby I am only a casual fan of rugby. The main point I was trying to make was that other sports other than the GAA (including Rugby and Rugby League) are not afraid to make changes when it is deemed aspects of the games are not being played the way most people in the sport think they should be.
I absolutely know cynicism exists in all sports but the governing body of many sports will then amend the rules to combat this.
The GAA authorities have the responsibility to keep the rules relevant to and in the spirit of the game I think.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1360 - 19/07/2016 15:17:29
1886397
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: "Unfortunately for a lot of teams he's back in his own 45 picking his hole with 5 teammates "marking" 1 forward." But that's perhaps how you beat an ultra defensive team you defend and attack as one. Normally it's only two players back. The sweeper and whoever is picking up the one forward.
gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 19/07/2016 15:50:06
1886417
Link
1
|
|
Replying To bdbuddah: "I watch international rugby and some provincial rugby matches on TV and hear some Leinster season ticket holders at work/ rugby analysis's talking rugby and the rule changes that are brought in to combat various issues but to be honest the minute of detail goes over my head as while I enjoy watching rugby I am only a casual fan of rugby. The main point I was trying to make was that other sports other than the GAA (including Rugby and Rugby League) are not afraid to make changes when it is deemed aspects of the games are not being played the way most people in the sport think they should be.
I absolutely know cynicism exists in all sports but the governing body of many sports will then amend the rules to combat this.
The GAA authorities have the responsibility to keep the rules relevant to and in the spirit of the game I think." You dream of an era that never existed.
gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 19/07/2016 16:14:18
1886446
Link
0
|
|
'You're looking for it but there is no special example of a sport that's so beautifully pure and flowing that cynicism doesn't exist'
Precisely... and as soon as new rules are introduced to combat it loopholes are found and exploited so it becomes a vicious circle
bumpernut (Antrim) - Posts: 1852 - 19/07/2016 16:26:33
1886466
Link
0
|
|
Michael Murphy won a ball from the throw in at half time and gave the ball to Paddy McBrearty who fired over.
Tyrone were unable to get bodies back and it looked great.
Joe Brolly's idea might therefore work that the kick out must go out past the half way line.
It would also make the winning of primary possession vital and the mark might actually be of a benefit.
Very easy to monitor also.
TheRightStuff (Donegal) - Posts: 1688 - 19/07/2016 16:48:45
1886485
Link
0
|
|
I've played rugby now for 14 years and there's only been 1 rule change to the break down and that's that you can't make the tackle and then jackal the ball instantaneously you have to clap your hands to show your aren't part of the ruck, then reengage. It's convoluted and frankly the better jackals just do what they always did as they do it that fast and efficiently it's very hard for a ref to see it happening in a pile of bodies.
Rugby has been altered many times in the scrum but then again that's just the engage instructions and cynicism still happens in basically every scrum.
You're looking for it but there is no special example of a sport that's so beautifully pure and flowing that cynicism doesn't exist
Seansy48 (Tyrone) - Posts:65 - 19/07/2016 14:15:55There has been a lot more than 1 laws change to the breakdown in the past 14 years. Entry, tacklers role in the breakdown etc and plenty more.
But I agree totally with your last sentence
ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 19/07/2016 18:25:00
1886558
Link
0
|
|
Replying To gotmilk: "You dream of an era that never existed." Its fairly obvious that a game with more kicking, less handpassing and where the ball moved quicker towards the oppositions half existed in the past. Where I and some others often see as people dreaming is when manager sends out a team with a simple plan where most of their players block off space in front of their goal and then be available to take a handpass is imagined to have hatched an ingenious and thoughtful tactical plan after the event.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1360 - 19/07/2016 18:37:17
1886566
Link
0
|