Rule idea for Gaelic football wrt high fielding

[Eamonnca1]

Idea - The "flying mark" or the "555 timer" rule:

• Ball is kicked a distance longer than 20 meters.
• Players go up, one of them makes a catch.
• Player who makes the catch cannot be tackled for another 5 seconds, and his opponents have 5 seconds to put 5 meters between themselves and the point where the catch was made. Failure to comply by any one player results in a free to the man who made the catch, and the free has to be taken from the hands immediately. 

Advantages:

• Incentivizes longer kicks
• Rewards high fielding
• Discourages blanket defenses
• Blanket defenses can now only happen with shorter range passes (usually hand passes), so it's a disincentive to overly rely on the hand pass
• The five second rule incentivizes the catching player to quickly get rid of the ball, or start making a run if he has room.
  Keeps the game flowing without necessarily the interruptions you get in Ozzie Rules where there is a free awarded regardless

Disadvantages:

• How do you measure five meters in the heat of a game? Could be one more thing for referees to remember when they're already loaded with responsibilities.
• If the catching player holds onto the ball, everyone has to start counting to five to be able to tell when he can be tackled again. Adds another level of complication to the game, but we might be able to live with that.

Thoughts...?

[lenny]

Idea - The "flying mark" or the "555 timer" rule:

• Ball is kicked a distance longer than 20 meters.
• Players go up, one of them makes a catch.
• Player who makes the catch cannot be tackled for another 5 seconds, and his opponents have 5 seconds to put 5 meters between themselves and the point where the catch was made. Failure to comply by any one player results in a free to the man who made the catch, and the free has to be taken from the hands immediately. 

Advantages:

• Incentivizes longer kicks
• Rewards high fielding
• Discourages blanket defenses
• Blanket defenses can now only happen with shorter range passes (usually hand passes), so it's a disincentive to overly rely on the hand pass
• The five second rule incentivizes the catching player to quickly get rid of the ball, or start making a run if he has room.
  Keeps the game flowing without necessarily the interruptions you get in Ozzie Rules where there is a free awarded regardless

Disadvantages:

• How do you measure five meters in the heat of a game? Could be one more thing for referees to remember when they're already loaded with responsibilities.
• If the catching player holds onto the ball, everyone has to start counting to five to be able to tell when he can be tackled again. Adds another level of complication to the game, but we might be able to live with that.

Thoughts...?

First thought is I like it.

[BennyHarp]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

[Eamonnca1]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

Yup, that's a potential disadvantage too. Could end up looking a bit more like Aussie Rules, which is why I was thinking of taking a different approach to rewarding players for making a high catch.

Maybe instead of 5 seconds, how about not allowing anyone near him until after he has released the ball from his hands (whether it's to bounce or toe-tap). The existing rules about overcarrying could take care of how much time he's holding onto the ball.

[BennyHarp]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

Yup, that's a potential disadvantage too. Could end up looking a bit more like Aussie Rules, which is why I was thinking of taking a different approach to rewarding players for making a high catch.

Maybe instead of 5 seconds, how about not allowing anyone near him until after he has released the ball from his hands (whether it's to bounce or toe-tap). The existing rules about overcarrying could take care of how much time he's holding onto the ball.

I'm not trying to pick holes here as I understand where you are coming from, but would this mean a catch by a player on the 21 yard line from a 20 yard pass would enable him a clear run on goal without a tackle? 4 steps would get him right in on goal.

[Schkite]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

Yup, that's a potential disadvantage too. Could end up looking a bit more like Aussie Rules, which is why I was thinking of taking a different approach to rewarding players for making a high catch.

Maybe instead of 5 seconds, how about not allowing anyone near him until after he has released the ball from his hands (whether it's to bounce or toe-tap). The existing rules about overcarrying could take care of how much time he's holding onto the ball.

I'm not trying to pick holes here as I understand where you are coming from, but would this mean a catch by a player on the 21 yard line from a 20 yard pass would enable him a clear run on goal without a tackle? 4 steps would get him right in on goal.

Also if a team were wasting time at the end of a game, they could keep passing it across their defence without coming under too much pressure.

It'd have to be limited to the midfield area or middle third, if it's to encourage high fielding that's the area affected anyway.

[lenny]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

Yup, that's a potential disadvantage too. Could end up looking a bit more like Aussie Rules, which is why I was thinking of taking a different approach to rewarding players for making a high catch.

Maybe instead of 5 seconds, how about not allowing anyone near him until after he has released the ball from his hands (whether it's to bounce or toe-tap). The existing rules about overcarrying could take care of how much time he's holding onto the ball.

I'm not trying to pick holes here as I understand where you are coming from, but would this mean a catch by a player on the 21 yard line from a 20 yard pass would enable him a clear run on goal without a tackle? 4 steps would get him right in on goal.

Also if a team were wasting time at the end of a game, they could keep passing it across their defence without coming under too much pressure.

It'd have to be limited to the midfield area or middle third, if it's to encourage high fielding that's the area affected anyway.

Mark would only be awarded for a forward pass. You couldn't reward a sideways or backwards pass.

[Eamonnca1]

If I'm reading this right, I don't like the thought of an attack consisting of a series of 20 yard passes without any tackles being allowed. It's a bit like kick netball. 5 seconds is a long time too.

Yup, that's a potential disadvantage too. Could end up looking a bit more like Aussie Rules, which is why I was thinking of taking a different approach to rewarding players for making a high catch.

Maybe instead of 5 seconds, how about not allowing anyone near him until after he has released the ball from his hands (whether it's to bounce or toe-tap). The existing rules about overcarrying could take care of how much time he's holding onto the ball.

I'm not trying to pick holes here as I understand where you are coming from, but would this mean a catch by a player on the 21 yard line from a 20 yard pass would enable him a clear run on goal without a tackle? 4 steps would get him right in on goal.

Not a clear run, because the opponents only have to give space from where the catch was made. As soon as he runs 5m from that spot he's fair game. He can either run or take the shot.  Could make short range points very easy to get now that you mention it.

[Eamonnca1]

Mark would only be awarded for a forward pass. You couldn't reward a sideways or backwards pass.

Not sure if that's a good idea, it re-opens the possibility of blanket defenses.

[Jell 0 Biafra]

Wouldn't at all be in favor of any such rule, but hypothetically, the way round some of these unintended consequences would be to limit the number of marks per possession to one.  No defensive keep ball, no "marking" your way down the pitch tackle-free.

[Bud Wiser]

Football is gone so bad now that you want to reward a player for catching and kicking the ball. Maybe throw in a free pass to Coppers and a guaranteed ride if they actually kick the ball more than once in an entire game.  Who was it said someone should go around with a sprong and burst all them footballs? Maybe close down football for a while until all the basketball and women's stuff disperses and just let every club play hurling.  I was listening to a woman there dother day and she was saying that "I am going to make sure my two eldest take up the gaelic football, it is much safer than that bloody snoooker"   I think the game is finished and if it's not this years championship will definitely finish it.

[twohands!!!]

Incredibly difficult, if not impossible for a referee to enforce accurately, so a big no.

1)Keeping track of the ball being kicked at least 20m, especially if the kicker and the catcher are both moving

2)The whole getting 5 metres away in 5 seconds - ball is kicked out to a crowd in the middle of the field how is the ref supposed to keep track of 4 different opposition players and the fact that they are supposed to get 5 metres away from the player who catches the ball.

3) A defensive side could simply station 2/3/4 forwards around/near the opposition's goal and constantly kick the ball long so that any time a forward caught the ball they would in effect have a tap-over free.

[Throw ball]

I would be in favour of the fielder getting time to play the ball when it is caught directly from the kick out ie. a couple of steps. That would be as far as I would go. In yesterday's Irish News Danny Hughes was saying how he and Geezer were talking about the rules and suggesting the advantage rule should be a Aussie Rules type advantage. The referee would blow the free and then the player fouled would decide weither to play on or not. It would reduce referees having to make a judgement on advantage or not and could help reduce tactical fouling a bit as frees could be taken quicker giving less time to flood players back. Referees may have to remember to book players during definite breaks in play though!

[Eamonnca1]

How about not allowing the fielder to score directly from the spot where the mark was taken? That would solve the problem of giving him a handy tap-over scoring opportunity.

[redzone]

theres no way the mark of any description will make it into football, to radical. it would completely finish tackling.