Rule change on the way for kick-outs?

[Jinxy]

Restriction on kick-outs being looked at by GAA

Jarlath Burns, chair of the standing committee, says that an anomaly has arisen in that players in the corners are both outside the 20-metre line and 13 metres from the ball and the idea of requiring the kick-out to go forward is being considered.
'Slip of hand'
"There is an argument that there is a slip of land on the field where it would be advisable to prohibit a player from receiving a kick-out if you wanted to make the ball go forward. When the rule on kick-outs was changed the rule wasn't correspondingly changed that the ball had to go forward 20 metres.
"It has been discussed and might be worth looking at. It wouldn't take a lot to change that but it might have a positive implication."

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/restriction-on-kick-outs-being-looked-at-by-gaa-1.2935222#.WHiWV4lToVE.twitter

I suppose it's basically closing a 'loophole' that the wording of Rule 2.7 didn't allow for.

[magpie seanie]

Why did it take so long? Are they watching matches or drinking and eating in the hospitality?

[Jinxy]

If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?

[Link]

If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?

teams playing into a very strong wind

[Rossfan]

You'd have to move all football games out of Pearse Stadium.
Now if they could bring in a rule that all place kicks must go forward.....

[haranguerer]

If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?

Anyone with commonsense.

Reason: the game is there with rules sufficient for it to be played. Changing the fundamentals regularly in some sort of misguided hope of giving a better spectacle is incompetent at best. The rule changes there have been have been by and large a failure. The GAA is so out of touch with players its ludicrous. There's nothing wrong with going sideways, there's nothing wrong with going short, theres nothing wrong with going backwards. To whoever comes up with this shite: stop changing the game to try to create some utopia which only ever existed in your head.

[Jinxy]

How about, all kick-outs are taken from the small parallelogram and they must cross the 20m line?

[David McKeown]

I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.

[haranguerer]

How about, all kick-outs are taken from the small parallelogram and they must cross the 20m line?

No, none of it. I'd say go the other way, do whatever you want with your own kick.

I've never seen the sense in penalising players of the team who've been awarded a free kick. If they decide its advantageous to take it to a lad standing 1ft away from them, then fair enough. Similarly with kickouts. Take it as short as you want, distance should just apply to opposition.

[Ciarrai_thuaidh]

Someone needs to pull the reins on Jarlath and his current gallop. Is he determined to bend the rules of Gaelic football towards his own vision of the game completely? The mark is already being exposed as the waste of time anybody with sense knew it would be, now this shite? "Kickouts must travel forward"..FFS, what next?

[screenexile]

I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.

You've never seen the clip out to the corner back standing on the sideline that barely moves forward?

I think the ball should travel past the 45 (which shouldn't be an issue with a kicking tee and the ball on the 13). Jarlath Burns seemed to suggest they looked at this but the below doesn't sound right:

"If the long kick-out were made compulsory, you'd find the full-forward line would have no reason to wait up there. The possibility of a short kick-out forces players to push up or concede possession. You'd end up with everyone dropping back towards the contest area.

That doesn't make sense to me? Surely yes you would have a contested breaking ball area but surely you want 1 or 2 FFs remaining in anticipation of clean possession and a quick kick pass into that area?

[Esmarelda]

I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.

You've never seen the clip out to the corner back standing on the sideline that barely moves forward?

I think the ball should travel past the 45 (which shouldn't be an issue with a kicking tee and the ball on the 13). Jarlath Burns seemed to suggest they looked at this but the below doesn't sound right:

"If the long kick-out were made compulsory, you'd find the full-forward line would have no reason to wait up there. The possibility of a short kick-out forces players to push up or concede possession. You'd end up with everyone dropping back towards the contest area.

That doesn't make sense to me? Surely yes you would have a contested breaking ball area but surely you want 1 or 2 FFs remaining in anticipation of clean possession and a quick kick pass into that area?

As mentioned above, what about under-age teams or adult 'keepers kicking into a very strong wind.

Make them kick it forward if it makes that much difference but please don't go with this over the '45 thing.

[Jinxy]

Should the keeper be allowed to kick it out of his hands?

[vallankumous]

They could just bring it back to dropping the ball in from a helicopter instead of having kick outs.

[Jinxy]

Restart the game with a hop-ball on the edge of the square.