Kerry Cynical Play

[clubman21]

I thinkPaddy Tally has cleaned up the Kerry tackling, much .ore disciplined and on a par with Tyrone. Rumours that Ricey might be helping there next year .

and when exactly did tyrone stop being cynical?

Every teams cynical especially the best, it's part of the game. end thread

[Milltown Row2]

I thinkPaddy Tally has cleaned up the Kerry tackling, much .ore disciplined and on a par with Tyrone. Rumours that Ricey might be helping there next year .

and when exactly did tyrone stop being cynical?

Every teams cynical especially the best, it's part of the game. end thread

Yeah move on, the best teams play on the edge

[johnnycool]

I thinkPaddy Tally has cleaned up the Kerry tackling, much .ore disciplined and on a par with Tyrone. Rumours that Ricey might be helping there next year .

and when exactly did tyrone stop being cynical?

Every teams cynical especially the best, it's part of the game. end thread

Yeah move on, the best teams play on the edge

As a referee, should more yellows be dished out when teams are prevented from counterattacking quickly by the cynical tug back and the likes?

[imtommygunn]

If there are patterns though to teams fouling - e.g. with what has been identified here - then it should be looked at. It's one thing to play on the edge but if there's a pattern to it and is advantageous and systemic etc then things should be looked at. It's different several individuals playing on the edge.

[Rossfan]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and is no doubt a tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

[Lucifer]

There’s an understandable trend in football (same in NFL btw) that the closer you get to the business end of the season, the more referees turn a blind eye to aggressive play. Basically red card offences become yellow card offences, black card offences tends to become yellow card offences, or ignored completely.

I don’t mind this approach myself. Gaelic football is at its heart a physical sport, and I’ve no interest in watching a freetaking contest to decide the destiny of Sam. The winners should have a bit of mettle and then some.

And because (us nordies especially) we only really start to analyse Kerry at the latter end of a championship, it does on occasion seem like they have a different set of rules. They don’t. Not Kerry per se. The last eight, last four and last two have an incrementally different set of rules.

We just see more of Kerry and Dublin at these stages than anyone else, playing more often by the “bigger boy” rules. And for some observers, it manifests in paranoia.

I'd tend to agree with this.  In the latter stages referees feel more compelled to help create a better game, and that often means making different decisions than they normally would.  The commentary around games only feeds this, as seen when a referee is said to ruin a game for giving a red card at a crucial juncture when in fact it is the player themselves who have caused the issue, not the referee (unless it's overwhelmingly stupid like Donie Vaughan!)  There's plenty of exceptions to this where strong referees have made decisions which haven't helped the game, but overall there is a tendency throughout games to be that bit more lenient.

[Lucifer]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and us no doubtca tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

Could we make a distinction between a "genuine" foul and a "cyncial" foul?  Any "cynical" foul coming out of your own half is automatically brought to midfield, or 30 yards forward (whichever is further.)  As I recall, there was a previous motion defeated to bring frees forward 30M for interference/dissent (or a distance like that.)  It probably won't solve a whole pile, but it is surely better. 

Referees need to be much more stringent on any form of interference of a free, and increasing the distance forward will help a little at least.  Once a free is given, any attempt to play the ball or the man should automatically be brought forward without any hesitation.  Say in the example of a "cynical" foul on the 13m line aimed at just stopping the play.  The ball is brought forward to midfield but the player continues to hold the player on the ground to not allow him to get the ball away for the free to be taken.  The ball is now moved from midfield a further 30 yards, which is  around 45.  Surely it acts as some form of deterrent?  I don't think this is a particularly big change, nor difficult to apply.  A "cynical" foul coming out of defence is any foul where the tackler fouls without trying to play the ball (rather than dragging down etc used for the black card.)   

[RadioGAAGAA]

Moving the ball up makes no difference, unless it becomes scoreable.

I'd suggest offender gets 10 mins to cool their jets - no replacement.


To avoid the options available to the referee becoming too complex wonder is it rolling the sin bin in with a yellow, so you'd have:

- black; player off, can be replaced
- yellow; player off for 10 mins, can't be replaced, 2 yellows = red as current
- red; player off for remainder of game, can't be replaced.

A team losing a player for 10 mins would hurt them far more than 30m concession on a free.

[An Fhairche Abu]

Kerry are cynical? This is news on a par with water is wet.

[JoG2]

'insert county name' cynical play... Thread must have been started by someone who watches very little football

[blewuporstuffed]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and us no doubtca tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

Could we make a distinction between a "genuine" foul and a "cyncial" foul?  Any "cynical" foul coming out of your own half is automatically brought to midfield, or 30 yards forward (whichever is further.)  As I recall, there was a previous motion defeated to bring frees forward 30M for interference/dissent (or a distance like that.)  It probably won't solve a whole pile, but it is surely better. 

Referees need to be much more stringent on any form of interference of a free, and increasing the distance forward will help a little at least.  Once a free is given, any attempt to play the ball or the man should automatically be brought forward without any hesitation.  Say in the example of a "cynical" foul on the 13m line aimed at just stopping the play.  The ball is brought forward to midfield but the player continues to hold the player on the ground to not allow him to get the ball away for the free to be taken.  The ball is now moved from midfield a further 30 yards, which is  around 45.  Surely it acts as some form of deterrent?  I don't think this is a particularly big change, nor difficult to apply.  A "cynical" foul coming out of defence is any foul where the tackler fouls without trying to play the ball (rather than dragging down etc used for the black card.)

How on earth do you do that and expect referees to implement consistently?

[keep her low this half]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and us no doubtca tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

Could we make a distinction between a "genuine" foul and a "cyncial" foul?  Any "cynical" foul coming out of your own half is automatically brought to midfield, or 30 yards forward (whichever is further.)  As I recall, there was a previous motion defeated to bring frees forward 30M for interference/dissent (or a distance like that.)  It probably won't solve a whole pile, but it is surely better. 

Referees need to be much more stringent on any form of interference of a free, and increasing the distance forward will help a little at least.  Once a free is given, any attempt to play the ball or the man should automatically be brought forward without any hesitation.  Say in the example of a "cynical" foul on the 13m line aimed at just stopping the play.  The ball is brought forward to midfield but the player continues to hold the player on the ground to not allow him to get the ball away for the free to be taken.  The ball is now moved from midfield a further 30 yards, which is  around 45.  Surely it acts as some form of deterrent?  I don't think this is a particularly big change, nor difficult to apply.  A "cynical" foul coming out of defence is any foul where the tackler fouls without trying to play the ball (rather than dragging down etc used for the black card.)

How on earth do you do that and expect referees to implement consistently?

Very very difficult to be consistent for any ref.
If the tackler attempts to play the ball and mistimes it, genuine tackle, free move on.
If the tackler makes no attempt to play the ball, cynical foul and a card, colour of card open to debate.
The referee has to judge if the tackler was attempting to play the ball but should the referee not be judging that all the time?

[Milltown Row2]

There’s an understandable trend in football (same in NFL btw) that the closer you get to the business end of the season, the more referees turn a blind eye to aggressive play. Basically red card offences become yellow card offences, black card offences tends to become yellow card offences, or ignored completely.

I don’t mind this approach myself. Gaelic football is at its heart a physical sport, and I’ve no interest in watching a freetaking contest to decide the destiny of Sam. The winners should have a bit of mettle and then some.

And because (us nordies especially) we only really start to analyse Kerry at the latter end of a championship, it does on occasion seem like they have a different set of rules. They don’t. Not Kerry per se. The last eight, last four and last two have an incrementally different set of rules.

We just see more of Kerry and Dublin at these stages than anyone else, playing more often by the “bigger boy” rules. And for some observers, it manifests in paranoia.

I'd tend to agree with this.  In the latter stages referees feel more compelled to help create a better game, and that often means making different decisions than they normally would.  The commentary around games only feeds this, as seen when a referee is said to ruin a game for giving a red card at a crucial juncture when in fact it is the player themselves who have caused the issue, not the referee (unless it's overwhelmingly stupid like Donie Vaughan!)  There's plenty of exceptions to this where strong referees have made decisions which haven't helped the game, but overall there is a tendency throughout games to be that bit more lenient.

The referee is not there to make the game 'better' or or let it flow... That is entirely down to the players and the managers tactics, he's only there to officiate the game, christ he couldn't give a monkeys who wins or when the foul is committed ..

Portlaois played the Clare champions in the All Ireland club semi final 12 years ago, in the first tackle after seconds the Portlaois lad carried out a straight red card offence, probably thought I'd leave a marker on this lad early and won't get a card, red card and the Clare champions went off to Croke Park.

Lunacy by the player but the ref was left with no choice and did the right thing and not what the commentators are looking for..

Please get it out of your heads that the ref wants to make it better, if there is a man sent off it actually makes his game easier, so he'll take that all day

[Milltown Row2]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and us no doubtca tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

Could we make a distinction between a "genuine" foul and a "cyncial" foul?  Any "cynical" foul coming out of your own half is automatically brought to midfield, or 30 yards forward (whichever is further.)  As I recall, there was a previous motion defeated to bring frees forward 30M for interference/dissent (or a distance like that.)  It probably won't solve a whole pile, but it is surely better. 

Referees need to be much more stringent on any form of interference of a free, and increasing the distance forward will help a little at least.  Once a free is given, any attempt to play the ball or the man should automatically be brought forward without any hesitation.  Say in the example of a "cynical" foul on the 13m line aimed at just stopping the play.  The ball is brought forward to midfield but the player continues to hold the player on the ground to not allow him to get the ball away for the free to be taken.  The ball is now moved from midfield a further 30 yards, which is  around 45.  Surely it acts as some form of deterrent?  I don't think this is a particularly big change, nor difficult to apply.  A "cynical" foul coming out of defence is any foul where the tackler fouls without trying to play the ball (rather than dragging down etc used for the black card.)

How on earth do you do that and expect referees to implement consistently?

A genuine foul? and a cynical foul? they are still fouls regardless, if a players plays the man instead of the ball he's being cynical, if he's pulling his top, then he preventing him from playing that's also cynical and a genuine foul..

Its clear as mud at times but, deliberate is used in the black card rules, can only go with that, until its changed, this ever changing rule book

[blanketattack]

The oul "clumsy tackle" foul by forwards on defenders to prevent a quick counter attack is one of the most cynical going and us no doubtca tactic.
Refs seldom take any card action presumably as they don't want to slow proceedings and it's far away from goal.

Could we make a distinction between a "genuine" foul and a "cyncial" foul?  Any "cynical" foul coming out of your own half is automatically brought to midfield, or 30 yards forward (whichever is further.)  As I recall, there was a previous motion defeated to bring frees forward 30M for interference/dissent (or a distance like that.)  It probably won't solve a whole pile, but it is surely better. 

Referees need to be much more stringent on any form of interference of a free, and increasing the distance forward will help a little at least.  Once a free is given, any attempt to play the ball or the man should automatically be brought forward without any hesitation.  Say in the example of a "cynical" foul on the 13m line aimed at just stopping the play.  The ball is brought forward to midfield but the player continues to hold the player on the ground to not allow him to get the ball away for the free to be taken.  The ball is now moved from midfield a further 30 yards, which is  around 45.  Surely it acts as some form of deterrent?  I don't think this is a particularly big change, nor difficult to apply.  A "cynical" foul coming out of defence is any foul where the tackler fouls without trying to play the ball (rather than dragging down etc used for the black card.)

How on earth do you do that and expect referees to implement consistently?

Very very difficult to be consistent for any ref.
If the tackler attempts to play the ball and mistimes it, genuine tackle, free move on.
If the tackler makes no attempt to play the ball, cynical foul and a card, colour of card open to debate.
The referee has to judge if the tackler was attempting to play the ball but should the referee not be judging that all the time?

It's very easy to foul a player with a genuine attempt to play the ball, or at least looks genuine from a ref's point of view, but does the job of stopping the attack at source