MOTIONS
COMHDHÁIL 2016
ARD CHOMHAIRLE MOTIONS
3.40 (a) (iv) (6)
(1)
That Rule 6.27(B) and (C) – All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship -Official Guide Part 1 – (pages 93-101), as adopted for years 2014-2016, be retained, subject to:
(i) Changes in composition of participating Counties based on the Promotion and Relegation regulations provided for in the current Rule.
(ii) The Review provided for in current Rule of the list of Counties to be included in the Provincial Qualifying Group of the Liam McCarthy Cup.
Ard Chomhairle
(2)
(A) That Rule 6.27(A) – Organisation of All-Ireland Senior Football Championship – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 93-96) be amended to read:
"(A) All-Ireland Senior Football Championship
(i) Provincial Championships
All Counties are eligible to participate in the Provincial Championships.
These Championships shall be played on a Knock-Out Format.
A 'Round Robin' Format may not be used.
The Winners of the Provincial Championships shall qualify for the All-Ireland Championship Quarter-Finals.
(ii) All-Ireland Qualifier Series
The All-Ireland Qualifier Series shall be played on a Knock-Out basis
Round 1
This Round shall consist of sixteen teams, excluding the eight Provincial Finalists and the eight teams that will comprise Division 4 of the following year's National Football League.
An Open Draw shall be made to determine the eight pairings.
Round 2
The eight winners of Round 1 shall play in this Round.
An Open Draw shall determine the pairings.
Round 3
Each of the four defeated Provincial Finalists shall play against one of the four winners from Round 2.
Subject to the avoidance of Repeat Pairings where feasible, a Draw shall be made to determine the four pairings.
(iii) All-Ireland Quarter-Finals
Each of the four Provincial Champions shall play against one of the winners from Round 3,
Subject to the respective Provincial Champions not meeting the defeated finalists from their own Province and to the avoidance of Repeat Pairings were feasible,
a Draw shall be made to determine the four pairings.
(iv) All-Ireland Semi-Finals
A Provincial Rota System, initially determined by Central Council, shall apply.
If a Provincial Championship winning team is defeated in its Quarter-Final, the team that defeats it shall take its place in the Semi-Final.
(v) All Ireland Final
Other matters related to the All-Ireland Series
(1) Scheduling
As in current Rule.
(2) Venues
Home Venues shall be used in Rounds 1 and 2 of the All-Ireland Qualifier Series, with the first team drawn having Home Advantage.
Exception
Where a team from Divisions 2, 3 or 4 is drawn against a team from a higher Division of the following year's National Football League, the team from the lower Division shall have Home Advantage.
The above arrangements shall be conditional on Home Grounds being deemed to meet the criteria set down by the National Facilities/Health and Safety Committee and the Central Competitions Control Committee.
Venues in Round 3 shall be determined by the Central Competitions Control Committee.
All Ireland Quarter-Finals Scheduling
As in current Rule.
(B) All-Ireland Senior 'B' Football Championship
The eight teams that will comprise Division 4 of the following year's National Football League shall participate in the All-Ireland Senior 'B' Football Championship.
Exception
Where one team or more of Division 4 of the following year's National Football League qualifies for its current Provincial Final, the lowest placed team, outside of teams to be relegated, (e.g. a team that has finished sixth or fifth) in Division 3 of the National Football League and which has not qualified for its Provincial Final shall play in the All-Ireland Senior 'B' Championship.
The Championship shall be played on a Knock-Out basis.
An Open Draw shall determine the pairings in each Round up to and including the Semi-Finals.
Promotion and Relegation
The Winners of the All-Ireland 'B' Championship shall be eligible to participate in the following year's All-Ireland Qualifier Series.
If the team that wins the All-Ireland 'B' Football Championship does not win promotion from Division 4 in the following year's National Football League, it will be replaced in the All-Ireland 'B' Championship by the team that finished lowest in Division 3 (other than the two relegated teams) of that year's National Football League and has not qualified for its Provincial Final.
Rules affected – Rule 6.28(a); Re-letter current Sections (B) to (I) accordingly.
Ard Chomhairle
(3)
That Rule 3.2 Exception (i) Rules of Specification – Time – Official Guide Part 2 (Page 12) be amended to read:
"(i) In Inter-County Senior Championship, National League, Subsidiary Competition and Tournament Games, the playing time shall consist of 35 minutes each."
Ard Chomhairle
MOTIONS CONSEQUENT UPON CENTRAL COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS
(3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
2004: Competitions Review Task Force Report
2007: Facilitating a better programme of games for club players
2007: Task Force on Player Burnout Report
2008: Second Player Burnout Report
2013: Football review Committee Report
2014: Hurling 2020 report
2014: Minor Review Workgroup Report
(4)
That Rule 6.16 – Age Grades – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 84-86) be amended as it relates to Minor Grade and to read as follows:
"Minor (Under 17) Inter – County – Be Under 17 years and over 15 years.
Minor (Under 18) Club – Be Under 18 years and over 14 years."
This Motion proposes no other change to Rule.
Rule Affected – 6.34 O.G.
(Motion effective from January 1st 2018)
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(5)
(A) That Rule 6.16 - Age Grades - Official Guide Part 1 (pages 84-86) be amended as it relates to Under 21 Grade and read as follows:
"Under 20 – Inter-County Football – Be Under 20 years and over 18 years.
Under 21 – Inter-County Hurling – Be Under 21 years and over 18 years.
Club – Be Under 21 years and over 16 years.
This Motion proposes no other change to this Rule.
Rules affected - Rules 6.27(H), 6.28 and 6.34 O.G.
(B) Add a New Rule as Rule 6.17 – Official Guide Part 1 (with current Rules 6.17 and onwards being re-numbered accordingly):
"Inter-County Under 20 Football Championship
A Player who is on a team list submitted to a Referee for an Inter-County Senior Championship game at any stage of the Current Championship year is ineligible to participate in the Inter-County Under 20 Football Championship."
Rules affected – Rules 6.16, 6.27(H), 6.28 and 6.34 O.G.
(C) Amend Rule 3.5, Rules of Specification – Official Guide Part 2 (Pages 12-13) by inclusion of
"Inter-County Under 20 Football Championship in which there shall be no replays, with teams level after Extra-Time deciding the game on the outcome of a sudden-death free-taking Competition, the details of which shall be determined by the Central Council."
Amend reference to "Inter County Under 21 Championships" to "Inter-County Under 21 Hurling Championship".
This Motion proposes no other change to this Rule.
Rules affected – Rule 3.4, Rules of Specification; Rules 6.27(H), 6.16, 6.28 and 6.34 O.G.
(D) Add to Rule 6.27 (H) – Organisation Inter-County Championships – Official Guide Part 1 (page 105)
"The All Ireland Under 20 Football Championship shall be played in the months of June, July and August."
Rules affected – Rules 6.16, 6.27(H), 6.28, and 6.34, O.G.
(Motion effective from January 1st 2018.)
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(6)
Add to Rule 6.21 – Inter-County Players Availability to Clubs – Official Guide Part 1 (page 89) as Section (d):
"Players who are not included in an Inter-County Senior Panel of twenty six players, shall be available to their Clubs on the weekends of National League and Senior Championship games."
Penalty: A County shall forfeit Home Venue for its next 'Home Game' in the respective National League.
(Motion effective from January 1st. 2017)
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(7)
Amend Rule 6.30 – All Ireland Finals – Official Guide Part 1 (page 106) to read:
"The All-Ireland Senior Finals shall be played in Croke Park.
The Football Final shall be played on the first Sunday in September, except when there are five Sundays in September when it shall be played on the second Sunday of that month. The Hurling Final shall be played on the Sunday two weeks previous to the Football Final in either circumstance. In exceptional circumstances, the Central Council may make other arrangements".
Rules affected – Rule 6.27 and 6.28 O.G.
(Motion effective January 1st 2017).
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(8)
Amend Rule 3.5, Rules of Specification – Time - Official Guide Part 2 (pages 12-13) to read:
" Unless the Management committee of Central Council otherwise permits on an application by a Competition Control Committee, extra time shall be obligatory in the event of a draw in the following Competitions:
(A) Inter-County All-Ireland and Provincial Senior Championship
Games with the exceptions of -
(i) All-Ireland Finals (Sam Maguire and Liam McCarthy Cups only) and the Provincial Finals, in which Replays shall apply,
and
(ii) 'Round Robin' Group Games in Hurling, in which Rule 6.20(4)(a) shall apply (i.e. one 'table point' credited to each team).
(B) Other Competitions:
- Inter-County Under 21 Championships;
- Inter-County Minor Championships;
- Inter-County Intermediate Championship;
- Inter-County Junior Championship;
- Knock-out Stages of the National Leagues;
- Inter-Provincial Competitions;
- Inter-County Tournaments;
- Inter-Club Provincial and All-Ireland Championships;
- Sigerson and Fitzgibbon Cups;
- Other games in subsidiary competitions."
Rule Affected – Rule 3.4, Rules of Specification, O.G. Part 2; Rule 6.20, O.G. Part 1.
(Motion effective from January 1st 2017)
Ard Chomhairle (3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(9)
Delete 6.27 (G)– All-Ireland Intermediate Hurling Championship – Official Guide Part 1 (page 105).
Rule affected – Rule 6.14(delete), 6.17, and 6.28.
(Motion effective January 1st 2017)
(10)
That the All-Ireland Junior Football Championship in its current structure be abolished by deletion of the current provisions for the Championship in Rule 6.27(H).
Rules affected – Rules 6.15, 6.17 and 6.28.
(Motion effective from January 1st 2017)
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(11)
(1) That a new section be added to Rule 6.27 – Inter- County Championships – Official Guide Part 1.
All-Ireland Junior Football Championship
The All-Ireland Junior Football Championship shall be organised on a Knock-Out/Open draw basis and shall be confined to the second best teams of the current year's National Football League Division 4 Counties in Ireland, to Kilkenny (graded Junior) and to the winners of the British Championship who shall enter at the quarter final stage.
(2) That Rule 6.15 – All Ireland Junior – Official Guide Part 1 (page 84) be amended to read:
(1) Inter-County Junior Football, excluding Britain.
Subject to Age Restrictions set out in Rule 6.16, all players from the designated Counties are eligible to participate except:
(a) Those who have played on an Inter-County Senior Championship Team in the current Championship Year or the previous Championship Year.
Exception: In the case of a County graded Junior by the Central Council, the Senior players of that County and Senior players declaring for that County shall be eligible to play in the Inter-County Junior Football Championship.
(b) Those have played on the winning team in the previous year's All-Ireland Junior Football Championship Final.
(2) Inter-County Junior football Championship – Britain.
In the case of Counties in Britain, all players are eligible to participate in the All-Ireland Junior Football Championship except;
(a) Those who have played on an Inter-County Senior Championship team in the current Championship Year.
(b) Those who have played on the winning team in the previous year's All-Ireland Junior Football Championship Final.
Penalties - As in Current Rule 6.15
Rules affected – Rules 6.16, 6.27(H) and 6.28
(Motion effective January 1st 2017)
Ard Chomhairle 3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
RULES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MOTIONS
3.40 (a) (iv) (3)
(12)
That the first paragraph of Rule 1.15 – Anti-Doping – Official Guide Part 1 (page 9) be amended to read as follows:
The Association forbids the use of prohibited substances or methods, a practice generally known as doping in sport. The Rules of the Association regarding doping are the Irish Anti-Doping Rules as adopted by Sport Ireland and as amended from time to time. The latest version can be downloaded from http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/Anti-Doping/ . The Rules contained in the said Irish Anti-Doping Rules shall have effect and be construed as Rules of the Association.
Remainder of Rule to remain unchanged.
Rules Advisory Committee
(13)
That Rule 2.1(a) – Membership - Official Guide Part 1 (page 13) be amended to read as follows:
There shall be three types of Membership of the Association:
(i) Full Membership, for persons Over 18 years (i.e. shall have celebrated 18th birthday prior to January 1st of the Membership Year.
(ii) Youth Membership, for persons Under 18 and Over 9 years (i.e. shall celebrate 18th birthday on January 1st of the Membership Year or on a later date and shall have celebrated 9th birthday prior to January 1st of the Membership Year).
(iii) Child Membership, for children Under 9 years (i.e. shall celebrate 9th birthday on
January 1st of the Membership Year or on a later date.
On expiration of a Child Membership of the Association, a person may apply for Youth Membership of the Association through a Club for which he is eligible to play.
Rules affected or possibly affected – Rule 2.2, 2.3; Rule 5 Club Constitution.
Rules Advisory Committee
(14)
That the following sentence be added at the end of Rule 2.1(c) - Membership - Official Guide Part 1 (page 13):
A Member who resigns his membership of the Association and thereafter seeks to re-apply for membership shall be restricted to making such application to the Club of which he was a member prior to his resignation.
Rule affected – Rule 5.3 Club Constitution
Rules Advisory Committee
(15)
That Rule 2.1(f) – Membership - Official Guide Part 1 (page 13) be amended to read:
The Membership of the Gaelic Athletic Association shall run from 1st January to the 31st December each year.
Rules Advisory Committee
(16)
That the following be added to Rule 3.11 – Elections (County Convention) – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 20-21) as a new Section (c) –
(c) Subject to the limitations set out at (b), a County Bye-Law may make provision regulating and controlling eligibility/tenure for election to the Officer positions outlined in Section (a).
Existing Section (c), (d) and (e) to be re-numbered accordingly.
Rules Advisory Committee
(17)
That Rule 3.11(d) – County Convention- Official Guide Part 1 – (page 21) be amended to read:
Should a vacancy arise in the Officerships of the County Committee or in a County's representation on Central or Provincial Council, it shall be filled on the basis of (a) Nomination by Clubs, (b) ballot vote of Officers and Members of the current County Committee.
Rules Advisory Committee
(18)
That Rule 3.17 – County Bye Laws - Official Guide Part 1 (page 22) - be amended to read as follows:
"County Conventions shall make Bye–Laws which shall be reviewed on an annual basis and forwarded to the Management Committee of Central Council within two weeks of the date of Convention for sanction. They shall not become operative until sanctioned.
A County Bye-Law shall not be contrary to a Rule in the Official Guide. They shall not place a restriction on when Club Fixtures are played or govern postponement of fixtures, as such matters constitute powers of the Competition Control Committee.
The Management Committee may, for the purpose of compliance with the General Rules and standardisation, and following consultation between its Rules Advisory Committee and the County Committee concerned, approve amendments to a proposed Bye-Law submitted for sanction. Such a Bye-Law shall become operative immediately and without the necessity of it receiving further approval of a County or Special Convention.
Motions to remove or amend an existing Bye-Law shall be carried by two-thirds of those present, entitled to vote and voting.
Rules Advisory Committee
(19)
That the following paragraph be added to Rule 3.18 – County Committee - Official Guide Part 1 (page 23) :
(f) District or other Committees or Clubs may, not later than the 31st August in any year, notify the Secretary of the County Committee in writing of the appointment of a replacement representative on the County Committee. Such representative shall thereafter assume full membership of the County Committee until the conclusion of the following County Convention.
Rules Advisory Committee
(20)
That Rule 3.19(m) – Powers of County Committee – Official Guide Part 1 (page 26) be amended to read:
"(m)
(i) To allow players of Junior and Intermediate Clubs, including players of Clubs unable to field Junior and/or Intermediate Teams, to play for Divisional or Group Senior Teams.
(ii) To allow players of Junior Clubs, and the players of Intermediate Clubs unable to field in that grade, to play for Group Intermediate Teams.
Rules Advisory Committee
(21)
(A)
That Rule 3.20 (iii) – County's Sub-Committees/Functions - Official Guide Part 1 (page 27) be amended to read as follows:
3.20 Sub-Committees/Functions
A County Committee shall appoint the following Sub-Committees, membership of which shall be set out in County Bye-Laws except as otherwise provided in this Rule:
(iii) Fixtures Analysts
(a) At least one Fixtures Analyst shall be appointed by the Management Committee.
(b) The Fixtures Analyst(s) shall be responsible for monitoring and analysing the County Fixtures Programme on an annual basis.
(c) The Fixtures Analyst(s) shall present a Report to Annual Convention on fixtures played in all club competitions and make recommendations for changes in the fixture calendar where appropriate
d) This report will be submitted to the Provincial and Central Fixtures Analysis Committees annually.
(B)
That Rule 3.32 (x) – Provincial Fixture Planners - Official Guide Part 1 (page 38) be amended to read as follows:
3.32 (Provincial) Sub Committees Functions
(x) Fixtures Analysts
(a) Two Fixtures Analysts shall be appointed by the Management Committee. One of these shall be nominated as the Provincial Representative on the Central Fixtures Analysis Committee.
(b) The Fixtures Analyst(s) shall be responsible for monitoring and analysing the Provincial Fixtures Programme.
(c) The Fixtures Analyst(s) shall present a Report to Provincial Convention on all Fixtures at Provincial and County levels and make recommendations for changes in the fixture calendar where appropriate
(d)The Fixtures Analyst(s) shall assist the Central Fixtures Analysis Committee in organising the education and training of Fixtures Analysts at County level
(C)
That Rule 3.52 – The Central Fixtures Planning Committee - Official Guide Part 1 (page 54) be amended to read as follows:
3.52 The Central Fixtures Analysis Committee
(a) It shall consist of no more than ten members including a Chairperson appointed by the Management Committee, four nominated Provincial fixtures analysts and the Secretary of the Competitions Control Committee.
(b) It shall be responsible for monitoring and analysing the National Fixtures Programme.
(c) It shall present a Report to Annual Congress on all Fixtures at National, Provincial and County levels and make recommendations for changes in the fixtures calendar where appropriate.
(e) It shall determine the National minimum Required Standards for fixtures programmes at all levels.
(f) It shall keep a register and organise the training of all Fixtures Analysts at Provincial and County level.
Rules Advisory Committee
(22)
That Rule 3.35 – Congress - Official Guide Part 1 (page 41) be amended to read as follows:
The Annual Congress shall be held prior to the 1st March. The venue shall be selected by the Central Council, who shall give due consideration to all applications received by the Council. It shall consist of the outgoing Council (voting rights as on Council), the past Presidents, and delegates from Counties in Ireland on the basis of one delegate from each ten affiliated Clubs or fraction of ten over five with a minimum representation from such Counties of four delegates and a maximum representation from any one County of ten delegates. Counties with fewer than five affiliations shall be represented by not more than two delegates.
An International County Committee with less than 10 affiliated Clubs shall have two representatives.
Rest of the Rule to remain unaltered.
Rules Advisory Committee
(23)
That Rule 3.55 (c) Handball – Official Guide Part 1 (page 56) be amended to read as follows:
" All Handball Committees at National, Provincial and County level, shall be Sub-Committees of the respective G.A.A. Committee or Council, and shall be responsible to them in all matters.
Notwithstanding anything contained in Rules pertaining to the roles and functions of County Committees, Provincial Councils or Central Council, Handball Committees may hold an Annual General Meeting prior to the 30th November each year."
Rules possibly affected: 3.19, 3.20,3.29,3.30,3.32,3.42, 3.43.
Rules Advisory Committee
(24)
That a new Rule 3.56 – Official Guide Part 1 be inserted as follows with the existing Rule 3.56 and subsequent Rules re-numbered as appropriate.
3.56 ROUNDERS
(a) The Rounders Council of Ireland shall, subject to the overall control of Central Council, be responsible for the promotion of the National Game of Rounders.
(b) The affairs of the Rounders Council of Ireland shall be subject to the General Rules of the Association and the Constitution for the regulation of its affairs as sanctioned by the Management Committee.
Rules Advisory Committee
(25)
The last sentence of Riail 3.58 – Deviation from Rule - Official Guide Part 1 (page 56): be amended to read as follows:
Application for permission as in (a) and (b) above must be made annually.
Rules Advisory Committee
(26)
That a new Rule 4.17 – Player Injury Scheme - Official Guide Part 1 be inserted as follows
Central Council may make arrangements for the provision of a Player Injury Scheme for members of Units of the Association. The Scheme shall be administered in accordance with such terms and conditions as may be determined from time to time.
Any member or unit of the Association found, following investigation by Central Council, to have made, or assisted in the making of a fraudulent claim under the Scheme shall be deemed to have discredited the Association and shall be liable to the penalties set out in Rule 7.2 (e)
Rules Advisory Committee
(27)
That the Definition of First Club – Rule 6.3 – Official Guide Part 1 (page 69) be amended to read as follows:
The Club (or Club within an Independent Team) with which a player first legally (i.e. in accordance with Rule and Bye-Law) participated in Club Competition at U12 Grade or over (including Go-Games) organised by the County Committee or one of its Sub-Committees in the County of his permanent residence.
Rules Advisory Committee
(28)
(A) That Rule 6.4(a) – Attachment to First Club - Official Guide Part 1 (page 70) be amended to read as follows:
For the purposes of this Rule, a person first becomes a member of the Association by joining a Club of the Association, as a Youth Member, within the County of his permanent residence.
(B) That Rule 6.4(d) – Attachment to First Club - Official Guide Part 1 (page 70) be amended to read as follows:
When a player first legally participates in Club Competition with a Club (including a Club within an Independent Team) at Under 12 Grade or over (including Go-Games) organised by the County Committee or one of its Sub-Committees, that Club becomes his First Club.
Rules Advisory Committee
(29)
That the following be adopted as a new Rule 6.6, Official Guide Part 1
In the case of a member seeking a transfer or attachment to a Unit of the Association, he may be accompanied at a Hearing by one Full Member of either the Club/Unit of which he is currently a member of or the Club/Unit to which he wishes to transfer or be attached.
Rules affected – Rule 7.3(x); Current Rule 6.6 and subsequent Rules to be re-numbered accordingly.
Rules Advisory Committee
(30)
(A)
That Rule 6.6(b) Exceptions (ii) and (iii) – Inter-County Transfers – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 72-73) be amended to read as follows:
(ii) Add to the Rule "subject to the player being Over 18 years as defined in Rule 6.16
(iii) Add to the Rule "subject to the player being Over 18 years as defined in Rule 6.16
Rules affected – Rules 6.3 and 6.8
(B)
That Rule 6.8 (B) (ii) and (iii) – Playing Restrictions (County and Province) – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 76-77) be amended to read as follows:
(ii) Add to the Rule "subject to the player being Over 18 years as defined in Rule 6.16
(iii) Add to the Rule "subject to the player being Over 18 years as defined in Rule 6.16
Rule affected – Rules 6.3 and 6.8.
Rules Advisory Committee
(31)
That Rule 6.7(B) (2) – Playing Restrictions (Club) – Official Guide Part 1 (page 74) be amended by the first line of (a) and (b) reading:
"With an Independent Under 21, Minor or Younger Grade Team".
Rule Affected – Rule 3.19(n)
Rules Advisory Committee
(32)
(A) That Rule 6.11(b)(vi) – Sanctions - Official Guide Part 1 –(page 80) be amended to read as follows:
"A player who has received a Sanction shall not be eligible to play with his Own Club in Ireland (other than in exceptional circumstances to be determined by Central Council from time to time) for the 30 days after the date of approval of his Sanction in Croke Park but is eligible to play with his Own County.
(B) That Rule 6.11(b)(vii) – Sanctions - Official Guide Part 1 (page 80) - be amended to read as follows:
"A Sanctioned player who returns to Ireland and plays with his Own Club may not subsequently return to resume playing in America or Canada in the same year.
Rules Advisory Committee
(33)
(A) That Rule 6.13 (1)(a) – Inter-Club Intermediate - Official Guide Part 1 (page 82) be reworded as follows:
"These who are currently graded as Club Senior Championship status in the Code"
(B) That Rule 6.13(2)(a) – Inter-Club Intermediate - Official Guide Part 1 (page 82) be reworded as follows:
"Those who are currently graded as Club Senior or Intermediate Championship status in the Code."
Rule affected: Rules 6.18 and 6.19
Rules Advisory Committee
(34)
Amend Rule 6.18 – Club Championship and League Status of players – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 86-87) as follows:
In Section leading with the words
"A player shall not lose his current Championship Status by"; Insert:
(1) Playing in a Senior or Intermediate Championship on a Divisional or Group Senior or
Intermediate team.
(2) Playing on a College Club team in a Senior Championship, as allowed by Rule 6.7,
Exception (3).
Current provisions (1) and (2) to become (3) and (4).
Rules affected – Rules 6.13 and 6.19
Rules Advisory Committee
(35)
That Rule 6.19 – Gradings of Clubs and Players - Official Guide Part 1 (page 87) be amended to read
A County Committee shall delegate responsibility for dealing with applications for Regrading to its Competitions Control Committee subject to the following:
(a) The County Committee shall retain the right to make the final decision on an application for Regrading by a Club.
(b) A Player aggrieved by a decision on his application for Regrading shall have the right of appeal to the County Hearings Committee whose decision shall be final. The appeal shall be made within three working days of the receipt of notification of the decision, it shall state the grounds on which the appeal is being made and shall be signed by the appellant player. Other formalities regarding submission of appeal (e.g. provision of duplicate copy, fee) outlined in Rule 7.11 (f) to (i), are not applicable in this case. All other relevant sections of Rule 7.11 shall apply. An appeal may only be upheld on the basis of the provisions outlined in Rule 7.11(o).
The remainder of the Rule to be unchanged.
(36)
That Rule 6.24 - Organisation (Provincial and All Ireland Club) Official Guide Part 1 (page 91) be amended as follows:
After the third paragraph "If a County Championship winning team .................... to represent it" insert the following:
"Similarly, in the event of a County Championship not being completed but only one remaining team in that championship is eligible to participate in the Provincial Championship, the County Committee shall nominate that Club to represent it.
Nominations in any other circumstances are not allowed.
Except as provided above, in the event of a County or Provincial Championship not being completed, the respective Provincial or All Ireland Championship shall continue without a representative of the County or Province concerned."
Rules Advisory Committee
(37)
That Rule 7.4(a) – Validity of Team Constitution - Official Guide Part 1 (page 137) be amended to read as follows:
(a) Without prejudice to the general disciplinary jurisdiction of the Council or Committee-in-Charge or the Rules concerning Objections, the Competitions Control Committee of a Council or Committee- in-Charge may of its own volition at any time or on receipt of a request from a Unit involved in a game, not later than three days after the official starting time of the game, shall investigate in such manner as it deems fit the validity of the constitution of a Team taking part in the Game..
Rules Advisory Committee
(38)
That Rule 7.3 (p) Procedures for Disciplinary and Related Hearings – Official Guide Part 1 (page 131) by adding the following:
Exception: Where the Fixed Penalty for Debarment from playing for the Remainder of the Game, to include any extra-time, set down for non-repeat Category 1 and 11 infractions is concerned, the member involved shall be entitled only to written notice of the Confirmation of the Penalty initially.
A member may seek a Hearing on any or all Category 1 or 11 infractions involved only at the point when a Match Suspension, or its time equivalent, is proposed.
Rules Advisory Committee
(39)
That the first paragraph of Rule 7.12 – Reinstatements - Official Guide Part 1 (page 153)- be amended to read as follows:
(a) Central Council shall consider and adjudicate on the recommendations made
by the Central Appeals Committee for the re-instatement or otherwise of players/members serving a suspension imposed in accordance with Rule.
Remainder of the Rule to remain unchanged.
Rules Advisory Committee
(40)
Amend Article 5.9 of the Club Constitution – Official Guide Part 1 (page 162) - in its first line to read:.
"The name and address of a person proposed as a Full Member ....................." etc.
Rules affected – Rules 2.1 Official Guide Pat 1.
Rules Advisory Committee
STANDING COMMITTEE ON PLAYING RULES
3.40 (a) (iv) (4)
(41)
Rule 3.40 (a) (iv) (4) Motions from the Standing Committee on Playing Rules
Amend Rule 2 – Set Play, the Rules of Football – Official Guide Part 2, (pages 62-64) to provide for the introduction of 'The Mark'
"When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the Kick-Out point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee.
The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b) Playing on immediately.
The following procedures shall apply:
(a) A Free Kick
The player shall signify to the Referee that he is availing of and then take the free kick himself from the hand from the point where he was awarded the 'Mark'.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark' the Referee will allow up to five seconds for the player to take the kick. If the player delays longer than five seconds the Referee will cancel the 'Mark' and throw in the ball between a player from each side.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark', the opposing players must retreat 10m to allow the player space to take the kick. If an opposition player deliberately blocks or attempts to block the kick within 10m, or if an opposition player impedes the player while he is taking the kick, the Referee shall penalise the opposition by bringing the ball forward 13m.
If the Referee determines that the player who makes the 'Mark' has been injured in the process and is unable to take the kick, the Referee shall direct the Player's nearest team mate to take the kick but he may not score directly from the kick.
(b) Play on immediately
(i) In this circumstance the player may not be challenged for the ball until he carries the
ball up to a maximum of four consecutive steps or holds the ball for no longer than the
time needed to take four steps and/or makes one act of kicking, hand- passing,
bouncing or toe-tapping the ball.
(ii) If he is illegally challenged, a free kick shall be awarded to his team from the point at
which the challenge is made, and this free kick may be taken by any player on his team."
Rules affected – Rules 1, 3, 4, 5 Definitions Rules of Football
Ard Chomhairle/Standing Committee on Playing Rules
(42)
Amend Rule 5.12, T.O. 2015 (Official Guide Part 2) (Playing Rules of Football) – Aggressive Fouls (Page 82) - to read:
"To deliberately collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purpose of taking him out of the movement of play"
Ard Chomhairle/Standing Committee on Playing Rules
MOTIONS CARRIED AT COUNTY CONVENTIONS/
SUBMITTED DIRECTLY BY A COUNTY COMMITTEE
3.40 (a) (i) (ii)
(43)
That a new Rule 1.18 – Broadcast Rights - Official Guide Part 1 be introduced:
That Congress 2016 enacts a New Rule [1.18]: "Broadcast Rights
All televised Inter-County Championship games shall be available on free to air T.V."
Rules affected/possibly affected: Rules 3.30, 3.36(f), 3.43, 3.46, Part 1, (Treoraí Oifigiúil 2015).
Effective from 1/ 1/2017.
Naomh Seosamh Buachailli Uí Chonaill, Áth Cliath
(44)
That Rule 3.11 (b) Exceptions (2) – County Convention Elections - Official Guide Part 1 (page 20) be amended to read:
Where a County Bye-Law provides that the Treasurer and / or Children's Officer and / or P.R.O. are / is not subject to the maximum period of office of five years.
If a member is elected or appointed to an Officer position 'in term' twenty six weeks or less before the next Convention, that time served shall not be considered as part of the five years' period.
Fionnbhrú Colmcille, Áth Cliath
(45)
That Rule 3.20 (xiv)– County Sub-Committees/Functions - Official Guide Part 1 (page 29) be replaced by the following:-
Child Safeguarding and Health and Well Being Committee
It shall be responsible for:
(a) The safeguarding and promotion of the interests of wellbeing of all those under 18 years of age who are involved in our games and other activities.
(b) All health related matters referred to it by the County Committee and/or the County Management Committee.
Persons with the particular skill sets appropriate to the respective functions of the Committee shall act as complementary work-groups.
Rules affected or possible affected – Rules 1.13 and 3.11 O.G.
Coiste Chontae Chorcaí
(46)
That Rule 3.25 (b) T.O. 2015 – Provincial Convention Elections - Official Guide Part 1 (page 31) be amended to read as follows:
A Provincial Officer, other than a full time Secretary and Treasurer, shall not hold office for more than three consecutive years. A Treasurer may not hold office for more than six consecutive years. Should a vacancy arise in the Officerships of the Provincial Council prior to 31st October in any year, it shall be filled on the basis of (a) nominations of the counties (b) ballot vote of Counties, (based on Provincial Convention voting strength) and Members of current Provincial Council.
Dun Bleisce, Luimneach
(47)
That Rule 3.46 (a) – Management Committee - Official Guide Part 1 (page 51) be amended as follows (remainder of Rule unchanged):-
(a) It shall consist of the President, the Director General (without voting rights), the President elect, if in office, the immediate Past President for the year after his term of office as President, the Chairmen of the Provincial Councils, the two Representatives of Congress elected by Congress, one Central Council member from each of the four Provinces and one Central Council member from International Units, elected by Central Council, and two Nominees of the President and Director General, who are members of the Association, subject to their approval by Central Council, and the Finance Director (without voting powers).
Coiste Chontae Eorpa
(48)
That Rule 5.1(b) Note (1) - Uses of Property – Official Guide Part 1 (page 65) be amended to read as follows:
Central Council shall have the power to authorise the use of Croke Park and all County Grounds for games other than those controlled by the association.
C.L.G. Naomh Iosaif Sráid Na Cathrach, An Clár
(49)
That Rule 6.9 'Special Eligibility Provisions for Hurling' – Official Guide Part 1 (page 77) be deleted.
Craobh Rua Chamlocha, Ard Mhacha
(50)
That Rule 6.11 (d) (iii) Playing in the U.S.A./Canada/Australasia/Europe (Page 78-81) be amended as follows:
(1) That Rule 6.11(d)(iii) include "Australasian Board" for Transfers
(2) That all references to Sanctions for the "Australasian Board" be deleted from Rule 6.11(b)(i), (v), (x), (xi) and (d) (ii).
Coiste Chontae An Astráil
(51)
That Rule 6.16 – Age Grades - Official Guide Part 1 (pages 84-86) be amended as it relates to Age Restrictions in respect of participation in Adult Competitions to read as follows:-
"Adult
- Club for non-Championship competitions - be over 16 years.
- Club for Championship competitions - be over 17 years.
- Inter-County – be over 18 years."
The rest of the Rule to remain unaltered.
Proposed amended Rule to become operative four weeks from the date of Annual Congress.
Cnoc an Teampaill, Corcaigh
(52)
That Rule 6.18 - Club Championship and League Status of Players Official Guide Part 1 (page 86) be amended as set out below:-
In Section dealing with:
"A Player shall not lose his current Championship status by", delete provision (1)
"(1) Participating in a game or Competition the purpose of which is to determine Qualification/relegation for the following year's Championship."
or
Naomh Laisrian Mainistir, Laoise
(53)
That Rule 6.20 Part (4) (c) – County Championships - Official Guide – Part 1 (page 88) be amended as follows (changes underlined):
(4) If a Championship is partly organised on a League basis, the following Regulations shall apply:
(a) League results shall be credited as follows: 2 points for a win, and one for a draw.
(b) If a Team is Disqualified or Retires during the course of the League Stage, its played Games shall stand and its unplayed Games shall be awarded to the Opposing Teams.
(c) Except where provided for otherwise in County Bye-Law or in Competition Regulation, when Teams finish with equal points for Qualification for the Concluding Stages, or for Promotion or Relegation, the tie shall be decided by the following means and in the order specified:
(i) Where two or more Teams are involved - the outcome of the meeting of the Teams in the previous games in the Competition;
(ii) Scoring Difference (subtracting the total Scores Against from total Scores For);
(iii) Highest Total Score For;
(iv) A Play-Off.
Exceptions to (c):
(1) In relation to means (ii) and (iii) above, if the accumulated scores of a team or teams, so involved, are disadvantaged by a disqualification, loss of game on a proven objection, retirement or walk over, the tie shall be decided by a Play-Off.
(2) Regulations (i), (ii) and (iii) shall not apply to under 16or younger age grade competitions.
(3) Part (d) remains unchanged
Rule 6.37 remains unchanged
Cumann Naomh Pádraig, An Goirtín, Tír Eoghain
(54)
That Rule 6.21 (c) – Inter-County Players Availability to Clubs - Official Guide Part 1 (page 89) be deleted.
Coiste Chontae Thír Eoghain; Realt na Mara, Bundobhráin, Dún na nGall
(55)
That Rule 6.24 (a) (ii) – Organisation (Provincial and All-Ireland Club) - Official Guide Part 1 (page 91) be deleted and amend the following paragraph accordingly.
Rath Naoi, Cill Mhantáin
(56)
That Rule 6.24(a) - Organisation (Provincial and All-Ireland Club) - Official Guide Part 1 (page 91) be amended to include provision for a Provincial and All-Ireland Club Championship in a Grade between Senior and Intermediate, to be entitled Premier Intermediate, with qualification for either this Grade or the Intermediate Grade being determined based on the relative strength of the respective participants' County Intermediate Championship.
Proposed wording of amended Rule 6.24(a), as follows:-
Organisation (Provincial and All-Ireland)
(a) Provincial and All-Ireland Club Championship shall be organised in Senior, Premier Intermediate, Intermediate and Junior Grades.
The following Eligibility Rules shall apply:
(i) A Divisional or Group Team winning a County Championship shall not participate.
(ii) The Premier Intermediate, Intermediate and Junior Grades shall be confined to Clubs whose top grade is respectively Premier Intermediate, Intermediate or Junior.
(iii) The representative at Intermediate Grade from any County that has not more than 25% of its clubs in that code entering at a higher grade (i.e. Senior and Premier Intermediate), shall only be eligible to compete at Premier Intermediate Grade and not Intermediate Grade, for the Provincial and All-Ireland Championships.
The rest of the Section to remain unchanged.
C.L.G. Naomh Eoin, An Clár
(57)
That Rule 6.27 (A) – All-Ireland Senior Football Championship - Official Guide Part 1 (pages 93-96) shall be amended to read as follows;
1. Provincial Championships. These championships shall be played on a straight Knock Out Format. The winners shall qualify for separate All Ireland Championship Quarter Finals where they shall not meet the team they defeated in the provincial final. Extra time shall be mandatory in all games including provincial finals. All games in all provinces must be completed not later than the first week end in July. Other than that arrangements shall be a matter for the Provincial Councils.
2. B. All Ireland Senior Football Championships.
(i) All Ireland Senior Football Championship Tier 1. The All Ireland Football Championships shall be organised on a two tier basis. Tier 1 shall be played for the Sam Maguire Cup. It shall consist of the winners and runners up of the four provincial championships, (8 teams) and the eight highest ranked teams in the National Football Leagues, (8 teams), after the provincial finalists are excluded, for the first year.
From year two onwards it shall consist of the winners and runners up of the four provincial championships, the winner in Tier 2 from the previous year and the seven highest ranked teams in the National Football Leagues after the provincial finalists are excluded.
Provincial winners shall be entitled to a home draw in round one of this competition. In all other games up to semi final stage the first team drawn shall have home venue.
The competition shall be run on an open draw knock out basis apart from the exception mentioned above regarding provincial championship winners, with extra time in all games including the final.
Provincial finalists shall be allowed a thirteen day gap between their provincial finals and their participation in Tier 1 games. Provincial finalists shall be entitled to a home draw in their first game in this competition.
(ii) All Ireland Senior Football Championship Tier 2. This shall consist of the remaining 16 teams in the National Football League. Games in this competition shall be paired with games in Tier 1 in so far as possible up to semi final stage. It shall be mandatory that the semi finals and finals are so paired.
The competition shall be run on a knock out basis with extra time in all games including the final.
Other than as specified above, dates and venues shall be a matter for the Central Competitions Control Committee.
Note 1. Central Council shall have the authority to decide on a suitable and appropriately named trophy for Tier 2.
Note 2. Arrangements for venues shall be conditional on grounds being deemed suitable to meet the criteria set down by the National Health and Safety Committee and the Central Competitions Control Committee.
Rules affected in accordance with Rule 3.40 (c) T.O. 2015; Rule 6.28 T.O. 2015, Rule 6.27 T.O. 2015 and Rule 3.5 of the Rules of Specification T.O. 2015.
Cill Mor, Ros Comáin
(58)
That Rule 6.27 (A) – All-Ireland Senior Football Championship - Official Guide Part 1 (pages 93-96) be amended as follows:
The Championship shall be organised as follows:-
Delete all of (i), (ii), (ii) and (iv) and add in the following:-
Provincial Championships: - These championships shall be played on a Knock-Out format.
All Ireland Championships: -
Structure:
The All Ireland Championship shall be seeded.
The eight teams which contested the previous year's Provincial Championship Finals shall be the top seeds.
Second seeds shall be the beaten semi-finalists in the Provincial Championships from the previous year.
Third and fourth seeds shall be determined by the finishing positions in the National Football League of the current year.
Competition Format
Round 1
Tier 3 teams v Tier 4 teams with Tier 4 teams at home.
Counties from the same province shall be separated where possible in the draw or at the very least no duplication of provincial championship pairings shall be allowed.
Round 2
Tier 2 teams v the winners of Round 1.
Counties from the same province shall be separated where possible in the draw
or at the very least no duplication of provincial championship pairings shall be allowed.
Round 3
Tier 1 teams v the winners of Round 2 in the last 16.
No duplication of provincial championship pairings shall be allowed
Quarter Finals
Open draw between the winners of Round 3.
Semi Finals
Open Draw
All Ireland Final
Coiste Chontae Cheatharlach
(59)
That Rule 6.27(B) – All Ireland Senior Hurling Championship – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 96-99) be amended to allow for the participation of the Christy Ring Cup Winners in the Leinster Championship Quarter-Finals in the current year of its winning the Christy Ring Cup.
Amendments proposed as follows:-
(1) Stages
(i) Provincial Championships, (b) Leinster
Add the following:
"The Christy Ring Cup Winners shall qualify for the Leinster Quarter-Finals in the current year of winning the Christy Ring Cup"
(2) Stage (ii) All-Ireland Qualifier Series
Amend to read:
"Round 1 – This shall comprise of eight of the teams that were defeated in the
Munster and Leinster Quarter and Semi-Finals.
Two Groups shall be formed as follows:-
Group 1 – Four Leinster Championship Teams - the two defeated Semi-Finalists
and two of the four defeated Quarter-Finalists.
A Play-Off shall determine the three defeated
Quarter-Finalists that will qualify for this stage of the Championship.
Group 2 – Three Munster plus one Leinster Championship Team.
The Leinster Championship Team to be included in the Munster
Group shall, where feasible, be one of the three Teams that
qualified for the Leinster Quarter-Finals through the Provincial
Qualifier Group or through the winning of the Christy Ring Cup
in the current year.
If however two of these three teams qualify for the Leinster
Final, then the replacement shall be one of the Leinster Teams
defeated by them. A draw shall be made, as appropriate, to
determine the Team to be included in the Munster Group."
Rest of provisions re Round 1 to remain unchanged.
(3) Promotion/Relegation
Amend the final paragraph to read:
"2017 and onwards – the fourth placed Team shall be relegated to the Christy Ring Cup. The Christy Ring Cup winners shall participate in the Leinster Championship at Quarter-Final stage in the current Championship Year and shall be promoted to the Provincial Qualifier Group for the following year.
Remainder of Rule 6.27(B) to remain unchanged.
Possible Rule affected – 6.27(C)
(Effective from 2017)
Fánaithe an Ghleanna, Aontroim
(60)
That Rule 6.27(B)(ii) – All Ireland Senior Hurling Championship Qualifier Series – Official Guide Part 1 (pages 97-98) be amended to read:
"Round 1
This shall comprise the eight teams that were defeated in the Munster and Leinster Quarter and Semi-Finals. The Teams shall play on a Knock-Out basis. Subject to the avoidance of repeat pairings an open draw of four pairings shall be made. Venues shall be on a Home or Away basis and shall be determined by a Draw. The four Winners shall progress to Round 2.
Round 2
The four winners of Round 1 shall play on a Knock-Out basis. Subject to the avoidance of Repeat Pairings, where feasible, a Draw shall be made to determine the Pairings".
Comhairle Laighean
(61)
That Rule 6.27 (F) – All-Ireland Minor Hurling Championship - Official Guide Part 1 (page 103) be amended as follows: delete all words (from the first "The" to the final "Council") and replace with the following:
All-Ireland Inter County Minor Hurling Championship.
Competing counties shall initially enter their provincial minor hurling competition.
The All-Ireland series shall be organised as follows:
The Munster and Leinster champions shall automatically qualify for separate All-Ireland semi-finals.
The remaining two semi-final places shall be filled by two teams qualifying from a Quarter Final series, organised as follows:
All-Ireland Minor Hurling Quarter Finals
Qualifying counties:
(1) The Munster and Leinster runners up who shall qualify for separate All-Ireland Quarter Final places
(2) Two Leinster teams who shall be the losers of the Quarter Finals of the Leinster Minor Hurling Championship
(3) Two Munster teams who shall be the losers of the first round play-offs in the Munster Minor Hurling Championship
(4) The Connacht and the Ulster champions
The teams in (2), (3) and (4) shall enter a Round Robin series from which two teams shall qualify for the Quarter Finals proper.
These six teams shall be divided into two groups of three teams.
Each group shall consist of one team from Munster, one team from Leinster and one team from either Connacht or Ulster. (Note: The Ulster team shall be given a bye in the first of the group games.)
Each team will play both of the others in the group
Teams will be ranked in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6.20 (4)(a).
At the end of the group games the two top ranked teams in each group will cross-play (A1 vB2 and B1 v A2).
The two winners shall qualify for the Quarter Finals and shall be drawn, one each, against the Munster and the Leinster runners up.
All-Ireland Minor Hurling Semi-Finals
The Munster and Leinster champions shall each play one of the Quarter Final winners and as far is feasible two teams from the same province shall not be drawn against each other in a Semi-Final.
All-Ireland Minor Hurling Final
The winners of the All-Ireland Semi-finals shall play each other in the All-Ireland Minor Hurling Final.
This new format to be effective from 2016.
Coiste Chontae na Gaillimhe
(62)
That the second paragraph of Rule 6.28 (a) – Provincial Championships – Official Guide Part 1 (page 105) quoted below is amended to read as also proposed below:
Current Text:
"Minor Provincial Championships shall commence not earlier than the second week of April and not later than May 1st, and shall be decided during the months of April, May, June (as authorised by Central Council, based on Second Level Schools' examination dates) and July."
Amended Text Proposed:
"Minor Provincial Championships may commence not earlier than the third week of March and shall commence not later than May 1st, and shall be decided during the months of March, April, May, June (as authorised by Central Council, based on Second Level Schools' examination dates) and July."
Comhairle Na Mumhan
(63)
That Rule 7.3(f) (ii) – Procedures for Disciplinary and Related Hearings - Official Guide Part 1 (page 129) be amended to read:
The Referee has failed to submit his Report within a period of 5 days after the game concerned; or
Naomh Cillian CLG. Crois Ban, Ard Mhacha
(64)
That Rule 7.2 of the Club Constitution – Executive Committee - Official Guide Part 1 – Appendix 5 (page 163) by the inclusion of 'Hurling Development Officer.
That in the Club Constitution Clause 7.2 the words "Hurling Development Officer" be included.
Cumann Éire Óg, An Charraig Mhór, Cumann Naomh Mhuire, Coill an Chlochair, Tír Eoghain
(65)
That Rule 7.5 of the Club Constitution – Executive Committee - Official Guide Part 1 Appendix 5 (page 163) be amended to read as follows:
7.5 The Executive Committee including the Players' Representative, shall be elected by the Full Members present, entitled to vote and voting at the Annual General Meeting. Exception: The Children's Officer and the Officer for Irish Language and Culture shall be appointed at the Annual General Meeting on the recommendation of the outgoing Executive Committee.
Naomh Dominic, Ros Comáin
(66)
That Rule 11.11 of Club Constitution – Club Financial Year - Official Guide Part 1 (page 174) be amended to read: "The end of the Club Financial Year shall be September 30th.
Clann na nGael, Ard Mhacha
Annual Congress 2016: The Motions Explained
This coming Friday and Saturday (February 26 and 27) the GAA's Annual Congress will take place at the Mount Wolseley Hotel in Co. Carlow.
This year a total of 65 motions will come before the delegates to be discussed and voted upon. Unlike last year, this is not a 'playing rules congress'.
The motions come from a variety of sources; Central Council have submitted the majority of the motions, in different guises. For example, Motions 4 to 11 are submitted from Central Council on the back of a number of sub-committee reports published in recent years, such as the Football Review Committee report (2013), Hurling 2020 report (2014) and the Minor Review Workgroup report (2014).
Motions 12 to 40 come from the Rules Advisory Committee, many of which are technical and relate to administrative 'tidying up' of the rulebook, while motions 41 and 42 have been submitted from the Standing Committee on the Playing Rules.
Finally, motions 43-65 have been submitted by counties/provinces.
The full list of motions as they will appear before the delegates are available to be downloaded in a word document at the end of this article.
Here are some useful documents to read alongside examining the motions:
2016 Annual Report
GAA Official Guide Part 1
GAA Official Guide Part 2
And below is a simplified guide to the motions to be dealt with in Carlow this weekend.
***
Motion 1: The first motion relates to the All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship and it essentially seeks to retain the structure used for the championship from 2014-2016 for future years. The current structure, which includes a Leinster 'round robin' qualifying group, was introduced at Congress 2013 for a three-year period and this motion seeks to retain that structure.
Motion 2: This motion, if passed, paves the way for an All-Ireland 'B' Championship in football to be introduced. The 'B' Championship, which would take place after the completion of the provincial championships, which would take place as normal, would comprise of the eight teams that would make up Division IV of the following year's league. In the event of one of those teams reaching their provincial final, the lowest placed team that was not relegated in that season's Division III would enter the 'B' Championship, with the provincial finalist from next year's Division IV taking part in the main All-Ireland Senior Championship.
Motion 3: Only applicable if Motion 2 is passed. Would allow for matches in the 'B' Championship to be 70 minutes long.
Motion 4: Proposes that the minor grade, at inter-county level only, become U17 and no longer U18. It proposes that all minor players at inter-county level be aged between 15 and 17 and at club level, between 14 and 18. To be effective from January 1, 2018.
Motion 5: Proposes the abolition of the U21 grade at inter-county football level, to be replaced with an U20 grade, with players eligible to be aged between 18 and 20. It proposes no such change to the U21 grade for hurling, or at club level, in either code.
The motion includes some supplementary information on the U20 championship, in the event of the motion being passed. The competition is proposed to take place between June and August, with no replays. Drawn games will be decided by extra-time, and, in the event of that not providing a winner, by "the outcome of a sudden-death free-taking competition, the details of which shall be determined by the Central Council." The motion also proposes that any player on a team list submitted to an inter-county referee for a senior inter-county championship match in that season will not be eligible to compete in the U20 competition. The U21 grade in hurling, and at club level in both codes, will be entirely unaffected by this motion.
Motion 6: This motion proposes the following: "Players who are not included in an Inter-County Senior Panel of 26 players, shall be available to their Clubs on the weekends of National League and Senior Championship games." In the event of this rule not being implemented by counties, the penalty is as follows: "A County shall forfeit Home Venue for its next 'Home Game' in the respective National League."
Motion 7: A very significant motion. This proposes that All-Ireland football finals be played on the first Sunday in September, with the hurling final to be played two weeks prior. The aim of this motion is to provide more space for playing club games in the month of September. Effective from January 1, 2017.
The specific wording is as follows:
"The Football Final shall be played on the first Sunday in September, except when there are five Sundays in September when it shall be played on the second Sunday of that month. The Hurling Final shall be played on the Sunday two weeks previous to the Football Final in either circumstance. In exceptional circumstances, the Central Council may make other arrangements".
Motion 8: This motion seeks to make extra-time obligatory for practically all games, with a handful of exceptions, namely All-Ireland finals and provincial finals.
Motion 9: This motion proposes the abolition of the All-Ireland Intermediate Hurling Championship (inter-county only). Effective from January 1, 2017.
Motion 10: This motion proposes the abolition of the All-Ireland Junior Football Championship in its current form. The following motion, Motion 11, proposes a new structure to the championship, so these motions are indelibly linked.
Motion 11: This motion proposes that the All-Ireland Junior Football Championship be reconstituted on the following basis:
"The All-Ireland Junior Football Championship shall be organised on a Knock-Out/Open draw basis and shall be confined to the second best teams of Counties in Ireland that participated in the current year's National Football League Division 4, to any County within Ireland graded Junior by the Central Council and to the winners of the All Britain Junior Football Championship, who shall enter the All-Ireland Junior Football Championship at the quarter-final stage.
This motion includes a considerable amount of supplementary information in relation to eligibility, and in relation to teams from Britain.
***
Motions 12-40 are submitted based upon a report of the Rules Advisory Committee. Many are technical and administrative in nature.
Motion 12: This motion, very simply, proposes the following amendment be introduced to a section in the Official Guide in relation to anti-doping procedure:
"The Association forbids the use of prohibited substances or methods, a practice generally known as doping in sport. The Rules of the Association regarding doping are the Irish Anti-Doping Rules as adopted by Sport Ireland and as amended from time to time. The latest version can be downloaded from http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/Anti-Doping/ . The Rules contained in the said Irish Anti-Doping Rules shall have effect and be construed as Rules of the Association."
Motions 13, 14, 15: Relate to different types of membership of the GAA.
Motions 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21: Relate to election of officers at county conventions, procedures and powers of county committees and sub-committees, the appointment of fixtures analysts.
Motion 22: Relates to the staging of Congress; proposes it be staged before March 1 every year, and also concerns the number of representatives counties can have.
Motion 23: Relates to handball committees.
Motion 24: Relates to Rounders.
Motions 25: Minor, technical change in the 'Deviation from Rule' section of the Official Guide.
Motion 26: Relates to the Player Injury Scheme.
Motions 27, 28, 29 30, 31: Relates to definitions of first club, attachments to first club, transfers and some technical changes on references to playing restrictions.
Motion 32: Relates to sanctions.
Motion 33, 34 and 35: A number of technical motions related to club championships.
Motion 36: Relates to the nomination of clubs to represent a county in a provincial championship, in the event of a county championship not being completed in time.
Motion 37: Relates to Procedures for Disciplinary and Related Hearings.
Motions, 38, 39, 40: Technical motions relating to validity of team constitution, reinstatements and the club constitution.
***
Motions 41 and 42 submitted by Central Council on foot of proposals from the Standing Committee on the Playing Rules approved by Central Council
Motion 41: This motion provides for the introduction of 'the mark' in Gaelic football. This is precisely what is proposed:
"When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately.
The following procedures shall apply:
(a) A Free Kick
The player shall signify to the Referee that he is availing of and then take the free kick himself from the hand from the point where he was awarded the 'Mark'.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark' the Referee will allow up to five seconds for the player to take the kick. If the player delays longer than five seconds the Referee will cancel the 'Mark' and throw in the ball between a player from each side. Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark', the opposing players must retreat 10m to allow the player space to take the kick. If an opposition player deliberately blocks or attempts to block the kick within 10m, or if an opposition player impedes the player while he is taking the kick, the Referee shall penalise the opposition by bringing the ball forward 13m.
If the Referee determines that the player who makes the 'Mark' has been injured in the process and is unable to take the kick, the Referee shall direct the Player's nearest team mate to take the kick but he may not score directly from the kick.
(b) Play on immediately (i) In this circumstance the player may not be challenged for the ball until he carries the ball up to a maximum of four consecutive steps or holds the ball for no longer than the time needed to take four steps and/or makes one act of kicking, hand passing, bouncing or toe-tapping the ball.
(ii) If he is illegally challenged, a free kick shall be awarded to his team from the point at which the challenge is made, and this free kick may be taken by any player on his team."
Motion 42: This motion proposes that the section on 'Aggressive Fouls' in the Official Guide be amended to read:
"To deliberately collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purpose of taking him out of the movement of play."
***
Motions 43-65 have been submitted by counties/provinces.
Motion 43 (Dublin): This motion proposes that all televised inter-county championship games be available on free to air TV.
Motion 44 (Dublin): Technical rule change relating to appointments and terms of certain county officers.
Motion 45: Relates to the Child Safeguarding and Health and Well Being Committee. Proposes that said committee be responsible for:
(a) The safeguarding and promotion of the interests of wellbeing of all those under 18 years of age who are involved in our games and other activities.
(b) All health related matters referred to it by the County Committee and/or the County Management Committee.
Motion 46 (Europe): Proposes that one Central Council member from International Units be added to the GAA's Management Committee.
Motion 47 (Clare): Proposes that the GAA can authorise the playing of non-GAA sports at all county grounds and not only Croke Park.
Motion 48 (Armagh): Proposes the deletion and abolition of the rule that allows players to play inter-county hurling for the county of their parents or for their county of residence, where that county is not competing for the Liam MacCarthy Cup in the All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship. (Example: A player from Cork living in Monaghan can play for Monaghan. A player from Cork living in Kilkenny cannot play for them).
Motion 49 (Australia): Relates to Australasian Board transfers.
Motion 50 (Cork): Relates to age restrictions. Proposes that:
1) Players be 16 or over to play non-championship club games
2) Players be 17 or over to play championship club games
3) Players be 18 or over to play inter-county games.
It is proposed to become operative four weeks after the date of Annual Congress.
Motion 51 (Laois): Technical motion on the rules relating to a player's club championship or league status.
Motion 52 (Tyrone): This motion relates to the regulations around a county championship that has a league format in some aspect.
Motion 53 (Donegal): Very simply, this motion proposes the deletion of the rule in the Official Guide - Inter-County Players' Availability to Clubs. To read that rule, click here. It's on Page 89. That rule has very clear specifications for when inter-county players can be expected to fulfil club championship games prior to inter-county championship games.
Motion 54 (Wicklow): Relates to the section in the official guide - 'Provincial and All-Ireland Club'. This motion proposes that this be deleted (reasons for which are below). The relevant section is on page 91 of the official guide, which can be found here. This motion is indelibly linked with Motion 55, which proposes an alternative to the existing section.
Motion 55 (Clare): This motion proposes the creation of a new grade for a Provincial and All-Ireland Club Championship between senior and intermediate entitled 'Premier Intermediate'. The motion, therefore, proposes that there are now four club championship grades at provincial and All-Ireland level (not at county level), namely, senior, premier intermediate, intermediate and junior. Intermediate county champions from across the country would enter either the intermediate or premier intermediate championships according to the relative strength of their county intermediate championship.
Motion 56 (Roscommon): This motion from Roscommon proposes an alternative structure to the All-Ireland Football Championship, distinct to the the one proposed in Motion 2. In the event that Motion 2 is passed, all other motions with separate proposals for the All-Ireland Football Championship structure will become invalid.
The Roscommon motion proposes that, after the provincial championships are finished (by the first weekend of July, the proposal states), the competition will divide into two separate competitions, the Tier 1 competition and a Tier 2 competition. In Year 1 of the new proposal, Tier 1 (Sam Maguire) will feature the eight provincial finalists and the eight highest ranked teams in that year's Allianz Football League (not including provincial finalists where there is a crossover). From year 2 on, the winner of the previous year's Tier 2 competition will also be included in the Tier 1 competition, along with the seven highest ranked national league sides.
The format of the Tier 2 competition is proposed to feature the remaining 16 teams not eligible to compete or the Tier 1 competition.
Motion 57 (Carlow): This motion from Carlow also proposes an alternative structure to the Football Championship. This motion proposes that the provincial championships take place as normal, but then, that the All-Ireland series takes on a new seeded format based on the previous year's provincial championships.
The motion proposes four sets of seeds based on the previous year's provincial championship performances. The bottom two pots of seeds will be determined by that year's National Football League results. The All-Ireland series would then take place with Pot 3 and 4 seeds playing in Round 1, before meeting Pot 2 teams in Round 2 before the winners eventually face Pot 1 teams in Round 3. The remaining eight teams after those three rounds would advance to an open draw All-Ireland quarter-final stage.
Motion 58 (Antrim): This motion, from Antrim, relates to the Hurling Championship and proposes a method to allow for the participation of the Christy Ring Cup winners in the Leinster Championship Quarter-Finals in the same year as that county wins the Christy Ring Cup.
The motion also proposes a number of amendments to the All-Ireland Championship structure, namely the creation of two groups of four teams in the All-Ireland Qualifiers section.
Motion 59 (Leinster): This motion proposes a change to the Qualifier structure in the All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship, namely that the beaten Leinster and Munster quarter-finalists and semi-finalists play two knock-out rounds, with the eventual winners advancing.
Motion 60 (Galway): This motion proposes a change to the structure of the All-Ireland Minor Hurling Championship. It proposes the creation of an All-Ireland round robin stage featuring beaten sides from Leinster and Munster, alongside Galway and the Ulster champions. It is proposed that the round robin section will be divided into two groups of three, with the top two teams in each group playing against each other, with the two winners joining the Munster and Leinster runners-up in the All-Ireland quarter-finals. The motion proposes that the format, if adopted, be adopted from 2016.
Motion 61 (Munster): This motion relates to the playing of minor provincial championships. It proposes that minor championships can start any time after the third week of March and must be started by May 1.
Motion 62 (Armagh): Technical motion relating to referee reports.
Motion 63 (Tyrone): Motion proposing the introduction of Hurling Development Officers to Executive Committees.
Motion 64 (Roscommon): Motion regarding the Officer for Irish Language and Culture on Executive Committees.
Motion 65 (Armagh): Motion regarding the end of the Club Financial Year.
***
Will anything be passed?
Good to see Cill Mhór getting a motion on the Clàr again
Motion 7 is bound to get passed
I was at our own county convention this year. It was tough enough going. It would take a special animal to sit through this stuff.
What way have people's clubs voted on the mark proposal and how have counties been mandated to vote?
I assume delegates won't be making it up as they go?
I hope the under 21 grade is left alone, change to june-august would kill the brilliant football development going on in the county
Am I reading this right? Are motions 2 and 56 two different proposals to re-structure the inter-county football championship?
Motion 5 - a joke
Motion 6 - enlightened
Have any clubs or county boards discussed these proposals in advance?
Quote from: tippabu on February 24, 2016, 10:15:21 PM
I hope the under 21 grade is left alone, change to june-august would kill the brilliant football development going on in the county
More than anything, I think what would kill us in Tipp is if they abolished altogether. I think we can adapt to U-20, and to summer football, especially if they are not allowed feature on senior panels.
Quote from: tiempo on February 25, 2016, 12:16:55 PM
Motion 5 - a joke
Motion 6 - enlightened
Expand on 5 please!!??
Quote from: Rossfan on February 25, 2016, 03:03:38 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 25, 2016, 12:16:55 PM
Motion 5 - a joke
Motion 6 - enlightened
Expand on 5 please!!??
The motion includes some supplementary information on the U20 championship, in the event of the motion being passed. The competition is proposed to take place between June and August, with no replays. Drawn games will be decided by extra-time, and, in the event of that not providing a winner, by "the outcome of a sudden-death free-taking competition, the details of which shall be determined by the Central Council." The motion also proposes that any player on a team list submitted to an inter-county referee for a senior inter-county championship match in that season will not be eligible to compete in the U20 competition. The U21 grade in hurling, and at club level in both codes, will be entirely unaffected by this motion.The motion is designed to fail. Standard toilet.
Very sensible restricting eligibility to prevent burn out.
Quote from: Rossfan on February 25, 2016, 04:43:09 PM
Very sensible restricting eligibility to prevent burn out.
Do hurlers not suffer burnout?
Hurlers are if course a special type of man and can't be compared to mere football players.
Also Hurley things can only be changed if the President is from Cork or Kilkenny etc. ;)
Motion 57 (Carlow)
Why do they bother? Is there nothing else on the minds of Carlow GAA than to come up with some proposal that would further reduce their chances of winning a game.
Carlow is a nice county, I like Carlow.... but
Do other sports have that many proposals for change every time?
I'm assuming noone has had an input to a club decision on any of the congress motions?
I think the mark is a super idea. I don't think the current version of GF is as good as it could be.
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2016, 11:12:42 AM
I think the mark is a super idea. I don't think the current version of GF is as good as it could be.
In theory. In practice what you will have is a series of Cluxton clones chipping the ball into the chest of mobile MDMA / Mattie Donnelly types running into space.
Quote from: LeoMc on February 26, 2016, 12:49:14 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2016, 11:12:42 AM
I think the mark is a super idea. I don't think the current version of GF is as good as it could be.
In theory. In practice what you will have is a series of Cluxton clones chipping the ball into the chest of mobile MDMA / Mattie Donnelly types running into space.
A mark would only be awarded if the ball has travelled outside the 45m line, so at least it might stop some of the short kick outs that don't even go outside the 13m line!!
Is the mark only from a kickout? Because a lot/most of the AFL marks are those cheap 15m passes into the chest.
I think the B Championship proposal is already toast.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 26, 2016, 02:45:48 PM
Is the mark only from a kickout? .
Yes. And outside the 45 and can't have touched the ground after being kicked.
Quote from: westbound on February 26, 2016, 02:11:03 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on February 26, 2016, 12:49:14 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2016, 11:12:42 AM
I think the mark is a super idea. I don't think the current version of GF is as good as it could be.
In theory. In practice what you will have is a series of Cluxton clones chipping the ball into the chest of mobile MDMA / Mattie Donnelly types running into space.
A mark would only be awarded if the ball has travelled outside the 45m line, so at least it might stop some of the short kick outs that don't even go outside the 13m line!!
Cluxton regularly picks our runners outside the 45 in space on the wings from Shane Ryan through to MDMA.
Awarding a mark for this will not encourage contested high fielding.
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
From Louthgaa.ie
Motion 1: The first motion relates to the All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship and it essentially seeks to retain the structure used for the championship from 2014-2016 for future years. The current structure, which includes a Leinster 'round robin' qualifying group, was introduced at Congress 2013 for a three-year period and this motion seeks to retain that structure. PASSED
Motion 2: This motion, if passed, paves the way for an All-Ireland 'B' Championship in football to be introduced. The 'B' Championship, which would take place after the completion of the provincial championships, which would take place as normal, would comprise of the eight teams that would make up Division IV of the following year's league. In the event of one of those teams reaching their provincial final, the lowest placed team that was not relegated in that season's Division III would enter the 'B' Championship, with the provincial finalist from next year's Division IV taking part in the main All-Ireland Senior Championship. WITHDRAWN
Motion 3: Only applicable if Motion 2 is passed. Would allow for matches in the 'B' Championship to be 70 minutes long.
Motion 4: Proposes that the minor grade, at inter-county level only, become U17 and no longer U18. It proposes that all minor players at inter-county level be aged between 15 and 17 and at club level, between 14 and 18. To be effective from January 1, 2018. PASSED
Motion 5: Proposes the abolition of the U21 grade at inter-county football level, to be replaced with an U20 grade, with players eligible to be aged between 18 and 20. It proposes no such change to the U21 grade for hurling, or at club level, in either code.
The motion includes some supplementary information on the U20 championship, in the event of the motion being passed. The competition is proposed to take place between June and August, with no replays. Drawn games will be decided by extra-time, and, in the event of that not providing a winner, by "the outcome of a sudden-death free-taking competition, the details of which shall be determined by the Central Council." The motion also proposes that any player on a team list submitted to an inter-county referee for a senior inter-county championship match in that season will not be eligible to compete in the U20 competition. The U21 grade in hurling, and at club level in both codes, will be entirely unaffected by this motion. PASSED
Motion 6: This motion proposes the following: "Players who are not included in an Inter-County Senior Panel of 26 players, shall be available to their Clubs on the weekends of National League and Senior Championship games." In the event of this rule not being implemented by counties, the penalty is as follows: "A County shall forfeit Home Venue for its next 'Home Game' in the respective National League." PASSED
Motion 56 (Roscommon): This motion from Roscommon proposes an alternative structure to the All-Ireland Football Championship, distinct to the the one proposed in Motion 2. In the event that Motion 2 is passed, all other motions with separate proposals for the All-Ireland Football Championship structure will become invalid.
The Roscommon motion proposes that, after the provincial championships are finished (by the first weekend of July, the proposal states), the competition will divide into two separate competitions, the Tier 1 competition and a Tier 2 competition. In Year 1 of the new proposal, Tier 1 (Sam Maguire) will feature the eight provincial finalists and the eight highest ranked teams in that year's Allianz Football League (not including provincial finalists where there is a crossover). From year 2 on, the winner of the previous year's Tier 2 competition will also be included in the Tier 1 competition, along with the seven highest ranked national league sides.
The format of the Tier 2 competition is proposed to feature the remaining 16 teams not eligible to compete or the Tier 1 competition. DEFEATED
Motion 57 (Carlow): This motion from Carlow also proposes an alternative structure to the Football Championship. This motion proposes that the provincial championships take place as normal, but then, that the All-Ireland series takes on a new seeded format based on the previous year's provincial championships.
The motion proposes four sets of seeds based on the previous year's provincial championship performances. The bottom two pots of seeds will be determined by that year's National Football League results. The All-Ireland series would then take place with Pot 3 and 4 seeds playing in Round 1, before meeting Pot 2 teams in Round 2 before the winners eventually face Pot 1 teams in Round 3. The remaining eight teams after those three rounds would advance to an open draw All-Ireland quarter-final stage. DEFEATED
2015 Finances
In Brief: Key Figures
Drop of €0.5m in revenues to €56m
Gate receipts down by €2.7m
Central Council championship attendances drop by 40,000
Commercial revenues increased by €2m
Distributions to units similar to 2014 at €12.5m
Games development increased by €1m to €10m
Net result is break-even
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
I think they should have kept the U21 football championship. Passed by 68.6% would suggest massive effort was put in to get rid of it.
Quote from: Cunny Funt on February 26, 2016, 10:35:35 PM
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
I think they should have kept the U21 football championship. Passed by 68.6% would suggest massive effort was put in to get rid of it.
Why do you think they should have kept it U21? It's a very progressive step in my opinion. With average age of senior players now younger and getting younger still, a move down from U21 is sensible and positive.
Quote from: ck on February 26, 2016, 10:45:34 PM
Quote from: Cunny Funt on February 26, 2016, 10:35:35 PM
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
I think they should have kept the U21 football championship. Passed by 68.6% would suggest massive effort was put in to get rid of it.
Why do you think they should have kept it U21? It's a very progressive step in my opinion. With average age of senior players now younger and getting younger still, a move down from U21 is sensible and positive.
A progressive step would be to do something about scheduling of sigerson cup football or to stop colleges from playing in pre-season competitions but of course it wasn't up for debate at congress.
U-21 football replaced and diluted while the hurling U-21 kept as it is makes no sense.
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
Am I the only one who thinks that the two should be both reduced in age, if they were going to reduce minor at all?
Quote from: Cunny Funt on February 26, 2016, 11:04:04 PM
Quote from: ck on February 26, 2016, 10:45:34 PM
Quote from: Cunny Funt on February 26, 2016, 10:35:35 PM
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
I think they should have kept the U21 football championship. Passed by 68.6% would suggest massive effort was put in to get rid of it.
Why do you think they should have kept it U21? It's a very progressive step in my opinion. With average age of senior players now younger and getting younger still, a move down from U21 is sensible and positive.
A progressive step would be to do something about scheduling of sigerson cup football or to stop colleges from playing in pre-season competitions but of course it wasn't up for debate at congress.
U-21 football replaced and diluted while the hurling U-21 kept as it is makes no sense.
Agreed. God help us when the first sudden death free kick shootout takes place. A horror show.
Quote from: Farrandeelin on February 26, 2016, 11:20:24 PM
Quote from: ONeill on February 26, 2016, 10:22:43 PM
Motion 5 to change inter-county football U21 to U20, and play in June, July, and Aug is PASSED, with 68.6% for
Motion 4, to lower Minor grade age from U18 to U17, is just PASSED, with 68.2% for. Effective from Jan 1, 2018. Inter-county Minor to U17 in football and hurling. Still U18 for clubs.
Am I the only one who thinks that the two should be both reduced in age, if they were going to reduce minor at all?
Another horror show.
The move to later in the year alone meant changing to U20 wasn't nesscary but the attempt to make the best U20/21 players ineligible for the grade if they dare take up the offer of being on the senior team will help gut the competition of the very players that light it up year after year. This is the most enjoyable, open and exciting IC competition of all so it's quite incredible to see delegates vote to damage it so severely and foist a terrible decision onto players rather than sort the issue out themselves.
Smacks more of an attempt to stealth kill a grade HQ wanted to kill in the past but failed to rather than protect players.
I thought Paraic Duffy wouldn't get his wish to get scrap the U21 All Ireland until it became unpopular however it seems popularly doesn't count for much in GAA anymore. That U-20 championship is a diluted version where the general public will quickly lose interest in that competition.
The naysayers in full flow!!
So they make a good decision for club football by moving minor to under 17. This should mean no more hold ups to club championship and league games due to county minors as they now can't play for their clubs senior team due to their age.
But they now create an under 20 competition that will be played in the summer months which senior county players cannot play in.
This will add another reason to cancel club league and championship games.
As others have said the fact that senior county plays cannot play in it will further devalue the competiion.
Counties with smaller player pools will be further weakened at this level.
Quote from: FermGael on February 27, 2016, 07:42:35 AM
So they make a good decision for club football by moving minor to under 17. This should mean no more hold ups to club championship and league games due to county minors as they now can't play for their clubs senior team due to their age.
But they now create an under 20 competition that will be played in the summer months which senior county players cannot play in.
This will add another reason to cancel club league and championship games.
As others have said the fact that senior county plays cannot play in it will further devalue the competiion.
Counties with smaller player pools will be further weakened at this level.
This weekend we have 3 under 21s starting v westmeath, possibly 4. As far as i know only 1 of them will be affected by the new rule though as only the 1 would be under 20
Club minor still U18. Such a balls of a rule to bring in. What if a club has a good minor tewm, but has 1 or 2 players on the county u20 team who are 18, and another 2 or 3 on the 'new' county minor/u17 team? It's ridiculous and if there is a player or 2 who are 18 on the u20 county panels, then surely to God June is stressful enough as it is for them.
Personally think the changes are daft. Why have different rules for hurling and football too? If the changes to minor were to an under 17.5 (I.e. School year) I could see some logic as it would free the majority for exams. However, this will only mean that instead of A levels/Leaving being disrupted it will be GCSE/ Inter for some. I know at GCSE that involves more exams and a less experienced student. Instead of helping this adds greater burden IMHO.
Absolute madness again from the decision makers of the GAA who continue to ensure the elite are looked after and fcuk the clubs. It was bad enough last year with the vote to stop minors playing with their senior team until they are second year minor, as well as an 18 year old and a county minor cannot play with their club until the county team are knocked out of the championship. Now this year the vote through a motion to cater for the elite county men which will once again hammer the clubs, with an U.20 championship played in June, July and August. At least with the current timing clubs do not have these players for preseason which is bad in itself but now in the heart of the Summer months, never mind months of training beforehand, these lads will be playing county football and either not allowed to play with their club or too wrecked from loads of training, it just doesn't make sense.
Thes men who make these decisions are so out of touch with grassroots and the challenges of fielding at senior club level without better U.17, minor and now U.20 players. County football is the only thing that matters nowadays.
Quote from: Line Ball on February 27, 2016, 08:48:58 AM
Absolute madness again from the decision makers of the GAA who continue to ensure the elite are looked after and fcuk the clubs. It was bad enough last year with the vote to stop minors playing with their senior team until they are second year minor, as well as an 18 year old and a county minor cannot play with their club until the county team are knocked out of the championship. Now this year the vote through a motion to cater for the elite county men which will once again hammer the clubs, with an U.20 championship played in June, July and August. At least with the current timing clubs do not have these players for preseason which is bad in itself but now in the heart of the Summer months, never mind months of training beforehand, these lads will be playing county football and either not allowed to play with their club or too wrecked from loads of training, it just doesn't make sense.
Thes men who make these decisions are so out of touch with grassroots and the challenges of fielding at senior club level without better U.17, minor and now U.20 players. County football is the only thing that matters nowadays.
I can see the situation in weaker counties where clubs will actively disencourage their young players from playing county u20. There is only one place for them in summer months and it's not on an underage B team, training to get smashed by Dublin.
The over 40s has been changed to the over 41s, but not in hurling. If a draw after 60 mins the first captain to skull 2 pints wins the day.
Quote from: Syferus on February 27, 2016, 12:52:27 AM
The move to later in the year alone meant changing to U20 wasn't nesscary but the attempt to make the best U20/21 players ineligible for the grade if they dare take up the offer of being on the senior team will help gut the competition of the very players that light it up year after year. This is the most enjoyable, open and exciting IC competition of all so it's quite incredible to see delegates vote to damage it so severely and foist a terrible decision onto players rather than sort the issue out themselves.
Smacks more of an attempt to stealth kill a grade HQ wanted to kill in the past but failed to rather than protect players.
Excellent decision by congress. Might force Roscommon to play big boys senior football now instead of hiding behind age grade football.
Unless you've seen the sickening injuries caused by burnout and the studies involved you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
You're not dealing with these injuries at the coal-face - disgusting is how I describe them. 20/21 year olds having groin and hip injury operations all because of the what you're describing above. Senor inter county managers/u21 county managers and Sigerson managers flogging players till they can't run
I really do wonder what planet some posters here live on.
And yet we let it continue in the Hurley stuff :o
Would it not have made sense to have the u20 championship at the time of year the u21 is currently on with all players having to play with just the u20s until their county were eliminated from the u20 championship? It ends before the champioship ensues, thus keeping young players from training on 2 different teams.
Additionally, could the sigerson cup not be a competition for students above u20? As it is 90% of players starting for the top colleges are over that age anyway. Herein, players u20 wouldn't be involved in McKenna Cup, etc also as the Unis would have to look at over 20 year old players.
As a result u20 players wouldn't be involved with 3-4 panels at the same time.
And college league,sigerson cup football which includes inter county pre season competitions and the nonsense of two games in two days during sigerson cup finals weekends remain untouched.
Quote from: Captain Obvious on February 27, 2016, 12:26:36 PM
And college league,sigerson cup football which includes inter county pre season competitions and the nonsense of two games in two days during sigerson cup finals weekends remain untouched.
Exactly. It is the demands on a small number of young elite players that is the problem. I hate seeing change just for the sake of it and that is what this looks like to me. Unless there is a valid issue with the Leaving Cert/A-levels versus minor football I can't see much merit in either change.
The mark passed for kick outs caught - without the ball touching the ground - past the 45. Not even a trial????? Holy fcuk what is going on down there.
There really seems to be an abnormal amount of questionable motions passing at this congress.
Quote from: Captain Obvious on February 27, 2016, 12:26:36 PM
And college league,sigerson cup football which includes inter county pre season competitions and the nonsense of two games in two days during sigerson cup finals weekends remain untouched.
Yep. This is the madness of the GAA
Different organisation. They are self governed.
the GAA needs to stop players training/playing with more than one team
Quote from: TF15 on February 27, 2016, 12:55:41 PM
The mark passed for kick outs caught - without the ball touching the ground - past the 45. Not even a trial????? Holy fcuk what is going on down there.
Disgusting.
Cue training of impeeding the best high fielders in the country as they begin their run up to catch a high ball.
The old maxim if its not broke don't fix it...
Let me guess. Not implemented in hurling...
And this comes into effect immediately?
Competitions already underway being played under two different set of rules?
Quote from: tiempo on February 27, 2016, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: TF15 on February 27, 2016, 12:55:41 PM
The mark passed for kick outs caught - without the ball touching the ground - past the 45. Not even a trial????? Holy fcuk what is going on down there.
Disgusting.
Cue training of impeeding the best high fielders in the country as they begin their run up to catch a high ball.
The old maxim if its not broke don't fix it...
Let me guess. Not implemented in hurling...
And this comes into effect immediately?
Competitions already underway being played under two different set of rules?
Is there any other team sport in the world that changes it's rules as much and as often as Gaelic football does?
Maybe the players could get a vote on these matters? Or do the oul jobsworths at this congress who don't even play anymore get to decide for players currently playing the game?
Totally disillusioned with the GAA. The clubs fcuked over with the season being shortened/no replays bar provincial and AI Final both failing to pass. Lunatics running the asylum.
As a former midfielder with decent hands, I'm delighted that the mark has been passed - high fielding had been basically eliminated from the game and this should bring back one of the most enjoyable aspects of football in my opinion.
Not good from a sligo perspective as we don't really have any high fielders at the moment, but good for the overall game
Mark my words, it'll not increase high fielding. In fact it will increase kick outs to the wing to the oncoming runner at chest level. It'll also slow the game down as players will always take the 5 seconds and likely pass the ball backwards from the free while the opposition sprint back into their own half. Nice ideal but in reality it won't work.
Quote from: TF15 on February 27, 2016, 02:54:27 PM
Mark my words, it'll not increase high fielding. In fact it will increase kick outs to the wing to the oncoming runner at chest level. It'll also slow the game down as players will always take the 5 seconds and likely pass the ball backwards from the free while the opposition sprint back into their own half. Nice ideal but in reality it won't work.
Time will tell, but I would think it would be relatively easy to defend against kickouts to the wings especially if they have to make it outside the 45 - I was not enjoying the cluxton style sickouts, effective yes, enjoyable no.
I hope this time next year we are all applauding the change as I think it was a necessary one. I have mentioned this many times in the past.
The other two changes I have suggested is for two refs and a time clock for all county matches
Quote from: sligoman2 on February 27, 2016, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: TF15 on February 27, 2016, 02:54:27 PM
Mark my words, it'll not increase high fielding. In fact it will increase kick outs to the wing to the oncoming runner at chest level. It'll also slow the game down as players will always take the 5 seconds and likely pass the ball backwards from the free while the opposition sprint back into their own half. Nice ideal but in reality it won't work.
Time will tell, but I would think it would be relatively easy to defend against kickouts to the wings especially if they have to make it outside the 45 - I was not enjoying the cluxton style sickouts, effective yes, enjoyable no.
I hope this time next year we are all applauding the change as I think it was a necessary one. I have mentioned this many times in the past.
The other two changes I have suggested is for two refs and a time clock for all county matches
But not in hurling... just to be clear...
Dublin get slagged off for having more money than the other counties but was Dublin proposed that all TV games be free to air. Vast majority want to keep selling our games to SKY... money grabbing shame.
Good move with the mark though, short kickout and 30 handpasses to get too halfway line is horrible stuff... rugby league
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:38:29 PM
Dublin get slagged off for having more money than the other counties but was Dublin proposed that all TV games be free to air. Vast majority want to keep selling our games to SKY... money grabbing shame.
Easy to shun the tv money when you're making cash hand over fist even without it.
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
When does the mark change come into play? This season?
How is this going to stop short kickouts? Be better with kickouts have to go beyond the 45.
Also from my viewpoint allowing sky to bid for rights is to keep a free market. They should still get rte and Irish free to air channels to buy the games but don't make it easy for them by limiting it to them
Quote from: DJGaliv on February 27, 2016, 03:51:11 PM
When does the mark change come into play? This season?
How is this going to stop short kickouts? Be better with kickouts have to go beyond the 45.
True enough but it will encourage keepers to kick to high fielders...
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:53:56 PM
Quote from: DJGaliv on February 27, 2016, 03:51:11 PM
When does the mark change come into play? This season?
How is this going to stop short kickouts? Be better with kickouts have to go beyond the 45.
True enough but it will encourage keepers to kick to high fielders...
To be fair I think that the days of high fielders are gone. This will suit a fast wing forward coming out wide to collect the kickout into his chest rather than an open looping high fielding contest that's long gone.
Possession is king, risking 50/50 or even 60/40 high kickouts are rare. I don't know how this can be stopped
this'll bring back the high fielders :)
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:59:38 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Irish people? All of them? Surely they're responsible for people involved in the G.A.A. only. Does someone who never attends a game and moans about not being able to see them all rank as high as kids who require a coach or a ground that requires floodlights?
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:59:38 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Irish people? All of them? Surely they're responsible for people involved in the G.A.A. only. Does someone who never attends a game and moans about not being able to see them all rank as high as kids who require a coach or a ground that requires floodlights?
Kids who require a coach? You for real... paid coaches? :o im thinking many GAA people who cant afford SKY as well as elderly and those kids...
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 04:05:59 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:59:38 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Irish people? All of them? Surely they're responsible for people involved in the G.A.A. only. Does someone who never attends a game and moans about not being able to see them all rank as high as kids who require a coach or a ground that requires floodlights?
Kids who require a coach? You for real... paid coaches? :o im thinking many GAA people who cant afford SKY as well as elderly and those kids...
Yes, there are many paid coaches. What do you find odd about that? GAA people that can't afford Sky get to watch the vast majority of the games that are broadcast. And wait for it, there are many games that aren't shown on any platform. How should these people be compensated?
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:12:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 04:05:59 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:59:38 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Irish people? All of them? Surely they're responsible for people involved in the G.A.A. only. Does someone who never attends a game and moans about not being able to see them all rank as high as kids who require a coach or a ground that requires floodlights?
Kids who require a coach? You for real... paid coaches? :o im thinking many GAA people who cant afford SKY as well as elderly and those kids...
Yes, there are many paid coaches. What do you find odd about that? GAA people that can't afford Sky get to watch the vast majority of the games that are broadcast. And wait for it, there are many games that aren't shown on any platform. How should these people be compensated?
True there are many filling their pockets in GAA doing what used to be done voluntarily... I didn't ask anyone get compensated but is galling to watch our games being sold to Rupert Murdock...
The Gaa is losing it's soul. The rules they had 20, 30, 40 years ago were perfectly acceptable. That was the game like it or lump it. Now we are pandering to the media and every Tom Dick and Harry . Time to wise up !
Sky is the least of our worries coming out of this congress.
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 04:18:28 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:12:30 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 04:05:59 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 04:02:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:59:38 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on February 27, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 03:47:13 PM
and leave thousands of people here with no access to games while SKY figures are minimal?... money grabbing shower of...
Wasn't the difference between Sky's bid and TV3's bid minimal? And where is the money going to? I thought the "money-grabbing" remarks had left this board.
when GAA puts money above the interests of Irish people the remarks will be on the board...
Irish people? All of them? Surely they're responsible for people involved in the G.A.A. only. Does someone who never attends a game and moans about not being able to see them all rank as high as kids who require a coach or a ground that requires floodlights?
Kids who require a coach? You for real... paid coaches? :o im thinking many GAA people who cant afford SKY as well as elderly and those kids...
Yes, there are many paid coaches. What do you find odd about that? GAA people that can't afford Sky get to watch the vast majority of the games that are broadcast. And wait for it, there are many games that aren't shown on any platform. How should these people be compensated?
True there are many filling their pockets in GAA doing what used to be done voluntarily... I didn't ask anyone get compensated but is galling to watch our games being sold to Rupert Murdock...
The GAA is making no more money after selling the FTA TV3 package to subscription channel Sky.
In fact, didn't TV3 offer a bit more than Sky?
It is a totally redundant argument to defend the GAA doing a deal with Sky on the grounds that it has an added financial benefit.
Had the Dublin motion been passed, then TV3 would in all likelihood purchase the package and all the pundits and commentators that Sky took from TV3 would return to TV3.
One of the more progressive motions was denied.
Just saw that motion trying to move all Ireland forward by two weeks was rejected as it was six or so votes short of a two thirds majority
Galway apparently voted against it, a county where the club championship drags onto learly November and where they don't have provincial opposition in club hurling. They should not have been allowed to vote.
Some other eejit from Cork declared that September is Gaelic games month in Ireland
yeah it is two fiffin games in a month and up to four weeks apart from the semi finals
You cannot make this shit up unreal
An awful lot of people got out the wrong side of the bed this morning ::)
Ye all from Castle bar?
As for the lad that wants the rules from 30 years ago kept..... :-[
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
Surely it is only for the kickout?
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
Surely it is only for the kickout?
It is Muppet but don't be spoiling the indignant folks' moanfest
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
Surely it is only for the kickout?
For now until some TV pundit decides it should be implemented in open play !
Quote from: Rossfan on February 27, 2016, 05:33:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
Surely it is only for the kickout?
It is Muppet but don't be spoiling the indignant folks' moanfest
We couldn't catch a cold in the middle so it won't effect us at all.
Quote from: ha ha derry on February 27, 2016, 04:44:40 PM
The Gaa is losing it's soul. The rules they had 20, 30, 40 years ago were perfectly acceptable. That was the game like it or lump it. Now we are pandering to the media and every Tom Dick and Harry . Time to wise up !
...every Joe, Pat and Colm
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 27, 2016, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
What happens if the ball doesn't carry past the 45m line?
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 27, 2016, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
Closer to 2003 than 2013 I think.
Does Cluxton keep his kick outs short or change it ?
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 07:52:34 PM
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 27, 2016, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
What happens if the ball doesn't carry past the 45m line?
they just play on :-\ jees man it's not complicated
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 07:52:34 PM
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 27, 2016, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
What happens if the ball doesn't carry past the 45m line?
they just play on :-\ jees man it's not complicated
Eh......
Ok I'll bite.
So I kick the ball to my corner back, it doesn't make the 45m line, and you say we 'just play on'?
So what has changed?
The sooner Conor Deegan sets up a club Version of the GPA the better!!!!
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 09:46:06 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 27, 2016, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 07:52:34 PM
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 27, 2016, 07:49:38 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 27, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 27, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
The mark is passed. Aussie Rules is now our national game.
when was it even trialed at adult level?
I mean, come on?
this is ridiculous
In the league a couple of years ago, 2013? Years flying I've lost track :-\
What happens if the ball doesn't carry past the 45m line?
they just play on :-\ jees man it's not complicated
Eh......
Ok I'll bite.
So I kick the ball to my corner back, it doesn't make the 45m line, and you say we 'just play on'?
So what has changed?
if a player catches it beyond the 45 and lands and three men sit on him he doesn't get a free against him for overcarrying... also it may encourage long kickouts again...
Here is a report on the new rule: https://www.newstalk.com/GAA-Congress-passes-motion-to-introduce-the-mark (https://www.newstalk.com/GAA-Congress-passes-motion-to-introduce-the-mark)
"When a player catches the ball cleanly from a kick-out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the kick-out point, he shall be awarded a 'Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b) Playing on immediately".
If the player chooses to take the free kick, then the referee will allow the player five seconds to take a free kick, and opposing players must retreat 10 metres to allow the player space to take the kick.
I see now that it is simply an incentive for a player who catches it, rather than a rule forcing keepers to kick long.
Quote from: muppet on February 27, 2016, 09:55:20 PM
Here is a report on the new rule: https://www.newstalk.com/GAA-Congress-passes-motion-to-introduce-the-mark (https://www.newstalk.com/GAA-Congress-passes-motion-to-introduce-the-mark)
"When a player catches the ball cleanly from a kick-out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the kick-out point, he shall be awarded a 'Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b) Playing on immediately".
If the player chooses to take the free kick, then the referee will allow the player five seconds to take a free kick, and opposing players must retreat 10 metres to allow the player space to take the kick.
I see now that it is simply an incentive for a player who catches it, rather than a rule forcing keepers to kick long.
aye won't force long kickouts but may encourage it. Don't panic we'll still have the 10 metre kickouts.... indoor soccer style
Quote from: Mayo4Sam14 on February 27, 2016, 08:19:39 PM
Does Cluxton keep his kick outs short or change it ?
His kick outs generally go beyond the 45 but he tends to put them wide where there is space for a man to run into.
Quote from: tiempo on February 27, 2016, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: TF15 on February 27, 2016, 12:55:41 PM
The mark passed for kick outs caught - without the ball touching the ground - past the 45. Not even a trial????? Holy fcuk what is going on down there.
Disgusting.
Cue training of impeeding the best high fielders in the country as they begin their run up to catch a high ball.
The old maxim if its not broke don't fix it...
Let me guess. Not implemented in hurling...
And this comes into effect immediately?
Competitions already underway being played under two different set of rules?
q
Why in under god would anyone want a mark in hurling? I can only hope you meant the age group changes, which honestly doesn't make sense other than the men in Croke Park knew they would get it passed with the help of the hurling counties provided it didn't affect them
A lot of hysteria about the mark... won't make that big a difference if teams are determined to keep the short kickouts. Sounds like a good innovation to me.
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What a remarkable command of the English language!
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
I say, what a fine contribution (in posh accent)
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
The blanket defence has absolutely nothing to do with players getting bottled up in the middle of the field from a kickout.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Wait til you see what this joke of a rule brings in. I can see in the dying minutes of games a team winning a kick out, calling the mark, stopping, turning around and passing it backwards. Lovely football! ::)
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Wait til you see what this joke of a rule brings in. I can see in the dying minutes of games a team winning a kick out, calling the mark, stopping, turning around and passing it backwards. Lovely football! ::)
If you win a kick-out getting the ball from the goal past the 45 to your team-mates hands is hardly without skill.
I don't think it'll make much difference. I was all for it ten years ago when Tyrone (for example) had five men waiting to tackle a high-fielder. This happens less often and I think it's fine to reward a well place kick and a well timed run, together with catching ability.
Once it's not a lead in to it being used elsewhere I don't mind it at all..............in theory.
I would have preferred for it to be compulsory for the ball to travel 45m from a kick out but the mark is a start. As someone who loved playing midfield the joy has gone out of it the last 10 years and this will hopefully restore it!!
What a bundle of eejits
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Wait til you see what this joke of a rule brings in. I can see in the dying minutes of games a team winning a kick out, calling the mark, stopping, turning around and passing it backwards. Lovely football! ::)
the other team will have an extra outfield player to try and stop that.
come back and let us know the first time that trick works
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 28, 2016, 11:12:34 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Wait til you see what this joke of a rule brings in. I can see in the dying minutes of games a team winning a kick out, calling the mark, stopping, turning around and passing it backwards. Lovely football! ::)
the other team will have an extra outfield player to try and stop that.
come back and let us know the first time that trick works
You obviously haven't watched a game of football in the last 15 years
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 11:22:02 AM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 28, 2016, 11:12:34 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 28, 2016, 03:53:35 AM
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:20:15 AM
The mark is f**king stupid. What a shower of f**king plonkers. I guarantee you will see no more or less high fielding. And on the odd occasion you do, it will be because some f**king overgrown 7ft f**king ogre has been recruited for the sole purpose of catching a ball and winning a free/possession. No doubt with about as much footballing ability as a f**king cow.
The real beauty of fielding a ball wasn't just the high catching, it was what the fielder did next, be that set up a team mate off the shoulder, turn and set up a quick attack with a quick ball, go on an attacking solo run etc.
Jarlath Burns I hope you're happy. You've helped pave the way for stop start football. I f**king really resent this utterly stupid f**king decision. f**king morons.
What he usually did next was absolutely nothing because he was bottled up by a blanket defence.
Wait til you see what this joke of a rule brings in. I can see in the dying minutes of games a team winning a kick out, calling the mark, stopping, turning around and passing it backwards. Lovely football! ::)
the other team will have an extra outfield player to try and stop that.
come back and let us know the first time that trick works
You obviously haven't watched a game of football in the last 15 years
If a team is hanging onto the lead in the dying minutes, the goalie has the cojones to take the risk to kick it out long and the midfielder fields the ball for a mark? that's what it's all about.
It would be nice if this mark rule works and effects a change. At least it rewards the midfielder who does manage to make the mark despite a windmill of hands trying to to slap the ball away from his outstretched hands. For it to effect a change, then ban the slap and just have players competing to field the ball from the kick out.
Quote from: rrhf on February 28, 2016, 10:55:43 AM
What a bundle of eejits
Exactly, why can't they wait and see how it pans out first before coming on here and slamming it before it has even begun. Clowns
Quote from: redzone on February 28, 2016, 12:09:54 PM
Quote from: rrhf on February 28, 2016, 10:55:43 AM
What a bundle of eejits
Exactly, why can't they wait and see how it pans out first before coming on here and slamming it before it has even begun. Clowns
Slamming it because it's f**king stupid
Congress coming up with new rules to highlight my inability to kick the ball out accurately to the left. Thanks lads!
Quote from: general_lee on February 28, 2016, 12:18:02 PM
Quote from: redzone on February 28, 2016, 12:09:54 PM
Quote from: rrhf on February 28, 2016, 10:55:43 AM
What a bundle of eejits
Exactly, why can't they wait and see how it pans out first before coming on here and slamming it before it has even begun. Clowns
Slamming it because it's f**king stupid
Lets give it a go and if it's shite we will get rid of it. Quit being judgemental
Given that this fairly fundamental change, are they not going to trial the mark first? I don't like the idea of essentially getting a free kick for performing a skill of the game. Also, maybe I missed it but id like to think that I keep fairly up to date with GAA matters and I didn't know this rule was even up for debate.
Yeah I look forward to future rule changes rewarding a 20 yard punt pass and sure maybe we could introduce some thing for a block tackle and fancy flicks etc ::) cos doing so will encourage those things to happen more
Jarlath burns said we were sleepwalking in to losing an important skill of the game.........there is a lot more important sleepwalking going on......not sleeping at the till however!!!
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
It also introduces yet another break in play, Joe McQuillan will be choking on his whistle if this gets any worse.
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
You have it there! The Mark will slow down the game, Will be used still for short kick outs and give the advantage to the team doing the kick out.
Quote from: screenexile on February 28, 2016, 10:53:22 AM
I would have preferred for it to be compulsory for the ball to travel 45m from a kick out but the mark is a start. As someone who loved playing midfield the joy has gone out of it the last 10 years and this will hopefully restore it!!
waste of time - ball is broken anyway. will lead to short kickouts and more of them.
rules are fine as they are
Watched a minor league game recently trialling these bullshit rules plus kicking the ball after 3 handpasses- led to a lot of 2 yard kick passes.
What a crock of shit
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
Well if they're idiots, so are you. And for that matter, so is anyone who has identified the mark as a solution, as in doing so it requires a complete absence of thought about what the problem is.
I'll keep it short here, but the reason why the mark works in Aussie Rules is because the alternative to not winning a mark is dismal; if you drop the ball or allow it to bounce, you will get unmercifully emptied. The free kick earned is only a secondary benefit, and a distant second at that.
In Gaelic Games the true advantage will always be in winning possession in such a way that it takes your direct opponent out of this phase of play, thereby creating a numeric advantage. The mark is the antithesis of this concept and will not work.
Unfortunately the GAA is full of prize clampets - and I'm including you here - who just can't work this out.
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 07:54:48 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
You have it there! The Mark will slow down the game, Will be used still for short kick outs and give the advantage to the team doing the kick out.
How can the mark be used for short kick outs?
Quote from: thewobbler on February 28, 2016, 08:10:31 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
Well if they're idiots, so are you. And for that matter, so is anyone who has identified the mark as a solution, as in doing so it requires a complete absence of thought about what the problem is.
I'll keep it short here, but the reason why the mark works in Aussie Rules is because the alternative to not winning a mark is dismal; if you drop the ball or allow it to bounce, you will get unmercifully emptied. The free kick earned is only a secondary benefit, and a distant second at that.
In Gaelic Games the true advantage will always be in winning possession in such a way that it takes your direct opponent out of this phase of play, thereby creating a numeric advantage. The mark is the antithesis of this concept and will not work.
Unfortunately the GAA is full of prize clampets - and I'm including you here - who just can't work this out.
Your talking through your f**king ass. A free shot at goal under no pressure is a distant benefit in Aussie Rules?
"winning possession in such a way/ numeric advantage/ direct opponent" you've been listening to way too much Off the ball. I'd say you thought you were a really clever fcuker writing that.
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 08:34:25 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on February 28, 2016, 08:10:31 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
Well if they're idiots, so are you. And for that matter, so is anyone who has identified the mark as a solution, as in doing so it requires a complete absence of thought about what the problem is.
I'll keep it short here, but the reason why the mark works in Aussie Rules is because the alternative to not winning a mark is dismal; if you drop the ball or allow it to bounce, you will get unmercifully emptied. The free kick earned is only a secondary benefit, and a distant second at that.
In Gaelic Games the true advantage will always be in winning possession in such a way that it takes your direct opponent out of this phase of play, thereby creating a numeric advantage. The mark is the antithesis of this concept and will not work.
Unfortunately the GAA is full of prize clampets - and I'm including you here - who just can't work this out.
Your talking through your f**king ass. A free shot at goal under no pressure is a distant benefit in Aussie Rules?
"winning possession in such a way/ numeric advantage/ direct opponent" you've been listening to way too much Off the ball. I'd say you thought you were a really clever fcuker writing that.
just keep burying your head in the sand you twit. Maybe you'll burrow your way back to the 1970s and revel in the bliss of watching turgid football sprinkled with uncontested high catches.
Given the choice between Eoghan O'Gara taking a free shot from 30m, and Eoghan O'Gara slipping the ball off to Diarmaid Connolly who is motoring off his shoulder, which one is any sane man going to take?
In the same play in Oz, O'Gara's face is on the ground before he can move the ball into a hand passing position. That's why it's of fundamental to their game, even though not one teammate of O Gara ever wants to see him kicking a free.
Quote from: thewobbler on February 28, 2016, 09:03:47 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 08:34:25 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on February 28, 2016, 08:10:31 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 28, 2016, 07:43:10 PM
The presence of the mark will drive the game further into a short kick-out strategy, that is guaranteed. Tyrone under Harte have not played with high-fielding midfielders and any incentive for us to kick long is now completely removed as more than likely we'll be facing superior fielders out the pitch.
I'd say you'll see 90% of top level teams see a long kickout strategy as too much of a lottery with the mark and within 10 years the short kickout game of Tyrone, Monaghan and Donegal will be a mainstay of Intercounty and club tactics.
If you wanted fielding all kickouts should have been made to travel 45m. That was the way to promote fielding, the top brass really are f**king idiots.
Well if they're idiots, so are you. And for that matter, so is anyone who has identified the mark as a solution, as in doing so it requires a complete absence of thought about what the problem is.
I'll keep it short here, but the reason why the mark works in Aussie Rules is because the alternative to not winning a mark is dismal; if you drop the ball or allow it to bounce, you will get unmercifully emptied. The free kick earned is only a secondary benefit, and a distant second at that.
In Gaelic Games the true advantage will always be in winning possession in such a way that it takes your direct opponent out of this phase of play, thereby creating a numeric advantage. The mark is the antithesis of this concept and will not work.
Unfortunately the GAA is full of prize clampets - and I'm including you here - who just can't work this out.
Your talking through your f**king ass. A free shot at goal under no pressure is a distant benefit in Aussie Rules?
"winning possession in such a way/ numeric advantage/ direct opponent" you've been listening to way too much Off the ball. I'd say you thought you were a really clever fcuker writing that.
just keep burying your head in the sand you twit. Maybe you'll burrow your way back to the 1970s and revel in the bliss of watching turgid football sprinkled with uncontested high catches.
Given the choice between Eoghan O'Gara taking a free shot from 30m, and Eoghan O'Gara slipping the ball off to Diarmaid Connolly who is motoring off his shoulder, which one is any sane man going to take?
In the same play in Oz, O'Gara's face is on the ground before he can move the ball into a hand passing position. That's why it's of fundamental to their game, even though not one teammate of O Gara ever wants to see him kicking a free.
It'll take one hell of a kick out from cluxton to give O'Gara a mark 30m from goal!!!
Re the Mark.
What happens if an opponent catches the ball, do they get a mark, which in all intense purposes is a free kick 45M from goal?
Quote from: johnneycool on February 29, 2016, 09:31:04 AM
Re the Mark.
What happens if an opponent catches the ball, do they get a mark, which in all intense purposes is a free kick 45M from goal?
Was just about to ask that :) I presume it's worded such that the mark is only awarded to a player on the team taking the kickout.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 29, 2016, 09:32:29 AM
Quote from: johnneycool on February 29, 2016, 09:31:04 AM
Re the Mark.
What happens if an opponent catches the ball, do they get a mark, which in all intense purposes is a free kick 45M from goal?
Was just about to ask that :) I presume it's worded such that the mark is only awarded to a player on the team taking the kickout.
Surely not?
I assumed it was open season. If not then that minimises further the chance of a catch as the opposition will be uber breaking everything
"A player" is the wording isn't it.
If you catch the opposition kick out wouldn't you be even more entitled to a mark
IF YOU CHOOSE TO CLAIM IT.
You can choose to play on too - which seems to be lost on the angry brigade here who obviously never even read the feckin motion.
But you can't be tackled in your first four steps?
It'll take a black card rewrite to include the obvious cynicism of tackling to not allow the catcher to drive down the centre at you.
It strikes me that the risk/reward ratio is too weighted on the risk if that's the case. Giving someone like David Moran a 50 metre free kick at your goals if he wins the kickout, or even a chance to take a quick free, would not be a sustainable approach. If that is the rule, and the wording seems that it certainly can be interpreted that way, then I can't see many people taking the risk of the long kickout.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 29, 2016, 09:56:54 AM
It strikes me that the risk/reward ratio is too weighted on the risk if that's the case. Giving someone like David Moran a 50 metre free kick at your goals if he wins the kickout, or even a chance to take a quick free, would not be a sustainable approach. If that is the rule, and the wording seems that it certainly can be interpreted that way, then I can't see many people taking the risk of the long kickout.
The counter to that is that if the mark was only available to the team taking the kick out, there would be ZERO incentive for the other team to try to catch the ball. The only thing any 'defending' team would do in this case is break the ball, resulting in even less high fielding than there is at the moment!
At least if two fellas are trying to catch the ball then there is a chance one of them might. If one fella is trying to catch it and the other fella is only trying to ensure that it's not caught then there is more chance of no mark being made.
To be honest, I can see flaws with any variation of the mark and IMO that is why it should have been properly trialled before being adopted by congress.
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Yeah, i agree with Mickey there.
I certainly dont think this rule change will have the effect that is intended.
To not properly trial it was crazy.
The only feasible way this will work will be a mobile midfielder, running onto a directed kickout taking it chest high. No team is going to risk sticking the ball into the air and conceding a free kick 45m out.
Also, I'm genuinely a bit unclear about how this is going to work logistically. For example, if a player runs onto the kick out jumps outside the 45m but lands inside it.....is his possession measured by where he takes off? Is it where he catches the ball (so the ref will have to judge where possession is gained perhaps whilst the player is mid air), Is it where he lands? What if possession is fumbled on landing? At what point is it deemed a clean catch? Does the ref blow his whistle to indicated the mark is an option? Can a player score directly from the resulting free kick?
If you do take it clean, 5 seconds isnt much to getup, set yourself and have a shot at goal (if within range)
When do the changes take effect?
Don't understand the hysteria here regarding the mark. Don't think it'll be detrimental to the game.
I would consider the rejection to bring the AI finals forward by 2 weeks should have garnered more attention. I fail to see why anyone could argue against it. Would free up more time for club football.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:39:16 AM
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Yeah, i agree with Mickey there.
I certainly dont think this rule change will have the effect that is intended.
To not properly trial it was crazy.
Nail on the head from MH. An utter pile of shite.
Quote from: donelli on February 29, 2016, 01:39:10 PM
Don't understand the hysteria here regarding the mark. Don't think it'll be detrimental to the game.
I would consider the rejection to bring the AI finals forward by 2 weeks should have garnered more attention. I fail to see why anyone could argue against it. Would free up more time for club football.
I agree with you there.
What was the rationale for rejecting that one?
Quote from: general_lee on February 29, 2016, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:39:16 AM
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Yeah, i agree with Mickey there.
I certainly dont think this rule change will have the effect that is intended.
To not properly trial it was crazy.
Nail on the head from MH. An utter pile of shite.
And the dreary steeples people reject change........
Quote from: Rossfan on February 29, 2016, 02:05:01 PM
Quote from: general_lee on February 29, 2016, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:39:16 AM
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Yeah, i agree with Mickey there.
I certainly dont think this rule change will have the effect that is intended.
To not properly trial it was crazy.
Nail on the head from MH. An utter pile of shite.
And the dreary steeples people reject change........
No - trial it and then make a decision based on the trial instead of guessing that this will improve high catching
Quote from: Rossfan on February 29, 2016, 02:05:01 PM
Quote from: general_lee on February 29, 2016, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:39:16 AM
Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2016, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: tiempo on February 28, 2016, 07:58:37 PM
Mickey Harte's take on it
https://vimeo.com/157031439
3:33 if you want to cut to the chase! Mickey hits the nail on the head!
Yeah, i agree with Mickey there.
I certainly dont think this rule change will have the effect that is intended.
To not properly trial it was crazy.
Nail on the head from MH. An utter pile of shite.
And the dreary steeples people reject change........
I reject stupid f**king baseless decisions that make absolutely no sense.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:59:07 AM
When do the changes take effect?
does anyone know when the changes come in?
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:59:07 AM
When do the changes take effect?
does anyone know when the changes come in?
2016 Championship I think. Also, wasn't the mark trialled a few years ago, 2013 I think?
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 29, 2016, 03:04:45 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:59:07 AM
When do the changes take effect?
does anyone know when the changes come in?
2016 Championship I think. Also, wasn't the mark trialled a few years ago, 2013 I think?
So when does it come in for clubs?
Just for the championship?
or from the start of this years club season?
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 03:47:54 PM
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 29, 2016, 03:04:45 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:59:07 AM
When do the changes take effect?
does anyone know when the changes come in?
2016 Championship I think. Also, wasn't the mark trialled a few years ago, 2013 I think?
So when does it come in for clubs?
Just for the championship?
or from the start of this years club season?
All referees are to be called in and trained in the application of the new ruling...........
No wait,
They're just going to wing it along as usual!
I see that the championship revamp was taken off the table before congress.
I also see that Roscommon had a motion in regarding the restructuring of the championship. Was that also removed?
No. Roscommon and Carlow both had motions defeated.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 29, 2016, 03:55:54 PM
No. Roscommon and Carlow both had motions defeated.
I think I heard one of them got quite close to being passed. Do you know which one it is and what it entailed?
Roscommon got 20%, Carlow got 40%. Neither really within an asses roar.
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
+1.
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
Yes but back in 2010 there wasn't as many teams taking short kick outs. What you are describing is irrelevant if the rule makes it even less likely that a team will kick the ball out as the risk is giving away a free kick within shooting distance!
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
You may not score from a marked free kick
Large ball winning mf are far far from lads who are well capable of spraying it about usually. What the mark also ensures is that if a team loses possession at mf, they'll have an extra couple of seconds to draw their team from the break at mf into defensive formation in thier 45. 5 seconds of a break in play is ample time to drop from midfield to within your own 45.
Quote from: trileacman on March 01, 2016, 12:03:19 AM
Large ball winning mf are far far from lads who are well capable of spraying it about usually. What the mark also ensures is that if a team loses possession at mf, they'll have an extra couple of seconds to draw their team from the break at mf into defensive formation in thier 45. 5 seconds of a break in play is ample time to drop from midfield to within your own 45.
How in god's name will a team have EXTRA time to drop players back? If a player catches a mark, he has a MAXIMUM of 5 seconds to take the free. He also has the option of taking the kick straight away or of playing on with no-one allowed tackle him for 4 steps!
Quote from: DuffleKing on February 29, 2016, 11:46:46 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
You may not score from a marked free kick
Doesn't say that in the rule just voted on;
(a) A Free Kick
The player shall signify to the Referee that he is availing of and then take the free kick himself from the hand from the point where he was awarded the 'Mark'.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark' the Referee will allow up to five seconds for the player to take the kick. If the player delays longer than five seconds the Referee will cancel the 'Mark' and throw in the ball between a player from each side.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark', the opposing players must retreat 10m to allow the player space to take the kick. If an opposition player deliberately blocks or attempts to block the kick within 10m, or if an opposition player impedes the player while he is taking the kick, the Referee shall penalise the opposition by bringing the ball forward 13m.
If the Referee determines that the player who makes the 'Mark' has been injured in the process and is unable to take the kick,
the Referee shall direct the Player's nearest team mate to take the kick but he may not score directly from the kick.The only time you can't score from a mark is when the person who actually made the mark is injured and a team mate is designated to take it. I'd presume from that part of the rule that you are indeed able to score from a mark provided you're the one who made the mark in the first place.
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
Jesus lads you'd be doing well to score directly from a mark!!
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Quote from: DuffleKing on February 29, 2016, 11:46:46 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
You may not score from a marked free kick
You can score from a mark directly but only if the guy claiming the catch takes the kick. So basically there is one player in Ireland who with any regularity is capable of catching a ball clean in a crowded midfield and kicking it over the bar from beyond 45m. And even Bryan Sheehan isn't that great at clean catching.
The mark worked in the NFL in 2010, the game was better to watch, but as I said above, if teams simply use it to play the ball backwards it will become a horrible scourge.
But currently you have a crowded midfield: Lets say Dublin v Mayo. If a Dublin midfielder catches the ball his teammates in the area must remain there because he is being swarmed by Mayo players and may lose possession. So the other Dublin players must remain to tackle the Mayo player if he turns the ball over.
With the mark: The Dublin player catches clean. All other Dublin players in the midfield area can now move away instantly (hopefully forward), and forwards can start running because they know the possession is assured and can not be taken away and also that their player will have a free space to place a pass. In addition they know they have to sprint to their new positions because their midfielder has only 3-4 seconds to deliver the ball.
Surely this is better than midfield scrums that we see now, with referees guessing which way to award a free?
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 01, 2016, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on February 29, 2016, 11:46:46 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
You may not score from a marked free kick
You can score from a mark directly but only if the guy claiming the catch takes the kick. So basically there is one player in Ireland who with any regularity is capable of catching a ball clean in a crowded midfield and kicking it over the bar from beyond 45m. And even Bryan Sheehan isn't that great at clean catching.
The mark worked in the NFL in 2010, the game was better to watch, but as I said above, if teams simply use it to play the ball backwards it will become a horrible scourge.
But currently you have a crowded midfield: Lets say Dublin v Mayo. If a Dublin midfielder catches the ball his teammates in the area must remain there because he is being swarmed by Mayo players and may lose possession. So the other Dublin players must remain to tackle the Mayo player if he turns the ball over.
With the mark: The Dublin player catches clean. All other Dublin players in the midfield area can now move away instantly (hopefully forward), and forwards can start running because they know the possession is assured and can not be taken away and also that their player will have a free space to place a pass. In addition they know they have to sprint to their new positions because their midfielder has only 3-4 seconds to deliver the ball.
Surely this is better than midfield scrums that we see now, with referees guessing which way to award a free?
I agree.
It isn't a fix all solution to stop every goalkeeping taking short kick outs, but at least there is now more of an incentive to kick long to midfield.
It has always and ever been the case that teams without good fielders in midfield would take short kick outs and that wont change. But at least now the teams with good fielders will be rewarded if they kick long.
Quote from: screenexile on March 01, 2016, 09:28:32 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
Jesus lads you'd be doing well to score directly from a mark!!
Just outside the 45m line, free kick, ball in hand? There's quite a few lads would fancy that.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 03:47:54 PM
Quote from: mayo.mick on February 29, 2016, 03:04:45 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on February 29, 2016, 11:59:07 AM
When do the changes take effect?
does anyone know when the changes come in?
2016 Championship I think. Also, wasn't the mark trialled a few years ago, 2013 I think?
It's coming in in Ulster on 1st May but 1/1/17 for the rest.
So when does it come in for clubs?
Just for the championship?
or from the start of this years club season?
Quote from: westbound on March 01, 2016, 10:02:54 AM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 01, 2016, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on February 29, 2016, 11:46:46 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on February 29, 2016, 06:23:39 PM
I disagree with almost all the dissenters about the mark between 45's - I saw this in the National League in 2010. I thought it worked great. Then it was dropped without fair consideration. Personally I thought it speeded up games.
My theory/observations on the mark in 2010:
1. Currently if a player catches and is fouled it is a free and the game stops anyway (so no change there)
2. Currently if a player catches and is then swarmed the momentum is lost and the play is slowed down
3. With the mark if a catch is made the free is automatically awarded. The player can take it quick so no need to stop play at all. The net effect is really just making opposition players clear away (thus no swarming and slowing down play)
4. If the player is swarmed and prevented from taking it quick then the free is automatically brought forward to what will be then a likely point-scoring position.
5. The whole advantage of the mark is to have the ball in hand with a a clear opportunity to kick pass fast into teh forwards
Perhaps to ensure its aim some supplemental rule could be added:
If the player accepts the free then he must only kick pass forward, not back
You may not score from a marked free kick
You can score from a mark directly but only if the guy claiming the catch takes the kick. So basically there is one player in Ireland who with any regularity is capable of catching a ball clean in a crowded midfield and kicking it over the bar from beyond 45m. And even Bryan Sheehan isn't that great at clean catching.
The mark worked in the NFL in 2010, the game was better to watch, but as I said above, if teams simply use it to play the ball backwards it will become a horrible scourge.
But currently you have a crowded midfield: Lets say Dublin v Mayo. If a Dublin midfielder catches the ball his teammates in the area must remain there because he is being swarmed by Mayo players and may lose possession. So the other Dublin players must remain to tackle the Mayo player if he turns the ball over.
With the mark: The Dublin player catches clean. All other Dublin players in the midfield area can now move away instantly (hopefully forward), and forwards can start running because they know the possession is assured and can not be taken away and also that their player will have a free space to place a pass. In addition they know they have to sprint to their new positions because their midfielder has only 3-4 seconds to deliver the ball.
Surely this is better than midfield scrums that we see now, with referees guessing which way to award a free?
I agree.
It isn't a fix all solution to stop every goalkeeping taking short kick outs, but at least there is now more of an incentive to kick long to midfield.
It has always and ever been the case that teams without good fielders in midfield would take short kick outs and that wont change. But at least now the teams with good fielders will be rewarded if they kick long.
and what will the other team do on their kick outs?
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 01, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Yes, but potentially a guy has clean possession, 45m out with 5 seconds to decide what to do with it. That's potentially a dangerous enough scenario to emerge from your own kick out. Teams won't risk it as the risk to kicking long is now greater than before.
The only time this mark will work is when a mobile half forward / midfielder runs onto a precision chest high kick out. I would suggest it will have little impact on the amount of high catches that take place in an average game. I think it will become the biggest red herring in the rule book since they tried to enforce the closed hand fist pass a few years ago.
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 01, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Yes, but potentially a guy has clean possession, 45m out with 5 seconds to decide what to do with it. That's a dangerous enough scenario to emerge from your own kick out.
The only time this mark will work is when a mobile half forward / midfielder runs onto a precision chest high kick out. I would suggest it will have little impact on the amount of high catches that take place in an average game. I think it will become the biggest red herring in the rule book since they tried to enforce the closed hand fist pass a few years ago.
The well struck kick out, taken say from the 13m line, is caught on the 65m - 70m.
Player with the mark decides to take 4 huge leaps and makes 5m with each leap and ends up on the 45m line, from where he kick the ball over the bar. That would be a sight to behold, Cuchulain like.
Who knows how it might play out, for example Down v Kerry James O'Donoghue had taken 10 steps with the ball before Marty Duffy could count to 4.
The blame for the changes lie with the likes of Jimmy McGuinnes and Mickey Harte who have ruined Gaelic football at county level as a spectacle... the other clowns then copied them
Quote from: Main Street on March 01, 2016, 10:45:33 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 01, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Yes, but potentially a guy has clean possession, 45m out with 5 seconds to decide what to do with it. That's a dangerous enough scenario to emerge from your own kick out.
The only time this mark will work is when a mobile half forward / midfielder runs onto a precision chest high kick out. I would suggest it will have little impact on the amount of high catches that take place in an average game. I think it will become the biggest red herring in the rule book since they tried to enforce the closed hand fist pass a few years ago.
The well struck kick out, taken say from the 13m line, is caught on the 65m - 70m.
Player with the mark decides to take 4 huge leaps and makes 5m with each leap and ends up on the 45m line, from where he kick the ball over the bar. That would be a sight to behold, Cuchulain like.
Who knows how it might play out, for example Down v Kerry James O'Donoghue had taken 10 steps with the ball before Marty Duffy could count to 4.
:D Ok fair enough! So the player has possession 55-60 yards out and has an uncontested 5 seconds to pick a pass. I'd still say that's dangerous enough and in an era where most teams are fairly risk adverse, I cant imagine too many balls dropping high onto the 65m line! Like I said, the only use of this will be directed kick outs to chest - not high catches.
It has to be decided by central Council as to when to impement the mark. i would say 2017
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:53:41 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 01, 2016, 10:45:33 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 01, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Yes, but potentially a guy has clean possession, 45m out with 5 seconds to decide what to do with it. That's a dangerous enough scenario to emerge from your own kick out.
The only time this mark will work is when a mobile half forward / midfielder runs onto a precision chest high kick out. I would suggest it will have little impact on the amount of high catches that take place in an average game. I think it will become the biggest red herring in the rule book since they tried to enforce the closed hand fist pass a few years ago.
The well struck kick out, taken say from the 13m line, is caught on the 65m - 70m.
Player with the mark decides to take 4 huge leaps and makes 5m with each leap and ends up on the 45m line, from where he kick the ball over the bar. That would be a sight to behold, Cuchulain like.
Who knows how it might play out, for example Down v Kerry James O'Donoghue had taken 10 steps with the ball before Marty Duffy could count to 4.
:D Ok fair enough! So the player has possession 55-60 yards out and has an uncontested 5 seconds to pick a pass. I'd still say that's dangerous enough and in an era where most teams are fairly risk adverse, I cant imagine too many balls dropping high onto the 65m line! Like I said, the only use of this will be directed kick outs to chest - not high catches.
Where are you getting the five seconds from?
Quote from: Esmarelda on March 01, 2016, 05:16:20 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:53:41 AM
Quote from: Main Street on March 01, 2016, 10:45:33 AM
Quote from: BennyHarp on March 01, 2016, 10:36:01 AM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 01, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 01, 2016, 09:23:43 AM
Confusion here as I heard Congress reporters say over the weekend that you cannot score, but you're right looking at that wording. Maybe I dreamt it but I thought I heard Dara O'Se say the same.
The reality is though, there will be very few scores from marked free kicks.The will all be at least 45m out and the kicker will only have 5 seconds to take the kick
Yes, but potentially a guy has clean possession, 45m out with 5 seconds to decide what to do with it. That's a dangerous enough scenario to emerge from your own kick out.
The only time this mark will work is when a mobile half forward / midfielder runs onto a precision chest high kick out. I would suggest it will have little impact on the amount of high catches that take place in an average game. I think it will become the biggest red herring in the rule book since they tried to enforce the closed hand fist pass a few years ago.
The well struck kick out, taken say from the 13m line, is caught on the 65m - 70m.
Player with the mark decides to take 4 huge leaps and makes 5m with each leap and ends up on the 45m line, from where he kick the ball over the bar. That would be a sight to behold, Cuchulain like.
Who knows how it might play out, for example Down v Kerry James O'Donoghue had taken 10 steps with the ball before Marty Duffy could count to 4.
:D Ok fair enough! So the player has possession 55-60 yards out and has an uncontested 5 seconds to pick a pass. I'd still say that's dangerous enough and in an era where most teams are fairly risk adverse, I cant imagine too many balls dropping high onto the 65m line! Like I said, the only use of this will be directed kick outs to chest - not high catches.
Where are you getting the five seconds from?
I'm going by the rule posted by someone a few pages back;
(a) A Free Kick
The player shall signify to the Referee that he is availing of and then take the free kick himself from the hand from the point where he was awarded the 'Mark'.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark' the Referee will allow up to five seconds for the player to take the kick. If the player delays longer than five seconds the Referee will cancel the 'Mark' and throw in the ball between a player from each side.
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark', the opposing players must retreat 10m to allow the player space to take the kick. If an opposition player deliberately blocks or attempts to block the kick within 10m, or if an opposition player impedes the player while he is taking the kick, the Referee shall penalise the opposition by bringing the ball forward 13m.
If the Referee determines that the player who makes the 'Mark' has been injured in the process and is unable to take the kick, the Referee shall direct the Player's nearest team mate to take the kick but he may not score directly from the kick.
I have to say, I have been disappointed with congress this year.
I wouldn't have been for the mark (at least without a proper trial) but i suppose we will just have to wait and see how that works.
The biggest disappointment though is not moving the AI finals forward and not getting rid of replays.
These are the two things that could have helped club football and club fixtures hugely and somehow we have decided not to do it.
I cant really understand the logic for defeating either motion. :-\ :-[
Five seconds is actually quite along time. If you are standing with the ball looking around you. But I guess the time allowed includes teh first second or two for the players around to clear away from the marker. So in reality from the point where the guy is actually in a position to take a kick to the point where it is actually kicked will be more like 2-3 seconds.
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 10:46:29 AM
Five seconds is actually quite along time. If you are standing with the ball looking around you. But I guess the time allowed includes teh first second or two for the players around to clear away from the marker. So in reality from the point where the guy is actually in a position to take a kick to the point where it is actually kicked will be more like 2-3 seconds.
My issue would be that if you dont use it in 5 seconds it isa hop ball, which i think is harsh.
It would have been better if you havent used it in 5 seconds the referee calls play on, and youa re fair game to be tackled again, as is the rule in the AFL
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 10:48:03 AM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 10:46:29 AM
Five seconds is actually quite along time. If you are standing with the ball looking around you. But I guess the time allowed includes teh first second or two for the players around to clear away from the marker. So in reality from the point where the guy is actually in a position to take a kick to the point where it is actually kicked will be more like 2-3 seconds.
My issue would be that if you dont use it in 5 seconds it isa hop ball, which i think is harsh.
It would have been better if you havent used it in 5 seconds the referee calls play on, and youa re fair game to be tackled again, as is the rule in the AFL
Very good point and it should have been done like that!
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 10:32:03 AM
I have to say, I have been disappointed with congress this year.
I wouldn't have been for the mark (at least without a proper trial) but i suppose we will just have to wait and see how that works.
The biggest disappointment though is not moving the AI finals forward and not getting rid of replays.
These are the two things that could have helped club football and club fixtures hugely and somehow we have decided not to do it.
I cant really understand the logic for defeating either motion. :-\ :-[
Replays = € for the Powerful Provincial Councils
Earlier AI Finals - loss of more media space to soccer/rubby.
The provincial councils dont have a vote at congress AFAIK?
How would the earlier finals lose media space?
The money argument is incredibly short sighted. Passing those two motions would have done more for the club game than any amount of money for reinvestment.
At times we have lost sight of what the real goals are. The objective should always be to promote and improve our games, not increase revenue.
Provincial Councils don't need a vote in Congress to influence things buicìn . ;)
Big media coverage of Gaelic games ends with the AIFs.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 02, 2016, 12:31:17 PM
Provincial Councils don't need a vote in Congress to influence things buicìn . ;)
Big media coverage of Gaelic games ends with the AIFs.
Big deal.
Shorting the county season had the potential to improve the club scene and therefore improve participation.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 01:25:22 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 02, 2016, 12:31:17 PM
Provincial Councils don't need a vote in Congress to influence things buicìn . ;)
Big media coverage of Gaelic games ends with the AIFs.
Big deal.
Shorting the county season had the potential to improve the club scene and therefore improve participation.
True but I'm telling you why it wasn't voted through.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 02, 2016, 01:28:03 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 01:25:22 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 02, 2016, 12:31:17 PM
Provincial Councils don't need a vote in Congress to influence things buicìn . ;)
Big media coverage of Gaelic games ends with the AIFs.
Big deal.
Shorting the county season had the potential to improve the club scene and therefore improve participation.
True but I'm telling you why it wasn't voted through.
If that's the case we have lost the run of ourselves.
Quote from: longballin on March 01, 2016, 10:52:12 AM
The blame for the changes lie with the likes of Jimmy McGuinnes and Mickey Harte who have ruined Gaelic football at county level as a spectacle... the other clowns then copied them
The mark doesn't address this at all.
In fact if you think of McGuinness early days, they conceded the kickouts and didn't bother contesting them. I can see that happening more now as defence minded teams can simply retreat for opposition kickouts. They will happily concede a mark anywhere up to half way if they have 13 defenders in their own half.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 02, 2016, 11:12:56 AM
Replays = € for the Powerful Provincial Councils
Earlier AI Finals - loss of more media space to soccer/rubby.
Yeah, but the way things are now, the AI semi finals and finals are competing with the soccer for coverage. There is all the pre season drama, all the hype around transfer deadline day on August 31st and when September kicks off, its a brand spanking new Premier league season. The first months worth of games always have match ups between the big heavy hitters, which puts the sport even more front and centre in the media. The AI semi finals and final are having to compete with all that for media coverage and attention. If they are moved up a bit, they would have more time to themselves.
Anyway, I think that the issue of who gets more coverage, is a problem that that the GAA have created. It isn't that the media don't want to cover them more, its that there is so little
to cover. In the run up to the big games, entire teams go to ground and so do the managers. No one speaks to the media, unless they have to. Then when they do, it's the bare minimum, like a 30 second interview on the Sunday Game after a match. The players and managers disappear into a bubble of their own making.
As a journalist or media outlet, how are supposed to cover them, or the team, or the sport, when the players and managers involved won't talk to you, for the entire month of August and September? Contrast that with 20 odd Premier League managers doing press conferences every day, clubs with their own tv stations and online fanzines, non stop drama with La Liga & what ever Lionel Messi and Ronaldo are up to, SKY pimping the sport non stop. The GAA have none of that.
So is it any wonder the likes of RTE or Newstalk or the Indo choose to cover soccer and rugby instead? They give them the material and access to the players and managers. The GAA doesn't. If that changed, so would the coverage the GAA gets, all year around, not just the AI finals.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 10:48:03 AM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 10:46:29 AM
Five seconds is actually quite along time. If you are standing with the ball looking around you. But I guess the time allowed includes teh first second or two for the players around to clear away from the marker. So in reality from the point where the guy is actually in a position to take a kick to the point where it is actually kicked will be more like 2-3 seconds.
My issue would be that if you dont use it in 5 seconds it isa hop ball, which i think is harsh.
It would have been better if you haven't used it in 5 seconds the referee calls play on, and you're fair game to be tackled again, as is the rule in the AFL
Agreed that it sounds better, but then you would have players hovering around just in case the guy runs out of time. So the very idea of the mark clearing bodies out of midfield quickly would be self-defeated.
Also if players did clear away the marker would just simply change his mind, opt to play on, dart forward 5-10 yards and have a shot.
So it needs to be definitive. If a guy accepts a free, meaning opposition have to retreat, then he cannot be allowed to just run into that empty space because no one is available to pass to. In all other frees, if the player delays kicking it then the free is removed and the ball is hopped. So the rule for the mark is fairly consistent.
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 03:10:16 PM
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 02, 2016, 10:48:03 AM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 10:46:29 AM
Five seconds is actually quite along time. If you are standing with the ball looking around you. But I guess the time allowed includes teh first second or two for the players around to clear away from the marker. So in reality from the point where the guy is actually in a position to take a kick to the point where it is actually kicked will be more like 2-3 seconds.
My issue would be that if you dont use it in 5 seconds it isa hop ball, which i think is harsh.
It would have been better if you haven't used it in 5 seconds the referee calls play on, and you're fair game to be tackled again, as is the rule in the AFL
Agreed that it sounds better, but then you would have players hovering around just in case the guy runs out of time. So the very idea of the mark clearing bodies out of midfield quickly would be self-defeated.
Also if players did clear away the marker would just simply change his mind, opt to play on, dart forward 5-10 yards and have a shot.
So it needs to be definitive. If a guy accepts a free, meaning opposition have to retreat, then he cannot be allowed to just run into that empty space because no one is available to pass to. In all other frees, if the player delays kicking it then the free is removed and the ball is hopped. So the rule for the mark is fairly consistent.
I suppose the difference in the AFL is that the defending player can stand in the spot where the mark is taken and it is up to the player in possession to go back the 10 metres or whatever it is.He can then take the kick from anywhere up to where the defender is stationed.
Quote from: muppet on March 02, 2016, 01:57:22 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 01, 2016, 10:52:12 AM
The blame for the changes lie with the likes of Jimmy McGuinnes and Mickey Harte who have ruined Gaelic football at county level as a spectacle... the other clowns then copied them
The mark doesn't address this at all.
In fact if you think of McGuinness early days, they conceded the sickouts and didn't bother contesting them. I can see that happening more now as defence minded teams can simply retreat for opposition kickouts. They will happily concede a mark anywhere up to half way if they have 13 defenders in their own half.
Why would defences do that? The mark doesn't have to be taken. The catcher can play on. If no one challenges him and they have all retreated I'm pretty sure a catcher would just turn and run at the defence. So in that way it is exactly the same as the rules now. But currently I don't see defences leaving opposition midfielders isolated for the very reason I've given. So with the (optional) mark rule they still won't. They will have to challenge to prevent the catcher turning and running into space.
What we are likely to see is a lot of teams trying to break the ball to prevent clean catches. Which is okay by me if there is a clear break-ball strategy to recycle and move it quickly. The problem now is teams trying to catch the ball clean and then getting swarmed and the game slowing down.
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 03:17:58 PM
Quote from: muppet on March 02, 2016, 01:57:22 PM
Quote from: longballin on March 01, 2016, 10:52:12 AM
The blame for the changes lie with the likes of Jimmy McGuinnes and Mickey Harte who have ruined Gaelic football at county level as a spectacle... the other clowns then copied them
The mark doesn't address this at all.
In fact if you think of McGuinness early days, they conceded the sickouts and didn't bother contesting them. I can see that happening more now as defence minded teams can simply retreat for opposition kickouts. They will happily concede a mark anywhere up to half way if they have 13 defenders in their own half.
Why would defences do that? The mark doesn't have to be taken. The catcher can play on. If no one challenges him and they have all retreated I'm pretty sure a catcher would just turn and run at the defence. So in that way it is exactly the same as the rules now. But currently I don't see defences leaving opposition midfielders isolated for the very reason I've given. So with the (optional) mark rule they still won't. They will have to challenge to prevent the catcher turning and running into space.
What we are likely to see is a lot of teams trying to break the ball to prevent clean catches. Which is okay by me if there is a clear break-ball strategy to recycle and move it quickly. The problem now is teams trying to catch the ball clean and then getting swarmed and the game slowing down.
They already did it with Donegal under McGuinness. My point was that this does nothing whatsoever to counter defensively oriented teams who I believe will have a couple of lads maybe contest the mark and pull everyone else back. The risk/reward is in their favour as lose the mark and they have everyone back, win the mark and they don't lose the ball due to having everyone back and the man isolated.
Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 04:46:24 PM
Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)
I agree with most of that, but my concern is that certain managers will look at the risk/reward of the mark and will pull back 10-12 players. I think attack minded teams like the Dubs will ignore it, but with the possible exception of someone like Kerry or Mayo who might fancy winning a mark at midfield, I think the main outcome will be it encouraging more blankets.
The mark will turn out to be fairly irrelevant.........what about talking about the under 17, under 20 and possibly under 18 championships in 2018 all played in the peak summer months. May as well just scrap club football that year!
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 04:46:24 PM
Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)
This is nonsense.
Donegal defended the exact same way in every year Mcguinness managed them - they ill informed call it a blanket defence.
What evolved each year was their counter attacking style as they began to understand how best to exploit the space opponents left behind them by innocently committing numbers to break them down.
In short, if teams require time to set up a smother defence then the mark will have no inhibiting effect.
Quote from: DuffleKing on March 02, 2016, 11:48:21 PM
This is nonsense.
Donegal defended the exact same way in every year Mcguinness managed them - they ill informed call it a blanket defence.
What evolved each year was their counter attacking style as they began to understand how best to exploit the space opponents left behind them by innocently committing numbers to break them down.
In short, if teams require time to set up a smother defence then the mark will have no inhibiting effect.
How can my statement that Donegal modified their style be nonsense when you immediately afterwards state that they evolved????
Also to say they played exactly the same but then say they evolved a counterattcking plan is in itself contrdictory.
In 2011 Donegal defended with 12-13 players behind the ball even when they had possession. In 2012 they allowed players to transition quickly and vacate defensive positions. They did not play the same every year under McGuinness. That is naive, and shows a lack of awareness of what McGuinness achieved in building a successful all-Ireland strategy.
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 04:46:24 PM
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better.
Donegal patently won the all Ireland defending as they always had.
Quote from: muppet on March 02, 2016, 07:56:36 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 04:46:24 PM
Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)
I agree with most of that, but my concern is that certain managers will look at the risk/reward of the mark and will pull back 10-12 players. I think attack minded teams like the Dubs will ignore it, but with the possible exception of someone like Kerry or Mayo who might fancy winning a mark at midfield, I think the main outcome will be it encouraging more blankets.
I can see the point you are making but think of the opportunities that the mark will also present.
If you take a quick kick out after the opposition have had an attack with 5-6 men forward, win the mark at midfield and then you have a free kick into your own attack while the opposition haven't had time to get all the blanket back.
It might present opportunities for some teams to counter-attack the counter attacking teams
I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)
Quote from: westbound on March 03, 2016, 09:53:38 AM
Quote from: muppet on March 02, 2016, 07:56:36 PM
Quote from: PAULD123 on March 02, 2016, 04:46:24 PM
Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.
But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)
I agree with most of that, but my concern is that certain managers will look at the risk/reward of the mark and will pull back 10-12 players. I think attack minded teams like the Dubs will ignore it, but with the possible exception of someone like Kerry or Mayo who might fancy winning a mark at midfield, I think the main outcome will be it encouraging more blankets.
I can see the point you are making but think of the opportunities that the mark will also present.
If you take a quick kick out after the opposition have had an attack with 5-6 men forward, win the mark at midfield and then you have a free kick into your own attack while the opposition haven't had time to get all the blanket back.
It might present opportunities for some teams to counter-attack the counter attacking teams
I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)
100% agree with this.
The mark could turn out to have a positive effect on the game (although i have my doubts), but the trouble is we are guessing, and we shouldn't be making fundamental rule changes on the basis of guesswork.
Quote from: westbound on March 03, 2016, 09:53:38 AM
...I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)
I certainly agree that a trial 6 years ago does not hold strong enough evidence for a permanent rule change. But it is good evidence and should be considered significant at least.
The main thing I would say is how long should the trial be? In 2010 it was trialed only in the league and dumped for the championship. I do not consider that a true test of the rule. A major rule change will have a bit of settling in time before players and managers get used to it. You will see some silly things happening, like lots of frees being given away and people saying "it's ruining the game as a spectacle!!!" then after time people will learn to deal with it and make use of it. So seven league matches is not enough.
I would believe that a trail for two full season (league & championship) would have been fair to decide on a permanent decision. Otherwise we are looking at the effect of the change in immaturity.
The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 03, 2016, 11:02:30 AM
The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.
:-X
A kick after 3 consecutive hand passes would be some balls. Be loads of tippy 5 meter kicks and teams could play the blanket defence knowing that they stand the opposition up outside the shooting zones and press hard on the mandatory kick pass, making it even harder to probe through the defensive lines.
JUST LEAVE THE GAME ALONE!!!!!!! The GAA must be the most self critical sporting organisation in the world. Our games already are really good and much more viewer friendly than the supposed opposition sports of soccer and rugby.
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 03, 2016, 11:12:53 AM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 03, 2016, 11:02:30 AM
The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.
:-X
I have serious pity for the ref who already gets lambasted for missing the 9 steps of the Ballyboden equaliser, or Kevin Mc's two hops and now has to content with all of that!
Be no trouble to the Connacht MFL refs....
Only 1 rule - it's a free to the rhubarbs ;D
Quote from: TF15 on March 03, 2016, 12:26:19 PM
A kick after 3 consecutive hand passes would be some balls. Be loads of tippy 5 meter kicks and teams could play the blanket defence knowing that they stand the opposition up outside the shooting zones and press hard on the mandatory kick pass, making it even harder to probe through the defensive lines.
JUST LEAVE THE GAME ALONE!!!!!!! The GAA must be the most self critical sporting organisation in the world. Our games already are really good and much more viewer friendly than the supposed opposition sports of soccer and rugby.
you are kidding? last few years have been dire viewing, thankfully club football not so bad as that but coaches are apeing them..