National Forum

Rule changes to counter negative tactics

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Replying To bdbuddah:  "I'm trying to think this through in my head. A kick out would be about 3 seconds in air, if a player were to catch a ball (or get onto a breaking ball), look up and kick it in to a forward inside you could be talking 6 or 10 seconds more before the ball gets in there. If players were allowed to leave their zone when ball was kicked they might have time to run into midfield area but not flood defensive area. The blankets would be hard to sustain (with about 50 kick outs in a game)."
Or every player could line up on the edge of the zone because they know the ball won't be going short. So some of them might bust a gut back to ensure that there is defensive cover. It really would bring on the era of the outstanding athlete in gaelic football.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 23/07/2016 11:56:26    1888469

Link

This won't have any impact on negative tactics but as a way of closing the gap somewhat between weak and strong counties and having fewer ridiculous mismatches, I think games should be 13 a side and along with that the number of subs allowed reduced to 3. These 2 changes taken together would strengthen the competitiveness of weaker counties. Many counties struggle to get 15 inter county standard players on the pitch and when they come up against the stronger counties it is the depth of talent available to the stronger counties that really kills them. When weaker teams have to introduce their 3rd, 4th, or 5th sub the quality of player available to them at that stage usually slumps dramatically.
I was talking to a Longford man recently about their loss to Cork. He told me that Longford would just about have 15 players of intercounty level and he said they were doing well until one of their midfielders got injured and they had nobody anywhere close to his ability on the bench to replace him.
The problem of negative tactics needs to be addressed but the problem of the ever widening gap between the weak and the strong is one that requires equal attention.

PoolSturgeon (Galway) - Posts: 1907 - 23/07/2016 12:09:37    1888471

Link

Need to work out a more definable tackle. When players are crowded out of it, it's pot luck which way the referee is going point. Also the blanket defence is set up to let the opposition go over and back, without bringing contact into the game.

Should introduce something like a waist high tackle, a la Aussie Rules. Then the player in possession should use it or lose it. Would probably have to re-introduce the mark, to protect the high fielders from being swamped.

Rover_Hendrix (Sligo) - Posts: 3 - 23/07/2016 12:27:24    1888477

Link

This won't have any impact on negative tactics but as a way of closing the gap somewhat between weak and strong counties and having fewer ridiculous mismatches, I think games should be 13 a side and along with that the number of subs allowed reduced to 3. These 2 changes taken together would strengthen the competitiveness of weaker counties. Many counties struggle to get 15 inter county standard players on the pitch and when they come up against the stronger counties it is the depth of talent available to the stronger counties that really kills them. When weaker teams have to introduce their 3rd, 4th, or 5th sub the quality of player available to them at that stage usually slumps dramatically.
I was talking to a Longford man recently about their loss to Cork. He told me that Longford would just about have 15 players of intercounty level and he said they were doing well until one of their midfielders got injured and they had nobody anywhere close to his ability on the bench to replace him. The problem of negative tactics needs to be addressed but the problem of the ever widening gap between the weak and the strong is one that requires equal attention.
PoolSturgeon (Galway) - Posts:411 - 23/07/2016 12:09:37How does reducing the number of subs aid the game though? A clash of heads early in the game and you're down to 2 or 1 sub for rest of the game. What exactly do you define as inter county standard anyway? Teams will always be at different standards and levels. Reducing to 13 doesn't aid weaker counties or weaken stronger counties making any gap closer.
How do you address the problem of "negative tactics" though? Do you change rules? Change refereeing?

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 23/07/2016 12:49:04    1888485

Link

Replying To PoolSturgeon:  "This won't have any impact on negative tactics but as a way of closing the gap somewhat between weak and strong counties and having fewer ridiculous mismatches, I think games should be 13 a side and along with that the number of subs allowed reduced to 3. These 2 changes taken together would strengthen the competitiveness of weaker counties. Many counties struggle to get 15 inter county standard players on the pitch and when they come up against the stronger counties it is the depth of talent available to the stronger counties that really kills them. When weaker teams have to introduce their 3rd, 4th, or 5th sub the quality of player available to them at that stage usually slumps dramatically.
I was talking to a Longford man recently about their loss to Cork. He told me that Longford would just about have 15 players of intercounty level and he said they were doing well until one of their midfielders got injured and they had nobody anywhere close to his ability on the bench to replace him.
The problem of negative tactics needs to be addressed but the problem of the ever widening gap between the weak and the strong is one that requires equal attention."
A weaker team playing 13 a side on the current sized pitches would have to set up very defensively or they'd just get sliced through like butter.

For weaker teams to get better I think there has to be better competitions provided for them, that their players will want to play in and that their fans will want to go to.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 23/07/2016 12:52:22    1888487

Link

Replying To Rover_Hendrix:  "Need to work out a more definable tackle. When players are crowded out of it, it's pot luck which way the referee is going point. Also the blanket defence is set up to let the opposition go over and back, without bringing contact into the game.

Should introduce something like a waist high tackle, a la Aussie Rules. Then the player in possession should use it or lose it. Would probably have to re-introduce the mark, to protect the high fielders from being swamped."
When you start doing this you're completely changing our game.

For improving excitement levels I think changing the scoring system to greater reward points from outside the 45 could be great for the game.

I'd love to see it trialled.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 23/07/2016 12:57:05    1888488

Link

Replying To gotmilk:  "Or every player could line up on the edge of the zone because they know the ball won't be going short. So some of them might bust a gut back to ensure that there is defensive cover. It really would bring on the era of the outstanding athlete in gaelic football."
Don't know would it work out that way but if it did many would find that preferable to the defensive blankets we see today.

bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1360 - 23/07/2016 14:48:36    1888527

Link

Replying To bdbuddah:  "Don't know would it work out that way but if it did many would find that preferable to the defensive blankets we see today."
Good article on brollys proposals. Never thought of it that way.
https://www.facebook.com/SportsJOEdotie/posts/1152772901452951

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 24/07/2016 10:04:46    1888987

Link

Replying To gotmilk:  "Good article on brollys proposals. Never thought of it that way.
https://www.facebook.com/SportsJOEdotie/posts/1152772901452951"
Excellent article.

In general I don't like limiting players positioning in our game. Seems a bit Netball like to me where players are restricted to their roles.

I want to see a more dynamic game than that.

I still think referees could police the tackle better though. So many tackles are fouls based on the current definition, without trying to define the swarm tackle. That gives the benefit to defenders over attackers.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 24/07/2016 11:39:14    1889042

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "Excellent article.

In general I don't like limiting players positioning in our game. Seems a bit Netball like to me where players are restricted to their roles.

I want to see a more dynamic game than that.

I still think referees could police the tackle better though. So many tackles are fouls based on the current definition, without trying to define the swarm tackle. That gives the benefit to defenders over attackers."
Parts of the article were good in how it showed up potential downsides of proposed Brolly rules, particularly in the huge Croke Park pitch. I still think the idea of limiting the number of players in certain areas of the pitch at kick out time has merit (I don't like the idea of limiting players positioning in the game but the way the game has gone something drastic is probably needed for it to change direction). In the article he could have suggested alterations to the Brolly rules to improve them but he did not do this. A few other issues I would have with this article.
He says Brolly rules will be a big change in some aspects of how Gaelic football are played, big change have all ready happened in just the last few years with blanket defences followed by teams moving the ball forward in short passing movements up the pitch between each 45m lines with little direct competition between players for the ball which have taken away many characteristics out of Gaelic football.
The two other non-GAA field games I watch on TV a fair bit, Rugby and soccer have a tactical aspect built into their rules (their versions of offside rules), no type of offside rule or similar tactical rule ever existed in Gaelic football. This makes Gaelic football much less suitable for an overly tactical approach (the height of tactical approaches we are likely to see in Gaelic football will be very basic, simply keeping most of your players in defensive positions to block off space for attacking players).

bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1360 - 26/07/2016 09:21:20    1890140

Link

I honestly don't think any major rules changes are required. It will be interesting to see if the mark has any impact when it comes in at the start of next year and I wouldn't be completely against any small changes here and there. The main issue I feel is the championship structure and I believe the current structure is the reason we have so many of the tactical battles mainly seen in the Ulster Championship but this year has also been seen in Connacht and Leinster. Teams are so used to playing against each other and with the amount of analysis and prep teams do on each other that alot of the time they cancel each other out and it can lead to a poor game for the netueral to watch. Imagine a new structure where the same teams don't meet every year and you could go 3/4 years without meeting the same team again. There has been some great games in the qualifiers over the years and alot of teams seem to score more heavily that the did in the provincial championship. I think this is becuase teams know less about each other. For example, even though they lost when was the last time Derry scored 2-17 in an Ulster Championship game?

I honestly believe that a new championship structure would improve the overall quality of football rather than any mad rule change.

Mobot (Donegal) - Posts: 459 - 26/07/2016 13:44:55    1890381

Link

Replying To bdbuddah:  "Parts of the article were good in how it showed up potential downsides of proposed Brolly rules, particularly in the huge Croke Park pitch. I still think the idea of limiting the number of players in certain areas of the pitch at kick out time has merit (I don't like the idea of limiting players positioning in the game but the way the game has gone something drastic is probably needed for it to change direction). In the article he could have suggested alterations to the Brolly rules to improve them but he did not do this. A few other issues I would have with this article.
He says Brolly rules will be a big change in some aspects of how Gaelic football are played, big change have all ready happened in just the last few years with blanket defences followed by teams moving the ball forward in short passing movements up the pitch between each 45m lines with little direct competition between players for the ball which have taken away many characteristics out of Gaelic football.
The two other non-GAA field games I watch on TV a fair bit, Rugby and soccer have a tactical aspect built into their rules (their versions of offside rules), no type of offside rule or similar tactical rule ever existed in Gaelic football. This makes Gaelic football much less suitable for an overly tactical approach (the height of tactical approaches we are likely to see in Gaelic football will be very basic, simply keeping most of your players in defensive positions to block off space for attacking players)."
Tactics wise GAA is similar to basketball.

Shot clock or a change of scoring could be worth looking at.

The insistence on the hand pass being the root of all ills really irritates me.

Hand passing and running off the shoulder is very much a part of Ulster football culture. I honestly enjoy watching it.

I've played club football in Meath. I've seen the different culture, with kicking to the chest being very popular. Took me a while to adjust, I was much more used to kick passing into space than into the man. (Although over the last 7 years since I started playing and now following club football in Meath I've seen a large shift in the number of teams playing a more break from deep style of play.)

Anyway back on point.
We all have our own football cultures, it irritates me when people on here advocate for their culture as being better to watch or more pure than mine.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 27/07/2016 12:53:52    1890910

Link