FRC Feedback - poll on new rules - which do you like least?

[onefineday]

Stole this from the FRC feedback survey

https://www.gaa.ie/article/give-your-feedback-to-the-frc-rule-enhancements-during-the-allianz-football-league

Just curious to see what the general sentiment out there amongst us GAA nerds?

[Nanderson]

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

[Saffron_sam20]

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

Or just book players who throw the ball away or are clearly messing about.

[statto]

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

+1.

[statto]

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

Or just book players who throw the ball away or are clearly messing about.

Good alternative, if you were on a booking would think twice about slowing play up. 

[David McKeown]

What if you dislike all of them to the same amount?

To be fair I would like to see either the 3 v 3 or the 2 point arc tried in isolation but not both together to see what impact that has

[bennydorano]

Postpone the introduction for club football for 1 year should be N1 on any such list.

[marty34]

I watched a club (challenge) game yesterday under the new rules.

I thought it was great. 3 men up all the time - no issues there. Maybe fitness was an issue and it was a challenge game but it worked well.

Tap and go was good. Although a few lads weren't tuned in and forgot about it until some shouted at them. But definately helped speed the game up.

A few 2 pointers but pitch wasn't greatly marked out - hard to see. So it'll be hard with club umpires.

I enjoyed it. Big difference between that game and games last year. More speed and more pace. Time flew by.   

[JoG2]

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

+1.

+2

[onefineday]

What if you dislike all of them to the same amount?

To be fair I would like to see either the 3 v 3 or the 2 point arc tried in isolation but not both together to see what impact that has

Ah David, there must be one or two they really upsets you more than the others?
For me it's the 2-point arc, I could maybe live with it if we had the 4-point goal, but as is, the decision to double the value of a relatively straightforward shot at goal (for intercounty sharpshooters) has the potential to absolutely transform the game and not positively.

[Rossfan]

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.

[HiMucker]

What if you dislike all of them to the same amount?

To be fair I would like to see either the 3 v 3 or the 2 point arc tried in isolation but not both together to see what impact that has

Ah David, there must be one or two they really upsets you more than the others?
For me it's the 2-point arc, I could maybe live with it if we had the 4-point goal, but as is, the decision to double the value of a relatively straightforward shot at goal (for intercounty sharpshooters) has the potential to absolutely transform the game and not positively.

It's not in the vote but I'd go for the advancement for slowing down play or not handing ball back to opponent. The rule itself is good but the penalty is much to severe. Half the distance would suffice

+1.

+2

See a fair few ones mentioning this and I understand. Its too severe a punishment because people keep doing it. I don't believe this rule was implemented to become a common part of our game. It was implemented to completely stamp out the negative behaviour, and I believe it will if they persevere with it and it will become a rarity in the game. I think we need to be careful judging the ones we don't like as we may only be seeing an exaggerated consequence of them as players and coaches get used to them. There has been over 20 years of coaching players to slow down the attacking team by illegal means. It will take a bit of time and courage to change that thinking.

[AustinPowers]

What if you dislike all of them to the same amount?

To be fair I would like to see either the 3 v 3 or the 2 point arc tried in isolation but not both together to see what impact that has

Ah David, there must be one or two they really upsets you more than the others?
For me it's the 2-point arc, I could maybe live with it if we had the 4-point goal, but as is, the decision to double the value of a relatively straightforward shot at goal (for intercounty sharpshooters) has the potential to absolutely transform the game and not positively.

The 2 pointer thing is  nonsense.

I don't like it  but I even find myself saying "ah don't go in there (Inside the arc) , sure thats only 1 point "

Teams skirt around the arc  lining up a 40+ metre shot. It dissuades teams from actually getting the ball near the FF line to get   a goal,  which you want to see more of.  A 2 pointer is nearly as good  as a goal with far less risk of  losing possession , but  far less of the excitement you'd get with  the ball near the square.

[Milltown Row2]

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.

[scout]

The forward mark/advantage, literally gives the defender & art of defending zero chance.

If a forward gets a mark,the best decision for the defender is to just go in through the man and foul so they can't go at the goal etc..