Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[AustinPowers]

So , when Peter  Harte went into goals, he  technically wasn't  the "keeper" for 10 minutes?  So he couldn't  have touched  the ball  on the ground  in small square?

What if  Morgan  was sent off, and Harte  went into goals?  Would  he have  had the keepers privileges then?

[Milltown Row2]

So , when Peter  Harte went into goals, he  technically wasn't  the "keeper" for 10 minutes?  So he couldn't  have touched  the ball  on the ground  in small square?

What if  Morgan  was sent off, and Harte  went into goals?  Would  he have  had the keepers privileges then?

While wearing the keepers top he or whoever wears it had the privileges of a keeper, which is basically  in the small square

[PMG1]

The new trial rules about the kick out having to cross the 45 and the on where free kicks must go forward do not make sense, they are going to encourage mass defence. If keeper is hitting a kick out then obviously all the other teams forwards are going to go back to midfield as they know that's where the kick is going, they are going to behind the opposition 45.  Same for the free kick, if you give away a free and you know it can't go backwards then obviously you and probably everyone on your team is going to be goalside

[onefineday]

Some new rules bring trialled...

https://www.gaa.ie/football/news/gaa-to-trial-experimental-kick-out-and-free-kick-rules/

Terrible ideas, the rule of not being able to go back to the keeper worked well. When teams are chasing games they push up on kicks and the keeper has to go long, so there is no need for a rule to make a team lump a ball if the opposition is happy enough to concede the kick out

Why do they have to keep changing the rules?

Seems just to be a rule change for the sake of it.

If they'd sort out the tackle, that'd be a decent start.

Change is needed, there are far too many passages of non contact lateral (boring) play, it's horrible to watch and frustrating for many players. These are.interesting proposals and worth looking at, but don't go far enough.
I have reservations around the kick out, I don't think it's really the route of the problem, certainly not in football.
I like the proposal around not kicking the ball backwards from deadball situations, but I'd like that to go further to stop the ball going back over half way line once it's gone forward, that would need to be accompanied by a rule requiring 2/3 players to remain in opposition half at all times though.

[Milltown Row2]

I think I'd stop refereeing football when or if these rules come in. Hurling is so easy to ref

[seafoid]

I think I'd stop refereeing football when or if these rules come in. Hurling is so easy to ref

Football is always changing

[Milltown Row2]

I think I'd stop refereeing football when or if these rules come in. Hurling is so easy to ref

Football is always changing

Its dung, and full of moany cnuts..

[Rossfan]

I think I'd stop refereeing football when or if these rules come in. Hurling is so easy to ref

Especially when most of the rules in the book are ignored

[Milltown Row2]

I think I'd stop refereeing football when or if these rules come in. Hurling is so easy to ref

Especially when most of the rules in the book are ignored

Makes for a better game, but I can see you the boring back passing lateral 15 men behind the ball keeper being the main scorer pulling and dragging type of guy.

[Rossfan]

2 different issues entirely.
Don't know why they bother with Refs in Hurley stuff, sure the sideline official could keep the time and scores and throw the ball in.

[LeoMc]

Put a keeper off in sin bin lately. The opposition where giving off that the player who went into nets had to be wearing a keepers top!! This based on Tyrone game on TV the week before..

I explained that they didn't have to wear a keepers top, wearing the keepers top only gives the 'keeper' the rights of a keeper, nothing else. these people giving off are senior div 1 managers

Our seniors were playing 2 different lads in nets at different stages, neither were keepers. One made a run out and the other hung back in one game, possession lost and the one with the outfield jersey on that day tried to take the kick out but the ref didn't allow him to kick it because the other man had the keepers jersey on at half forward. Do you agree with that one?
I can see the keeper jersey going soon if the game keeps going like it is now, no advantage in it. If you like saving shots you may go to the soccer.

Is the main "right" the keepers jersey give is to touch ball on ground in small square? Kickouts not an issue, anyone can take. I did see a game where an out field player took the kick out, ran on and received the ball back from the receiver. Ref blew for it, rightly, and the teams manager went mad shouting "he isn't the keeper" but ref said he took kick and can't receive it back, but the keeper could have as he didn't take kick.

Also the keeper can't be shouldered/charged in the small square, all other players can be.

The rule about the kickout only says keeper so in this case the ref was wrong. Yet another terribly drafted rule in the rule-book.

A player in direct receipt of a kick-out may not pass the ball to his team's goalkeeper without another player playing the ball.

Ref was wrong, only if the actual keeper had been standing in the goal line when the kick out was taken.

[Louther]

Put a keeper off in sin bin lately. The opposition where giving off that the player who went into nets had to be wearing a keepers top!! This based on Tyrone game on TV the week before..

I explained that they didn't have to wear a keepers top, wearing the keepers top only gives the 'keeper' the rights of a keeper, nothing else. these people giving off are senior div 1 managers

Our seniors were playing 2 different lads in nets at different stages, neither were keepers. One made a run out and the other hung back in one game, possession lost and the one with the outfield jersey on that day tried to take the kick out but the ref didn't allow him to kick it because the other man had the keepers jersey on at half forward. Do you agree with that one?
I can see the keeper jersey going soon if the game keeps going like it is now, no advantage in it. If you like saving shots you may go to the soccer.

Is the main "right" the keepers jersey give is to touch ball on ground in small square? Kickouts not an issue, anyone can take. I did see a game where an out field player took the kick out, ran on and received the ball back from the receiver. Ref blew for it, rightly, and the teams manager went mad shouting "he isn't the keeper" but ref said he took kick and can't receive it back, but the keeper could have as he didn't take kick.

Also the keeper can't be shouldered/charged in the small square, all other players can be.

The rule about the kickout only says keeper so in this case the ref was wrong. Yet another terribly drafted rule in the rule-book.

A player in direct receipt of a kick-out may not pass the ball to his team's goalkeeper without another player playing the ball.

Ref was wrong, only if the actual keeper had been standing in the goal line when the kick out was taken.

That's interesting, never considered that. Looking back it was possible the keeper wasn't in his small square when it happened. See a lot of that in juvenile matches where outfield player ends up taking kick out but never paid much attention to keepers position. This was the first time I'd seen the non GK kicker take ball back off receiver and assumed that's why he threw it up.

Cheers lads.

[Hound]

Spirt of the rule is that the person who takes the kickout can't receive the next pass. Everyone knows that, and a technical error in drafting doesn't take away from that. Therefore, in my view ref was absolutely right to call it. Common sense approach.

[David McKeown]

Spirt of the rule is that the person who takes the kickout can't receive the next pass. Everyone knows that, and a technical error in drafting doesn't take away from that. Therefore, in my view ref was absolutely right to call it. Common sense approach.

The problem with the common sense approach is it's not particularly common and leads to wildly inconsistent decision making.  I would expect the rule as written to be implemented surely that would be the common sense approach.  What other rules should the ref ignore and or change in the name of common sense?

[Milltown Row2]

Spirt of the rule is that the person who takes the kickout can't receive the next pass. Everyone knows that, and a technical error in drafting doesn't take away from that. Therefore, in my view ref was absolutely right to call it. Common sense approach.

The problem with the common sense approach is it's not particularly common and leads to wildly inconsistent decision making.  I would expect the rule as written to be implemented surely that would be the common sense approach.  What other rules should the ref ignore and or change in the name of common sense?

And while the rule is in place it should be adhered to, until it's amended that is, won't be long before plenty expose loophole's in the rules to suit

But the ref (rightly or wrongly) will make a call and that's that, that can't be changed at the time