Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football

[Maiden1]

This thread definitely confirms the maxim opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one (and each 1 is different). 

I might as well add if we want to stop 'blanket defences' then I think we should have 1 explicit rule I.e. there has to be 3/4 players stay in own 1/2. Any 4 and the 4 can change. If the ref sees team has more than 11 players back give a 21 metre free.  Other team has to keep 3/4 players in defense as well to ensure they don't overrun the opposition who can't get numbers back to defend.

[JoG2]

This thread definitely confirms the maxim opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one (and each 1 is different). 

I might as well add if we want to stop 'blanket defences' then I think we should have 1 explicit rule I.e. there has to be 3/4 players stay in own 1/2. Any 4 and the 4 can change. If the ref sees team has more than 11 players back give a 21 metre free.  Other team has to keep 3/4 players in defense as well to ensure they don't overrun the opposition who can't get numbers back to defend.

Our poor old refs are struggling with the 1-2-3 handpass fiasco, never mind 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11..ball gets hoofed up the pitch, 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 *whistle*. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11.......

[tippabu]

This thread definitely confirms the maxim opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one (and each 1 is different). 

I might as well add if we want to stop 'blanket defences' then I think we should have 1 explicit rule I.e. there has to be 3/4 players stay in own 1/2. Any 4 and the 4 can change. If the ref sees team has more than 11 players back give a 21 metre free.  Other team has to keep 3/4 players in defense as well to ensure they don't overrun the opposition who can't get numbers back to defend.

i presume you mean 3/4 stay in oppositions half (stay forward) as opposed to stay in own half.....i just think these are way to complicated and hard to enforce....its like if a defender is coming out with the ball and a forward is chasing him and tackling him then he has to put on the breaks and give up if crossing the line resulting in a free. I would absolutely love 15 on 15, open space, attractive football.....i am not trying to pick any holes so the game can stay shite and boring like alot of them are now

[tippabu]

Don't really see how going to 13 a side would make much of a difference. If you want to drop players back then the two players you lose would probably come from your forwards or one forward and one 'defender' that defends the 45m area.

The problem is we have seen how getting players back makes it more difficult to score. We have also now figured out how we can get them back and still transition pretty quickly when we turnover the opposition. We have now figured out that playing in front of the massed defence and probing is the most effective way of countering the massed defence. So unless we can figure out a way of preventing teams dropping players back and forcing opponents to play a probing kind of attack we are stuck with the pretty shit fare we get in many games.

But would you be open to trialing it and seeing how it panned out. Youve stated your reasons why you think it mightnt work i feel it would be very much worth looking at because.......

1. Less players means more space, I fully believe there should be allowance for a defensive set up, carlow and fermanagh for instance I don't think would have had the success of last year without it and with 13 a side you could still implement this but there should be more room to operate and space to find for attacking players. Even in this years all ireland at times dublin had 15 players in their own half, so taking 2 out can only free up space that is being occupied

2. Players are fitter than they have ever been, should be no issue in this regards with less players.

3. It should help counties with a smaller/less talented pick than the bigger counties....I know in tipp starting team would be stronger starting 13 and much better quality of player to be able call off the bench. The last few years we had a strong starting 15 with 3/4 players who you would be happy to come on and do a good job and be effective....dublin bring on 6 all stars off the bench so with 13 a side it should only strengthen the full compliment of players every team uses in a game

4. It would make a huge difference to rural clubs who struggle for numbers.

[BennyCake]

This thread definitely confirms the maxim opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one (and each 1 is different). 

I might as well add if we want to stop 'blanket defences' then I think we should have 1 explicit rule I.e. there has to be 3/4 players stay in own 1/2. Any 4 and the 4 can change. If the ref sees team has more than 11 players back give a 21 metre free.  Other team has to keep 3/4 players in defense as well to ensure they don't overrun the opposition who can't get numbers back to defend.

i presume you mean 3/4 stay in oppositions half (stay forward) as opposed to stay in own half.....i just think these are way to complicated and hard to enforce....its like if a defender is coming out with the ball and a forward is chasing him and tackling him then he has to put on the breaks and give up if crossing the line resulting in a free. I would absolutely love 15 on 15, open space, attractive football.....i am not trying to pick any holes so the game can stay shite and boring like alot of them are now

Yeah I agree. Refs have enough to do without counting players behind a line. You'd need bleepers fitted to all players or something.

I think with 11/12 players, teams might be more likely to go man to man. As a free man could really do damage. So there's an incentive to defend, and an incentive to attack.

[Maiden1]

This thread definitely confirms the maxim opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one (and each 1 is different). 

I might as well add if we want to stop 'blanket defences' then I think we should have 1 explicit rule I.e. there has to be 3/4 players stay in own 1/2. Any 4 and the 4 can change. If the ref sees team has more than 11 players back give a 21 metre free.  Other team has to keep 3/4 players in defense as well to ensure they don't overrun the opposition who can't get numbers back to defend.

i presume you mean 3/4 stay in oppositions half (stay forward) as opposed to stay in own half.....i just think these are way to complicated and hard to enforce....its like if a defender is coming out with the ball and a forward is chasing him and tackling him then he has to put on the breaks and give up if crossing the line resulting in a free. I would absolutely love 15 on 15, open space, attractive football.....i am not trying to pick any holes so the game can stay shite and boring like alot of them are now

But 15 vs 15 is like wishing they would bring back Cagney & Lacey 1 it's not going to happen and 2 it probably wasn't as good as you remember.

Coaching always evolves and the coaches at county level haven't got the job winning it in a raffle. They have more than likely had some success in the first place playing the way they do. If there was a coach out there that was winning everything 15 vs 15 there would be a queue to hire them.  I personally don't like 6 forwards standing in conventional position. It stops the long ball in to full forward if the chf forward is standing in the road 10 meters directly in front of him.

I agree with you on problem of if guy coming out with call he might rightly realise that there will only be 3 back if he crosses 1/2 way line. As long as 1 of 1/2 forwards also realise the back is making a run out of defence he can back into his 1/2. I'm definitely making it sound complicated but don't know if it would be.

[macdanger2]

Don't really see how going to 13 a side would make much of a difference. If you want to drop players back then the two players you lose would probably come from your forwards or one forward and one 'defender' that defends the 45m area.

The problem is we have seen how getting players back makes it more difficult to score. We have also now figured out how we can get them back and still transition pretty quickly when we turnover the opposition. We have now figured out that playing in front of the massed defence and probing is the most effective way of countering the massed defence. So unless we can figure out a way of preventing teams dropping players back and forcing opponents to play a probing kind of attack we are stuck with the pretty shit fare we get in many games.

But would you be open to trialing it and seeing how it panned out. Youve stated your reasons why you think it mightnt work i feel it would be very much worth looking at because.......

1. Less players means more space, I fully believe there should be allowance for a defensive set up, carlow and fermanagh for instance I don't think would have had the success of last year without it and with 13 a side you could still implement this but there should be more room to operate and space to find for attacking players. Even in this years all ireland at times dublin had 15 players in their own half, so taking 2 out can only free up space that is being occupied

2. Players are fitter than they have ever been, should be no issue in this regards with less players.

3. It should help counties with a smaller/less talented pick than the bigger counties....I know in tipp starting team would be stronger starting 13 and much better quality of player to be able call off the bench. The last few years we had a strong starting 15 with 3/4 players who you would be happy to come on and do a good job and be effective....dublin bring on 6 all stars off the bench so with 13 a side it should only strengthen the full compliment of players every team uses in a game

4. It would make a huge difference to rural clubs who struggle for numbers.

I'd be in favour of trialling it for the above reasons plus the simplicity of it, it adds no extra pressure on the ref and it doesn't fundamentally change the game. Wobbler's point about it favouring fitness over skill at lower levels (at higher levels, incredible fitness is already a pre requisite) may be one downside to consider

[Zulu]

Don't really see how going to 13 a side would make much of a difference. If you want to drop players back then the two players you lose would probably come from your forwards or one forward and one 'defender' that defends the 45m area.

The problem is we have seen how getting players back makes it more difficult to score. We have also now figured out how we can get them back and still transition pretty quickly when we turnover the opposition. We have now figured out that playing in front of the massed defence and probing is the most effective way of countering the massed defence. So unless we can figure out a way of preventing teams dropping players back and forcing opponents to play a probing kind of attack we are stuck with the pretty shit fare we get in many games.

But would you be open to trialing it and seeing how it panned out. Youve stated your reasons why you think it mightnt work i feel it would be very much worth looking at because.......

1. Less players means more space, I fully believe there should be allowance for a defensive set up, carlow and fermanagh for instance I don't think would have had the success of last year without it and with 13 a side you could still implement this but there should be more room to operate and space to find for attacking players. Even in this years all ireland at times dublin had 15 players in their own half, so taking 2 out can only free up space that is being occupied

2. Players are fitter than they have ever been, should be no issue in this regards with less players.

3. It should help counties with a smaller/less talented pick than the bigger counties....I know in tipp starting team would be stronger starting 13 and much better quality of player to be able call off the bench. The last few years we had a strong starting 15 with 3/4 players who you would be happy to come on and do a good job and be effective....dublin bring on 6 all stars off the bench so with 13 a side it should only strengthen the full compliment of players every team uses in a game

4. It would make a huge difference to rural clubs who struggle for numbers.

I'd certainly have no issue with trialling it. I don't think the three hand pass rule is the right answer either but I'm in favour of it getting a longer trial than many here are willing to give it. The bottom line is nobody knows what will change the game for the better and I think any rule change needs to be trialled in at least 100 games to see how it changes the game. The game isn't a good spectacle at the moment so we need to get serious about how to address that. Trialling changes at senior IC level is not the way to go.

[seafoid]

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/central-council-must-take-their-chance-to-change-the-game-1.3759248

"That the handpass proposal has been advanced reflects the deep unease within the game that kicking the ball has become a skill, the practice of which is in accelerated decline. This concern was also expressed by the report of the 2012 Football Review Committee report but it was decided that as hand-passing had shown signs of abating no moves would be made to curb the practice.
That 'trend' proved illusory, as can be seen by combining the statistical findings of the FRC and the current Standing Committee on the Playing Rules.
In the 1970s the ratio of hand-pass to kicked pass was 1.1:1. By 2000, this had risen to 1.8:1. Ten years later, it was 2.3:1. The recent SCPR recommendations reported the 2018 figure as 3.4:1.

Time to act

If the GAA wants to do something about this it is clearly time to act. There are those who say that there is nothing wrong with football but the transition to a possession-based game makes it less exciting on the simple objective grounds that the ball is in contest for a far smaller amount of time.
That is the basis of the most damning comparison with hurling where possession is contested several times a minute.
Given the strength of feeling on the quality of football at present, which is a factor, along with others, such as competitive imbalance, in its waning popularity – evident in both match attendances and television audiences – a review was bound to take place."

This could explain at lot


Down would be  operating at a ratio of 1.6 : 1 which was the 1994 level
Meath would be operating at 1.8 :1 or the 2001 level
Tyrone and Kerry  must be at 2.3 :1 or the 2010 level

[Rossfan]

Tippabu  you haven't insulted or upset me at all.
No harm in a bit of debate at all.
I strongly feel incessant handpassing has ruined football and when you combine that with ball carriers being let do what they want while getting frees if touched.....
The latter left defenders fearful of tackling at all which led us to blanket defences and turning the game into soccer with hands.
At least in soccer the ball is still loose enough that a tackler has some chance of getting it.
If we continue to let football be a possession game then we need to bring in a tackle on the man ala Aussie Rules or dare I say rubby
Anyway over to Central Council this weekend

[Itchy]

http://pca.st/0Xj8

off the ball podcast, 40 odd mins in Brian Cuthbert, Cork manager, chats about the rules. He was on the standing committee that introduced them. For those who are rubbishing the rules I strongly suggest you at least listen to him. Then ask yourself why only 12 of the 32 managers surveyed bothered to reply.

[DuffleKing]

So some managers and coaches should be listened to? Could you supply two lists so that we know how navigate the discussion?

[Zulu]

Well I'd listen to the 12 that replied. Should we listen to those who didn't bother replying but will rubbish other people's suggestions on the national airwaves?

The game needs help, very few people disagree with that. I coach teams and when you're on the line you tend not to notice if the game is good or bad so it's fair to say most IC set ups are not focused on whether the game is good to watch. However, I think every sport should be concerned whether it's entertaining to the general sporting public.

I'll coach a team to play around outside a massed defence and probe for chances but not force score attempts. I won't pay €10 - €50 to watch other teams do it too often though. It should concern any genuine football fan when many genuine football people aren't bothered about watching the game anymore.

[Itchy]

So some managers and coaches should be listened to? Could you supply two lists so that we know how navigate the discussion?

I feel like I'm a teacher in baby infants with you., If all these managers today are universally against the rule why did the vast majority of them not get involved when invited to in the formative period when rules were being developed? Some rules were tweaked in the early stages. Now same managers just expect them to be dumped and Declan Bonner for example heaped insult on those who came up with the rules. That is the point I'm asking the likes of you to comment on.

[joemamas]

Well I'd listen to the 12 that replied. Should we listen to those who didn't bother replying but will rubbish other people's suggestions on the national airwaves?

The game needs help, very few people disagree with that. I coach teams and when you're on the line you tend not to notice if the game is good or bad so it's fair to say most IC set ups are not focused on whether the game is good to watch. However, I think every sport should be concerned whether it's entertaining to the general sporting public.

I'll coach a team to play around outside a massed defence and probe for chances but not force score attempts. I won't pay €10 - €50 to watch other teams do it too often though. It should concern any genuine football fan when many genuine football people aren't bothered about watching the game anymore.

100% correct. Entertainment value has declined dramatically. But Managers are getting "expenses" so for the most part they don't give a shite about quality.

As for Declan Bonner, did he not manage a Donegal minor team and a good few of them have graduated to the senior ranks, maybe he realizes that it will be very difficult to change stripes.