So what do ye think of the black card rule now?

[thewobbler]

How do I not have a worthwhile point?

What suspensions have been tried?

Has there ever been a clear mandate to referees to send off the 3rd / 4th / 5th man to enter a scrap? This simple rule works remarkably well in ice hockey. Doesn't prevent mass brawls, but goes a long way towards it.

Has any player ever been retroactively punished for entering a scrap? If so, I can't remember it happening.

So from what I've seen with my eyes, unless you're the unlucky one who the referee randomly chooses from a line-up to send off after a melee, or unless you show the levels of wanton violence in a melee that makes you unmistakeably known to the red, then players almost always get off scot free.

That's the root of the problem.

-- 

Regarding your other mad theory on the value of fines, let's leave it here, as you clearly have no concept of how little spare cash is available to county boards, and even less understanding that the player(s) who cause the problems get completely off, but the entire county suffers.

[muppet]

How do I not have a worthwhile point?

What suspensions have been tried?

Has there ever been a clear mandate to referees to send off the 3rd / 4th / 5th man to enter a scrap? This simple rule works remarkably well in ice hockey. Doesn't prevent mass brawls, but goes a long way towards it.

Has any player ever been retroactively punished for entering a scrap? If so, I can't remember it happening.

So from what I've seen with my eyes, unless you're the unlucky one who the referee randomly chooses from a line-up to send off after a melee, or unless you show the levels of wanton violence in a melee that makes you unmistakeably known to the red, then players almost always get off scot free.

That's the root of the problem.

-- 

Regarding your other mad theory on the value of fines, let's leave it here, as you clearly have no concept of how little spare cash is available to county boards, and even less understanding that the player(s) who cause the problems get completely off, but the entire county suffers.

That is the point of the deterrent.

Maybe they could use the money they don't spend on managers?

The manager then might be inclined to make it clear to his squad that mass brawls wouldn't be tolerated. How much does the squad holiday in La Manga cost? I think it was your own county that pioneered this trend. It must cost €60,000 to send a squad and officials. No one worries that 'the entire county suffers' in that case do they?

[Denn Forever]

I think they are one of the better rule changes. 

People are bleating on about them not being applied correctly but they've only recently been brought in.  A rule  that we learn from day 1 (over carrying) is still not being applied consistently.

[twohands!!!]

I think they are one of the better rule changes. 

People are bleating on about them not being applied correctly but they've only recently been brought in.  A rule  that we learn from day 1 (over carrying) is still not being applied consistently.

What's still shocking is the huge number of people who have a very hazy idea of what's an actual black card offence, especially some of the pundits.

There's a whole bunch of GAA folk I'd love to doorstep with a camera crew and ask them to what the rule-book actually defines as a tackle.
If you are a manager, coach, pundit or player and you don't know what the rule-book says is a tackle, they don't be surprised when a ref blows for a foul against you/your player.

To me there seems to be a serious chunk of GAA folk who have either never read the rules or havent read them in decades or if they have read them their reading comprehension must be so low as being close to being non-existent.

[Main Street]

I think they are one of the better rule changes. 

People are bleating on about them not being applied correctly but they've only recently been brought in.  A rule  that we learn from day 1 (over carrying) is still not being applied consistently.

What's still shocking is the huge number of people who have a very hazy idea of what's an actual black card offence, especially some of the pundits.

There's a whole bunch of GAA folk I'd love to doorstep with a camera crew and ask them to what the rule-book actually defines as a tackle.
If you are a manager, coach, pundit or player and you don't know what the rule-book says is a tackle, they don't be surprised when a ref blows for a foul against you/your player.

To me there seems to be a serious chunk of GAA folk who have either never read the rules or havent read them in decades or if they have read them their reading comprehension must be so low as being close to being non-existent.

So what if it takes time to get a grasp of the black card rule? It's not a simple rule and leaves room for interpretation by the ref.
It might take a few more seasons to get a good overview.
One of the big positives  from the black card rule I'd say (imo) is the reduction in the incidents of cynical dragging down an opponent who's trying to break out of his own half, on the counter attack.

[BennyHarp]

For want of a better place to post this. An excellent article from Dick Clerkin...

Put physicality back into football
   
Friday, August 21, 2015Dick Clerkin
When it come to the physical side there needs to be an acceptance that the lines can be crossed at times without the game being called into disrepute. It's accepted in hurling, so why not in football, asks Dick Clerkin

I'VE seldom enjoyed an hour in front of the TV as much as I did last Sunday night watching the Tipp Galway highlights on the Sunday Game. The absorbing contest was complemented by the engaging post-game analysis from Donal Óg Cusack, Anthony Daly and Henry Shefflin.

Passion, intellect, insight, and humour exuded seamlessly from the panel. At one stage, I thought Henry was going to get up and swing a hurl at Des Cahill, he was so involved in the analysis. The best game of the championship to date needed to be celebrated and the pundits played their part in talking the game up to the optimum. Let's face it, this year's hurling championship badly needed it.

However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the drastically different approaches that have been taken when assessing our national sports. The last two weekends' action has provided the best examples of this. In that regard, I found it hard to believe how everyone casually glossed over an incident that effectively cost Tipperary a place in this year's All-Ireland final, never mind nearly seriously injuring a player who gave one of the finest exhibitions ever witnessed in Croke Park.

After all previous efforts to stop Seamus Callanan had failed miserably, John Hanbury was left with no option in the closing stages but to execute what WWE fans would call a 'Tombstone'. Based on his form that day, it is fair to say that Callanan was odds-on to plunder his fourth goal and likely push Tipperary on to victory.

Callanan probably had to get his upper vertebrae checked out on Monday morning, yet, in relative terms, this incident barely got a mention. Three years ago, in very similar circumstances, Seán Cavanagh became enemy number one after dragging down Conor McManus in almost the exact same location. The uproar provided a catalyst for a reaction that eventually led us to the 'black card'. Regrettably so.

You can't blame the three lads for not allowing incidents like Hanbury's pile-driver override the thrilling battle that took place last Sunday. Don't get me wrong; I'm not looking to have the hurlers hauled over the coals for their misdemeanours. Far from it. All I am asking is that football is allowed to be played along similar lines.

We have arrived at a point now that a mistimed shoulder tackle in Gaelic football could get you sent off the pitch, while we allow our hurlers to stay on the field after committing acts that in other circumstances might get you a criminal conviction. Let's be honest, that is where we currently are.

From day one, I knew that the black card would be a regrettable introduction to Gaelic football. Hard case makes bad law and, instead of dealing with the specific instances that initiated its inception, a one-hat-fits-all approach was taken. The unforeseen impact has left us in a much worse place than when we started, and only its most blinkered proponents could honestly say the game is better since the introduction of the black card.

Freakonomics, a great book I might have referenced here before, explores the real and often hidden underlying causes for changes in societal behaviour. In one chapter, it explores the unforeseen behaviour of parents collecting their children from daycare. To curb the growing instance of parents arriving late to collect their children, they introduced a fine system. What happened? The 'late pick-up' incidents increased. Doubled even!

The moral incentive to pick up their kids on time was replaced with a financial transaction that the parents were happy to pay, for the extra few minutes free time in the afternoon. A not dissimilar pattern has emerged since the introduction of the black card. Without the stats in front of me, I would chance a bet on there being an actual increase in 'cynical' fouls of the drag-down variety, rather than a decrease, since the black card's introduction. At the very least, it hasn't acted as an effective deterrent. The moral disincentive against perpetrating a black card offence has been replaced with a legitimate transaction that many players are continually happy to pay. Equally, offences that would never have raised the ire of anyone in the past have seen the offenders sent to the stand, simply because a referee now feels he is obliged to.

A further example that illustrates how poorly thought out the black card solution was, is the recent prevalence of neck-high challenges. Instead of now attempting to stop a player with a direct shoulder charge or strong tackle, the likes of which we cheer in hurling, players won't commit for fear of being led into 'black card territory'.

The low-risk option now is to take the player high by the neck, but make sure you don't go to ground with him. A yellow card is all that can be shown here, yet it is unquestionably a more dangerous and equally cynical tackle than anything on the black card menu. The whole thing is a mess.

Another regressive symptom of the black card is the continued erosion of physicality from our game, which is now being replaced with cynicism, largely borne out of frustration. For fear of mistiming a physical challenge out the field, players are now more inclined to retreat and tackle in numbers than put themselves in line for an early shower. This isn't the case in hurling, as players like Iarla Tannion, Padraic Maher and Jackie Tyrrell ferociously fling their bodies into collisions. As Cyril Farrell says 'tis great manly shtuff'.

We celebrate the physicality and intensity witnessed in hurling matches, yet implement rules that curb the same in football. That a player should be sent off for a single infraction, some of which are on the low side of cynical, continues to be an embarrassment to our game and an injustice to its players. I know of no other field sport in the world where a similar rule applies.

In nearly every game I play in these days, there are countless examples of players pulling out of challenges for fear of being a fraction of a second late and ending up in a referee's book. Instead we retreat, and retreat until the risk reward is so low all is left is an unsightly, yet effective, mass defence approach. Managers are recognising this, and subsequently coaching the same.

Supporters and commentators alike relish the physicality in games and want to see more. I can guarantee you players want to see more of it also. In my opinion, a lot of the cynicism we are currently witnessing is borne out of frustration through the lack of physicality permitted. A few body checks and mistimed shoulder charges never caused anyone too many sleepless nights. God knows there were plenty of them back in the alleged golden days of yore. This is the small price we need to be willing to pay in order to encourage more honest physicality back into our game.

At the end of the day, our games are sold on the basis that they are physical contact sports. With that, there has to be an acceptance that the lines can be crossed at times without the game being called into disrepute. That philosophy has been afforded to hurling, and it is the better for it. It is time we return the same to football.

[orangeman]

Hits a few nails on the head there with that article.

The lawmakers wouldn't concede that our rules are an embarrassment.

[omaghjoe]

Great article by the Big Dick there actually.

Tho I think that its more than just the black card. Teams are playing percentages now adays. Standing a man up is seen as a more  effective method of stifling an attack than hitting him a good shoulder. Going for a shoulder is risky, you might miss, you might get a card, give away a free, you could end up out of position, there is a multitude of things that could go wrong, so players dont do it

I get what he's saying that the players want it and supporters want it but in the percentage game we play now a days we actually have to find a way of rewarding it if teams are gonna incorporate it.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Well said Dick Clerkin.

[Hardy]

Excellent analysis by Dick. It makes plain the total wrong-headedness of the concerted campaign, that has been going on now for the best part of twenty years, to remove physicality from the game. "Cleaning up the game", became the catchphrase of the Mary Poppins tendency that took it upon themselves to decide that the game was dirty.

Dick hit the nail on the head and said in another way what we've been saying here forever. They kept introducing new rules, when all that was needed was to implement the old ones. The game wasn't dirty. It was manly. The rules were adequate to deal with any individual instance where manly turned into dirty, as it will in any contact game. There was no systemic problem. But there sure is now. And it has been caused by a combination of the new rules and the refusal to implement any of the rules properly.

I don't particularly like the practice of making comparisons with hurling. The case that football is being ruined stands on its own merits. But it has now got to the stage where the comparison is unavoidable. There has been an amazing divergence in the cultures of the two sports over a small number of years. There is now a glaring difference in  the way the two games are regulated. And there is only one reason for it - nobody decided that hurling was dirty or needed cleaning up.

We often talk about unforeseen consequences, but many of the consequences of this unmanning of football were obvious and pointed out here in advance of the implementation of the various waves of rule changes. Even if they couldn't figure them out for themselves, the perpetrators of these ridiculous rules only had to look at soccer, which has been made unwatchable for many by the systematic removal of all physical contact from the game.

Dick has listed most of them very clearly, but has inexplicably neglected to mention the biggest one (and the one that was the most predictable - see soccer again) - the inevitable rise of simulation. When you increase the penalties for physical contact, you increase the incentives for simulating it. And, of course, when you fail even to acknowledge that simulation is a problem and fail to implement your own rules that punish it, you compound the blunder and you end up with what we saw last week.

[crossfire]

Brilliant article Dick.

[J70]

Intelligent lad, Dick. Good article.

Although it would be interesting to see the stats on the effects, if any, of the black card's introduction.

[rrhf]

Just after watching the butchers of Meath kick Tyrone round the field in 1996.  That was no one man team either with Cush, Canavan, Devlins, Cavlan and Dooher.  They systematically smashed us and with that our chances of a first all Ireland.  Brutality first football second was the dark arts of the time not to be confused with manliness.. dirty hits should never be regarded as manly.  We all knew after 1996 that removing thuggery from our game was important and not to be confused with physicality. Unfortunately removing physicality from our game encourages other forms of aggression and simulation.  If teams had maintained a manly physicality instead of dirty hits then the rule makers would not have tampered so much with our game rules. Its.interesting to note how the results of some counties since indicate they haven't adapted to the aftermath of the 90s. We all know the era of the broken jaw had to be left behind - but they have gone way too far.  How do we get the balance back?

[Zulu]

For want of a better place to post this. An excellent article from Dick Clerkin...

Put physicality back into football
   
Friday, August 21, 2015Dick Clerkin
When it come to the physical side there needs to be an acceptance that the lines can be crossed at times without the game being called into disrepute. It's accepted in hurling, so why not in football, asks Dick Clerkin

I'VE seldom enjoyed an hour in front of the TV as much as I did last Sunday night watching the Tipp Galway highlights on the Sunday Game. The absorbing contest was complemented by the engaging post-game analysis from Donal Óg Cusack, Anthony Daly and Henry Shefflin.

Passion, intellect, insight, and humour exuded seamlessly from the panel. At one stage, I thought Henry was going to get up and swing a hurl at Des Cahill, he was so involved in the analysis. The best game of the championship to date needed to be celebrated and the pundits played their part in talking the game up to the optimum. Let's face it, this year's hurling championship badly needed it.

However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the drastically different approaches that have been taken when assessing our national sports. The last two weekends' action has provided the best examples of this. In that regard, I found it hard to believe how everyone casually glossed over an incident that effectively cost Tipperary a place in this year's All-Ireland final, never mind nearly seriously injuring a player who gave one of the finest exhibitions ever witnessed in Croke Park.

After all previous efforts to stop Seamus Callanan had failed miserably, John Hanbury was left with no option in the closing stages but to execute what WWE fans would call a 'Tombstone'. Based on his form that day, it is fair to say that Callanan was odds-on to plunder his fourth goal and likely push Tipperary on to victory.

Callanan probably had to get his upper vertebrae checked out on Monday morning, yet, in relative terms, this incident barely got a mention. Three years ago, in very similar circumstances, Seán Cavanagh became enemy number one after dragging down Conor McManus in almost the exact same location. The uproar provided a catalyst for a reaction that eventually led us to the 'black card'. Regrettably so.

You can't blame the three lads for not allowing incidents like Hanbury's pile-driver override the thrilling battle that took place last Sunday. Don't get me wrong; I'm not looking to have the hurlers hauled over the coals for their misdemeanours. Far from it. All I am asking is that football is allowed to be played along similar lines.

We have arrived at a point now that a mistimed shoulder tackle in Gaelic football could get you sent off the pitch, while we allow our hurlers to stay on the field after committing acts that in other circumstances might get you a criminal conviction. Let's be honest, that is where we currently are.

From day one, I knew that the black card would be a regrettable introduction to Gaelic football. Hard case makes bad law and, instead of dealing with the specific instances that initiated its inception, a one-hat-fits-all approach was taken. The unforeseen impact has left us in a much worse place than when we started, and only its most blinkered proponents could honestly say the game is better since the introduction of the black card.

Freakonomics, a great book I might have referenced here before, explores the real and often hidden underlying causes for changes in societal behaviour. In one chapter, it explores the unforeseen behaviour of parents collecting their children from daycare. To curb the growing instance of parents arriving late to collect their children, they introduced a fine system. What happened? The 'late pick-up' incidents increased. Doubled even!

The moral incentive to pick up their kids on time was replaced with a financial transaction that the parents were happy to pay, for the extra few minutes free time in the afternoon. A not dissimilar pattern has emerged since the introduction of the black card. Without the stats in front of me, I would chance a bet on there being an actual increase in 'cynical' fouls of the drag-down variety, rather than a decrease, since the black card's introduction. At the very least, it hasn't acted as an effective deterrent. The moral disincentive against perpetrating a black card offence has been replaced with a legitimate transaction that many players are continually happy to pay. Equally, offences that would never have raised the ire of anyone in the past have seen the offenders sent to the stand, simply because a referee now feels he is obliged to.

A further example that illustrates how poorly thought out the black card solution was, is the recent prevalence of neck-high challenges. Instead of now attempting to stop a player with a direct shoulder charge or strong tackle, the likes of which we cheer in hurling, players won't commit for fear of being led into 'black card territory'.

The low-risk option now is to take the player high by the neck, but make sure you don't go to ground with him. A yellow card is all that can be shown here, yet it is unquestionably a more dangerous and equally cynical tackle than anything on the black card menu. The whole thing is a mess.

Another regressive symptom of the black card is the continued erosion of physicality from our game, which is now being replaced with cynicism, largely borne out of frustration. For fear of mistiming a physical challenge out the field, players are now more inclined to retreat and tackle in numbers than put themselves in line for an early shower. This isn't the case in hurling, as players like Iarla Tannion, Padraic Maher and Jackie Tyrrell ferociously fling their bodies into collisions. As Cyril Farrell says 'tis great manly shtuff'.

We celebrate the physicality and intensity witnessed in hurling matches, yet implement rules that curb the same in football. That a player should be sent off for a single infraction, some of which are on the low side of cynical, continues to be an embarrassment to our game and an injustice to its players. I know of no other field sport in the world where a similar rule applies.

In nearly every game I play in these days, there are countless examples of players pulling out of challenges for fear of being a fraction of a second late and ending up in a referee's book. Instead we retreat, and retreat until the risk reward is so low all is left is an unsightly, yet effective, mass defence approach. Managers are recognising this, and subsequently coaching the same.

Supporters and commentators alike relish the physicality in games and want to see more. I can guarantee you players want to see more of it also. In my opinion, a lot of the cynicism we are currently witnessing is borne out of frustration through the lack of physicality permitted. A few body checks and mistimed shoulder charges never caused anyone too many sleepless nights. God knows there were plenty of them back in the alleged golden days of yore. This is the small price we need to be willing to pay in order to encourage more honest physicality back into our game.

At the end of the day, our games are sold on the basis that they are physical contact sports. With that, there has to be an acceptance that the lines can be crossed at times without the game being called into disrepute. That philosophy has been afforded to hurling, and it is the better for it. It is time we return the same to football.

Hmmm. Some good points no doubt but he is wrong to say the black card hasn't worked and while it isn't perfect it has served the game well in my opinion. The issue here though is the attitude of referees, players and, indeed, supporters. Lets take the McCann incident -

Player(s) - disgraceful dive that has nothing to do with, black, yellow or red cards and simply a mindset we shouldn't tolerate. In addition, why was the Monaghan player touching McCann at all? Too much sly, cowardly, sledging of opponents going on.

Referee - How can you be an inter county referee and send someone off for something you didn't see? This isn't the first time a top (??) inter county football referee seemed to issue a card while only guessing at what happened. If you don't know what happened you can make a decision - end of.

Supporters - Not many defended McCann in fairness, but some did and I've seen plenty defend other dives or exaggerated reactions on the basis there was some contact. This attitude only encourages lads and is bizarrely justified on the 'winning is all that matters' platform.

Diving is now accepted in soccer but if we don't watch ourselves there'll be a generation of players, coaches and supporters in football who'll see nothing wrong with diving either.

I do agree with Dick on his general point though. I see shoulder after shoulder in hurling that is a foul by the book and some are even bookings being let go while in football if it isn't strictly by the book it's a foul and worse again, a text book shoulder that injures or puts a guy on his arse is often deemed a foul.

Look at last years Kerry/Mayo semi final, the ref was abused to high heaven by Mayo supporters when in the main he was brilliant and let a physical brand of football go. If that was the norm then we'd have a much better game. Going down easy pays in football while it doesn't in hurling. Mind you hurling referees ignore so many blatant fouling that I wouldn't be lauding them either.

[Main Street]

There are positives to the black card, Dick's opinions are valid and refreshingly honest but they're anecdotal in the scheme of things, not fact. The cynical fouling to stop the counterattack has diminished and the spectre of players queueing  in the last 10 minutes to take their yellow card fouls, is much less evident. That other cynical activities have emerged as part of a team's strategy is not the fault of the black card but arise partly as a response to the black card rule and partly to a creeping culture of cynicism. Once upon a time such cynical antics were  called 'soccer style' but not anymore, now it's 'GAA style' and nothing to do with the spillover from soccer.
The day will come when it's said  that "it's part of the game,  what can you do?"