Should An Glenn object?

[Milltown Row2]

Forgive me if its already been discussed (I haven't read all of the thread), but is there any reason why the GAA can't do substitutions the way they do them in soccer?

At the halfway point on the sideline, players come off before substitute goes on. Ref or linesman oversees it?

You see how long it takes a soccer player to walk off when he wants to waste time? Then treble that as a player at the far corner of a GAA pitch (a smart manager would tell the player coming off to head to the far corner before sub is signalled) would have nearly 3 times as far to go, at walking or limping pace this would take too much time

Gie them 20s to get off then yellow card them if they arent off in that time

They are coming off anyway so unless they are already on a yellow card then they are not going to worry about getting one. It's not like soccer where yellow cards are totted up and you get suspended once you get a certain amount

You'd imagine the introduction of something like this is an absolute certainty to eventually come out of this mess. I would also introduce no subs in injury time to cut out the knavery that KC were at too - not unique to them obviously.

I'd throw this up for discussion too.

The ref can add on the time OK, but every bit as much as killing time, teams use the subs to kill momentum in the dying seconds/minutes.

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

[Armagh18]

Forgive me if its already been discussed (I haven't read all of the thread), but is there any reason why the GAA can't do substitutions the way they do them in soccer?

At the halfway point on the sideline, players come off before substitute goes on. Ref or linesman oversees it?

You see how long it takes a soccer player to walk off when he wants to waste time? Then treble that as a player at the far corner of a GAA pitch (a smart manager would tell the player coming off to head to the far corner before sub is signalled) would have nearly 3 times as far to go, at walking or limping pace this would take too much time

Gie them 20s to get off then yellow card them if they arent off in that time

They are coming off anyway so unless they are already on a yellow card then they are not going to worry about getting one. It's not like soccer where yellow cards are totted up and you get suspended once you get a certain amount

You'd imagine the introduction of something like this is an absolute certainty to eventually come out of this mess. I would also introduce no subs in injury time to cut out the knavery that KC were at too - not unique to them obviously.

I'd throw this up for discussion too.

The ref can add on the time OK, but every bit as much as killing time, teams use the subs to kill momentum in the dying seconds/minutes.

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Does that make them nuts? Jaysus

[imtommygunn]

It's a bit like the head injury stuff - you can't enforce any of that. Black cards and yellow cards for players going off would be carnage. No subs not enforceable with injuries a possibility etc. It's impossible to police.

It's like anything - people will rip the arse out of it to try and win and that's what happened here. It's very hard to mitigate for.

[Milltown Row2]

Forgive me if its already been discussed (I haven't read all of the thread), but is there any reason why the GAA can't do substitutions the way they do them in soccer?

At the halfway point on the sideline, players come off before substitute goes on. Ref or linesman oversees it?

You see how long it takes a soccer player to walk off when he wants to waste time? Then treble that as a player at the far corner of a GAA pitch (a smart manager would tell the player coming off to head to the far corner before sub is signalled) would have nearly 3 times as far to go, at walking or limping pace this would take too much time

Gie them 20s to get off then yellow card them if they arent off in that time

They are coming off anyway so unless they are already on a yellow card then they are not going to worry about getting one. It's not like soccer where yellow cards are totted up and you get suspended once you get a certain amount

You'd imagine the introduction of something like this is an absolute certainty to eventually come out of this mess. I would also introduce no subs in injury time to cut out the knavery that KC were at too - not unique to them obviously.

I'd throw this up for discussion too.

The ref can add on the time OK, but every bit as much as killing time, teams use the subs to kill momentum in the dying seconds/minutes.

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Does that make them nuts? Jaysus

Its nuts because if the player is actually injured he should be taken off and not allowed to play and not forced to play, the reality is a lot different though

[marty34]

Subs and injury time is the only means a ref has to actually stop play, that's always been the case, I'd introduce time wasting by free takers or give them 15 20 seconds to line up a free. Keepers are the worst for it also looking for footballs while one is sitting in the net.

If deemed time wasting by the keeper a hop ball on the 14 would quicken up his kicks

Yeah, GAA has so much to learn from other sports but so backward at times as it's preceived the rule has come from soccer or rugby etc. Crazy.

I think they're introducing a shot clock, or trialing it in rugby for a conversion after a try. A great idea to cut down on how long it takes.

I mean in  the GAA, the ball is in play for about 30 mins during a game. Other 30 mins it's out of play. Really teams are playing for 30 mins.

Maybe each half should be 40 mins long nowadays.

That would just put  more and more emphasis on the fitness side rather than the skill side. Ever look at a top intercounty players gps stats? Madness.  even the average club player is putting up big numbers these days

But they're only playing for 30 mins.

All that training and fitness etc. and the ball is in actual play for 30 mins.

Yeah, all them GPS fitness stats and in some matches they only score 5 points.

[thewobbler]

There are significant cultural problems within GAA surrounding acceptable levels of cheating.

Stealing yards for frees. Water carriers and physios entering the field unannounced to block runs. Kicking multiple balls onto the field to disrupt a restart. Signalling a head injury after any collision, or even a cramp. Engaging in off-the-ball wrestling with a yellow-carded player to have him sent off. Club umpires signalling their decision before the ball has left the boot. Slowed down restarts. Keepers taking a minute to walk upfield to hit a free that's outside their range. Referee intimidation.

All described regularly and fondly as "shithousery" and so many fans love to see their team engage in all forms of it.

Every single one of these things happens regularly  and they're each every bit as worthy of a rematch as an extra player being on the field for 10 seconds.

So what difference would new rules on substitutions make? None. It might prevent this exact scenario unfolding again. But it won't stop shithousery. And it won't change our cultural acceptance of it.

[Milltown Row2]

There are significant cultural problems within GAA surrounding acceptable levels of cheating.

Stealing yards for frees. Water carriers and physios entering the field unannounced to block runs. Kicking multiple balls onto the field to disrupt a restart. Signalling a head injury after any collision, or even a cramp. Engaging in off-the-ball wrestling with a yellow-carded player to have him sent off. Club umpires signalling their decision before the ball has left the boot. Slowed down restarts. Keepers taking a minute to walk upfield to hit a free that's outside their range. Referee intimidation.

All described regularly and fondly as "shithousery" and so many fans love to see their team engage in all forms of it.

Every single one of these things happens regularly  and they're each every bit as worthy of a rematch as an extra player being on the field for 10 seconds.

So what difference would new rules on substitutions make? None. It might prevent this exact scenario unfolding again. But it won't stop shithousery. And it won't change our cultural acceptance of it.

Here's the thing thewobbler, if your club is winning a club final by a couple of points and the momentum is with the other team, you are the manager, there is no way in the world that you will allow them to have that momentum, its about winning and sometimes whether its right or wrong shithousery is required to break that play up, and if it works, you'll live with it..

I remember playing senior hurling during a time and we just moved up to division one, the amount of silly goals we gave away was criminal, just loss of concentration or getting caught out, it meant that every time a ball came to or box we just got more panicky.

We decided when the ball came in that we'd accidently fall on the ball (dangerous enough lol) but it then made the ref make a call, was he push, its dangerous so stop play and so on, now it may have only happened once in a game or so but it killed a good lot of those crappy goals we gave away..

Things changed over the years after and sitting on the ball or not attempt to move was seen as a free in, that was still a better outcome than a ball being lashed into the net..

For every play there is someone looking to strip it down and see how they can gain an advantage

[seafoid]

There are significant cultural problems within GAA surrounding acceptable levels of cheating.

Stealing yards for frees. Water carriers and physios entering the field unannounced to block runs. Kicking multiple balls onto the field to disrupt a restart. Signalling a head injury after any collision, or even a cramp. Engaging in off-the-ball wrestling with a yellow-carded player to have him sent off. Club umpires signalling their decision before the ball has left the boot. Slowed down restarts. Keepers taking a minute to walk upfield to hit a free that's outside their range. Referee intimidation.

All described regularly and fondly as "shithousery" and so many fans love to see their team engage in all forms of it.

Every single one of these things happens regularly  and they're each every bit as worthy of a rematch as an extra player being on the field for 10 seconds.

So what difference would new rules on substitutions make? None. It might prevent this exact scenario unfolding again. But it won't stop shithousery. And it won't change our cultural acceptance of it.

Here's the thing thewobbler, if your club is winning a club final by a couple of points and the momentum is with the other team, you are the manager, there is no way in the world that you will allow them to have that momentum, its about winning and sometimes whether its right or wrong shithousery is required to break that play up, and if it works, you'll live with it..

I remember playing senior hurling during a time and we just moved up to division one, the amount of silly goals we gave away was criminal, just loss of concentration or getting caught out, it meant that every time a ball came to or box we just got more panicky.

We decided when the ball came in that we'd accidently fall on the ball (dangerous enough lol) but it then made the ref make a call, was he push, its dangerous so stop play and so on, now it may have only happened once in a game or so but it killed a good lot of those crappy goals we gave away..

Things changed over the years after and sitting on the ball or not attempt to move was seen as a free in, that was still a better outcome than a ball being lashed into the net..

For every play there is someone looking to strip it down and see how they can gain an advantage

Those are ref issues
Changing the rules during the game whther deliberately or not is a different type of issue.

[Mike Tyson]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

[Cavan19]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

I don't think it is 3 distinct points it is you can only make them on 3 occasions during a game.

[Mike Tyson]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

I don't think it is 3 distinct points it is you can only make them on 3 occasions during a game.

Yea sorry that's what I meant. Not constricted to a point in the game but only on 3 occassions.

[Milltown Row2]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

That's if they have no subs left, if they do they can replace them whenever and if a player goes off with a head injury he also can be replaced with a temp sub

[Mike Tyson]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

That's if they have no subs left, if they do they can replace them whenever and if a player goes off with a head injury he also can be replaced with a temp sub

That's my point, the risk of not replacing an injured player is already there and does happen under the current rules. Don't think there's too much noise around player welfare in that regard at the minute. Not that I'm in agreement with no subs in injury time but its on average 2-3mins of time added (be interesting to know how much of that is actual playing time) so can't see the issue around player welfare. If you're injured you go off and go a man down - same as when all your subs are used currently.

[tonto1888]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

I don't think it is 3 distinct points it is you can only make them on 3 occasions during a game.

Yea sorry that's what I meant. Not constricted to a point in the game but only on 3 occassions.

good in theory but what if someone gets injured and you've already used your 3 sub occasions?

[Mike Tyson]

So no subs during injury time? so actual injuries can not be replaced? You'll have the player welfare nuts coming on then saying that the players will be forced to play when injured and so on..

You have to have subs and its a break in play, same as a player going down and holding his head, they are all using it to slow play, the ref aint a doctor and that's a medic's call tbf

Is that not the case when a team uses up all their subs anyway? You just have to deal with it and go a man down?

On Colm Parkinson's podcast the idea was floated of following Premier League sub rules in that you can only make subs at 3 distinct points in a match. Would there be many drawbacks to that?

I don't think it is 3 distinct points it is you can only make them on 3 occasions during a game.

Yea sorry that's what I meant. Not constricted to a point in the game but only on 3 occassions.

good in theory but what if someone gets injured and you've already used your 3 sub occasions?

Well that's my point above - you carry on with 14. The same that would happen if all subs were used by the 50th minute today. I think the PL operates that way too - down to 10 men and it's a case of hard luck.