gaaboard.com

Not sure if there's a thread on it?

I think it's an abomination and has to go. Really unfair on defenders, a forward should have do much more than collect a ball to have a free shot on goal.

Have to agree. Slows down the game down. Don't know what GAA logic thinking it would add to the game.

They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

I see a lot wrong with it.

It takes the skills out of the game, a forward now wins the ball and can stop and take a free shot on goal.

Winning the ball is one part of a forward's job, he needs to be able to hold off challenges, take players on, create the space for himself. It takes away all that off the cuff talent that forwards have.

You look at some of the great scores in the past, would they now just be marks? Probably.

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

I think opposite as teams will bring more bodies behind the ball. Balls was  rarely kicked in with double sweepers patrolling the down. Mayo game v Tipp aside dont see many goal chances.

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

I agree with Angelo. It's a pile of shit. The normal mark is/was bad enough but this advanced mark needs to go. What's the enjoyment in seeing someone execute a great skill like a high catch then immediately stop and hold his hand up? Part of the enjoyment of watching good football is not just the skill itself but the play that it leads to. The advanced mark adds nothing to the game. Shame on these morons who thought it up

How are marks counted? Are they counted as points from Play or frees?

Quote from: From the Bunker on December 14, 2020, 09:31:12 PM
How are marks counted? Are they counted as points from Play or frees?

Frees I'd say

Quote from: reillycavan on December 14, 2020, 09:50:46 PM

Quote from: From the Bunker on December 14, 2020, 09:31:12 PM
How are marks counted? Are they counted as points from Play or frees?

Frees I'd say

Just checked there in the Dublin/Meath game:

Scorers for Dublin: Dean Rock 1-7 (5fs, 145), Sean Bugler 1-2, Niall Scully 1-1, Ciaran Kilkenny 0-4, Paddy Small 0-3 (2ms), Con O'Callaghan 0-2, Paul Mannion 0-1 (1f), John Small 0-1.

Scorers for Meath: Jordan Morris 0-4 (1f), Thomas O'Reilly 0-1 (1f), Cillian O'Sullivan 0-1, Bryan Menton 0-1, Jason Scully 0-1, Joey Wallace 0-1 (m).

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Jesus!!

If your defender isn't winning primary possession and allowing the attacker to 'have' the ball and hope he takes it off him then I can see you must be looking after a Tyrone club team in Ulster  ;)

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Allowing an attacker the ball it nuts, if he sprints out and gets the ball out the wing then yes manage the situation, but the forward mark is generally a high ball pumped in and a defender should have time to challenge himself for the ball, and I'd ask the question as to why he isn't touch tight!

As a defender a pumped high ball is a 50/50 in fact it favours a defender.

I'm not for the forward mark btw

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 01:57:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Jesus!!

If your defender isn't winning primary possession and allowing the attacker to 'have' the ball and hope he takes it off him then I can see you must be looking after a Tyrone club team in Ulster  ;)

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Allowing an attacker the ball it nuts, if he sprints out and gets the ball out the wing then yes manage the situation, but the forward mark is generally a high ball pumped in and a defender should have time to challenge himself for the ball, and I'd ask the question as to why he isn't touch tight!

As a defender a pumped high ball is a 50/50 in fact it favours a defender.

I'm not for the forward mark btw

The first thing roared at a defender is not to foul. Get out in fron leaves you open to getting caught in behind. It doesn't sound like you've played the game but the same as in any sport, you do not get caught in behind, it's unforgivable. Good defenders are trained to be able to shadow their man and be on their tail at all time, if they can get the ball they go for it, if they can't they get tight.

You seem to be saying that defenders are trained to be kamikaze, gung ho nuts who commit for every ball blindly - which is idiotic and the sign of someone who has never played the game or only played junior football maybe.

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

I agree with your idea to give it another season or 2. As I said before it was very interesting to see 2 unheralded teams coming through this year who utilised a very direct style. I've never seen Cavan or tipp being as direct before using the big man at full forward and it got them a lot of scores. As a consequence there was a lot less of the sideways, over and back boring possession game which is very boring to watch and in my eyes is sucking the life out of the game. After another couple of seasons we should be able to give a definitive view on the success of the advanced mark. At the moment it looks promising.

A good forward should beat his man to the ball the vast majority of the time assuming the ball in is decent and there is not a notable pace differential. Yes a good defender can try  to mark in front and read the play but the bottomline is that the forward knows where he is going to go next, the defender has to react to the forwards movements, the converse is not as important.

Quote from: TabClear on December 15, 2020, 02:45:33 PM
A good forward should beat his man to the ball the vast majority of the time assuming the ball in is decent and there is not a notable pace differential. Yes a good defender can try  to mark in front and read the play but the bottomline is that the forward knows where he is going to go next, the defender has to react to the forwards movements, the converse is not as important.

+1

A good defender is never trained to gamble, they are trained to follow their man and stick tight.

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 02:03:19 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 01:57:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Jesus!!

If your defender isn't winning primary possession and allowing the attacker to 'have' the ball and hope he takes it off him then I can see you must be looking after a Tyrone club team in Ulster  ;)

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Allowing an attacker the ball it nuts, if he sprints out and gets the ball out the wing then yes manage the situation, but the forward mark is generally a high ball pumped in and a defender should have time to challenge himself for the ball, and I'd ask the question as to why he isn't touch tight!

As a defender a pumped high ball is a 50/50 in fact it favours a defender.

I'm not for the forward mark btw

The first thing roared at a defender is not to foul. Get out in fron leaves you open to getting caught in behind. It doesn't sound like you've played the game but the same as in any sport, you do not get caught in behind, it's unforgivable. Good defenders are trained to be able to shadow their man and be on their tail at all time, if they can get the ball they go for it, if they can't they get tight.

You seem to be saying that defenders are trained to be kamikaze, gung ho nuts who commit for every ball blindly - which is idiotic and the sign of someone who has never played the game or only played junior football maybe.

If can quote me where I said that then I'll agree with you, but you obviously read this with your eyes wide shut

As a player I don't mind the inside mark, I think it should be let run its term and see what tactical innovations can come from it - I think we are only at the start of that particular cycle and would open the game up for different builds of players, particularly at club level.  There is no doubt we'll soon see a team completely built upon getting those free shots and it will cause an outrage, but for now, it looks relatively like an untapped resource.

I've played both attack and defence, I can see the logic in both arguments - but we want an attacking game, so the reward I suppose should be with the attacker? I'm not overly keen on these wee pop passes to just inside the 45 (half of them don't even go the required distance) but I suppose it creates space and discourages the zonal defence as a result. As a defender, don't you have enough to be at? It's rough on defenders, at least in the AFL if you catch the man you can rip him to the ground as a bit of payback. Although majority of defenders play in front now so it's not really such as issue.

Critically, I suppose we are playing Aussie Rules now with the ball. I enjoy the AFL so I'm not too bothered but I know some people can't stand the stop / start of the mark. It can wear on the patience, maybe more so the older generation. I'd have preferred we adopt the ladies pick up or hooter system but this is what they have brought in.

Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 03:09:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 02:03:19 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 01:57:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Jesus!!

If your defender isn't winning primary possession and allowing the attacker to 'have' the ball and hope he takes it off him then I can see you must be looking after a Tyrone club team in Ulster  ;)

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Allowing an attacker the ball it nuts, if he sprints out and gets the ball out the wing then yes manage the situation, but the forward mark is generally a high ball pumped in and a defender should have time to challenge himself for the ball, and I'd ask the question as to why he isn't touch tight!

As a defender a pumped high ball is a 50/50 in fact it favours a defender.

I'm not for the forward mark btw

The first thing roared at a defender is not to foul. Get out in fron leaves you open to getting caught in behind. It doesn't sound like you've played the game but the same as in any sport, you do not get caught in behind, it's unforgivable. Good defenders are trained to be able to shadow their man and be on their tail at all time, if they can get the ball they go for it, if they can't they get tight.

You seem to be saying that defenders are trained to be kamikaze, gung ho nuts who commit for every ball blindly - which is idiotic and the sign of someone who has never played the game or only played junior football maybe.

If can quote me where I said that then I'll agree with you, but you obviously read this with your eyes wide shut

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 06:39:24 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 03:09:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 02:03:19 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on December 15, 2020, 01:57:16 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Jesus!!

If your defender isn't winning primary possession and allowing the attacker to 'have' the ball and hope he takes it off him then I can see you must be looking after a Tyrone club team in Ulster  ;)

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

Allowing an attacker the ball it nuts, if he sprints out and gets the ball out the wing then yes manage the situation, but the forward mark is generally a high ball pumped in and a defender should have time to challenge himself for the ball, and I'd ask the question as to why he isn't touch tight!

As a defender a pumped high ball is a 50/50 in fact it favours a defender.

I'm not for the forward mark btw

The first thing roared at a defender is not to foul. Get out in fron leaves you open to getting caught in behind. It doesn't sound like you've played the game but the same as in any sport, you do not get caught in behind, it's unforgivable. Good defenders are trained to be able to shadow their man and be on their tail at all time, if they can get the ball they go for it, if they can't they get tight.

You seem to be saying that defenders are trained to be kamikaze, gung ho nuts who commit for every ball blindly - which is idiotic and the sign of someone who has never played the game or only played junior football maybe.

If can quote me where I said that then I'll agree with you, but you obviously read this with your eyes wide shut

The first thing roared at a defender is get out in front and win your f**king ball, the next thing roared from the sideline if he continues to do this is "sub ref"

So I didn't say kamikaze defending. Thanks

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

I fully expect Dublin to target the mayo full back line with early balls played in

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

I more meant to say that I didn't seee many advanced marks being taken and converted.
Though there were a few where the player just played on.

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on December 15, 2020, 09:09:07 PM

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

I fully expect Dublin to target the mayo full back line with early balls played in

I don't have the stats, but I would guess Paddy Small has taken near the same number of advanced  marks as the rest of the Dubs forwards put together. It may be why he's (so far) stayed ahead of Mannion in the pecking order.

It is a ridiculous rule and anyone who has ever played the game will know this. Any defender will do their best to stop the forward winning clean possession, but a lot of the time it doesnt work, that shouldnt result in a free shot for the forward. They should still have to take the defender on/ lay the ball off.

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

No it's the prospect of goals which is why Tipp kicked it in long, not marks.

Sweeney has a 3 inch height advantage of his man and Mayo play completely wide open, one on one at the back. This was exposed against Tyrone in the league where they got caught out a number of times over the top.

Teams were back playing direct before the advanced mark came into being. Most of the marks I have seen have been clipped balls played to unmarked men just inside the 45 yard line. The majority of the marks I've seen in this year's Championship have been from laborious, slow buildups and eventually a player comes free inside the 45 yard line and it's kicked to him. They haven't been as a result of direct play where teams have won the ball, looked up and hit the full forward line early.

Look at Donegal it was the likes of McGonigle and McFadden - their midfielders who were winning marks and scoring them.

Quote from: Angelo on December 16, 2020, 09:39:25 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

Quote from: Main Street on December 15, 2020, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

Quote from: lenny on December 15, 2020, 07:01:51 PM

Quote from: general_lee on December 15, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
Lads it's f**king shite and clearly none of yous have kicked a ball in the last ten years. Refs are bad enough at applying the rules as it is without burdening them with this garbage. Maybe at county level it isn't as noticeable (or else you're all just blind) but at club level it adds absolutely nothing and gives forwards a massive advantage without any incentive that encourages forward play. Rewarding 25m chest high passes is bullshit

What's destroying the game at the moment is how good teams are at keeping possession and how reluctant they are to give a pass with any degree of risk. The result is endless side to side passing around the middle of the field. I've seen teams keep the ball for 4 or 5 minutes without getting the ball inside the 45 metre line and the other team just sit back waiting for them to come in. That has made numerous games unwatchable over the last couple of seasons. This season has been different because teams have an alternative offensive tactic. Teams like Cavan and Tipperary have come from nowhere to win their province playing a direct game with much less boring possession rubbish. I don't think they'd have been anywhere near as direct but for the inside mark.

Yes but this is the advance mark thread.

I'd agree with the general, it's shite and doesn't add anything to the game but I haven't seen it used very much this year in the championship games or have I missed something?

Tipp kicked loads of long, high balls into their full forwards v Cork and kept 3 men inside most of the time. They didn't win too many marks but the prospect of a mark meant this was a worthwhile tactic. It was also very effective. Cavan used the same tactic in a number of their games. They generally kept at least one big man like galligan or madden inside. Again it didn't always lead to a mark but the prospect of a mark encouraged them to use that tactic.

No it's the prospect of goals which is why Tipp kicked it in long, not marks.

Sweeney has a 3 inch height advantage of his man and Mayo play completely wide open, one on one at the back. This was exposed against Tyrone in the league where they got caught out a number of times over the top.

Teams were back playing direct before the advanced mark came into being. Most of the marks I have seen have been clipped balls played to unmarked men just inside the 45 yard line. The majority of the marks I've seen in this year's Championship have been from laborious, slow buildups and eventually a player comes free inside the 45 yard line and it's kicked to him. They haven't been as a result of direct play where teams have won the ball, looked up and hit the full forward line early.

Look at Donegal it was the likes of McGonigle and McFadden - their midfielders who were winning marks and scoring them.

Yep and Tipp fluffed their two chances.
I doubt Dublin will.

Hate the advanced mark rule with a passion, completely ruins fluidity in the forward line, 90% of the time now players will call a mark if they catch it, even if not in a scoring position because there is maybe a defender right tight to them, its a cop out for a forward they no longer have to beat a man. it has slowed the best part of the game down, nothing better in the game than seeing a corner forward win a ball sell a dummy, turn the man and sail one over the bar. now they just take that mark and set themselves. also the fact that if a forward makes a clean catch and doesn't take a mark but defender cant touch him for basically 4 steps completely takes away the art of defending if a forward gets the ball in front of you, honestly, of all the terrible rules there have been this is by far and away the worst it really has to go

Quote from: themac_23 on December 16, 2020, 11:35:01 AM
Hate the advanced mark rule with a passion, completely ruins fluidity in the forward line, 90% of the time now players will call a mark if they catch it, even if not in a scoring position because there is maybe a defender right tight to them, its a cop out for a forward they no longer have to beat a man. it has slowed the best part of the game down, nothing better in the game than seeing a corner forward win a ball sell a dummy, turn the man and sail one over the bar. now they just take that mark and set themselves. also the fact that if a forward makes a clean catch and doesn't take a mark but defender cant touch him for basically 4 steps completely takes away the art of defending if a forward gets the ball in front of you, honestly, of all the terrible rules there have been this is by far and away the worst it really has to go

Agree with this. If you dont call the mark immediately you should be fair game

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Oh I'm mistaken I obviously didn't play the game for 25 years and coach the last 15 then... but keep you working away posting absolute drivel all over the place  ::) ::) ::)

I like the advanced mark and I think it encourages teams to get their heads up and look for the long ball. It also encourages teams to get people into the half back line that can kick the ball. You can argue this was already coming naturally but I don't buy that myself.

Quote from: Itchy on December 16, 2020, 03:00:04 PM
I like the advanced mark and I think it encourages teams to get their heads up and look for the long ball. It also encourages teams to get people into the half back line that can kick the ball. You can argue this was already coming naturally but I don't buy that myself.

Maybe so but I still think the desired effect could be achieved more organically than through this big swipe at the heart of Gaelic Games.

——

I mean who in their right mind would want to be a corner back when the forward can "earn" an unopposed strike for a point, for displaying a skill so elementary as not fumbling a simple pass to him? Put simply, it's not fair.

——

What the rule makers want to achieve is the restoration of territorial tactics to something at least worth considering by teams, who have spent the past decade focused on possession tactics.

But Instead of looking only at the effect, the rule makers should look for the cause of possession-football dominance.

And the basic reason for it is that the current rules make it more rewarding than territory, particularly so if playing against a possession-tactics team. Basically, if you keep kicking the ball into 50:50 situations, against a well drilled possession team, you can expect to spend the vast majority of the match without the ball. Which makes it impossible to win.

And the reason why it's so easy, and therefore so rewarding, to play possession football is that there are no limits or boundaries to it within the rules; if after circling the ball at your own 45 for 5 minutes, you wish to kick it back to your goalkeeper, there is no deterrent.

The common refrain from the stands is "push up". But the basic reality is that when a player at midfield can choose to ping the ball into any of the 4 corners, then it's just not possible to remain continually pushed up with play; the ball travels 60m in 2 seconds. It's 4-5 times quicker than a player... and it doesn't tire as easily.

The solution, as broached here multiple times, is that if it was no longer possible for a team to pass the ball back across either 65, then the defending team would be given a real incentive to push up: for once they closed off the opposition half, they know the ball won't be simply kicked back over their heads in a few seconds time.

In one simple swoop, possession football becomes much more difficult, much less attractive. The direct result  of this change, is that territorial football becomes naturally more attractive. That shouldn't need explained, but to summarise: the penalty for getting boxed in on the 65 is innately much less appealing than one for losing the ball on the opposition 13. So you will do what you can to prevent it happening unnecessarily.

And you know the lovely thing for corner backs? Even though high balls might rain down upon them, they don't get unfairly punished because their opponent simply caught a ball.

This rule change needs an experimental period. Just to see.

Yeah, it's got to go. Along with the water breaks.

Quote from: Angelo on December 19, 2020, 07:18:03 PM
Yeah, it's got to go. Along with the water breaks.

Along with Cluxton. Everyone is sick looking at that hanger on.

Quote from: Itchy on December 16, 2020, 03:00:04 PM
I like the advanced mark and I think it encourages teams to get their heads up and look for the long ball. It also encourages teams to get people into the half back line that can kick the ball. You can argue this was already coming naturally but I don't buy that myself.

The one in the second half where Stephen Coen took the mark is exactly why it is a good rule. Dublin had 14 players back inside their own 45. Normally in this situation you could expect a team to continually go side to side and keep possession for a few minutes or take a pot shot. With this rule they were able to get their head up and play a brilliant 35 meter pinpoint pass into Coen's chest. It gives teams a potent weapon against mass defences. If the pass isn't perfect the defending team more than likely can set up a fast counter attack.

Quote from: lenny on December 19, 2020, 08:09:23 PM

Quote from: Itchy on December 16, 2020, 03:00:04 PM
I like the advanced mark and I think it encourages teams to get their heads up and look for the long ball. It also encourages teams to get people into the half back line that can kick the ball. You can argue this was already coming naturally but I don't buy that myself.

The one in the second half where Stephen Coen took the mark is exactly why it is a good rule. Dublin had 14 players back inside their own 45. Normally in this situation you could expect a team to continually go side to side and keep possession for a few minutes or take a pot shot. With this rule they were able to get their head up and play a brilliant 35 meter pinpoint pass into Coen's chest. It gives teams a potent weapon against mass defences. If the pass isn't perfect the defending team more than likely can set up a fast counter attack.

It's exactly why it isn't a good rule. It was a pass into a player who hadn't a chance of scoring into that situation. So teams are now trying to play illogical passes to create points from dead balls. He was faced the wrong way and surrounded by Dublin players. It makes a mockery of the game.

It takes the skill out of the game. You win a ball and the you stop, you don't try and take the challenges, beat a man, sell him a dummy, take a shot on under pressure. Instead you stop, put your hand up, wait for everyone to back off and take a shot at goal.

It really devalues any skill of the game. I look at the how it would have destroyed the joy we would have seen from guys like Linden, McCartney, Canavan, Mulligan, O'Neill, McDonnell, Jamie Clarke over the years if this rule had been in place.

Now I know Derry don't produce skillful forwards so maybe that is why you are all for it but for me it screws the defender and takes away any sort of quality forward play.

Get rid

This new proposed rule where a penalty will be given for "denial of a goalscoring opportunity" is more eejitry

These new rules always start with bullshit talk about "rewarding" things or "punishing" things

"Rewarding" clean catching, "punishing" cynicism

"Ah shure it'd be great to see that catch rewarded"

But that's the game, you don't and shouldn't get rewarded for a catch, it's not Aussie Rules, and Paddy Small's speciality of darting out to collect a 10 yard pass and getting a point for it does nothing for the game, it's just boring

Leave "rewarding" and "punishing" things for rearing children

Scores that would likely never have happend without the advanced mark:

https://youtu.be/-p2FAGgp3pg

Quote from: screenexile on December 16, 2020, 12:16:35 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: screenexile on December 15, 2020, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: Angelo on December 15, 2020, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: lenny on December 14, 2020, 07:29:39 PM

Quote from: J70 on December 14, 2020, 02:42:47 PM
They obviously want to encourage more kicking into the forwards.

Personally, I don't see much wrong with it. Accurate kicking and catching are skills we want to reward.

Totally agree, the advance mark has been a big success this year. Teams like Cavan and tipp have been successful playing a much more direct game than we've seen in previous seasons. This was surely as a result of the advanced mark. Mayo have been more direct than normal also and have used Aidan o Shea at full forward for good parts of games. It's been exciting to watch.

It has in its f**k. Mayo have used Aidan O'Shea at full forward in the past as he's a good target man, counties had been doing this before the mark. Team had already started to go much more direct again in the last few years before the mark.

It encourages teams to flood back now, majority of marks seem to be called somewhere between the 21 yard line and 45 yard line as teams have dropped back.

The only thing the advanced mark serves to do is dilute the quality of forward player. A forward no longer looks to sell a dummy or take his man on after winning a ball because he gets a free shot a goal.

It also is really unfair on a defender, part of the quality of a good defender is someone who is an excellent shadower, he might allow you get the ball but he's going to make sure you're going nowhere with it after.

You do know that not all kicks forward result in marks and that forwards still have to do these things??

Also your last part is nonsense. That "shadower" thing is part of the modern game when your defence is flooded let the forward win it and pass him off to a forward coming back to defend. It used to be you had to stop your man from getting the ball by getting out in front or reading the play and this is partly getting back to that.

Personally I'm not a massive fan of it but I'd like to see it play out for a year or 2 before I'd pass final judgment. I've yet to see a team really use it as a prolonged defined tactic so it would be interesting if that were to happen.

They have to all those things a lot less now.

It was never about stop your defender getting the ball. I have heard some amount of nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. Serious question, have you ever played the game? The first that would be roared at a corner back from the sideline when a ball went to his man was don't foul. If you are marking a good player sometimes you have no option but to let him win that ball and just try to stop him from doing anything with it. The hallmarks of a top class defender is someone who knows when to go for the ball and when to let his man get the ball and hold him up.

It's clear to me that you never played the game. Shadowing has always been a key part in what makes a good defender.

Oh I'm mistaken I obviously didn't play the game for 25 years and coach the last 15 then... but keep you working away posting absolute drivel all over the place  ::) ::) ::)

15 years?  Doire Colmcille?

Quote from: thewobbler on December 16, 2020, 05:56:20 PM

Quote from: Itchy on December 16, 2020, 03:00:04 PM
I like the advanced mark and I think it encourages teams to get their heads up and look for the long ball. It also encourages teams to get people into the half back line that can kick the ball. You can argue this was already coming naturally but I don't buy that myself.

Maybe so but I still think the desired effect could be achieved more organically than through this big swipe at the heart of Gaelic Games.

——

I mean who in their right mind would want to be a corner back when the forward can "earn" an unopposed strike for a point, for displaying a skill so elementary as not fumbling a simple pass to him? Put simply, it's not fair.

——

What the rule makers want to achieve is the restoration of territorial tactics to something at least worth considering by teams, who have spent the past decade focused on possession tactics.

But Instead of looking only at the effect, the rule makers should look for the cause of possession-football dominance.

And the basic reason for it is that the current rules make it more rewarding than territory, particularly so if playing against a possession-tactics team. Basically, if you keep kicking the ball into 50:50 situations, against a well drilled possession team, you can expect to spend the vast majority of the match without the ball. Which makes it impossible to win.

And the reason why it's so easy, and therefore so rewarding, to play possession football is that there are no limits or boundaries to it within the rules; if after circling the ball at your own 45 for 5 minutes, you wish to kick it back to your goalkeeper, there is no deterrent.

The common refrain from the stands is "push up". But the basic reality is that when a player at midfield can choose to ping the ball into any of the 4 corners, then it's just not possible to remain continually pushed up with play; the ball travels 60m in 2 seconds. It's 4-5 times quicker than a player... and it doesn't tire as easily.

The solution, as broached here multiple times, is that if it was no longer possible for a team to pass the ball back across either 65, then the defending team would be given a real incentive to push up: for once they closed off the opposition half, they know the ball won't be simply kicked back over their heads in a few seconds time.

In one simple swoop, possession football becomes much more difficult, much less attractive. The direct result  of this change, is that territorial football becomes naturally more attractive. That shouldn't need explained, but to summarise: the penalty for getting boxed in on the 65 is innately much less appealing than one for losing the ball on the opposition 13. So you will do what you can to prevent it happening unnecessarily.

And you know the lovely thing for corner backs? Even though high balls might rain down upon them, they don't get unfairly punished because their opponent simply caught a ball.

This rule change needs an experimental period. Just to see.

There was a time I railed against it as a suggestion but I'd actually favour a restriction on the fistpass in the current game. Years ago defenders weren't just comfortably enough in possession to hold onto the ball for long periods in their own half or about midfield. Nowadays defenders are as accomplished as forwards at retaining possession, throwing dummies, beating men that it's just to easy to retain possession. I'd make a rule that you can't fistpass the ball in your own half. In one fell swoop you punish teams for playing about with the ball in your own half, passing back to the keeper and reward quick transition to the forwards. Likewise simply just dropping deep would be punished because when you'd turn the ball over you'd have to try to and move it up to the opposition half where it was easier to keep possession.

I dislike a no back pass rule. Surely if your leading a game you'd just camp your full team inside your half/65/whatever and wait for the team to cross. If you're leading then the longer the opposition piss about in their own half the better. The more players you've back the less incentive for them to attack or play risky kick passes and you know when they do cross you can simply press up with your spare players and force the technical foul or turnover. A no back pass rule to me punishes a team for moving the ball forward from defence to attack, that seems incompatible with the tactics we are trying to promote.

Trileac I would think the biggest difference in what we are suggesting boils down to the most likely outcomes:

- If there's a restriction on fist passing, the unintended outcome (I expect) is that players will hoof the ball away as far as they can, especially if there's any semblance of pressure. Which doesn't strike me as a skilled pursuit. Kicking the ball over the sideline would often be a better result than taking a second to look up, and getting bottled up.

- if there's a restriction on when you can pass a ball backwards ie at the 65s, your "get out" ball becomes a punt as close to the square as you can manage. This isn't necessarily more skilled, but it is more tactical: keeping 2-3 players close to goal at all times, thereby playing the percentages, becomes a necessity. Hence the balance of possession can territory would be restored a little.

Also I get your reservations about teams not  leaving their own half. But if 10-12 men press into the opposition 65, the opposition would have to leave that sector of the field. They'll have no choice, because there just won't be the room to guarantee ball retention, and when it's coughed up, it'll be usually in kicking range.

Think of James Carr when he came in yesterday. He made a series of lung busting runs across the field. All futile, because his tiring teammates couldn't block off the entire field. Like everyone else, he soon settled down into guarding some space rather than closing it down.

Gaelic football is the only sport on this earth where teams are provided an advantage for interminably  holding onto the ball without doing anything with that possession. Soccer used to have this when you could pass it back to the keeper. One small rule change changed the game immeasurably for the better.

Quote from: thewobbler on December 20, 2020, 11:20:46 PM
Also I get your reservations about teams not  leaving their own half. But if 10-12 men press into the opposition 65, the opposition would have to leave that sector of the field. They'll have no choice, because there just won't be the room to guarantee ball retention, and when it's coughed up, it'll be usually in

I've never seen that to be true though. Name a match where a team have pushed 10-12 of their player up into the opponent's half? I haven't seen it happen consistently mostly because it's very hard to co-ordinate and difficult to maintain for 70 minutes.

The James Carr thing reinforces my point. Whether in terms of fitness or tactics it's easier to pack your own defence with men and start defending there. That's why pretty much every team does it. So surely where a team are punished for crossing into your defensive area you'd just pack that area with players and wait for them to enter?

Quick fact check here.

On another forum Rory Brickendeen is coming in for some criticism for shooting when he called the mark in the late stages of last nights match v Kerry.

Some posters think he had the choice to pass the ball, my understanding is once an advanced mark is called the player must shoot within 15 seconds?

Who's correct here? Could Brickedeen have passed the ball or not after he chose to take the mark.

Quote from: highorlow on February 18, 2024, 11:29:35 AMQuick fact check here.

On another forum Rory Brickendeen is coming in for some criticism for shooting when he called the mark.

Some posters think he had the choice to pass the ball, my understanding is once an advanced mark is called the player must shoot within 15 seconds?

Who's correct here? Could Brickedeen have passed the ball or not?

Of course he can pass

Quote from: JoG2 on February 18, 2024, 11:36:11 AM

Quote from: highorlow on February 18, 2024, 11:29:35 AMQuick fact check here.

On another forum Rory Brickendeen is coming in for some criticism for shooting when he called the mark.

Some posters think he had the choice to pass the ball, my understanding is once an advanced mark is called the player must shoot within 15 seconds?

Who's correct here? Could Brickedeen have passed the ball or not?

Of course he can pass

He can pass or shoot.. calling the mark means he has space and 15 seconds to do either.

Jarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Surely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:47:30 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Mine, from a referee's perspective is easier to manage

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 07:33:32 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:47:30 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Mine, from a referee's perspective is easier to manage

How would it be?
How are you to know who is playing backs, midfield or forwards? Teams are making positional switches all the time, subs come in with 27 on the back and you have to keep track of who is making his way forward etc? That sounds very difficult.

His idea that once the ball goes over a certain line it is not allowed to go back over it is surely much easier managed?

Any suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

The second biggest problem with football is that people from counties that are doing well, would quite happily sleep through a season of matches as long as their county wins Sam.

f**k whether the sport is in any way fun or entertaining, so long as we are winning.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

How can you actually police this? Would this not be the very essence of law of unintended consequence? I already see many issues with this by barely thinking if it for a few seconds. Coaches will try coach around it. So will it in fact slow up play, and players won't pass the 45 until they are ready to. What then if defenders can block a player off in a U formation to force the ball carrier back one direction and give up a free? That'd look horrible. This isn't basketball with a small court, 10 players, non-contact, and a shot clock. Making arbitrary lines is just silly and cannot see how it makes the game any better otehr than ruining teh spectacle even more

Coaches will try to coach around whatever is presented to  them dreadnought, for the one unifying principle of GAA coaching seems to be to never coach skills when you can coach ways to compensate for a lack of skill, instead.

——

Honestly I believe you're missing a small part of the thought process here, which is the bit that connects it all.

Should two teams have absolutely no interest or intent in attacking then there is no rule changes that make the game into a spectacle. This is the same in every sport.

Where football suffers in comparison to other sports, is that if one of the teams is determined to spoil the game by eating the clock, retaining the ball etc, that it is pretty much necessary for their opponents to mirror that type of football. If not, they'll tire themselves out chasing the ball around, mentally as much as physically.

What the backcourt rule would do is ensure that if one team wants to play football, then the other team can't spoil it (entirely) for them. For when the attack-minded team presses, the opposition simply has to come out; they will not have the room within their own 45 to play keep ball.... And once they've left that third of the field, it's closed off to them, meaning the attack-minded team has a much smaller space again in which to press them.

——

Would coaches spend hours at training setting up "u formations"? You know what... initially some would. And it would even work sometimes. But then you have to begin to balance things up. Should you have a policy of 4-5 men committing wherever possible to "forcing a 45", is that 45 enough of a reward for the fact that if the opponent gets the ball away, an overlap is statistically inevitable?

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 09:53:06 AMCoaches will try to coach around whatever is presented to  them dreadnought, for the one unifying principle of GAA coaching seems to be to never coach skills when you can coach ways to compensate for a lack of skill, instead.

——

Honestly I believe you're missing a small part of the thought process here, which is the bit that connects it all.

Should two teams have absolutely no interest or intent in attacking then there is no rule changes that make the game into a spectacle. This is the same in every sport.

Where football suffers in comparison to other sports, is that if one of the teams is determined to spoil the game by eating the clock, retaining the ball etc, that it is pretty much necessary for their opponents to mirror that type of football. If not, they'll tire themselves out chasing the ball around, mentally as much as physically.

What the backcourt rule would do is ensure that if one team wants to play football, then the other team can't spoil it (entirely) for them. For when the attack-minded team presses, the opposition simply has to come out; they will not have the room within their own 45 to play keep ball.... And once they've left that third of the field, it's closed off to them, meaning the attack-minded team has a much smaller space again in which to press them.

——

Would coaches spend hours at training setting up "u formations"? You know what... initially some would. And it would even work sometimes. But then you have to begin to balance things up. Should you have a policy of 4-5 men committing wherever possible to "forcing a 45", is that 45 enough of a reward for the fact that if the opponent gets the ball away, an overlap is statistically inevitable?

They absolutely will. But either way, the game needs tweaks, not huge changes that may irreversibly change the game. Coaches will try get around it so we need tweaks to adjust issues to try and streamline it and make the game more attacking and open. We are trying to chase a utopia style game that never actually existed in the past based on what ol' boys used to talk about. What we can do is try and make the modern game better. But coming up with mad stuff like no returning over a line is really odd. it's a field sport, but we'd reduce the field at certain times when we're trying to make more space?

The game doesn't need any more interference feel like the rules change every year and this "Football Development Panel" is just jobs for the boys (£££).

If people want open and attacking football then only way that doesn't make an absolute shit show of the game is to drop the players on a team from 15 to 13. Player's will still flood back yes but more space available to get scores from

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 08:56:55 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

The second biggest problem with football is that people from counties that are doing well, would quite happily sleep through a season of matches as long as their county wins Sam.

f**k whether the sport is in any way fun or entertaining, so long as we are winning.

The sport like any other needs maintenance.
But there are as many entertaining games now as there ever was.
There is simply much more of it on display and therefore more mediocre games to whinge about.
If you want to see more attacking football lets do something about the tackle. To see the ball carrier surrounded by 3 or four men in a mall and then blow them up for overcarrying is not right.
Simple answer, penalise the 3rd man in and give forwards a chance to display their abilities.
The centre field players will have more confidence in their forwards and more likely to play the ball in.

And cheap shots about which supporters county is doing well or not is just begrudgery not support.
Wise up.

Just as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

Derryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

Enforce the steps rule (and the 15 second mark rule for attackers while ye're at it ) to make the ball more available.
Coach tackling the ball from an early age.

Letting the man with the ball assault would be tacklers is a strike and should have the same penalty (red) as if the tackler assaulted the man with the ball.

The ball is not the personal possession of a player and anyone trying to keep it shouldn't be getting the privileges/abuses they're being wrongly allowed these days.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

Its begrudgery nothing more.

Derry are nothing special and wont be winning Sam anytime soon.
But almost every game does have moments of magic and you see these moments from previous games being used to say you never see this anymore.
Just recently I think it was Cahir O'kane highlighted impossible scores from deep in the pocket that are never tried anymore.
The following week Niall Toner pinned one from an even more Impossible angle.  But nobody highlighted it.

I advise that people actually sit down and watch the great games of yesterday with a critical mind.
Take the 1994 Ulster semi final Down and Derry. Hailed as one of the great games of the 90s. Perhaps it was.  I think it was ordinary enough, but was it better than last years Semifinal with Kerry and Derry?

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:05:33 AMJust as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

I don't think it is OTT. You are saying once you pass a 45 you can't return. That literally is drawing an arbitrary line or barrier you can't return past and I cannot see in any way how this helps the game other than players and coaches finding a way to make it a mess for a turnover

Quote from: Mourne Red on February 27, 2024, 10:00:49 AMThe game doesn't need any more interference feel like the rules change every year and this "Football Development Panel" is just jobs for the boys (£££).

If people want open and attacking football then only way that doesn't make an absolute shit show of the game is to drop the players on a team from 15 to 13. Player's will still flood back yes but more space available to get scores from

This new thing Burns has started? At least give it a chance. If it got rid of the inside mark and penalty shootouts I'd be happy.

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:29:49 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:05:33 AMJust as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

I don't think it is OTT. You are saying once you pass a 45 you can't return. That literally is drawing an arbitrary line or barrier you can't return past and I cannot see in any way how this helps the game other than players and coaches finding a way to make it a mess for a turnover

"In any way"?

You honestly can't see how the back court rule would reward teams for pressing up and pushing the opposition out?

 I do think you've settled on a position before considering it.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 11:54:55 AM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:29:49 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:05:33 AMJust as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

I don't think it is OTT. You are saying once you pass a 45 you can't return. That literally is drawing an arbitrary line or barrier you can't return past and I cannot see in any way how this helps the game other than players and coaches finding a way to make it a mess for a turnover

"In any way"?

You honestly can't see how the back court rule would reward teams for pressing up and pushing the opposition out?

 I do think you've settled on a position before considering it.

Absolutely I've thought of it. It rewards pressing like you say, in a U. So everyone drops back immediately to the 45 line to crowd the area. Where's the space for attacks with so many back? And then you swarm a fella who steps a foot inside the 45? Why over reward defence and not try and get ways to open space and get lads to attack instead?

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 10:44:59 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

Its begrudgery nothing more.

Derry are nothing special and wont be winning Sam anytime soon.
But almost every game does have moments of magic and you see these moments from previous games being used to say you never see this anymore.
Just recently I think it was Cahir O'kane highlighted impossible scores from deep in the pocket that are never tried anymore.
The following week Niall Toner pinned one from an even more Impossible angle.  But nobody highlighted it.

I advise that people actually sit down and watch the great games of yesterday with a critical mind.
Take the 1994 Ulster semi final Down and Derry. Hailed as one of the great games of the 90s. Perhaps it was.  I think it was ordinary enough, but was it better than last years Semifinal with Kerry and Derry?

This sort of discussion kind of reminds me of the Robin Williams and Matt Damon chat in Good Will Hunting.

Dismiss the quality of the 1994 match all you like.  Dismiss old football all you like.

Stats can tell you football has never been better.

But anybody who has experienced both the championship going experience of the 90s-00s, and that of today, and claims to prefer the latter, is either a liar or a wind up merchant.

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:58:43 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 11:54:55 AM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:29:49 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:05:33 AMJust as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

I don't think it is OTT. You are saying once you pass a 45 you can't return. That literally is drawing an arbitrary line or barrier you can't return past and I cannot see in any way how this helps the game other than players and coaches finding a way to make it a mess for a turnover

"In any way"?

You honestly can't see how the back court rule would reward teams for pressing up and pushing the opposition out?

 I do think you've settled on a position before considering it.

Absolutely I've thought of it. It rewards pressing like you say, in a U. So everyone drops back immediately to the 45 line to crowd the area. Where's the space for attacks with so many back? And then you swarm a fella who steps a foot inside the 45? Why over reward defence and not try and get ways to open space and get lads to attack instead?

It's not devised to over-reward defensive pressure. It's devised as a deterrent to the endless recycling of possession through skill-less handpassing into acres of space; the single greatest blight on Gaelic Football.

The value of possession currently dominates that of territory. Until this is addressed our game will continue to be an abomination.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Under these rules Id just coach my team to play Mourinho ball. Take an early lead. Then simply retreat all 15 of our players into my own half. If the opposing team are down 3/4 points they can't just sit back. They must advance into our half. And once they do they're trapped in it. Win a turnover and break into the oceans of space present in their half because all of my team and a large proportion of theirs are in my half.

This would ingrain the current extra-time tactic of mass retreat by the leading team.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 12:09:38 PM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:58:43 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 11:54:55 AM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 11:29:49 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:05:33 AMJust as an aside.

Your annoyance at "arbitrary lines" is perhaps OTT.

All field sports are founded upon arbitrary lines being drawn to signal the boundaries of the playing area.

I'm surely not alone in being in awe at the awareness, skill and perception shown by rugby players and NFL players - on both sides of the ball - when the presence of a sideline (or endline, or 20m line, or 10 yard imaginary line) can influence the current play.

Neither of these sports see arbitrary lines as a problem, just a necessary mechanism for keeping the game moving. Why not Gaelic football?

I don't think it is OTT. You are saying once you pass a 45 you can't return. That literally is drawing an arbitrary line or barrier you can't return past and I cannot see in any way how this helps the game other than players and coaches finding a way to make it a mess for a turnover

"In any way"?

You honestly can't see how the back court rule would reward teams for pressing up and pushing the opposition out?

 I do think you've settled on a position before considering it.

Absolutely I've thought of it. It rewards pressing like you say, in a U. So everyone drops back immediately to the 45 line to crowd the area. Where's the space for attacks with so many back? And then you swarm a fella who steps a foot inside the 45? Why over reward defence and not try and get ways to open space and get lads to attack instead?

It's not devised to over-reward defensive pressure. It's devised as a deterrent to the endless recycling of possession through skill-less handpassing into acres of space; the single greatest blight on Gaelic Football.

The value of possession currently dominates that of territory. Until this is addressed our game will continue to be an abomination.

But you just said it'd reward defensive pressure. that's my point about the law of unintended consequence. You'd try fix something with a major rule change, and you'd make it far worse instead

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 12:02:07 PM

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 10:44:59 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

Its begrudgery nothing more.

Derry are nothing special and wont be winning Sam anytime soon.
But almost every game does have moments of magic and you see these moments from previous games being used to say you never see this anymore.
Just recently I think it was Cahir O'kane highlighted impossible scores from deep in the pocket that are never tried anymore.
The following week Niall Toner pinned one from an even more Impossible angle.  But nobody highlighted it.

I advise that people actually sit down and watch the great games of yesterday with a critical mind.
Take the 1994 Ulster semi final Down and Derry. Hailed as one of the great games of the 90s. Perhaps it was.  I think it was ordinary enough, but was it better than last years Semifinal with Kerry and Derry?

This sort of discussion kind of reminds me of the Robin Williams and Matt Damon chat in Good Will Hunting.

Dismiss the quality of the 1994 match all you like.  Dismiss old football all you like.

Stats can tell you football has never been better.

But anybody who has experienced both the championship going experience of the 90s-00s, and that of today, and claims to prefer the latter, is either a liar or a wind up merchant.

So you are only allowed to reference past games if you consider them an example of how bad todays games are?

When your answer is "your a liar or wind up merchant" , you have lost the argument and don't deserve interaction with.

Quote from: trileacman on February 27, 2024, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Under these rules Id just coach my team to play Mourinho ball. Take an early lead. Then simply retreat all 15 of our players into my own half. If the opposing team are down 3/4 points they can't just sit back. They must advance into our half. And once they do they're trapped in it. Win a turnover and break into the oceans of space present in their half because all of my team and a large proportion of theirs are in my half.

This would ingrain the current extra-time tactic of mass retreat by the leading team.

Someone gets it...

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 12:26:35 PM

Quote from: trileacman on February 27, 2024, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Under these rules Id just coach my team to play Mourinho ball. Take an early lead. Then simply retreat all 15 of our players into my own half. If the opposing team are down 3/4 points they can't just sit back. They must advance into our half. And once they do they're trapped in it. Win a turnover and break into the oceans of space present in their half because all of my team and a large proportion of theirs are in my half.

This would ingrain the current extra-time tactic of mass retreat by the leading team.

Someone gets it...

That they might. What I mean is that they might well be right and I'm barking up the wrong tree.

But I'd ask this

1. What is actually different between this proposed version of "Mourinho ball" and the one that currently takes place? They're following exactly the same principles to me.

2. How many men do you actually think you would need to press into the opposition 45 to push them out? Be honest. Let's say 10. Maybe 11 against a highly skilled possession team. You won't need 15, that's for sure.  Yeah that would leave oceans of space in your own half. But unless your opponents leave men up too, then there shouldn't be that overlap described.

Quote from: Duine Inteacht Eile on February 27, 2024, 08:10:33 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 07:33:32 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:47:30 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Mine, from a referee's perspective is easier to manage

How would it be?
How are you to know who is playing backs, midfield or forwards? Teams are making positional switches all the time, subs come in with 27 on the back and you have to keep track of who is making his way forward etc? That sounds very difficult.

His idea that once the ball goes over a certain line it is not allowed to go back over it is surely much easier managed?

For me its the numbers on their backs, 1 to 7 are defenders 8 and 9 are midfielders and the others are forwards. If subs come on they replace either position and its a simple tick in our numbers page on the sheet.

If teams want to make a positional change they have to wait for a break in play and do it then

Flooding defence and flooding attack or teams holding up the ball in front of a wall of 'defenders' is really annoying to watch and pretty boring for the players also.

I've watched so many games at club level, players are actually passing someone with the ball so they can get into position to set up their defence! No attempt is made to tackle they guy, that's just one aspect.

If these footballing brains come up with ideas, they will be as difficult to navigate as any other rule change has been at the start

So a referee would be expected to continually count the number of players in a given section of the field and then ascertain whether all of those players are permitted in that section. For the entire game. Along with everything else.

I don't think that would be one bit manageable.


That's not me agreeing with wobbler's idea by the way. I think his idea completely rewards those creating the problem.

But it would definitely be easier for a referee to manage.

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 01:44:42 PM

Quote from: Duine Inteacht Eile on February 27, 2024, 08:10:33 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 07:33:32 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:47:30 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Mine, from a referee's perspective is easier to manage

How would it be?
How are you to know who is playing backs, midfield or forwards? Teams are making positional switches all the time, subs come in with 27 on the back and you have to keep track of who is making his way forward etc? That sounds very difficult.

His idea that once the ball goes over a certain line it is not allowed to go back over it is surely much easier managed?

For me its the numbers on their backs, 1 to 7 are defenders 8 and 9 are midfielders and the others are forwards. If subs come on they replace either position and its a simple tick in our numbers page on the sheet.

If teams want to make a positional change they have to wait for a break in play and do it then

Flooding defence and flooding attack or teams holding up the ball in front of a wall of 'defenders' is really annoying to watch and pretty boring for the players also.

I've watched so many games at club level, players are actually passing someone with the ball so they can get into position to set up their defence! No attempt is made to tackle they guy, that's just one aspect.

If these footballing brains come up with ideas, they will be as difficult to navigate as any other rule change has been at the start

There is nothing simple about that no 20 could be coming on for number 15 and going wing back and number 7 moving into the forwards. Like to see how that would be managed with maybe 10 subs on the pitch near the end of a game.

Quote from: Cavan19 on February 27, 2024, 03:43:12 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 01:44:42 PM

Quote from: Duine Inteacht Eile on February 27, 2024, 08:10:33 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 07:33:32 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:47:30 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:39:48 PMSurely just leave defenders in defence forwards stay up front and midfielders can roam the pitch?

See that's roughly how I think things would pan out with the half court rule. Some teams would stick to counter attacking football, which is no bad thing in itself so long as they don't have elongated possession before pressing go, but even the most rigid defensive structure would need at least one totem full forward as the plan b / blind alley option. For if they don't have that, they're just going to keep giving the pressing team the ball back.

Mine, from a referee's perspective is easier to manage

How would it be?
How are you to know who is playing backs, midfield or forwards? Teams are making positional switches all the time, subs come in with 27 on the back and you have to keep track of who is making his way forward etc? That sounds very difficult.

His idea that once the ball goes over a certain line it is not allowed to go back over it is surely much easier managed?

For me its the numbers on their backs, 1 to 7 are defenders 8 and 9 are midfielders and the others are forwards. If subs come on they replace either position and its a simple tick in our numbers page on the sheet.

If teams want to make a positional change they have to wait for a break in play and do it then

Flooding defence and flooding attack or teams holding up the ball in front of a wall of 'defenders' is really annoying to watch and pretty boring for the players also.

I've watched so many games at club level, players are actually passing someone with the ball so they can get into position to set up their defence! No attempt is made to tackle they guy, that's just one aspect.

If these footballing brains come up with ideas, they will be as difficult to navigate as any other rule change has been at the start

There is nothing simple about that no 20 could be coming on for number 15 and going wing back and number 7 moving into the forwards. Like to see how that would be managed with maybe 10 subs on the pitch near the end of a game.

It's a daft idea and never going to happen (I hope)

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

We were, but in our defense, it wasn't an obvious certainty (at least to me early on!) that the game would evolve in the manner in did following Jim's lead. I think back to our thrilling semis against Cork and Dublin, when they played open and allowed us to annihilate them on the break. By the 2016 Ulster Final, the writing was on the wall for me (that was like a pair of slow, giant sumo wrestlers going at it, rescued for Tyrone in injury time by three worldie points) and its only gotten worse. When we held the ball for the last 90 seconds of normal time in the 2022 Ulster Final, instead of trying to go for the winning score, I was pretty much done.

I read Jarlath's interview on GAA.ie and his plans for a root and branch look at how the game is played. Hope he succeeds, because I'm finding it hard to even watch Donegal these days. Aside from the freak of nature that is David Clifford, how many GAA stars could be considered among the top sports people in the country? As Burns alludes to when talking about skillful forwards being basically rendered obsolete, without his physique to go with his incredible skillset, would even Clifford be up there?

Watched plenty of All-Ireland finals back past 40yrs recently, you be lucky to get 1 in 4 of them, been a good game, 1 in 10 a outstanding game. Back then, half the lads back in the 80's, got the ball and just kicked it as far as they can. Now u watching  and going, what the hell they at, work it up the field

Quote from: J70 on February 27, 2024, 05:31:16 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

We were, but in our defense, it wasn't an obvious certainty (at least to me early on!) that the game would evolve in the manner in did following Jim's lead. I think back to our thrilling semis against Cork and Dublin, when they played open and allowed us to annihilate them on the break. By the 2016 Ulster Final, the writing was on the wall for me (that was like a pair of slow, giant sumo wrestlers going at it, rescued for Tyrone in injury time by three worldie points) and its only gotten worse. When we held the ball for the last 90 seconds of normal time in the 2022 Ulster Final, instead of trying to go for the winning score, I was pretty much done.

I read Jarlath's interview on GAA.ie and his plans for a root and branch look at how the game is played. Hope he succeeds, because I'm finding it hard to even watch Donegal these days. Aside from the freak of nature that is David Clifford, how many GAA stars could be considered among the top sports people in the country? As Burns alludes to when talking about skillful forwards being basically rendered obsolete, without his physique to go with his incredible skillset, would even Clifford be up there?

Dara Canavan an interesting case study in this. I still think he's surviving ok. the da was obviously absolutely fantastic and it's an interesting question as to whether or not he would survive in today's game (course he would I would say) but the son is a chip off the old block so I think he will be the test of it.

Clifford's physique a massive help yes.

Quote from: J70 on February 27, 2024, 05:31:16 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

We were, but in our defense, it wasn't an obvious certainty (at least to me early on!) that the game would evolve in the manner in did following Jim's lead. I think back to our thrilling semis against Cork and Dublin, when they played open and allowed us to annihilate them on the break. By the 2016 Ulster Final, the writing was on the wall for me (that was like a pair of slow, giant sumo wrestlers going at it, rescued for Tyrone in injury time by three worldie points) and its only gotten worse. When we held the ball for the last 90 seconds of normal time in the 2022 Ulster Final, instead of trying to go for the winning score, I was pretty much done.

I read Jarlath's interview on GAA.ie and his plans for a root and branch look at how the game is played. Hope he succeeds, because I'm finding it hard to even watch Donegal these days. Aside from the freak of nature that is David Clifford, how many GAA stars could be considered among the top sports people in the country? As Burns alludes to when talking about skillful forwards being basically rendered obsolete, without his physique to go with his incredible skillset, would even Clifford be up there?

Clifford is arguably the best of all time. Current stars who would be among the top sports people in the country would surely include Conor Glass, Darragh Canavan, Shane Mcguigan, Con OCallaghan. A lot of people criticise the modern game saying there's no room for flair and marquee forwards don't get a chance but in recent games we've seen Con O'C score 3.4, Shane McGuigan 0.11 and canavan 1.5. There possibly are rules which could be tinkered with slightly but there's still a great game there and the crowds are still turning out to see the games.

Quote from: Duine Inteacht Eile on February 27, 2024, 03:26:46 PMSo a referee would be expected to continually count the number of players in a given section of the field and then ascertain whether all of those players are permitted in that section. For the entire game. Along with everything else.

I don't think that would be one bit manageable.


That's not me agreeing with wobbler's idea by the way. I think his idea completely rewards those creating the problem.

But it would definitely be easier for a referee to manage.

So tell me how do we stop 15 players behind the ball? Or stop negative football?

That said I'd have played a third midfielder or player in the line between that and our 45 when managing our hurlers when we moved up, as getting hidings were demoralising

Quote from: lenny on February 27, 2024, 07:02:10 PM

Quote from: J70 on February 27, 2024, 05:31:16 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

We were, but in our defense, it wasn't an obvious certainty (at least to me early on!) that the game would evolve in the manner in did following Jim's lead. I think back to our thrilling semis against Cork and Dublin, when they played open and allowed us to annihilate them on the break. By the 2016 Ulster Final, the writing was on the wall for me (that was like a pair of slow, giant sumo wrestlers going at it, rescued for Tyrone in injury time by three worldie points) and its only gotten worse. When we held the ball for the last 90 seconds of normal time in the 2022 Ulster Final, instead of trying to go for the winning score, I was pretty much done.

I read Jarlath's interview on GAA.ie and his plans for a root and branch look at how the game is played. Hope he succeeds, because I'm finding it hard to even watch Donegal these days. Aside from the freak of nature that is David Clifford, how many GAA stars could be considered among the top sports people in the country? As Burns alludes to when talking about skillful forwards being basically rendered obsolete, without his physique to go with his incredible skillset, would even Clifford be up there?

Clifford is arguably the best of all time. Current stars who would be among the top sports people in the country would surely include Conor Glass, Darragh Canavan, Shane Mcguigan, Con OCallaghan. A lot of people criticise the modern game saying there's no room for flair and marquee forwards don't get a chance but in recent games we've seen Con O'C score 3.4, Shane McGuigan 0.11 and canavan 1.5. There possibly are rules which could be tinkered with slightly but there's still a great game there and the crowds are still turning out to see the games.

I do believe limiting the number of players allowed to tackle the ball carrier at any one time would make a vast difference to the game.
It would give talented ball carriers and forwards a fair chance to  display their skills and would give confidence to the centre field players that a pass into their forwards will have a chance of reaping reward.
It is pitiful to see 3 and 4 players malling a forward and winning a free from it.

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on February 27, 2024, 06:45:47 PMWatched plenty of All-Ireland finals back past 40yrs recently, you be lucky to get 1 in 4 of them, been a good game, 1 in 10 a outstanding game. Back then, half the lads back in the 80's, got the ball and just kicked it as far as they can. Now u watching  and going, what the hell they at, work it up the field

I agree there was some poor matches especially in the 80s. It got better in the 90s and into the 00s imho. The thing that existing in football back then that made it interesting is jeopardy. Forget about the David Clifford and Con show at the all ireland level, go to a junior or intermediate club match where the teams are trying to copy cat the senior teams and keep the ball - it's completely unwatchable.

Quote from: clonian on February 27, 2024, 07:56:28 PM

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on February 27, 2024, 06:45:47 PMWatched plenty of All-Ireland finals back past 40yrs recently, you be lucky to get 1 in 4 of them, been a good game, 1 in 10 a outstanding game. Back then, half the lads back in the 80's, got the ball and just kicked it as far as they can. Now u watching  and going, what the hell they at, work it up the field

I agree there was some poor matches especially in the 80s. It got better in the 90s and into the 00s imho. The thing that existing in football back then that made it interesting is jeopardy. Forget about the David Clifford and Con show at the all ireland level, go to a junior or intermediate club match where the teams are trying to copy cat the senior teams and keep the ball - it's completely unwatchable.

Same in hurling, goalkeeper playing a short puc out to a corner back near the sideline - where the ball is invariably fumbled or goes out over the sideline

Quote from: lenny on February 27, 2024, 07:02:10 PM

Quote from: J70 on February 27, 2024, 05:31:16 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 10:12:11 AMDerryman forever, it's not a cheap shot at all.

This board goes back forever and a day.

Look at threads on rule changes from the early noughties and it's Donegal ones saying there's nothing wrong with the game. Look at the late noughties threads and it's all Dublin ones telling us that we should get better at football instead of trying to change the rules. The past few years it's Derry wans telling us that football is as good to watch now as it ever was.

With all due respect, I don't think people from your county are currently objective about the state of Gaelic Football. This isn't a criticism of Derry btw... you folks didn't create this mess and it's absolute credit that instead of whinging about it, you've caught up.

But football is shite. Absolute shite. That's our sport and it's absolute shite.

We were, but in our defense, it wasn't an obvious certainty (at least to me early on!) that the game would evolve in the manner in did following Jim's lead. I think back to our thrilling semis against Cork and Dublin, when they played open and allowed us to annihilate them on the break. By the 2016 Ulster Final, the writing was on the wall for me (that was like a pair of slow, giant sumo wrestlers going at it, rescued for Tyrone in injury time by three worldie points) and its only gotten worse. When we held the ball for the last 90 seconds of normal time in the 2022 Ulster Final, instead of trying to go for the winning score, I was pretty much done.

I read Jarlath's interview on GAA.ie and his plans for a root and branch look at how the game is played. Hope he succeeds, because I'm finding it hard to even watch Donegal these days. Aside from the freak of nature that is David Clifford, how many GAA stars could be considered among the top sports people in the country? As Burns alludes to when talking about skillful forwards being basically rendered obsolete, without his physique to go with his incredible skillset, would even Clifford be up there?

Clifford is arguably the best of all time. Current stars who would be among the top sports people in the country would surely include Conor Glass, Darragh Canavan, Shane Mcguigan, Con OCallaghan. A lot of people criticise the modern game saying there's no room for flair and marquee forwards don't get a chance but in recent games we've seen Con O'C score 3.4, Shane McGuigan 0.11 and canavan 1.5. There possibly are rules which could be tinkered with slightly but there's still a great game there and the crowds are still turning out to see the games.

Yeah, but back in the day, most counties had a couple of corner forwards who could get a few scores from play on an average day, winning ball and taking on and beating their man. How many of those do we have these days? They're not getting a chance. When's the last time we saw an epic one on one battle? Last one I can think of was Higgins and O'Donoghue, and that was ten years ago! Even at that time, it was a bit of a throwback, which is partly why it got everyone so excited. In the first part of his intercounty career, I used to love watching Karl Lacey go one on one with the likes of Paddy Bradley and Stevie McDonnell. Even when we were utter shite, you knew Lacey would have a great battle with the opposition's top corner forward, just the two of them going at it.

No more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 12:42:55 PM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 12:26:35 PM

Quote from: trileacman on February 27, 2024, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Under these rules Id just coach my team to play Mourinho ball. Take an early lead. Then simply retreat all 15 of our players into my own half. If the opposing team are down 3/4 points they can't just sit back. They must advance into our half. And once they do they're trapped in it. Win a turnover and break into the oceans of space present in their half because all of my team and a large proportion of theirs are in my half.

This would ingrain the current extra-time tactic of mass retreat by the leading team.

Someone gets it...

That they might. What I mean is that they might well be right and I'm barking up the wrong tree.

But I'd ask this

1. What is actually different between this proposed version of "Mourinho ball" and the one that currently takes place? They're following exactly the same principles to me.

2. How many men do you actually think you would need to press into the opposition 45 to push them out? Be honest. Let's say 10. Maybe 11 against a highly skilled possession team. You won't need 15, that's for sure.  Yeah that would leave oceans of space in your own half. But unless your opponents leave men up too, then there shouldn't be that overlap described.

Addressing points in order

1. There's no difference between current tactics and my Mourinho ball scenario. That's the point I'm making. You're advocating for a rule change which by your own admission will cement the current state of the game. Unless you can propose why a team 2 or 3 points up would advance into the opposition 45 when they know that as soon as the attacking team cross the 45 the space they can use decreases by 40%.

2. You're describing why teams should press up. You haven't explained how teams are encouraged to press up under your proposed rules. It seems self evident to me that a half court rule would encourage teams to retreat to the 45 as they're then having to defend a much smaller pitch with the same amount of players.


Coaches/teams aren't intrinsically negative or defensive. Their focus is on winning and being competitive. If pushing up worked easily then coaches and the top teams would do that. But the risks far outweigh the rewards and so teams, especially at the start of games when they are trying to be overrun, and at the end when they are tired chose to defend deep and in numbers. Simply stating in print that pushing up on teams is a winning strategy doesn't make it so. If it were you'd see it every Sunday.

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

I don;t think they do actually. In Tailteann Cup final 2022, a Westmeath player fell to the ground, and played the ball along the ground in the build up to their goal. We were incensed. But turns out when a player falls to ground, they can indeed allow the ball to touch the ground and play it. Now that I know this rule (didn't before this one) I've noticed it and see refs allowing it

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 28, 2024, 08:27:01 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

I don;t think they do actually. In Tailteann Cup final 2022, a Westmeath player fell to the ground, and played the ball along the ground in the build up to their goal. We were incensed. But turns out when a player falls to ground, they can indeed allow the ball to touch the ground and play it. Now that I know this rule (didn't before this one) I've noticed it and see refs allowing it

I think it was brought in as a safety thing- you're obviously vulnerable on the ground so you can flick the ball away from yourself to protect you.

What percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

0 I'd say?

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

Not many. I thought I knew the rules quite well, but found that one out in 2022. So every day a school day and all that

Quote from: trileacman on February 27, 2024, 11:58:24 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 27, 2024, 12:42:55 PM

Quote from: Dreadnought on February 27, 2024, 12:26:35 PM

Quote from: trileacman on February 27, 2024, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on February 26, 2024, 10:35:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 26, 2024, 10:23:26 PMJarlth has plans to look at the game of football and change its negativity

Going to be difficult

I vowed never to type this up again. But I can't help it.

The fundamental problem with football is that the value of possession greatly outweighs the value of territory.

So instead of the rule makers looking at gimmicks - like the advanced mark - they need to look at the fundamental structures of the game.

Bring in the half court rule (no returning over either 45) and bring in a substantial penalty for breaking the rule (45m free from hand or the ground).

There will be a period of adjustment when (particular club) teams who've spent the past 10 years protecting the D, are afraid to leave the D at all. But it'll slowly dawn on everyone that when the opposition press you, the best thing you can do is move the ball quickly into the spaces left in their half. And I before long they'll understand that if they don't score every time it doesn't matter - as the ball will be returned to them much more often under these principles.

Under these rules Id just coach my team to play Mourinho ball. Take an early lead. Then simply retreat all 15 of our players into my own half. If the opposing team are down 3/4 points they can't just sit back. They must advance into our half. And once they do they're trapped in it. Win a turnover and break into the oceans of space present in their half because all of my team and a large proportion of theirs are in my half.

This would ingrain the current extra-time tactic of mass retreat by the leading team.

Someone gets it...

That they might. What I mean is that they might well be right and I'm barking up the wrong tree.

But I'd ask this

1. What is actually different between this proposed version of "Mourinho ball" and the one that currently takes place? They're following exactly the same principles to me.

2. How many men do you actually think you would need to press into the opposition 45 to push them out? Be honest. Let's say 10. Maybe 11 against a highly skilled possession team. You won't need 15, that's for sure.  Yeah that would leave oceans of space in your own half. But unless your opponents leave men up too, then there shouldn't be that overlap described.

Addressing points in order

1. There's no difference between current tactics and my Mourinho ball scenario. That's the point I'm making. You're advocating for a rule change which by your own admission will cement the current state of the game. Unless you can propose why a team 2 or 3 points up would advance into the opposition 45 when they know that as soon as the attacking team cross the 45 the space they can use decreases by 40%.

2. You're describing why teams should press up. You haven't explained how teams are encouraged to press up under your proposed rules. It seems self evident to me that a half court rule would encourage teams to retreat to the 45 as they're then having to defend a much smaller pitch with the same amount of players.


Coaches/teams aren't intrinsically negative or defensive. Their focus is on winning and being competitive. If pushing up worked easily then coaches and the top teams would do that. But the risks far outweigh the rewards and so teams, especially at the start of games when they are trying to be overrun, and at the end when they are tired chose to defend deep and in numbers. Simply stating in print that pushing up on teams is a winning strategy doesn't make it so. If it were you'd see it every Sunday.

My take Trileacman.

1. Our rules as they stand, mean that should neither team have an interest in attacking, then it's more than feasible that each would simply stay in their own half and play keep ball. Introducing back court lines does not make this situation any more or any less feasible.

2. Our rules as they stand do not prevent two teams that are hell bent on playing attacking football, from putting on a show. But both teams have to be (roughly) equally committed to this concept for it to work. Which is hen's teeth stuff.

3. The biggest weakness in the current rules/structures is that when one team wants to attack and the other wants only to contain, then the attacking team has little choice but to adapt their game and play containment football. Otherwise  they'll spend all their energy chasing shadows when they don't have the ball, going around in circles when they do have the ball, and chasing lost causes when their opponents counter attack. They have effectively no choice but to mirror their opponents' strategy and just be better at it.

4. What the backcourt rule would do - I believe - is provide some balance to that weakness above. The most simple explainer for this is how a negative/containment team would have to completely redress  their own kickout strategy. Currently the attack minded opposition can push up across the board and try to force the kickout to go long. But should the defending team conjure a soft spot, or indeed regain their own kickout literally anywhere on the field, they can choose to go backwards and play receycle-til-we-die. With a back court rule, the attacking team could, most of the time, ensure the kickout must go beyond the 45 by pushing 7-8 players up into 3 banks. And once that kickout goes long, it's not going back into the originating 45 unless the attacking team take it there. recycle-til-we-die just won't be an attractive option without the bail out option. The new bail out option would be to send it long.

5. Coaches, certainly in club football, are in my opinion intrinsically negative. As a rule, they will forego improvements in basic skills, in favour of focusing on ensuring that mistakes in basic skills go unpunished insofar as possible. And every (club) coach in Ireland will overload his "tactic" in this regard with safety first hand passing, backwards and lateral.

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

I don't think you're getting it Tyrone08.

If a high ball /long ball is broken down, and both (or multiple) players end up on the ground, if any of them touches it then it's a foul. For neither was in possession.

If a player is dispossessed by a tackle or shoulder just before falling to the ground, then then he wasn't in possession of the ball before falling, so if he touches it, it's a foul.

If a player on the ground makes any attempt to regain possession of the ball then it's a foul. He can swot it away. But he can't protect it.

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 09:49:40 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

Its not at all correct you keep saying touches, he's not playing the ball, he touches the ball its a foul.. if he's in  possession and falls to the ground he can play it.. In most cases he's touched it incidentally and that's a foul

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

never fails to amaze me how many supporters at games haven't a clue about the rules,and they're usually the loudest!  :o

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 10:45:12 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 09:49:40 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

Its not at all correct you keep saying touches, he's not playing the ball, he touches the ball its a foul.. if he's in  possession and falls to the ground he can play it.. In most cases he's touched it incidentally and that's a foul

How would you play the ball without touching it?

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 12:25:02 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 10:45:12 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 09:49:40 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

Its not at all correct you keep saying touches, he's not playing the ball, he touches the ball its a foul.. if he's in  possession and falls to the ground he can play it.. In most cases he's touched it incidentally and that's a foul

How would you play the ball without touching it?

Going around in circles here..

You can't touch the ball on the ground, If you are tackled with ball in hand you can play the ball by striking it along the ground while the ball is on the ground.

Definition for not playing the ball for me (with the whistle) is an incidental touch and not striking it away after having it in possession initially..

This is more common, as the player that falls to the ground is surrounded and he makes a failed attempt trying to lift the ball touches the ball (not trying to play/strike/add in whatever word that suits the attempt)

I have many times said "play on" when a player has done that which is usually followed by "he's touched the ball on the deck ref!"

There's a clear difference, I can't help you if you struggle with that

Quote from: JoG2 on February 28, 2024, 11:05:10 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

never fails to amaze me how many supporters at games haven't a clue about the rules,and they're usually the loudest!  :o

Yep, the fellas who roar for frees for 'two turns', 'showing the ball' or query why a player got pinged for picking up a 'rolling ball'.

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 12:39:13 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 12:25:02 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 10:45:12 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 09:49:40 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

Its not at all correct you keep saying touches, he's not playing the ball, he touches the ball its a foul.. if he's in  possession and falls to the ground he can play it.. In most cases he's touched it incidentally and that's a foul

How would you play the ball without touching it?

Going around in circles here..

You can't touch the ball on the ground, If you are tackled with ball in hand you can play the ball by striking it along the ground while the ball is on the ground.

Definition for not playing the ball for me (with the whistle) is an incidental touch and not striking it away after having it in possession initially..

This is more common, as the player that falls to the ground is surrounded and he makes a failed attempt trying to lift the ball touches the ball (not trying to play/strike/add in whatever word that suits the attempt)

I have many times said "play on" when a player has done that which is usually followed by "he's touched the ball on the deck ref!"

There's a clear difference, I can't help you if you struggle with that

My original point was there shouldnt be any changes to the rules until we enforce the ones we have.

Touching the ball on the ground was one example. Could easily talk about the 4 steps which are never enforced or the 3rd man into a meele who is usually never sent off (unless its tyrone) or the player closed fist punching a player during a "tackle" which is never punished.

Quote from: Bord na Mona man on February 28, 2024, 01:30:49 PM

Quote from: JoG2 on February 28, 2024, 11:05:10 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

never fails to amaze me how many supporters at games haven't a clue about the rules,and they're usually the loudest!  :o

Yep, the fellas who roar for frees for 'two turns', 'showing the ball' or query why a player got pinged for picking up a 'rolling ball'.

Nearly always a Galway buck that comes out with the 2 turns and showing the ball.

A mate of mine cam usually be heard roaring "Charging Ref".
What's the wording of the charging with the ball rule Milltown?

One I used to always hear against six county teams was their supporters roaring "too long!"

I was never coached that there was a time limit on holding the ball. Not that you ever would try to, because it would be poked out your hands or you'd be shouldered out of it.

What is the rule on this?

Can you technically stand there like in basketball, shielding the ball as long as you don't exceed steps?

Quote from: J70 on February 28, 2024, 04:45:14 PMOne I used to always hear against six county teams was their supporters roaring "too long!"

I was never coached that there was a time limit on holding the ball. Not that you ever would try to, because it would be poked out your hands or you'd be shouldered out of it.

What is the rule on this?

Can you technically stand there like in basketball, shielding the ball as long as you don't exceed steps?

Rule is 4 steps or the time it would take to take 4 steps I think?

Quote from: Armagh18 on February 28, 2024, 04:48:28 PM

Quote from: J70 on February 28, 2024, 04:45:14 PMOne I used to always hear against six county teams was their supporters roaring "too long!"

I was never coached that there was a time limit on holding the ball. Not that you ever would try to, because it would be poked out your hands or you'd be shouldered out of it.

What is the rule on this?

Can you technically stand there like in basketball, shielding the ball as long as you don't exceed steps?

Rule is 4 steps or the time it would take to take 4 steps I think?

Yes, looks like you're correct.

Apparently one of the changes suggested a couple of years ago was to abolish the number of steps and just make it a two second rule. Obviously it wasn't adopted.

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 01:54:06 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 12:39:13 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 12:25:02 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 10:45:12 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 09:49:40 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 08:56:18 AM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 28, 2024, 06:18:45 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 27, 2024, 10:05:41 PM

Quote from: tyrone08 on February 27, 2024, 08:47:29 PMNo more rule changes until we can properly enforce the rules we have. Can barley go 1 week without seeing 2 refs who have very different interpretation of the rules.

Players constantly blew for touching ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you to.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/gaa/gaa-rules-ball-ground-169516

Certain refs enforcing third man in when it suits and ignoring it other times etc etc

Touching the ball on the ground if knocked to the ground while in possession.. standard rule and strange why anyone doesn't know it

You can't though just randomly touch on the ground or strike it without being initially in possession

Majority of time the player who has the ball gets knocked to the ground he envibilty touches it on the groubd he gets blown for it. Never seen this rule implemented

You didn't in your first post. You said players getting constantly blown for touching the ball on the ground when the rules actually allow you.. That's not the case nor is it even close to the majority of times that the ball is actually touched on the ground in the game.

This is the annoying thing when gobshites behind the fence haven't a "scobby doo" about the rules but give off regardless

When would a player be on the ground touching the ball without having first been in possesion of it??

Jesus use a bit of common sense. Anytime a player touches the ball on the ground its because he was originally in possession and forced to the ground.

How many times in a game do you see a player tackled, falls to ground and touches the ball. He immediately gets blown and a free given against him even though he is actually allowed to play the ball on the ground as he was originally in possession.

Its not at all correct you keep saying touches, he's not playing the ball, he touches the ball its a foul.. if he's in  possession and falls to the ground he can play it.. In most cases he's touched it incidentally and that's a foul

How would you play the ball without touching it?

Going around in circles here..

You can't touch the ball on the ground, If you are tackled with ball in hand you can play the ball by striking it along the ground while the ball is on the ground.

Definition for not playing the ball for me (with the whistle) is an incidental touch and not striking it away after having it in possession initially..

This is more common, as the player that falls to the ground is surrounded and he makes a failed attempt trying to lift the ball touches the ball (not trying to play/strike/add in whatever word that suits the attempt)

I have many times said "play on" when a player has done that which is usually followed by "he's touched the ball on the deck ref!"

There's a clear difference, I can't help you if you struggle with that

My original point was there shouldnt be any changes to the rules until we enforce the ones we have.

Touching the ball on the ground was one example. Could easily talk about the 4 steps which are never enforced or the 3rd man into a meele who is usually never sent off (unless its tyrone) or the player closed fist punching a player during a "tackle" which is never punished.

In the 1995 AI final, Canavan  was not in possession of the ball when it fell to ground, he just managed to parry the ball with one hand before it fell to ground. Didn't the ref get it right that day?

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 03:04:15 PM

Quote from: Bord na Mona man on February 28, 2024, 01:30:49 PM

Quote from: JoG2 on February 28, 2024, 11:05:10 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on February 28, 2024, 08:41:35 AMWhat percentage of Gaaboarders know the playing rules fully?

never fails to amaze me how many supporters at games haven't a clue about the rules,and they're usually the loudest!  :o

Yep, the fellas who roar for frees for 'two turns', 'showing the ball' or query why a player got pinged for picking up a 'rolling ball'.

Nearly always a Galway buck that comes out with the 2 turns and showing the ball.

A mate of mine cam usually be heard roaring "Charging Ref".
What's the wording of the charging with the ball rule Milltown?

You can't charge with the ball or without it.

Quote from: thewobbler on February 28, 2024, 10:01:33 AMI don't think you're getting it Tyrone08.

If a high ball /long ball is broken down, and both (or multiple) players end up on the ground, if any of them touches it then it's a foul. For neither was in possession.

If a player is dispossessed by a tackle or shoulder just before falling to the ground, then then he wasn't in possession of the ball before falling, so if he touches it, it's a foul.

If a player on the ground makes any attempt to regain possession of the ball then it's a foul. He can swot it away. But he can't protect it.

How many are aware that when he plays the ball on the ground and it goes into the net, it is a valid goal?

Charge with a ball? Whats a free blown for technically, when he runs straight over the top of you, and you stood u ground.Seen many a free give for me and against me for this.If this not charging, what is it?

The 4 step rule needs changed to 6, which most player are taking anyway running hard. Player way fitter now than 30yrs ago.

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on February 28, 2024, 07:56:24 PMThe 4 step rule needs changed to 6, which most player are taking anyway running hard. Player way fitter now than 30yrs ago.

Yeah change it to 6 and enforce it, 6 steps is nothing now and letting it go isn't doing any harm, actually think it would do more harm to enforce the 4 steps

Quote from: Armagh18 on February 28, 2024, 08:16:04 PM

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on February 28, 2024, 07:56:24 PMThe 4 step rule needs changed to 6, which most player are taking anyway running hard. Player way fitter now than 30yrs ago.

Yeah change it to 6 and enforce it, 6 steps is nothing now and letting it go isn't doing any harm, actually think it would do more harm to enforce the 4 steps

The 6 steps rule would end up being enforced as the 4 steps are now
8 steps would then become the norm, quasi AFL.

Quote from: Main Street on February 28, 2024, 08:47:58 PM

Quote from: Armagh18 on February 28, 2024, 08:16:04 PM

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on February 28, 2024, 07:56:24 PMThe 4 step rule needs changed to 6, which most player are taking anyway running hard. Player way fitter now than 30yrs ago.

Yeah change it to 6 and enforce it, 6 steps is nothing now and letting it go isn't doing any harm, actually think it would do more harm to enforce the 4 steps

The 6 steps rule would end up being enforced as the 4 steps are now
8 steps would then become the norm, quasi AFL.

Yeah thats why I said enforce it, either that or leave as is and don't be too strict imo.

Why not have a 5 second rule rather than using steps

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 09:45:46 PMWhy not have a 5 second rule rather than using steps

I have seen Referees often use time when penalising rather than steps.

Quote from: From the Bunker on February 28, 2024, 11:15:42 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 09:45:46 PMWhy not have a 5 second rule rather than using steps

I have seen Referees often use time when penalising rather than steps.

Yes, and you are generally blown for overcarrying after 2 turns regardless of how little steps and time you have taken. One of those unwritten GAA rules  :)

Or if you stop to think....

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 09:45:46 PMWhy not have a 5 second rule rather than using steps

The actual wording of the current rule is

Quotewhen a playeris in possession of the ball it may be : carried in the hand for a maximum of four consecutive steps or held in the hand for no longer than the time needed to take four steps.

Yet more evidence for the no-one actually botthers to read the GAA rulebook pile.

Quote from: twohands!!! on February 29, 2024, 06:12:58 PM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 28, 2024, 09:45:46 PMWhy not have a 5 second rule rather than using steps

The actual wording of the current rule is

Quotewhen a playeris in possession of the ball it may be : carried in the hand for a maximum of four consecutive steps or held in the hand for no longer than the time needed to take four steps.

Yet more evidence for the no-one actually botthers to read the GAA rulebook pile.

I know the rule, I'm looking at cutting out the how many steps to just using 5 seconds.

My four steps won't get me further than a taller persons four steps ;D

Surely the 5 sec idea is a wind up? Boys could sprint  from the end line to near the 45m in 5 secs

Quote from: JoG2 on February 29, 2024, 08:20:43 PMSurely the 5 sec idea is a wind up? Boys could sprint  from the end line to near the 45m in 5 secs

Sure they are doing that now lol

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 29, 2024, 08:44:17 PM

Quote from: JoG2 on February 29, 2024, 08:20:43 PMSurely the 5 sec idea is a wind up? Boys could sprint  from the end line to near the 45m in 5 secs

Sure they are doing that now lol

Probably the right direction, but as jog2 points out is 5 secs too long?

Quote from: onefineday on March 02, 2024, 07:55:12 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on February 29, 2024, 08:44:17 PM

Quote from: JoG2 on February 29, 2024, 08:20:43 PMSurely the 5 sec idea is a wind up? Boys could sprint  from the end line to near the 45m in 5 secs

Sure they are doing that now lol

Probably the right direction, but as jog2 points out is 5 secs too long?

Possibly, if you shouted a time, be it 3 or 4 seconds at least they'll hear and release the ball, I do 'inform' players to play the ball, a warning, generally in juvenile games but have done it in senior games, bitta coaching you may say

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

https://www.irishnews.com/gaa/gaelic-football-is-a-brilliant-game-that-needs-better-promotion-armagh-boss-kieran-mcgeeney-AENE424KLNBX5DXFEKGPRQ3R34/


Well now.
Glad to see a bit of fight back.
I really think the GAA need to make it clear to RTE and others that the contract to broadcast the games comes with an obligation to promote not negate the great game that it is.

Why they allowed Brolly O' Rourke  and Spillane to talk down the game fir so long beggars belief.

Quote from: Derryman forever on March 21, 2024, 08:19:36 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

https://www.irishnews.com/gaa/gaelic-football-is-a-brilliant-game-that-needs-better-promotion-armagh-boss-kieran-mcgeeney-AENE424KLNBX5DXFEKGPRQ3R34/


Well now.
Glad to see a bit of fight back.
I really think the GAA need to make it clear to RTE and others that the contract to broadcast the games comes with an obligation to promote not negate the great game that it is.

Why they allowed Brolly O' Rourke  and Spillane to talk down the game fir so long beggars belief.

all fair comments from McGeeney I think

Quote from: tonto1888 on March 21, 2024, 09:19:21 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on March 21, 2024, 08:19:36 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

https://www.irishnews.com/gaa/gaelic-football-is-a-brilliant-game-that-needs-better-promotion-armagh-boss-kieran-mcgeeney-AENE424KLNBX5DXFEKGPRQ3R34/


Well now.
Glad to see a bit of fight back.
I really think the GAA need to make it clear to RTE and others that the contract to broadcast the games comes with an obligation to promote not negate the great game that it is.

Why they allowed Brolly O' Rourke  and Spillane to talk down the game fir so long beggars belief.

all fair comments from McGeeney I think

Agreed. We can be a negative bunch. Advanced mark still needs binned. Every single game this year, there's been many scores against Derry, and you mutter to yourself, 'christ, what a score'.

Quote from: JoG2 on March 21, 2024, 09:33:05 AM

Quote from: tonto1888 on March 21, 2024, 09:19:21 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on March 21, 2024, 08:19:36 AM

Quote from: Derryman forever on February 27, 2024, 08:51:04 AMAny suggestion that Defenders or forwards  cant cross the half way line is simply laughable.
Half backs have been scoring  since adam wad a boy.

The biggest problem with football is negative commentary and too much  available to see and comment on.
Go back and watch games from the 70s , 80, and 90s. There were many Turgid affairs with very poor skills and no plan. Just hoof it as far as possible and hope.

https://www.irishnews.com/gaa/gaelic-football-is-a-brilliant-game-that-needs-better-promotion-armagh-boss-kieran-mcgeeney-AENE424KLNBX5DXFEKGPRQ3R34/


Well now.
Glad to see a bit of fight back.
I really think the GAA need to make it clear to RTE and others that the contract to broadcast the games comes with an obligation to promote not negate the great game that it is.

Why they allowed Brolly O' Rourke  and Spillane to talk down the game fir so long beggars belief.

all fair comments from McGeeney I think

Agreed. We can be a negative bunch. Advanced mark still needs binned. Every single game this year, there's been many scores against Derry, and you mutter to yourself, 'christ, what a score'.

we are very negative on ourselves. Its an Irish thing.
Agree about the advanced mark. As it currently is it is ridiculous in what constitutes a free shot at goal

If there were no advanced mark it would be worse and the stats have shown this.

Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2024, 12:40:16 PMIf there were no advanced mark it would be worse and the stats have shown this.

whats the stats? I am not fully against it but it needs tweaked

Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2024, 12:40:16 PMIf there were no advanced mark it would be worse and the stats have shown this.

Maybe I'm picking this up wrong, but you think removing the advanced mark would make the game worse?

Quote from: JoG2 on March 22, 2024, 06:22:35 PM

Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2024, 12:40:16 PMIf there were no advanced mark it would be worse and the stats have shown this.

Maybe I'm picking this up wrong, but you think removing the advanced mark would make the game worse?

Yes

Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2024, 10:59:10 PM

Quote from: JoG2 on March 22, 2024, 06:22:35 PM

Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2024, 12:40:16 PMIf there were no advanced mark it would be worse and the stats have shown this.

Maybe I'm picking this up wrong, but you think removing the advanced mark would make the game worse?

Yes

 Midfield and defensive marks are fine but can you explain how the advanced mark has brought improvement to a game?

This isn't really a solution but I've a friend called Mark Devlin and he's very intelligent. We call him the advanced Mark.

Quote from: Olly on March 23, 2024, 07:40:16 AMThis isn't really a solution but I've a friend called Mark Devlin and he's very intelligent. We call him the advanced Mark.

Are you gauging his level of intelligence against your own?