Rule Change Needed to Stop Puke Keep-Ball

[Hound]

What about taking quick free kicks. Even if there is a booking. What about kicking it to yourself? A solo? Would speed things up and really punish the foul. Teams try and foul players to slow it down. Hat tip to Gary Lineker who said this about soccer.

One of the things I hate to see is a player who has won a free and who tries to play it quick from a metre or 2 away where free was awarded. Ball played quick to keep momentum and ref calls it back and argues with player who took it quick. Advantage lost over a metre or 2 and not as if it a scoring free.

Good refs let this go and keep game moving. Allowing the advantage of taking free quickly from current position rather than position of foul could help providing it not a scoring opportunity.

Completely agree with that, you're punishing the player that was fouled by making them come back a yard or two and letting the other team get set up.

Yep, most referees (there'll always be the odd poor ref who is the exception) let this go now. Keeps the game moving and doesn't penalise the attacking team.
Of course, if someone is going directly for a score then it's different and the free should be from where the foul took place.

[thewobbler]

Bringing in a rule that says no passing backwards into your own half once you've crossed halfway would give teams an incentive not to cross the halfway line until they were sure they had a move on.  It would, I think, increase the amount of lateral and backwards passing you see in the game rather than reduce it.

I'm not advocating this, but if backwards/lateral passing is a problem you want addressed, then maybe a rule that all passes must be forward  would be the better way to go.

It needs trialled to learn the unintended consequences.

Personally I'd like to see the 2 x 45s being utilised this way rather than a halfway line.

I don't think it would end the laborious retention of possession as it would likely  generate lulls in the pace when evenly matched teams informally agree to a breather here and there. But what it would do (I'm fairly certain) is make clock management of a 3-4 lead nigh on impossible - for it would give the team that's trailing, the ability to force their opponents into a decreasing space which innately would force turnovers - either by scores, wides or tackles.

[Milltown Row2]

Stop keepers coming up to take frees and 45s kills about 2 mins at a time.

Agree, 30 sec limit on a any free, use it or lose it.

Good to see a consensus has emerged around what's needed (and I'm ignoring those who think it's grand as it is and we're letting a few high profile games influence our thinking - my guess is they don't watch much club football).
1. Remove forward mark
2. Ball cannot travel back over the halfway line
3. 3 players from each team must remain in each half at all times
4. Keeper can't accept a pass from teammate unless he's inside his own 21 (can't fathom people saying nobody would want to do goals anymore, have they missed the first 130 odd years of Gaelic football and started watching 3 years ago??).

All above rules are easily policed at all club senior levels and don't require additional refs or equipment installed.

I think rule changes are due to be considered ahead of 2023, so who do we send these off to? I presume you're all happy that we say they represent the views of the foremost Ulster gaa discussion board?

Send them to your club sec if you are in a club and they'll review them (wont take long) and they'll have a little chuckle and come back with "computer says no"

Maybe I am the secretary!!
Thought I'd at least get support from you, given your lauding of proper football being played at u15 level. Do you feel that football should continue as is, or do we need rule tweaks to make the game a spectacle again? Being honest, I'd be surprised if there aren't pretty significant changes proposed by the rules committee this year - the vitriol down here around the Ulster final is unparalleled.in my experience. What's worse in my eyes is that every club in the country trying the same thing, I can't for the life of me understand why so many people are happy to watch it or don't accept that tweaking rules is exactly what sports administrators do in order to make their game a better product to watch and play.

To give another example, the reserve game I did last night had no defensive football at all, its only in games/leagues/competitions that matter it seems...

But some of your points will actually be difficult to administer during a game, checking for 3 players inside, while I'm tracking the ball, looking for off the ball stuff and looking at forwards, the ball can't travel back over the halfway line? the ball is played out of defence and two lads are jumping for the ball, it breaks off some player,  goes back over the halfway line, players all calling for it...

Bad enough players calling for lads inside the D every time even though they are well outside of it, the breaking the line for sidelines is bad enough.. The only one that makes sense is the forward mark, in fact any mark should be ditched, how many keepers or managers look/want to kick the ball long? None, its out of desperation and lazy defenders not making space

[thewobbler]

MR2, I don't see why the line(s) would be difficult to referee. Define it as: If a man in possession of the ball carries or passes it backwards across the line, it's a 45 to the opposition. This means that should a breaking ball or blocked pass or clean tackle force the ball back across the line, it's not a foul... for the team wasn't in control of the ball.

I'd also like some commonsense applied that if a player, who receives the ball on or around the line then crosses the line in the action of receiving the ball, then that's not a foul either. The purpose of the rule isn't to penalise attacking play; it's to compel teams to drive out.

A man who gets gobbled up the right side of the line and driven back though, that's a foul against him. He should have moved it quicker.

[Dreadnought]

I think many here need to think of the rule of unintended consequences. I get most of the suggestions are well intentioned, but how will they work in reality?

Can't cross back over a certain line. Will the attacking team not just wait for ages before committing? They won't want to lose the ball quickly until they are set against a possible counter attack. And the defence? Just need to create a line just inside that line of no return. Swarm any player who crosses it as they can't return.

A shot clock. Are the players fit enough to basically shuttle run for 75+ minutes? They already run more per minute than the average Premier League footballer. And that's with some slower build up plays included in that. If we're essentially shuttle running players to get a shot away every 45 seconds, they'll fall down by half time. Teams already get a nice average number of shots away per game. Are we really saying this is needed? The odd 2+ minute is the exception, not the norm.

I really think you need to be careful on what to bring in. As they can have huge unintended consequences as you try counteract them.

[Milltown Row2]

MR2, I don't see why the line(s) would be difficult to referee. Define it as: If a man in possession of the ball carries or passes it backwards across the line, it's a 45 to the opposition. This means that should a breaking ball or blocked pass or clean tackle force the ball back across the line, it's not a foul... for the team wasn't in control of the ball.

I'd also like some commonsense applied that if a player, who receives the ball on or around the line then crosses the line in the action of receiving the ball, then that's not a foul either. The purpose of the rule isn't to penalise attacking play; it's to compel teams to drive out.

A man who gets gobbled up the right side of the line and driven back though, that's a foul against him. He should have moved it quicker.

Its the gurning and moaning that would go with it that I'm probably more concerned with.. I want to turn up play the game and not be called a baldy wee cnut  when they feel their interpretation is different to mine 

[general_lee]

They don't represent  mine.

Apart from the removal of the forward mark (which is a load of shite) I disagree with the rest of that

I'd love to know what your objections are to the rest of them? Do people like the endless recycling keep ball they current rules permit and which are permeating through the game at all levels?

There's fa wrong with football as it is, any of the recent rules introduced have not changed anything. Why bring in more rules that won't affect anything?

[onefineday]

I think many here need to think of the rule of unintended consequences. I get most of the suggestions are well intentioned, but how will they work in reality?

Can't cross back over a certain line. Will the attacking team not just wait for ages before committing? They won't want to lose the ball quickly until they are set against a possible counter attack. And the defence? Just need to create a line just inside that line of no return. Swarm any player who crosses it as they can't return.

A shot clock. Are the players fit enough to basically shuttle run for 75+ minutes? They already run more per minute than the average Premier League footballer. And that's with some slower build up plays included in that. If we're essentially shuttle running players to get a shot away every 45 seconds, they'll fall down by half time. Teams already get a nice average number of shots away per game. Are we really saying this is needed? The odd 2+ minute is the exception, not the norm.

I really think you need to be careful on what to bring in. As they can have huge unintended consequences as you try counteract them.

Absolutely agree re unintended consequences, that's why changes need trialled and properly evaluated by people who understand the potential downsides.
I heard Michael quinlivan proposing shotclock which to my mind proved that great players may not be the best architects for rule designs - shot clocks are a nuts idea, not transferrable to club level and as you point out the fitness implications could be massive.
I get the point re teams not committing to crossing that line, be it halfway or 45, but that's why they have to keep a certain amount of men in each half, admit it's an extra job for the ref, but I imagine the crowd and opposition will assist with policing it!
I've been watching games with an eye of what wouldn't be able to happen, since I first saw wobbler's suggestion for no back pass from beyond half way and really think it would make a huge difference and has potential to transform the game. I'm not clear on your mention of 45 lines wobbler, but I think halfway would work well. Apart from the recycling of hall, the game management aspect when a team runs out the clock is a real curse too.

[trueblue1234]

I think many here need to think of the rule of unintended consequences. I get most of the suggestions are well intentioned, but how will they work in reality?

Can't cross back over a certain line. Will the attacking team not just wait for ages before committing? They won't want to lose the ball quickly until they are set against a possible counter attack. And the defence? Just need to create a line just inside that line of no return. Swarm any player who crosses it as they can't return.

A shot clock. Are the players fit enough to basically shuttle run for 75+ minutes? They already run more per minute than the average Premier League footballer. And that's with some slower build up plays included in that. If we're essentially shuttle running players to get a shot away every 45 seconds, they'll fall down by half time. Teams already get a nice average number of shots away per game. Are we really saying this is needed? The odd 2+ minute is the exception, not the norm.

I really think you need to be careful on what to bring in. As they can have huge unintended consequences as you try counteract them.

Absolutely agree re unintended consequences, that's why changes need trialled and properly evaluated by people who understand the potential downsides.
I heard Michael quinlivan proposing shotclock which to my mind proved that great players may not be the best architects for rule designs - shot clocks are a nuts idea, not transferrable to club level and as you point out the fitness implications could be massive.
I get the point re teams not committing to crossing that line, be it halfway or 45, but that's why they have to keep a certain amount of men in each half, admit it's an extra job for the ref, but I imagine the crowd and opposition will assist with policing it!
I've been watching games with an eye of what wouldn't be able to happen, since I first saw wobbler's suggestion for no back pass from beyond half way and really think it would make a huge difference and has potential to transform the game. I'm not clear on your mention of 45 lines wobbler, but I think halfway would work well. Apart from the recycling of hall, the game management aspect when a team runs out the clock is a real curse too.

If your relying on this then it's already dead in the water.

[Milltown Row2]

I think many here need to think of the rule of unintended consequences. I get most of the suggestions are well intentioned, but how will they work in reality?

Can't cross back over a certain line. Will the attacking team not just wait for ages before committing? They won't want to lose the ball quickly until they are set against a possible counter attack. And the defence? Just need to create a line just inside that line of no return. Swarm any player who crosses it as they can't return.

A shot clock. Are the players fit enough to basically shuttle run for 75+ minutes? They already run more per minute than the average Premier League footballer. And that's with some slower build up plays included in that. If we're essentially shuttle running players to get a shot away every 45 seconds, they'll fall down by half time. Teams already get a nice average number of shots away per game. Are we really saying this is needed? The odd 2+ minute is the exception, not the norm.

I really think you need to be careful on what to bring in. As they can have huge unintended consequences as you try counteract them.

Absolutely agree re unintended consequences, that's why changes need trialled and properly evaluated by people who understand the potential downsides.
I heard Michael quinlivan proposing shotclock which to my mind proved that great players may not be the best architects for rule designs - shot clocks are a nuts idea, not transferrable to club level and as you point out the fitness implications could be massive.
I get the point re teams not committing to crossing that line, be it halfway or 45, but that's why they have to keep a certain amount of men in each half, admit it's an extra job for the ref, but I imagine the crowd and opposition will assist with policing it!
I've been watching games with an eye of what wouldn't be able to happen, since I first saw wobbler's suggestion for no back pass from beyond half way and really think it would make a huge difference and has potential to transform the game. I'm not clear on your mention of 45 lines wobbler, but I think halfway would work well. Apart from the recycling of hall, the game management aspect when a team runs out the clock is a real curse too.

If your relying on this then it's already dead in the water.

Yeah, the blatant non fouls that are called for by buck ejjits at side of the of the pitch or players 100's of meters away from the ref calling it is hilarious.

Can you imagine a ref who blows for every call given out during a game?

[Keyser soze]

This guy is clearly on the windup, cant believe he has hooked so many experienced posters with his nonsense. I suppose it shows how far down the rabbit hole a large percentage of people have been led that they take this outlandish sort of thing seriously. 

[tbrick18]

Ditch the mark.
Trial 13 aside and leave it at that.

[trailer]

Ditch the mark.
Trial 13 aside and leave it at that.

Take away a sub as well. More space, more running, and less fresh legs from the bench. Games could be absolutely manic in the last 10 /15 mins.

[Estimator]

"Paul Rouse: Eight rule changes that could help to improve Gaelic Football" https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-40902359.html

Why make one change when you can make 8!!

[Milltown Row2]

"Paul Rouse: Eight rule changes that could help to improve Gaelic Football" https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-40902359.html

Why make one change when you can make 8!!

A lot of sense in those ideas in fairness