Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

Started by BennyCake, September 09, 2014, 12:47:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

JoG2

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on May 20, 2024, 01:43:03 PM
Quote from: cornerback on May 20, 2024, 10:37:16 AMThere was a incident in the Derry Galway game were a Galway player in possession was "ushered" over the sideline by a couple of Derry players. McQullian pointed his flag in favour of the Galway player and indicated a pushing motion with this hands.  I didn't hear if the referee blew his whistle at this point but is it not the linesmans job to indicate which way the line ball is to go and he should not be calling the freekick??

The linesman will advise the ref on off the ball incidents, he will do the line and he may even stand in behind a free and help the umpire on a wide or a point call.. The ref alone decides, he can take advise, but it will be his call

It's his call yes, but the wording in the rule book has changed. Historically the linesman would have called lined decisions and off the ball stuff, but can now alert the ref to any incident the ref may not have seen on or off the ball

Milltown Row2

Quote from: JoG2 on May 20, 2024, 03:08:32 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on May 20, 2024, 01:43:03 PM
Quote from: cornerback on May 20, 2024, 10:37:16 AMThere was a incident in the Derry Galway game were a Galway player in possession was "ushered" over the sideline by a couple of Derry players. McQullian pointed his flag in favour of the Galway player and indicated a pushing motion with this hands.  I didn't hear if the referee blew his whistle at this point but is it not the linesmans job to indicate which way the line ball is to go and he should not be calling the freekick??

The linesman will advise the ref on off the ball incidents, he will do the line and he may even stand in behind a free and help the umpire on a wide or a point call.. The ref alone decides, he can take advise, but it will be his call

It's his call yes, but the wording in the rule book has changed. Historically the linesman would have called lined decisions and off the ball stuff, but can now alert the ref to any incident the ref may not have seen on or off the ball

But he can't stop play like soccer.. the ref can still regardless of what the linesman says or motions (as in this case) do his own thing
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

Gianni

Could anyone help me understand these rules? Please! I beg you! I'm also willing to pay.

1. When the player is in possession of the ball, the ball is held in his hands, he could:
  A. throw the ball in the air and catch it again with your hands? I think not, right?
  B. throw the ball in the air, hit it with any part of the body except arms and hands and then catch it in the hands? I don't think so, am I right?
  C. throw the ball and hit it with any part of the body, maybe like someone throws the ball in the air and then hits it with his head, legal?
  D. Bringing the ball with the hands at head height and then, without either throwing or releasing it, hitting the ball with the head or any part of the body except the hands, legal?

2. Rule: 1.5 When the ball has not been caught, it may be bounced more than once in succession.. So a player could control the ball with one hand (or two?) and play it basketball style as far as he wants? It would be much easier than soloing so how come we don't see it? The reason I expect is that 'caught' does not infer with both hands?

3. When a player tries to catch a ball in the air he may touch the ball several times with his hands as long as he has control of it. But could he continue to bounce the ball from his hand into the air as Hurling players do with stick and ball?
Rule: To play the ball up with the hand(s) and catch it again before it touches the ground, another player, or goal-posts
But, according to the rule, a player, once he touches the ball once in the air, cannot touch it a second or third time?
I believe as long as he can't control the ball the player could do it, but if we interpret the rule literally this wouldn't be legal, would it?

4. Situation: a player takes possession and hops the ball.

 A. After the hop he flicks it up in the air and catches it before it bounces the ground, a posts or a player.
 B. he flicks it to pass the ball to someone else.
 C. he flicks it to score a goal.
are A, B, C legals?

5. Situation: a player with the foot or with other parts of body but the hands tries a "Sombrero trick" and:
 A. in the air he strikes the ball with hand/s to an other direction.
 B. in the air he strikes the ball with hand/s and then he caught it.
 C. in the air he caught it with hand/s and goes on.

6. Ladies Gaelic football allows this:
Rule: A player may toss up the ball with one hand and play it off with the same hand.
So a player toss up the ball with right hand, surpass a player and then he can catch it with right hand, legal?
What does play it off mean


Thanks

Milltown Row2

A B C are all illegal, you can't throw the ball, not sure what the D means/is.

1. When the player is in possession of the ball, the ball is held in his hands, he could:
  A. throw the ball in the air and catch it again with your hands? I think not, right?
  B. throw the ball in the air, hit it with any part of the body except arms and hands and then catch it in the hands? I don't think so, am I right?
  C. throw the ball and hit it with any part of the body, maybe like someone throws the ball in the air and then hits it with his head, legal?
  D. Bringing the ball with the hands at head height and then, without either throwing or releasing it, hitting the ball with the head or any part of the body except the hands, legal?

Question 2 you can 'basketball' the ball all the way up the pitch, as you have not taken the ball in with both hands or in 'control' of the ball, not used as a play as the ball is exposed and easy to tackle

These questions are obscure as are the rules. question 3 .. You can't switch the ball from hand to hand when in possession, if not fully in possession you can touch it as many times as you want in the 'air' if in possession of the ball he can't basketball style the ball up the pitch, as he's in possession of the ball.

Question 4. He hops the ball and in flight can 'flick' it or off load it as he's not entirely in 'possession of the ball, its not a definite hand pass, this can be seen when someone coming in is making a tackle on a player and he offloads the ball quickly, he can't have possession of the ball with both hands and then flick it, as it would be illegal. The same would apply to 'flicking' it into the net for a goal, he can't hop the ball up and punch it into the net 'deliberately' if it looks like he's lost possession or the ball has come 'loose' from a tackle then that's ok. Possession with both hands and 'throwing' it up is illegal.

A point on this that I wouldn't be too sure of is if he toe taps the ball up doesn't regain possession with both hands and punches it into the net then that could be legal. As he never retained possession of the ball form the hop.

Question 5. anyone on the pitch that does the Sombrero trick (had to google what it was) I'd gladly turn a blind eye and let the defender mill him. but on the rules of play he can do all three. As he's not in possession

question 6. I don't do ladies games..

You can send that £100 via paypal ;)
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

Lucifer

I can't see any reason why a toe tap and punch/flick to the net would be illegal, and under what rule would you penalise a player for punching to the net after a player has bounced on the ground?  I appreciate you mention "deliberate" but these are both scenarios I always considered legal regardless of any intention.  I've never seen anything to specifically cater for it in the rules, and as such, that deems it legal to me.  However I could have missed it.  I'm fully aware a referee is very likely to blow either as a foul (especially a bounce and flick to the net) as it is such an unusual scenario that they may not have considered the rules for it until they are faced with it!

Gianni, a lot of the questions you raised there were probably not answered because they are of no benefit.  Nobody, playing seriously, would try these.  It's probably easier to understand the rules by watching the games and then applying the rules to it, rather than the other way around.  Because if you are applying a strict interpretation of the rules to how the game is actually played, it will get very confusing very quickly!

Milltown Row2

Quote from: Lucifer on June 07, 2024, 12:26:01 PMI can't see any reason why a toe tap and punch/flick to the net would be illegal, and under what rule would you penalise a player for punching to the net after a player has bounced on the ground?  I appreciate you mention "deliberate" but these are both scenarios I always considered legal regardless of any intention.  I've never seen anything to specifically cater for it in the rules, and as such, that deems it legal to me.  However I could have missed it.  I'm fully aware a referee is very likely to blow either as a foul (especially a bounce and flick to the net) as it is such an unusual scenario that they may not have considered the rules for it until they are faced with it!

Gianni, a lot of the questions you raised there were probably not answered because they are of no benefit.  Nobody, playing seriously, would try these.  It's probably easier to understand the rules by watching the games and then applying the rules to it, rather than the other way around.  Because if you are applying a strict interpretation of the rules to how the game is actually played, it will get very confusing very quickly!

I've mentioned 'in possession' a few times to make my point, the one on the goal, I did say I have questions over it myself and would apply the rules at the time as I seen it, if I felt he was out of control of the ball then no probs, if he bounces and retrieves the ball and then flicks, no goal, the grey area is bouncing it down to retrieve it and then flicking ball into net... That goes for toe tapping and not taking backing into hand before flicking it.

Logically its legal, sure who applies logic  ;D
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

Gianni

Quotenot sure what the D means/is.
I mean holding the ball with hand/s and then hitting It with the head, should it be not legal? Is throwing the ball?

QuoteQuestion 2 you can 'basketball' the ball all the way up the pitch, as you have not taken the ball in with both hands or in 'control' of the ball, not used as a play as the ball is exposed and easy to tackle
So if you stop the ball with hand/s buy not catch It could you bounce the ball?

QuoteThese questions are obscure as are the rules. question 3 .. You can't switch the ball from hand to hand when in possession, if not fully in possession you can touch it as many times as you want in the 'air' if in possession of the ball he can't basketball style the ball up the pitch, as he's in possession of the ball.
I mean without catching the ball in flight you keep bounce the ball in air, like juggling, with one hand like this:



Or with two hands like this:

Gianni

Regarding this aspect of the rules, i.e. dribbling like in basketball, I have read several ideas on this forum about it.
Those who say it would be legal:

Quote from: tyroneman on August 13, 2009, 06:03:00 PMMy understanding is that you can hop the ball as many times as you want to gain control of it initially. Up to ref then to decide when you deemed to have control

Quote from: Louth Exile on August 14, 2009, 12:06:03 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on August 13, 2009, 04:54:25 PMMy understanding is that you were correct until last year or the year before when they changed the interpretation on the rule so that even if your attempting to control the ball referees are supposed to now award a free against

Do you know, was it a foul "under the old rule" if you changed the bouncing hand?

Quote from: Smokin Joe on August 13, 2009, 05:43:25 PMDoes that mean then that under the "old rules" that you could bounce the ball basketball style the whole length of the pitch?

Technically yes, but you try doing that against 15 Meathmen!!

Quote from: Hardy on August 14, 2009, 10:18:11 AMThis is all the Official Guide says abut it - interpret as you will:

Rule 1.5: When the ball has not been caught, it may be
bounced more than once in succession.

Rune 4.6 (under technical fouls): To bounce the ball
more than once consecutively after catching it.


It doesn't mention anything about control - only catching the ball. So I'd interpret that as allowing a basketball type dribble the length of the field if you fancy trying it. The Meathmen couldn't do a thing about it these days, Louth Exile without provoking a concerto of multicoloured card waving.

Those who consider it illegal.
QuoteNot really, you still couldn't be 'not in possession' for the whole length of the pitch, technically or otherwise. In practice, the ref will give you three bounces max (maybe four), and if you haven't managed to control it by then and have it in your possession, you'll be whistled up for overcarrying. Unless you're playing in a snowstorm.

QuoteI vaguely recall some rule change alright or talk of it, can you or anyone confirm this ?

up until then it was allowed to bounce the ball (I deem a 'hop' the action of a ball that is under control) was allowed a few times until the player brought the ball under control.
I actually recall thinkig about this some 20 years ago to see if I would actually use this to solo up the field a wee bit while feigning lack of control.
Realised this was stupid and thought better of it.

A decent ref would spot when its under control anyhow, but if that rule had not been applied as DMcKeown says, then the ref was incorrect awarding a free against gardiner on sunday.

This, however, is doubtful.

Quote from: Hardy on August 14, 2009, 10:18:11 AMThis is all the Official Guide says abut it - interpret as you will:

Rule 1.5: When the ball has not been caught, it may be
bounced more than once in succession.

Rune 4.6 (under technical fouls): To bounce the ball
more than once consecutively after catching it.


It doesn't mention anything about control - only catching the ball. So I'd interpret that as allowing a basketball type dribble the length of the field if you fancy trying it. The Meathmen couldn't do a thing about it these days, Louth Exile without provoking a concerto of multicoloured card waving.
Technically the rule is poor written. What constitutes possession? If I stop the ball from the side is it caught?



Lucifer

Possession is when you hold the ball, in either one hand or two. It's very similar to basketball in terms of dribbling, in that the dribble should technically end if the ball is held in any way at all (however this is now farcical in basketball where it just isn't called until it is ridiculously obvious.) However no player ever intentionally uses a basketball dribble, it's virtually always a means to retrieve possession when they aren't able to collect the ball in their hands after a bounce/solo/pass etc. A player will always take the ball into their hand/s if they can.

I don't understand why you are getting so caught up in these small nuances of the rules, I'm not sure it's much benefit to you!

Gianni

Well let's go in order.
A.

The problem with the rules here is that there is no definition of what a player in possession of the ball is.
Not everyone agrees that a player can dribble the ball like basketball. Infact the definition of caught is to keep the ball or to keep the ball from falling to the ground, I don't remeber verbatim. So if a player stops the ball with one hand to the side, he has technically caught the ball.
I mean when you can dribble the ball basketball style, not having caught the ball, and when you couldn't.
If you catch the ball with two hands? Or when? In basketball if you catch the ball then you can bounces the ball. Here not? If a player stops the ball, but but he doesn't catch the ball, but only stops it like a goalkeeper's save in football, would this be considered a catch?

It would be absolutely advantageous to dribble, one could run for a stretch much faster and then when danger arrives take the ball in his hands.

B.

Quote from: Gianni on June 07, 2024, 05:59:05 PM
Quotenot sure what the D means/is.
I mean holding the ball with hand/s and then hitting It with the head, should it be not legal? Is throwing the ball?
This?

C.
Quote from: Gianni on June 07, 2024, 05:59:05 PM
QuoteThese questions are obscure as are the rules. question 3 .. You can't switch the ball from hand to hand when in possession, if not fully in possession you can touch it as many times as you want in the 'air' if in possession of the ball he can't basketball style the ball up the pitch, as he's in possession of the ball.
I mean without catching the ball in flight you keep bounce the ball in air, like juggling, with one hand like this:



Or with two hands like this:

If you can touch the ball in the air as many times as you like could you continue to bounce the ball off your hand (like the ball on the Hurling bat)? With one hand  or with twoas in the pics?

The rule is To play the ball up with the hand(s) and catch it again before it touches the ground, another player, or goal-posts
Nobody talks about the player having to catch the ball or having to be in control of the ball. If the rule applies to the letter, a player could not touch the ball in the air and then touch it again until the ball touches the ground, a post, or another player. Or am I wrong?

D.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 07, 2024, 11:01:42 AMQuestion 5. anyone on the pitch that does the Sombrero trick (had to google what it was) I'd gladly turn a blind eye and let the defender mill him. but on the rules of play he can do all three. As he's not in possession

So you can touch the balls with feet or any part of the body except the hands and then you could:
1. Catch the ball, obviously.
2. Hit the ball with your hand/s to make it change direction.
3. Hit the ball many times on one hand(s).
4. Hit the ball with one hand(s) and then catch it?

I doubt 3 and 4 are legals.

E.
Rule: A player may toss up the ball with one hand and play it off with the same hand.

It is not a male or female question, but a lexical question.
I mean what play it off with the same hand mean?. So a player tosses up the ball with right hand, surpass a player and then he can catch it with right hand, legal?



Blowitupref

The new point scoring zone good or bad idea? Trials to be held on four points for a goal also




https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/arid-41413630.html
Is the ref going to finally blow his whistle?... No, he's going to blow his nose

joemamas

Quote from: Blowitupref on June 11, 2024, 02:13:51 PMThe new point scoring zone good or bad idea? Trials to be held on four points for a goal also




https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/arid-41413630.html

I was at the Mayo V Roscommon game ten days ago, not a bad game overall, however once the lateral and back passing started, it completely sucked the atmosphere out of the ground.
We all agree somethings needs to change, be eliminated.
Even if it takes a year or two to tweak, there has to be a better way.
One positive this season, no more lying down, I have never seen more players having a Lazarus type recovery, after they get "injured"

dec

Quote from: Blowitupref on June 11, 2024, 02:13:51 PMThe new point scoring zone good or bad idea? Trials to be held on four points for a goal also
"new point scoring zone"

-- Seems like a gimmick, if a player can reliably score from 40 yards then they should shoot. A two point score will just encourage people who shouldn't be shooting from that distance to have a go.

"four points for a goal"

-- take your points, goals will come, a cliche that arose because of players trying to go for goals that are not on rather than taking an available point, this will just encourage more of that. Another problem with the current possession style of football is players recycling the ball endlessly rather than taking a shot, i feel this will just encourage more recycling trying to work a goal chance.


dec

"1v1 for all throw-ins"

That is almost what it is like at the moment. In most of the games I have seen, one pair of players push each other while the other pair compete for the ball.