Messages

Not sure what's the best way of wording that poll, I've grown with some of the rules from when they first came out..

I'm looking at them as a supporter and as an official, bit confusing but the least enhancement that really doesn't count is the forward mark, very rarely has it been done in all the game I've done so far. 1V1 at midfield players are still grappling for the ball and in occasions the lads that are on the 45 are still able to sprint in and collect the break.

The 3 up and 4 defenders is grand, as a supporter

The limits on using the keeper is great, the keeper should in fact not be outside the large rectangle, hard enough to listen to at the best of times but christ when they are up the pitch they all think they are The Gooch.

Solo and go is good

Kick outs are the same for both teams, learn to win your own ball, if the other team is always winning the ball, then managers need to look at their players

Scoring arc is good, but shouldn't be used for advanced dissent 2 pointers.. 2 pointers if from play only

I'd pretty much agree with all that - definitely agree on 2 pts from dead balls, but I really think not retaining the 4 point goal was a serious misstep.

I'm not a fan of the midfield mark rule and the ensuing 50m penalty for contact either.

Diarmuid Murtagh on the radio Sunday evening described 2 pointers as "tap overs".
He said it looks long on TV but not when you're on the pitch playing.

So why were teams not doing tap overs before the rule? The endless moving the ball back sideways and looking to break lines to get into the 'scoring zone' and now they are just tapping them over, that would have nullified the swapped defence.

I think that's the maths of the whole thing.
Before it was keep possession until you're in the scoring zone where conversion rate is 75% or whatever, now, whilst conversion rate might only be 40% from outside the arc, it's worth 100% more, so the smart play is to take that shot.
And as for working a goal - it's worth 50% more than a 2-pointer, but the difficulty is presumably so much more than that, that's it's just not an option worth considering.

It's something we've seen in hurling too over the last decade, the realisation that as the probability of scoring a long range point has increased dramatically (lighter ball, stronger and better coached players), then the relative value of a goal has diminished and dramatically reduced the incentive to work goals.

3 goals in total this weekend in 4 provincial semi-finals. Aberration or is this becoming a 'thing'?

Need some help with this one...following on from the 4 step rule did the Ref's not always used to give the benefit to the player who was being tackled unfairly with a few extra steps? or did I just imagine that.

A ref can recount steps if he deems a player is getting fouled.

Back in the day, before we had the advantage rule, there was an unofficial rule of allowing a player to take a couple of extra steps when he was being 'fouled' just to see if he could break free and move the game on without a break, it was called the slow whistle...

But that was to be binned (even though it wasn't real) when the advantage rule came out, but it seems for most parts that we now have a hybrid rule where advantage is called and we still 'allow' those extra steps to break the challenge lol..

Wasn't there mention of changing from steps to seconds? Would that be easier to police?

In my limited refereeing experience I quickly realised that I wasn't even sure what a step is never mind trying to count them - that said, I did well on the technical fouls, it was my interpretation of the tackle that had the sidelines up in arms!

Still cant work out how 4 of last yrs starting forwards are not on that team.

Did you ever hear what happened? I know a few of the lads weren't named on the initial panel. Was there a fall out?

Fwiw I heard that the plan was to concentrate on developing the two all Ireland winning minor teams, maybe 3 in a row at u20 was the goal.

The National Football League has been desperate to get more offence into its game.  Every rule change going back to the 1970s has been in favour of the offence and to handicap the defence.  They've finally accomplished what they wanted: all offence, all passing and all action.  What the NFL took decades to do, the GAA is trying to do in months.  Football traditionalists will tell you both organisations have one goal: to destroy the offence-defence balance.

Just on that nfl point, yes changes are made on an ongoing basis to make the game more attractive to watch (that's sort of the rationale behind spectator sports), but to say the balance is gone in nfl would be a massive misstatement. The old adage about defence winning titles is as true today as it was 50 years ago. The last two Superbowl winners have been first or thereabouts in total defence, whilst barely breaking into the top 10 in offence.

Up Derry!

Johnny Bradley of Glen afaik

This would be the argument to call him out on.
Personally worry he's been chosen as the Irish Tommy Robinson character to scare off any ordinary decent folk supporting anti immigration candidates.

https://x.com/KimIversenShow/status/1903596642651267306

"You can't simultaneously call out the Muslim immigrants into your country AND support Israel, the country CAUSING all of the Muslim immigrants."

Not sure that argument holds up too well - the proportion of Palestinian refugees is very small I'd say.

Official stats suggest that of 18,000 applicants for IP in Ireland in 2024 (from an EU total of nearly 900k), 2,900 were Jordanian and 957 were Palestinian - typically, Jordanian refugees are Palestinian apparently - if that's the case then the group represents the 2nd largest proportion of applicants, almost tying with Nigeria at 20% each. The country of origin of the third country on the list was Pakistan with about 1,300. Neither Jordan nor palestine featured in the top 5 previous to 2024.

One other problem: you are allowing a small committee to have complete say over the entire game.  It appears they've been given carte blanche to do whatever they like.  Is there any time limit to FRC activities or is their dictatorial power over the game open ended?

Thus the goal is more entertainment and more action.  The FRC believes Kerry hitting long balls to David Clifford to be good for the game...which is fine.  When Ethan Rafferty, and other Ulster goalkeepers, run riot through opposing defences the FRC suddenly isn't interested in more excitement and scoring and put a stop to it.  You see the problem?  The FRC is picking winners and losers.

No major sport has ever overhauled its entire game like the GAA has just done.  Normally it's one rule change, to test the waters, then another and so on.  The National Football League has been desperate to get more offence into its game.  Every rule change going back to the 1970s has been in favour of the offence and to handicap the defence.  They've finally accomplished what they wanted: all offence, all passing and all action.  What the NFL took decades to do, the GAA is trying to do in months.  Football traditionalists will tell you both organisations have one goal: to destroy the offence-defence balance.  In other words, ruin the game.

I'm not trying to say who is right or wrong.  Obviously I'm in the camp of the traditionalists but that doesn't mean I'm right.  I'm simply trying to point out that a sport with the history and tradition of Gaelic football needs to mind that history and tradition and keep an eye on the long term consequences of any changes.

The moment you open Pandora's Box and allow so many changes at once, you open the door to endless changes.  Isn't that a slippery slope?

The FRC was given a remit to make gaelic football the best amateur sport in the world to watch and play.
There are fairly rigorous governance structures in place which all the new rules had to progress through and a lesser process for subsequent tweaks.
The reason why there has been such a radical overhaul of rules all at once is because of the very strict timelines imposed by Congress on the trialling of new rules.
New rules can only be introduced once every 5 years. These trial rules which were approved by special congress last October are in place until October this year. Congress (or special congress) will vote on the final package, it is probable that what we see now will see significant amendment before a final package of changes is agreed. I don't agree that the FRC is picking winners and losers based on geographical bias, if you look at the membership, there's balanced representation from all regions and indeed the gaa president who instigated the review is an Armagh man. They are reacting to feedback and statistical evidence.
They have a statistical unit analysing a large number of games from this year and comparing versus previous year's data (I believe this unit is led by a Derry man?).
The data and the feedback from their ongoing public surveys has shaped the initial proposals and the subsequent tweaks. My understanding is that no more tweaks are proposed prior to the final package being agreed for the October vote.
If we really want to shape the decisions then I think it's important to complete the feedback surveys on an ongoing basis (it's not a one and done thing and remains open) and probably more importantly, make sure that your county's delegates to the October vote understand your county's position and can articulate that position in a manner that can influence delegates.

Imo allowing the option of the short kickout improves the game in two main ways:

Firstly, it releases some of the congestion around the middle and increases the potential for a clean, high catch. (That might allow for a relaxation of the draconian rules around touching someone who makes that catch too).
Secondly, it brings a tactical decision into play, press or concede, only now, with the GK overlap option gone, the reward for pressing should be magnified and equally, the 3 up rule means that the risk and potential consequences of a press going wrong is hugely increased too.

Another big benefit is the simple fact that variation is more interesting for the spectator. Yes, we might have grown up on a diet of long kickouts, but having seen the dynamics that short options introduce, I would quite like to have the option retained.

Yes indeed, no close contests, cause the last decade has seen numerous brilliant close games in the opening rounds of the provincial championships   

Scores are of course higher as expected, but games to this point in the championship have not been.
Again, not unexpected, this next two weekends should see a number of competitive games and after them we'll be in a much better place to form our opinions.

Fwiw I think we've went to far, change was definitely needed, but our game is becoming a series of possessions which end in shots. Tackling and turnovers are declining, coaches appears to have quickly realized that 2pts are the way forward and the goal is an afterthought.
Anyway, we'll know better in a fortnight, but if we could do one thing now that might help the championship in front of us, I'm torn between the abolition of the 2pt free and the long kickout requirement.

Not sure what exactly was un-PC about the Naked Gun movies. I watched the first one recently with my 13 year old son without any concern.

On the other hand, watched Crocodile Dundee with both kids, including my ten year old daughter, and the scene in the bar with the transwoman getting humiliated was definitely an uncomfortable, dated part I fast forwarded.

As a matter of interest what was your kid's reaction? I've watched naked gun, top secret, king pin, dumb and dumber, something about Mary and airplane with my teenish kids over the last year with varying reactions!
They all have pieces that haven't aged well, dumb and dumber was a definite hit, airplane too (after they realised it wasn't a disaster movie - took a while), but they struggled with the rest tbh, they really couldn't comprehend why my wife and I were in stitches half the time throughout something about Mary and top secret really ain't great on rewatching!

It's almost on us.

(cue some Sky Sports whooshes)

Does anyone care?

We'll be hockeyed by Wicklow Sun week. Wicklow will then be ate by the Dubs in Aughrim.

I'm bored with it all.

I've read your posts for many years on GAA Board, but this is a very sad post.

For me, I'd like to resurrect the split Dublin idea with either a North Dub and South Dub, or Dub City and Dub County.

Feck me Orior. no way split Dublin. 4 behemoths instead of one. GAA is massive in capital. The fantasy 'Dun Laoghaire Rathdown' team on its own would give Leinster a good rattle.

I can handle despair. It's the little seeds of hope that kill you.

TBH being a Longford ultra gives me a certain respect in GAA circles here in Dublin. People nod heads...........there's yer man...........no hope...........still goes to all the games.........

Or else they think I'm a class of a simple bollix.

You're right, and I can't understand how dubs don't get this, the huge numbers involved in underage gaelic football in Dublin mean that splitting Dublin (which I'm totally in favour of) would result in 3/4/5 teams equal in strength to the current team. I hear you though, it wouldn't improve longford's lot or chances of adding to that Leinster haul, but at least we'd have a third provincial championship worth tuning into.

i do like most of the rules changes. 2 points for a free though is one which should go IMO

it has to stay as long as the 2 pointer is there or else it rewards fouling a good 2 point shooter outside the arc.

I don't agree with this all, the counter argument is that the longer the 2-point free remains, the more we will see players try and draw fouls outside the arc, but in scoring range.

Surely the referee has the tools at his disposal to deal with fouls outside the arc on this 2-point marksman as he's pulling the trigger?
Stats are showing about 48% success for 2pt kicks, so preventing this by giving away a much higher percentage 1pt kick would be unlikely to lead to much success in the long run.

It's common knowledge these rules benefit strong teams. There will be some bad trimmings but as long as the top 4/6 going well, all rosy in the world of the gaa.

That's likely to be borne out in the provincials too, there's good reason to expect some fair hammerings.
On the positive, it will likely ensure that the 2-pointer doesn't survive past this season.

[hard to know how much continuity you can take from U17 to U20]

Eamon Young, James Sargent, Johnny McGuckian is some half forward line for this level. Donegal are dangerous but it could be the same as last year, where whoever wins when Tyrone and Derry meet will be thinking of an All Ireland.

Galway and Mayo probably need watched having been the minor final 3 years ago but hard to know how much continuity you can take from U17 to U20

There are only 11 of Derry's 2022 minor panel on the 2025 u20 panel (35 players).

The word on the street was that Derry took the cream of the 2022 panel and added a good chunk of the 2023 minor team and a sprinkling of the 2024 minors. I'm not sure how many of those newbridge lads were on the 2022 team, but I heard there were no trials at any rate.