And the Indo uses a picture from the 98 final as if Kildare haven't suffered enough. Heartless
http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaa-have-announced-that-the-mark-will-be-introduced-across-the-board-on-january-1-35233092.html
Arising from last Saturday's Central Council meeting, the GAA confirmed that the rule, which was introduced at the 2016 GAA Congress in Carlow, was successfully trialled in Division One of the Higher Education League will come into effect from the beginning of 2017.
The rule states: "When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately."
It is hoped that the rule change will reward the skill of high fielding in the game.
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2016, 04:22:33 PM
And the Indo uses a picture from the 98 final as if Kildare haven't suffered enough. Heartless
http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaa-have-announced-that-the-mark-will-be-introduced-across-the-board-on-january-1-35233092.html
Arising from last Saturday's Central Council meeting, the GAA confirmed that the rule, which was introduced at the 2016 GAA Congress in Carlow, was successfully trialled in Division One of the Higher Education League will come into effect from the beginning of 2017.
The rule states: "When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately."
It is hoped that the rule change will reward the skill of high fielding in the game.
It won't... it should be a free in for any kickout that doesn't go past the 45!
Quote from: screenexile on November 21, 2016, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2016, 04:22:33 PM
And the Indo uses a picture from the 98 final as if Kildare haven't suffered enough. Heartless
http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaa-have-announced-that-the-mark-will-be-introduced-across-the-board-on-january-1-35233092.html
Arising from last Saturday's Central Council meeting, the GAA confirmed that the rule, which was introduced at the 2016 GAA Congress in Carlow, was successfully trialled in Division One of the Higher Education League will come into effect from the beginning of 2017.
The rule states: "When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately."
It is hoped that the rule change will reward the skill of high fielding in the game.
It won't... it should be a free in for any kickout that doesn't go past the 45!
Apart from when there's a wind of over 50 miles per hour blowing. The strength of the wind to be measured by a fourth official in the stand.
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2016, 04:22:33 PM
And the Indo uses a picture from the 98 final as if Kildare haven't suffered enough. Heartless
http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaa-have-announced-that-the-mark-will-be-introduced-across-the-board-on-january-1-35233092.html
Arising from last Saturday's Central Council meeting, the GAA confirmed that the rule, which was introduced at the 2016 GAA Congress in Carlow, was successfully trialled in Division One of the Higher Education League will come into effect from the beginning of 2017.
The rule states: "When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately."
It is hoped that the rule change will reward the skill of high fielding in the game.
How does the player signal his intention to do A or B and how does the Ref signal he's awarding the Mark?
Pity they didn't abolish the throwball points in the interests of rewarding players who can KICK the effin FOOTball
Did the GAA produce a report or anything outlining the factors that enabled them to deem the trial in the Higher Education league a success?
I assume to answer your question Rossfan, it probably will depend if the player who has fielded the ball is surrounded by opposition players or not.
Dear God, the art of fielding is lost!
I don't want to be negative but this is going to be a complete load of sh*t
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 21, 2016, 05:14:16 PM
Quote from: screenexile on November 21, 2016, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2016, 04:22:33 PM
And the Indo uses a picture from the 98 final as if Kildare haven't suffered enough. Heartless
http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/gaa-have-announced-that-the-mark-will-be-introduced-across-the-board-on-january-1-35233092.html
Arising from last Saturday's Central Council meeting, the GAA confirmed that the rule, which was introduced at the 2016 GAA Congress in Carlow, was successfully trialled in Division One of the Higher Education League will come into effect from the beginning of 2017.
The rule states: "When a player catches the ball cleanly from a Kick-Out without it touching the ground, on or past the 45m line nearest the KickOut point, he shall be awarded 'a Mark' by the Referee. The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately."
It is hoped that the rule change will reward the skill of high fielding in the game.
It won't... it should be a free in for any kickout that doesn't go past the 45!
Apart from when there's a wind of over 50 miles per hour blowing. The strength of the wind to be measured by a fourth official in the stand.
Time to dig out that Beaufort Scale.
Maybe more points should be awarded for successful scores scored into a wind higher than say, a number 7.
Ah ffs. Would these clowns ever just leave the f**king game alone??!!
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
Free in straight in front of the posts is one alternative. However that would slow the game down. Also the parameters would need to be set out distance etc. But none of this applies but it's a suggestion.
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
As a keeper you'll want to kick the ball shorter now unless you're Steven Cluxton the last thing you'll want to do is hoof a 50/50 ball out to the middle in case you concede a mark. The only way to stop a short kickout is to outlaw it!
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
I would have thought that the tactic of pushing up on the short kick, combined with some very high profile fcuk ups would maybe leave the short kick less popular in the years ahead. The mark will prolong this as they will not want to hoof it out and concede a mark. Maybe the powers that be should just calm down and let the game evolve for a few years or perhaps tighten up on implementing the rules that we do have so they are applied with some level of consistency. A national referees committee is needed in my view - 15 or so paid referees who do the biggest county games and every Monday sit down and assess performances. Referees stood down and promoted based on their performances. The rest of the week they train referees around the country. Sticking in new rules every other year but keeping the same failing refereeing structure in place is pointless.
Time to go back to having two monsters centre-field.
Leave the running to the small fellas.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 09:31:38 AM
Time to go back to having two monsters centre-field.
Leave the running to the small fellas.
How is operation McDermott 2.0 coming on, Jinxy?
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
The mark rule will promote a short kick out
Quote from: screenexile on November 22, 2016, 09:22:29 AM
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
As a keeper you'll want to kick the ball shorter now unless you're Steven Cluxton the last thing you'll want to do is hoof a 50/50 ball out to the middle in case you concede a mark. The only way to stop a short kickout is to outlaw it!
+1.
Every team will set up with a keeper who can accurately chip the ball 31-35 yards into the chest of a MDMA / Mattie Donnelly type runner.
Teams will now start with clean possession 50 yards from their own goal instead of under pressure on their own 21 yard lines so this will evolve to even more bodies around the middle to kill off space around their own 40.
The only way to stop short kick outs is not to have them. Get the ref to throw up the ball in the middle. Like in Aussie Rules.
Such a load of shite - why would you want to do away with short kick outs? Is this all just a hark back to the era of hoofing the ball as far as possible and hoping someone on your own team will catch it? Because it seems like it, and, leaving nostalgia aside, football has thankfully come a long way from this
The mark is daft. Another utterly stupid attempt to address a problem without first addressing the symptoms.
Jimmy McGuinness and co might have identified that possession restarts are generally a win-win situation. Steven Cluxton might have perfected the art.
But the only reason why they had this opportunity is because keepers are now allowed to take immediate restarts from anywhere inside their 13m line.
If we want to see teams kicking the ball out to centre field we need to make it the least worst option again. To do this is quite simple. Make keepers kick all kick outs from the 21, and all receivers must be at least 13m when taking the ball.
With this change, quick kick outs are gone and short kick outs become less appealing.
It won't necessarily encourage "the art of high fielding" but it will signal a return to having strong ball winners at midfield who might get a chance to show off that skill.
It's not that complicated.
Quote from: haranguerer on November 22, 2016, 10:31:21 AM
Such a load of shite - why would you want to do away with short kick outs? Is this all just a hark back to the era of hoofing the ball as far as possible and hoping someone on your own team will catch it? Because it seems like it, and, leaving nostalgia aside, football has thankfully come a long way from this
I agree. I have no desire for short kickouts to be stopped. I think the mark will have little effect either way on the game.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 22, 2016, 10:44:36 AM
The mark is daft. Another utterly stupid attempt to address a problem without first addressing the symptoms.
Jimmy McGuinness and co might have identified that possession restarts are generally a win-win situation. Steven Cluxton might have perfected the art.
But the only reason why they had this opportunity is because keepers are now allowed to take immediate restarts from anywhere inside their 13m line.
If we want to see teams kicking the ball out to centre field we need to make it the least worst option again. To do this is quite simple. Make keepers kick all kick outs from the 21, and all receivers must be at least 13m when taking the ball.
With this change, quick kick outs are gone and short kick outs become less appealing.
It won't necessarily encourage "the art of high fielding" but it will signal a return to having strong ball winners at midfield who might get a chance to show off that skill.
It's not that complicated.
This might work but you'd need a line (the 34) to implement it correctly. Your suggestion implies that a kick-out of 14m is ok though.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 22, 2016, 10:44:36 AM
The mark is daft. Another utterly stupid attempt to address a problem without first addressing the symptoms.
Jimmy McGuinness and co might have identified that possession restarts are generally a win-win situation. Steven Cluxton might have perfected the art.
But the only reason why they had this opportunity is because keepers are now allowed to take immediate restarts from anywhere inside their 13m line.
If we want to see teams kicking the ball out to centre field we need to make it the least worst option again. To do this is quite simple. Make keepers kick all kick outs from the 21, and all receivers must be at least 13m when taking the ball.
With this change, quick kick outs are gone and short kick outs become less appealing.
It won't necessarily encourage "the art of high fielding" but it will signal a return to having strong ball winners at midfield who might get a chance to show off that skill.
It's not that complicated.
You also need forwards who can score from distance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25x0vpb350
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCkVYgljVyw
Quote from: haranguerer on November 22, 2016, 09:00:10 AM
Ah ffs. Would these clowns ever just leave the f**king game alone??!!
The "Clowns" being Central Council and Congress???
The abolition of the point posts at the side was the start of the ruination of the game :D
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 22, 2016, 10:52:49 AM
Quote from: haranguerer on November 22, 2016, 10:31:21 AM
Such a load of shite - why would you want to do away with short kick outs? Is this all just a hark back to the era of hoofing the ball as far as possible and hoping someone on your own team will catch it? Because it seems like it, and, leaving nostalgia aside, football has thankfully come a long way from this
I agree. I have no desire for short kickouts to be stopped. I think the mark will have little effect either way on the game.Quote from: thewobbler on November 22, 2016, 10:44:36 AM
The mark is daft. Another utterly stupid attempt to address a problem without first addressing the symptoms.
Jimmy McGuinness and co might have identified that possession restarts are generally a win-win situation. Steven Cluxton might have perfected the art.
But the only reason why they had this opportunity is because keepers are now allowed to take immediate restarts from anywhere inside their 13m line.
If we want to see teams kicking the ball out to centre field we need to make it the least worst option again. To do this is quite simple. Make keepers kick all kick outs from the 21, and all receivers must be at least 13m when taking the ball.
With this change, quick kick outs are gone and short kick outs become less appealing.
It won't necessarily encourage "the art of high fielding" but it will signal a return to having strong ball winners at midfield who might get a chance to show off that skill.
It's not that complicated.
This might work but you'd need a line (the 34) to implement it correctly. Your suggestion implies that a kick-out of 14m is ok though.
Can't agree with much of the above. I'm not a fan of the mark but there isn't a solution any of us could come up with that wouldn't have us labelled as 'clowns' by plenty of others. I see very little positive about the short kick out as it generally means the opposition have dropped back and the team in possession are going to run the ball as far as they can. I don't see much of a future for football if it's a game where a team runs the ball unopposed to their opponents 50 only to be met by a mass of bodies there and a game of pass the parcel breaks out.
I wouldn't like to see the restarts slowed down either. It's more game I want not less and I don't think wobblers solution would effect much change anyway.
I don't think any tinkering with the games playing rules will make much impact on a sport that has as it's main competition loads of mismatches and knockout games. That format encourages teams to set up to be conservative and unambitious so we get that kind of football.
There is tinkering all the time, and very little (none?) of it has a positive effect, all the while ignoring the fact that the rules that are there need to be enforced.
As someone else pointed out, the short kickout which is now an issue for some is likely in part due to tinkering with the placement of the ball for kickouts (wide/score) - chestertons fence.
For my part, I'd enforce the steps rule - it would allow players to time tackles, and could potentially sort many of the problems we have in our game.
I would suggest most of the changes have been reasonably positive though I could take or leave a lot of them. However, the central issue is that the game is becoming a poorer spectacle but IMO the issue is more to do with how we (the coaches, players and now fans) are approaching the game rather than the rules themselves. It's percentages football and it's increasingly becoming boring to watch. I don't agree with the mark and some other proposed changes but I don't think the game should be allowed to be killed by coaches either.
Football, like everything else, evolves. Tactics have only really come into it in the last 15 years, and the easiest place to start is defensively. But forward play will catch up, unless of course, a raft of changes prevent us from ever getting to that point.
Just on this:
We don't need a new line to dictate if a kick out from the 20m line has gone 13m. Besides the fact that the arc (13m in every direction, not 13m out) previously existed to support this rule, the 13m minimum distance for a free should be innate to any referee!
By moving all kick outs to the 21m line it compresses the 29 possible recipients into a smaller area of the field. While we could argue all day about whether removing 560m2 from the generally "safe" kicking area is actually enough, you simply can't argue against the fact it would reduce the potential for a safe short kick out, and as such would make a territorial kick more appealing. That's just maths in action.
As for slowing down the game, this I agree might not help the sport - nothing generates more intensity than a constant flow of action. But at the same time, almost everyone involved in the game has had a good long moan about how we no longer produce players but running machines. Slowing down all restarts would by nature reduce the absolute requirement on having 400m style wing forwards who have to embark on 80m sprints to close down kick outs, before turning and charging 80m in other other direction. I'm not saying this is a magic pill by the way, just a small step in redressing a current imbalance towards outstanding athletes over outstanding talents.
---
Perhaps more to the point, absolutely none of this requires a new way of playing football. It's pretty much how we all played a decade ago.
Do not underestimate how significant the quick restart has been in creating the game we now watch.
Quote from: haranguerer on November 22, 2016, 02:20:15 PM
Football, like everything else, evolves. Tactics have only really come into it in the last 15 years, and the easiest place to start is defensively. But forward play will catch up, unless of course, a raft of changes prevent us from ever getting to that point.
Part of me thinks this. Natural equilibrium demands that forwards must get better as defences get better.
But the changes to soccer's offside rules in 1925 and 1990, and rugby's try value in the 70s then again in the 90s, and the introduction of basketball's 3 point line in the 70s, would suggest that ours is not the first sport to need the occasional bit of artificial intervention.
Do you want to list the playing changes the GAA have made in that time to see how it stacks up?
briefly off the top of my head
yellow card
red card
lifting off ground
kickout from score and wide from 13m
goal can't be fisted from hand
open fist when fisting points
square ball rule change
sidelines out of hands
frees out of hands (?)
number of subs
blood subs
black card
Not against change if thought through and beneficial, but even the way these come in are a joke, inevitably the first anyone hears about it is after it is enacted. Yes, I'd know about it if I went to co board meetings etc ::) but hardly any of the gaa public (players/supporters) do. Should there not be consultations about rule changes at the very least? See how long it took FIFA to implement goal line technology, a fairly obvious (you'd think) improvement, but at least they took the time to consider it properly.
Quote from: LeoMc on November 22, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: screenexile on November 22, 2016, 09:22:29 AM
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
As a keeper you'll want to kick the ball shorter now unless you're Steven Cluxton the last thing you'll want to do is hoof a 50/50 ball out to the middle in case you concede a mark. The only way to stop a short kickout is to outlaw it!
+1.
Every team will set up with a keeper who can accurately chip the ball 31-35 yards into the chest of a MDMA / Mattie Donnelly type runner.
Teams will now start with clean possession 50 yards from their own goal instead of under pressure on their own 21 yard lines so this will evolve to even more bodies around the middle to kill off space around their own 40.
I don't get you.
Teams will kick the ball out 35 yards and win clean possession instead of taking short kick-outs, and this will result in more bodies around the middle?
If there are more bodies in the middle, what's to stop the keeper taking a short kick-out?
The way I see it, we might get more bodies hanging around the HF line trying to hedge their bets and cover midfield runners and the full back line.
Either way, I don't see how the introduction of a mark will increase congestion around the middle of the field, and even if it does, that's going to leave the keeper with more options for short kick-outs.
Basically, this will be business as usual but with the added bonus of more clean catching out the field.
I'm not saying there will be a massive increase but I think the net effect will either be neutral or positive.
In fairness you can't accuse the GAA of being impetuous when it comes to rule changes. There's been dozens of changes in other sports too, not just the ones wobbler mentioned. I think the GAA are as reluctant to change and cautious as any sport. They were also the only sport that I'm aware of that offered everyone in the world to put forth their ideas on how the game should develop, was it Eugene Magee's committee that did it?
I don't believe attacking strategies will evolve much to beat the negativity currently in the game as there's little you can do if teams put 15 bodies inside their 45. That nonsense has been broken anyway but unfortunately the cure (endless probing handpasses around the 45) is worse than the disease. The issue is we have a knockout competition with only a handful of serious contenders so it pays to play tournament football as the soccer boys call it. We didn't do that in the past as we didn't really use tactics but now that we do, there's little reward in employing overly attacking principles when defensive ones are easier to coach and more likely to succeed.
I'd imagine most guys who make a clean catch will elect to play on unless they land surrounded by opposition. Nothing worse than a guy making a clean catch only to get bottled up on landing, losing possession or else a scrambling handpass back to a team-mate under pressure. Many refs simply award a free to fielder anyway even if no foul.
Can't see it slowing up matters much, even when mark is taken players will be keen to move it on.
For me the short kick-out feeds into everything that is hard to watch about our game presently. The kick-outs to corner-backs in the 1st Connacht final stand-out. The short kick-out gives the opposition ample time to 'set-up' their blanket/wall at the back while limiting the number of aerial contests.
It'd also be great to see the insistence that kick-outs must clear the 45. On the rare occasion that there's a gale force wind that makes hitting the 45 impossible the ref sensibly allows short kick-outs. Even if it brings a cluster of players out the middle that then leaves more space inside for quick ball in to forwards which would be good.
Goalies should be forced to do kickouts with their eyes closed. Bring in an ould bit of excitement for the fans. I know purists love the elegance of systems but Eugene McGee knows 2 retired brothers in Leitrim who have watched everything on RTE for the last 59 years and it is not fair to have Brolly doing all the excitement.
The short kickout is a lot to do with the opposition dropping 1 of the corner forwards into midfield or further back. Why would the keeper kick out into the middle where the opposition have an extra player when he can kick it short to a corner back who is unmarked that can work the ball to midfield with the extra man.
Play 11 a side, and therefore space is more valuable, therefore teams will be forced to go man to man. That would lead to longer kick outs because there would be nobody free to receive a short one.
We might actually see less congestion in the middle.
If you commit too many players there and there is a mark, you're effectively taken out of the game.
The way it worked for the last 10 years or more was you jumped against one or two, caught the ball, landed and then another two were waiting on the ground for you.
With the mark rule, that's four players who are now redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick.
I think we may actually get back to the good old fashioned aerial duel, as it's not the end of the world if your opponent catches it clean, as long as you have plenty of men back.
Or maybe I'm just hopelessly optimistic.
I'm not sure Jinxy. Few teams kick long as it is. Even less teams will kick long now there's a chance of an advantage for the other team (a mark and a free kick).
Is Croke Park too short now for 15 a side GF given the fitness levels of the players ?
Or does the inability of 4 out of 6 forwards to kick a point from distance nullify the fitness effect ?
It's not all shangri la, Jinxy. Even in the old days when you had fielders they would wear different numbers and it was very annoying.
But the ball got down the field faster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg9AoIFET4E
And you get great comments on youube as well
Tessa Mullins 3 years ago
i shifted him in a nightclub in galway :) best night of my life :D
Quote from: thewobbler on November 22, 2016, 02:21:30 PM
Just on this:
We don't need a new line to dictate if a kick out from the 20m line has gone 13m. Besides the fact that the arc (13m in every direction, not 13m out) previously existed to support this rule, the 13m minimum distance for a free should be innate to any referee!
By moving all kick outs to the 21m line it compresses the 29 possible recipients into a smaller area of the field. While we could argue all day about whether removing 560m2 from the generally "safe" kicking area is actually enough, you simply can't argue against the fact it would reduce the potential for a safe short kick out, and as such would make a territorial kick more appealing. That's just maths in action.
I like your suggestion thewobbler but think you are slightly out on your math. Currently you must be outside the 20m line and 13m from the kick-out. A rule that is ignored a lot.
The two D's are 530m2 in size and currently you can't be inside some of that area for kick-outs.
However currently you see some kick-outs collected around the 20m line, or even inside it (which is allowed) and you suggestion would push this out at least 7m. I'd guess then most short kick-outs would go at least 30m from goal.
Stall the baller, I'm pretty sure you only have to be outside the 20m if it's not your keeper kicking it. But feck knows... the rules are a touch vague and it was early 2015 the last time I got a referee to explain them to me.
As far as I'm aware the two Ds no longer serve any purpose in the game apart from for penalties, as the keeper now has the option of restarting the ball from any point inside his 13m line, as long as the ball isn't moving.
But again, this is based on me consulting just one inter county referee. He could have been feeding me his interpretation rather than the facts.
Dont know about this one, teams will still play short as the mark not really be a benefit, the big worry is the GAA changing rules year after year, Black card one year, square ball rule another, number of subs 1 year, marks the next,
I remember the big change in GAA was in 1988 when the frees and sidelines could be taken from the hand, the pace of the game seriously increased after that and was seen as a good move.
Now there have been multi rules changes in recent years, some stay, other fall away, its not a wonder nobody knows the rules anymore. Is the game in that bad a shape that we must change the rules all the time, we worst than formula 1
This is the current rule.
When the ball is played over the endline by
the Team attacking that end, or after a score
is made, play is restarted by a kick-out off the
ground from the 13m line and within the large
rectangle.
If the goalkeeper is not taking the kick-out, he
shall stay in the small rectangle, and all other
players, except the player taking the kick-out,
shall be outside the 20m line and 13m from the
ball, until it has been kicked.
The player taking a kick-out may kick the
ball more than once before any other player
touches it but may not take the ball into his
hands.
The ball shall travel 13m before being playe
the mark really is a non event. read comments from a university manager recently saying that they did'nt prepare for it (mark rule) but will have it sorted in a couple of weeks.
more of an issue imho is gang tackling and overcarrying the ball. by addressing these issues we would have a much better spectacle.
1 player should only be allowed to tackle the ball carrier. second player in results in a free to the player in possession. so if a midfielder gains possession from a kickout he only has 1 player to contend with. any tackle from behind (of any kind) free to player in possession.
in return, defender get rewarded for good tackling / defending by ref consistently enforcing 4 step rule.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 04:40:53 PM
We might actually see less congestion in the middle.
If you commit too many players there and there is a mark, you're effectively taken out of the game.
The way it worked for the last 10 years or more was you jumped against one or two, caught the ball, landed and then another two were waiting on the ground for you.
With the mark rule, that's four players who are now redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick.
I think we may actually get back to the good old fashioned aerial duel, as it's not the end of the world if your opponent catches it clean, as long as you have plenty of men back.
Or maybe I'm just hopelessly optimistic.
Your 'hopelessly optimistic' appears to be: more players back in defence earlier
I'm not against the mark as such, BUT surely it'll actually lead to less teams pushing up on defenders to prevent short kick outs (and therefore actually lead to more short kick outs?)
Take the example of the way Kerry pushed up on Cluxton's kick out for the goal this year. That was high risk from Kerry, but obviously they figured it was worth the risk because cluxton was never going to be able to kick it long enough to get it to a Dublin player in space.
However, if there was the possibility of a mark for the dublin midfielders, who then had a free run (or a free kick) into the kerry defense there is no way in the world the kerry players would have pressed up the way they did. The risk is too high IMO.
So, I can only see this leading to more short kick outs rather than less.
One of the reasons short kick outs happen is because of the speed at which the kick out is taken. If kick-outs are taken slower it gives players time to push up on all the defenders. (Obviously, this could have a negative effect of allowing teams time to get everyone back in their own half!!!!)
Quote from: ha ha derry on November 23, 2016, 09:26:44 AM
the mark really is a non event. read comments from a university manager recently saying that they did'nt prepare for it (mark rule) but will have it sorted in a couple of weeks.
more of an issue imho is gang tackling and overcarrying the ball. by addressing these issues we would have a much better spectacle.
1 player should only be allowed to tackle the ball carrier. second player in results in a free to the player in possession. so if a midfielder gains possession from a kickout he only has 1 player to contend with. any tackle from behind (of any kind) free to player in possession.
in return, defender get rewarded for good tackling / defending by ref consistently enforcing 4 step rule.
Yeah I think this will have very little impact from what I've heard of the university games so far.
University is different to senior intercounty.
Which came first? Puke football or the model of the modern f Footballer ? If the defensive systems were banned would fellas be able to play like 20 years ago? Or have the Benny Coulters and Liam McHales been bred out of the game? Can players be trusted to think?
Do the stats people need to start measuring things differently ?
Puke football is like the Roundheads in the English civil war.
Cavalier football is in the doldrums. Eg Down, Meath, Galway , Offaly.
Quote from: seafoid on November 23, 2016, 10:40:27 AM
University is different to senior intercounty.
Which came first? Puke football or the model of the modern f Footballer ? If the defensive systems were banned would fellas be able to play like 20 years ago? Or have the Benny Coulters and Liam McHales been bred out of the game? Can players be trusted to think?
Do the stats people need to start measuring things differently ?
Puke football is like the Roundheads in the English civil war.
Cavalier football is in the doldrums. Eg Down, Meath, Galway , Offaly.
Yes those players are few these days. The modern midfielder is smaller, all round running and carrying player. There won't suddenly be dozens of 7 foot midfielder emerging in January.
The horse has already bolted. The game has changed.
Quote from: haranguerer on November 23, 2016, 09:30:49 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 04:40:53 PM
We might actually see less congestion in the middle.
If you commit too many players there and there is a mark, you're effectively taken out of the game.
The way it worked for the last 10 years or more was you jumped against one or two, caught the ball, landed and then another two were waiting on the ground for you.
With the mark rule, that's four players who are now redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick.
I think we may actually get back to the good old fashioned aerial duel, as it's not the end of the world if your opponent catches it clean, as long as you have plenty of men back.
Or maybe I'm just hopelessly optimistic.
Your 'hopelessly optimistic' appears to be: more players back in defence earlier
Then they are basically conceding kick-out possession to the other team.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 23, 2016, 11:13:13 AM
Quote from: haranguerer on November 23, 2016, 09:30:49 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 04:40:53 PM
We might actually see less congestion in the middle.
If you commit too many players there and there is a mark, you're effectively taken out of the game.
The way it worked for the last 10 years or more was you jumped against one or two, caught the ball, landed and then another two were waiting on the ground for you.
With the mark rule, that's four players who are now redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick.
I think we may actually get back to the good old fashioned aerial duel, as it's not the end of the world if your opponent catches it clean, as long as you have plenty of men back.
Or maybe I'm just hopelessly optimistic.
Your 'hopelessly optimistic' appears to be: more players back in defence earlier
Then they are basically conceding kick-out possession to the other team.
And this could turn out to be the worst thing about the new mark rule....it could result in some teams just putting nearly all players behind the half way line because they know they are going to concede possession to the 6'6'' midfielder around the half way line.
In honesty, it's very hard to know how this will impact games. It really should have been trialled for longer rather than just implemented after a few college games.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 23, 2016, 11:13:13 AM
Quote from: haranguerer on November 23, 2016, 09:30:49 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 04:40:53 PM
We might actually see less congestion in the middle.
If you commit too many players there and there is a mark, you're effectively taken out of the game.
The way it worked for the last 10 years or more was you jumped against one or two, caught the ball, landed and then another two were waiting on the ground for you.
With the mark rule, that's four players who are now redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick.
I think we may actually get back to the good old fashioned aerial duel, as it's not the end of the world if your opponent catches it clean, as long as you have plenty of men back.
Or maybe I'm just hopelessly optimistic.
Your 'hopelessly optimistic' appears to be: more players back in defence earlier
Then they are basically conceding kick-out possession to the other team.
I'm not commenting on how it will work out, just on what you're saying. You've said we might get back to an aeriel duel as less people will be committed in the middle, as when they are committed they are '...redundant in terms of getting back to defend your free kick'.If they're not to be redundant in defending your free kick, then it stands to reason they'll be in defence.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 22, 2016, 03:42:32 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on November 22, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
Quote from: screenexile on November 22, 2016, 09:22:29 AM
Quote from: GrandMasterFlash on November 22, 2016, 09:03:07 AM
What's the alternative lads, in an attempt to mitigate the scourge that is the short kick out and to promote high fielding? There seems to be considerable pessimism/criticism but not much in the way of alternatives. I don't think it's a panacea but in the slow moving world of GAA regulations it's a small positive step, providing it's implemented correctly.. ???
As a keeper you'll want to kick the ball shorter now unless you're Steven Cluxton the last thing you'll want to do is hoof a 50/50 ball out to the middle in case you concede a mark. The only way to stop a short kickout is to outlaw it!
+1.
Every team will set up with a keeper who can accurately chip the ball 31-35 yards into the chest of a MDMA / Mattie Donnelly type runner.
Teams will now start with clean possession 50 yards from their own goal instead of under pressure on their own 21 yard lines so this will evolve to even more bodies around the middle to kill off space around their own 40.
I don't get you.
Teams will kick the ball out 35 yards and win clean possession instead of taking short kick-outs, and this will result in more bodies around the middle?
If there are more bodies in the middle, what's to stop the keeper taking a short kick-out?
The way I see it, we might get more bodies hanging around the HF line trying to hedge their bets and cover midfield runners and the full back line.
Either way, I don't see how the introduction of a mark will increase congestion around the middle of the field, and even if it does, that's going to leave the keeper with more options for short kick-outs.
Basically, this will be business as usual but with the added bonus of more clean catching out the field.
I'm not saying there will be a massive increase but I think the net effect will either be neutral or positive.
To clarify. IMO teams will initially try to exploit this new rule to their advantage. Think of Cluxton chipping the ball into the chest of MDMA running into space. Teams will evolve to counter this and push more players in to close off the space and as you say they will revert to the short kick out. The risk of the opposition clean catching your kick out will make keepers less likely to kick it beyond the 45 unless the odds are stacked in their favour.
Anyway lets wait and see how it evolves.
I don't see this happening Leo Mc. Certainly not with any team that actually has a head on its shoulders. And I do find some of the concepts described by you and others as a bit mad.
The whole point of quick restarts (a la Cluxton) is to catch opponents on the hop; they've committed too many players forward or to the opposite side of the pitch. The attack stems from the momentum created by taking these potential barriers out of play.
The last thing on earth that will go through MDMA's head in such a scenario is to call for a mark, which means stopping the game and giving his opponents a valuable few seconds to recover their positions.
After all, what advantage is actually accrued in this scenario from taking a mark? What use on earth is clean possession when a) you are forced to kick that possession at least 13m and b) your opponents are now all behind the ball. Think this one out folks.
---
Fundamentally this is why the concept of the mark is completely flawed in Gaelic Football. It doesn't actually provide any advantage to the recipient in the overwhelming majority of circumstances. Moving the ball quickly through your hands to an oncoming half back who can break the midfield line has always been the most effective way to beat teams in the middle third. The mark don't change that.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 23, 2016, 03:14:19 PM
I don't see this happening Leo Mc. Certainly not with any team that actually has a head on its shoulders. And I do find some of the concepts described by you and others as a bit mad.
The whole point of quick restarts (a la Cluxton) is to catch opponents on the hop; they've committed too many players forward or to the opposite side of the pitch. The attack stems from the momentum created by taking these potential barriers out of play.
The last thing on earth that will go through MDMA's head in such a scenario is to call for a mark, which means stopping the game and giving his opponents a valuable few seconds to recover their positions.
After all, what advantage is actually accrued in this scenario from taking a mark? What use on earth is clean possession when a) you are forced to kick that possession at least 13m and b) your opponents are now all behind the ball. Think this one out folks.
---
Fundamentally this is why the concept of the mark is completely flawed in Gaelic Football. It doesn't actually provide any advantage to the recipient in the overwhelming majority of circumstances. Moving the ball quickly through your hands to an oncoming half back who can break the midfield line has always been the most effective way to beat teams in the middle third. The mark don't change that.
Theoretically, don't the opposition players have to move away from the player making the mark even if he then elects to play on? That's one advantage, although I think you make a good point with regards to actually electing to take the free.
The mark is only really an advantage for the guy who fields the ball in a cluster of players but that is unlikely to happen too often but when it does the mark will be a good think. I don't really see it having much of an impact either way but I think it's worth a look at and if it helps generate more high fielding contests great but if not then little will be lost. Teams should get back to going man on man for kickouts anyway as there is no real advantage to what's going on now bar making the game more of a running sport and it isn't helpful.
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 23, 2016, 03:48:27 PM
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Great question. A team is playing into the wind and the opposition catch the kickout. They will probably be within range of scoring from the resulting 'mark'. This could result in even more of a safety first approach from teams as they really can't afford the opposition to catch the ball within scoring range.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 23, 2016, 03:48:27 PM
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Never thought about that. I presume so.
In that case, a kick out reaching 40 yards that is caught by opposing team basically gifts them a 40 yard free and a handy enough score. Makes you wonder why a keeper would kick long, doesn't it?
A keeper taking a kickout would only be kicking it 25 yards or so if their opponents caught it 40 yards from goal so therefore I don't think it is risky kicking it long but it is risky kicking is medium to short. I think the default setting of too many people is to list all the possible downsides whereas lets have a look at it and see if it brings anything positive. As I said before, I think it will make little difference either way.
Kicking long reduces the likelihood of the team retaining possession. It should make things more interesting.
I think the game as it is now is biased towards defenders, a bit like catenaccio , the Italian soccer defensive system.
Donegal v Kildare 2011 is a good example of puke football
Kildare broke the ball down in midfield and made 9 passes with fellas within scoring range for some before Donegal committed a foul
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWlABqUppF0
Start at 3.10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpA0oPR_EOQ
Benny Coulter was quoted in the Star when he retired
"There are games you got to at club level where two teams are playing defensive systems and it is ridiculous at times," Coulter said.
"I was even reading stuff the other day, colleges games where they were playing two sweepers."When we were playing for St Mark's (Warrenpoint) in '96 or '97 you just went out and played football, and the better man won, but, now, even at minor level it's down to tactics and crap like that.
"There is too much time spent in the gym and crap like that, or in front of tvs watching stuff."Maybe the likes of 'Skinner' (Eoin) Bradley he'd be a player I'd pay in to watch because he is that unpredictable."He is the type of fella that just plays off the cuff and does his own thing."With a lot of county footballers it's more to do with how fit you are, stuff like that – it sickens me too at times.
Plus there is all the damage the training does to players.
Joe Brolly talking sense for a change :
"It's fascinatinto see how Gooch's physique has transformed in the past decade. At first, a lithe, supremely supple footballer, running riot in his first final against Mayo. In the end, a muscled, tight, gymnastic physique. Darragh ó Sé described this metamorphosis brilliantly a few years back with the classic line: "You used to see Gooch swigging a bottle of Coca-Cola and eating a bag of crisps. Now, he walks down the main street in Killarney sipping spring water and eating a banana."
In the period between September and May 2013, over half of the Kildare senior squad (16 players) went under the knife."
I don't know what's going to happen!
Quote from: seafoid on November 23, 2016, 04:59:07 PM
Kicking long reduces the likelihood of the team retaining possession. It should make things more interesting.
I think the game as it is now is biased towards defenders, a bit like catenaccio , the Italian soccer defensive system.
Donegal v Kildare 2011 is a good example of puke football
Kildare broke the ball down in midfield and made 9 passes with fellas within scoring range for some before Donegal committed a foul
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWlABqUppF0
Start at 3.10
Donegal v Kildare 2011 was intriguing contest between two totally committed sides with some outstanding scores, both set of players gave their all during that 90 minute game. It was a much better watch than the majority of games I saw this summer.
Quote from: Zulu on November 23, 2016, 04:38:06 PM
A keeper taking a kickout would only be kicking it 25 yards or so if their opponents caught it 40 yards from goal so therefore I don't think it is risky kicking it long but it is risky kicking is medium to short. I think the default setting of too many people is to list all the possible downsides whereas lets have a look at it and see if it brings anything positive. As I said before, I think it will make little difference either way.
But it's the obvious downsides/weaknesses in the rules that coaches will seek to exploit.
Quote from: BennyCake on November 23, 2016, 06:10:41 PM
Quote from: Zulu on November 23, 2016, 04:38:06 PM
A keeper taking a kickout would only be kicking it 25 yards or so if their opponents caught it 40 yards from goal so therefore I don't think it is risky kicking it long but it is risky kicking is medium to short. I think the default setting of too many people is to list all the possible downsides whereas lets have a look at it and see if it brings anything positive. As I said before, I think it will make little difference either way.
But it's the obvious downsides/weaknesses in the rules that coaches will seek to exploit.
Teams will obviously need to get 14 players on the goal line while the goalie is kicking thé ball out.
Quote from: BennyCake on November 23, 2016, 06:10:41 PM
Quote from: Zulu on November 23, 2016, 04:38:06 PM
A keeper taking a kickout would only be kicking it 25 yards or so if their opponents caught it 40 yards from goal so therefore I don't think it is risky kicking it long but it is risky kicking is medium to short. I think the default setting of too many people is to list all the possible downsides whereas lets have a look at it and see if it brings anything positive. As I said before, I think it will make little difference either way.
But it's the obvious downsides/weaknesses in the rules that coaches will seek to exploit.
But I'm not sure those downsides exist or will impact upon coaches thinking. Any team I would coach would focus on how we can get possession from all our kickouts. Likewise we would focus on the other team not winning clean possession, especially out the field. However, I don't think a guy winning a free kick 60 yards from our goal would make me nervous about our keeper kicking it long for a contested kick. You're probably right though, coaches will probably look at it from how can we break it down from opponents rather than how can we use it to our advantage. We are far too negative in our thinking about football with naïve being the worst thing a coach can be accused of.
I don't see the game changing much with this new rule. Defences were on top the last few years, the best footballers are all arguably playing in defence and its a pattern that will continue in the years ahead. The way the game has gone it could be a while before another forward wins footballer of year.
True, not sure there's any point playing a good player in the full forward line anymore while you'd have to consider playing your best players in your half back line from now on. I wonder will Ciaran McManus find himself played as a half back before his career is over? Jamie Clarke had some time there but there's quite a few very good forwards who would have more tools to be very effective coming from deep facing the goal rather than running from sideline to sideline trying to find space behind 12 players standing in front of them.
Quote from: Blowitupref on November 23, 2016, 06:53:03 PM
I don't see the game changing much with this new rule. Defences were on top the last few years, the best footballers are all arguably playing in defence and its a pattern that will continue in the years ahead. The way the game has gone it could be a while before another forward wins footballer of year.
I don't think 6 all-star forwards are justified under the current fashion. The Dubs got 3 which was very generous
Quote from: Zulu on November 23, 2016, 09:14:00 PM
True, not sure there's any point playing a good player in the full forward line anymore while you'd have to consider playing your best players in your half back line from now on. I wonder will Ciaran McManus find himself played as a half back before his career is over? Jamie Clarke had some time there but there's quite a few very good forwards who would have more tools to be very effective coming from deep facing the goal rather than running from sideline to sideline trying to find space behind 12 players standing in front of them.
Is he still going?!
McManus started his intercounty career as a wing back if memory serves...
Quote from: BennyCake on November 23, 2016, 04:13:42 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 23, 2016, 03:48:27 PM
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Never thought about that. I presume so.
In that case, a kick out reaching 40 yards that is caught by opposing team basically gifts them a 40 yard free and a handy enough score. Makes you wonder why a keeper would kick long, doesn't it?
The mark only applies for kick outs that go to or past the 45m line. Therefore the closest that a free in for a mark for the opposition could possibly be is on the 45 (And usually it'd be a bit further out, so hardly a handy enough score!).
I don't know if the rule allows you to score directly from a mark, but my guess is that it does.
But the way teams/managers are risk averse at the moment, keepers are unlikely to kick out long if there is a chance that the opposition will get a free kick to attack from around halfway.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with the mark. It could have a benefit (particularly in the short term), but in the long term I can't see how it will prevent the defensive structures/mindsets from remaining.
Is the problem the midgets that crowd the midfield or the fitness levels or the fact it is a game for defences or the tactics ?
Can it be reformed to give a decent spectacle or do we just have to wait ?
Quote from: westbound on November 24, 2016, 11:23:49 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on November 23, 2016, 04:13:42 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 23, 2016, 03:48:27 PM
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Never thought about that. I presume so.
In that case, a kick out reaching 40 yards that is caught by opposing team basically gifts them a 40 yard free and a handy enough score. Makes you wonder why a keeper would kick long, doesn't it?
The mark only applies for kick outs that go to or past the 45m line. Therefore the closest that a free in for a mark for the opposition could possibly be is on the 45 (And usually it'd be a bit further out, so hardly a handy enough score!).
I don't know if the rule allows you to score directly from a mark, but my guess is that it does.
But the way teams/managers are risk averse at the moment, keepers are unlikely to kick out long if there is a chance that the opposition will get a free kick to attack from around halfway.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with the mark. It could have a benefit (particularly in the short term), but in the long term I can't see how it will prevent the defensive structures/mindsets from remaining.
Does the man who claims the mark have to take the mark or can anyone take it?
I think your name actually has to be Mark.
Quote from: Croí na hÉireann on November 24, 2016, 11:41:47 AM
Quote from: westbound on November 24, 2016, 11:23:49 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on November 23, 2016, 04:13:42 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 23, 2016, 03:48:27 PM
I think Stephen Cluxton, and other accurate (normally!!) kick out experts might result in a few marks. It just has to be caught cleanly before it bounces, right? There's no stipulation it has to be a soaring catch to the clouds?
In that case, a 45 metre driven kick to a man running towards the sideline would also count as a mark, and I think that will be seen more than the contested high catch with the big man winning it. Half forwards and half backs might get more marks than midfielders.
Is a mark also awarded to the other team? If a kickout is caught by the opposition outside your 45, is a mark awarded then? And can they score from it?
Never thought about that. I presume so.
In that case, a kick out reaching 40 yards that is caught by opposing team basically gifts them a 40 yard free and a handy enough score. Makes you wonder why a keeper would kick long, doesn't it?
The mark only applies for kick outs that go to or past the 45m line. Therefore the closest that a free in for a mark for the opposition could possibly be is on the 45 (And usually it'd be a bit further out, so hardly a handy enough score!).
I don't know if the rule allows you to score directly from a mark, but my guess is that it does.
But the way teams/managers are risk averse at the moment, keepers are unlikely to kick out long if there is a chance that the opposition will get a free kick to attack from around halfway.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with the mark. It could have a benefit (particularly in the short term), but in the long term I can't see how it will prevent the defensive structures/mindsets from remaining.
Does the man who claims the mark have to take the mark or can anyone take it?
Good question
The rule states the following:
"..............The player awarded a 'Mark' shall have the options of (a) Taking a free kick or (b Playing on immediately.""
That seems to suggest only the player awarded the mark can 'take' the free?
Looks like another rule open to interpretation!!!!!
Also, how 'immediate' is immediately'!!! ;)
Tbf, I don't think that's open to interpretation - the player can do one of two things; giving the ball to another player to take the free isn't one of them.
What time limit is put on "immediately" will need to be defined though
Quote from: macdanger2 on November 24, 2016, 12:16:32 PM
Tbf, I don't think that's open to interpretation - the player can do one of two things; giving the ball to another player to take the free isn't one of them.
What time limit is put on "immediately" will need to be defined though
The drafting/wording of so many GAA rules is absolutely terrible when you actually read the rules.
Quote from: Jinxy on November 24, 2016, 11:52:18 AM
I think your name actually has to be Mark.
Gospel.
St Marks in Warrenpoint venerate high fielding already. Up Down mark quick ball into the forwards.
If the mark rule shows us more of this, then bring it on.
From someone who maybe knows a thing or two about it. Would love to hear what his opinion is on it. Lots of players have played top level football, then played with the mark in AFL BUT having played football, then AFL, then football, back to AFL and now back again to football, he is surely the man who would give the best insight into it.
MARTIN CLARKE
https://youtu.be/EBt4HxxQ7Vw
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 02:23:31 PM
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
https://youtu.be/HySK0XAupWU
try that for an abortion of an excuse for PR
http://www.gaa.ie/news/the-mark/
"In order to be awarded a "Mark", the ball must not have been touched in flight by another player."
Two players compete for the ball, both make contact with the ball but one of them comes down with the ball in his hands.
No mark?
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 02:23:31 PM
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
Yes and no. It will be a mess the odd time it is implemented but will be far and few between as teams will still use kickouts to try and retain possession at all costs. I can't see it having any significant impact as regards changing the course that the game is currently on. As spectators we can't even get our heads around the black card after 3 years (I think) of its existence, I can already hear the apoplectic rage in the stand when the catcher goes down injured and the nearest man doesn't kick it quick enough or it goes over the bar. :-X
Quote from: tiempo on November 30, 2016, 03:01:31 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 02:23:31 PM
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
https://youtu.be/HySK0XAupWU
try that for an abortion of an excuse for PR
In none of those would the Mark have been actually an advantage really. Like as a coach, I'm thinking risk reward here. Why would a Mark incentivise me to go long? If I have a ball winning midfielder, I'll probably try and go long to him anyway, Mark or no Mark, and use him to lay the ball off and launch attacks. If I don't have a ball winner, why would the Mark make me go long? The reward of basically a free kick 45m out from your own goals or so, is not worth the risk of the attacking team getting a Mark in the same spot. It's far more dangerous now to go long and risk a free 50 metres out from your own goal, when the reward is still a free 50 metres out from your own goal.
and the bumpf about 'signalling to the ref by stopping'! What the f**k? Could they not have come up with something better than that. You don't know for sure you are going to get the Mark in all cases (ball touched, foot inside the 45 etc), so do you risk 'stopping' and assume the ref gives it? If you are the tackling player do you lay into him to try win the ball back or do you lay off until you see if it's a mark or not?
Finally, off the top of my head, the player has 5 seconds to play the ball, and the defenders have to retreat immediately 13 metres. Can you imagine the messing that's going to be going on with kicks rebounding off retreating players, roars for 13 metre penalties etc etc? This just sounds so half baked to me. If they really wanted to reward the high catch, and bring back long kicking, reward EVERY high catch with a mark, like the Aussies do, and at least you might see lads trying to kick the ball 30 yards to a forward so he can have a shot at goal. I still wouldn't like it, and I'm not proposing it, but it would make the kicker far more likely to try it than potentially penalising him (as goalie) with a free in to the opponents 50-60 metres out from your goal.
I foresee a lot of even more detailed and safety first kickout strategies.
Quote from: Croí na hÉireann on November 30, 2016, 04:16:23 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 02:23:31 PM
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
Yes and no. It will be a mess the odd time it is implemented but will be far and few between as teams will still use kickouts to try and retain possession at all costs. I can't see it having any significant impact as regards changing the course that the game is currently on. As spectators we can't even get our heads around the black card after 3 years (I think) of its existence, I can already hear the apoplectic rage in the stand when the catcher goes down injured and the nearest man doesn't kick it quick enough or it goes over the bar. :-X
Agreed. I just posted similar there myself before I saw your post.
Quote from: tiempo on November 30, 2016, 03:01:31 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 02:23:31 PM
Jesus, just read the full explanation and FAQ on this. It's going to be a mess.
https://youtu.be/HySK0XAupWU
try that for an abortion of an excuse for PR
Pretty much half of all the catches made in the video had another player get a touch on the ball so wouldn't be legit marks.
Inexcusable stuff in the video introduction of the mark.
Play till you hear the whistle, just like always. No whistle, no mark. Hear a whistle, everyone stops and referee indicates spot where free kick to be taken from. Referee starts counting down 5...4...3...2...1...0 and if free not by the time 0 is hit, ball thrown up.
What am I missing?
"When the player awarded the mark decides to play on, when may he be tackled?
He may be tackled after he takes four steps or once he plays the ball in any way."
This is a huge one imo, basically if you catch the ball clean, you can't be tackled for four steps. Provides a pretty decent advantage
Quote from: Ball Hopper on November 30, 2016, 06:14:39 PM
Play till you hear the whistle, just like always. No whistle, no mark. Hear a whistle, everyone stops and referee indicates spot where free kick to be taken from. Referee starts counting down 5...4...3...2...1...0 and if free not by the time 0 is hit, ball thrown up.
What am I missing?
The player has to call for the mark by stopping.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 30, 2016, 07:11:00 PM
Quote from: Ball Hopper on November 30, 2016, 06:14:39 PM
Play till you hear the whistle, just like always. No whistle, no mark. Hear a whistle, everyone stops and referee indicates spot where free kick to be taken from. Referee starts counting down 5...4...3...2...1...0 and if free not by the time 0 is hit, ball thrown up.
What am I missing?
The player has to call for the mark by stopping.
Like rugby. But it won't work like rugby.
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
You're dead right. It could be a massive success, like the black card, yellow card and the 'tick' were.
You just reinforced my point muppet....
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
It might. I just think it's ill conceived. I was positive towards the Black Card in principle.
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
Surely the place to give it a chance is to trial it in a competition, like at 3rd level for a year? If it significantly improves the game then by all means bring the motion to congress.
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
I knew the black card would be a disaster and it has proved to be so. This won't be a disaster - it will just have little impact and cause some confusion. It's a pretty pointless change with obviously very little thought gone into it. Or if a lot of thought has gone into it then it reflects terribly on those involved. As Buckass mentioned if a high catch is made from a kickout in recent times you very often see the fielder getting a handy free....and I've no problem with that versus the alternative of him being punished for overcarrying after a high catch and then being surrounded. So if that's what they're trying to achieve it's a waste of time. If they're trying to eliminate short kickouts this will be an utter failure.
The rule change though is in line with a lot of what the top brass are doing. To me they are totally out of touch with what they're seeing in front of them. Like - why don't we bring in a "mark" in hurling? Hurling guys somehow do a great job of protecting their game from this idiocy.
Sure they can have any rules they like in hurley s the Refs will ignore them all ::)
The real problem in the game still referred to as Gaelic Football is the throwball and runball infestation.
Address that first and we can take other rules from there.
Quote from: magpie seanie on December 02, 2016, 10:25:38 AM
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
I knew the black card would be a disaster and it has proved to be so. This won't be a disaster - it will just have little impact and cause some confusion. It's a pretty pointless change with obviously very little thought gone into it. Or if a lot of thought has gone into it then it reflects terribly on those involved. As Buckass mentioned if a high catch is made from a kickout in recent times you very often see the fielder getting a handy free....and I've no problem with that versus the alternative of him being punished for overcarrying after a high catch and then being surrounded. So if that's what they're trying to achieve it's a waste of time. If they're trying to eliminate short kickouts this will be an utter failure.
The rule change though is in line with a lot of what the top brass are doing. To me they are totally out of touch with what they're seeing in front of them. Like - why don't we bring in a "mark" in hurling? Hurling guys somehow do a great job of protecting their game from this idiocy.
Personally I think all kick outs should be required to travel past the 45 meter line or 35 meters if that's too far. As a former midfielder who had good catching skills I applaud anything that brings the high catch back to the game. The current game has become difficult to watch with short kick outs packed defenses and hundreds of hand passes. I understand that this may cause confusion at the outset but I hope the next step is mandating that all kick outs need to go beyond he 45.
I also think that teams should be required to have a minimum of three players in the opponents half of the field at ALL times - we don't need 0-3 to 0-2 scores like we had in Donegal this year...
Quote from: sligoman2 on December 02, 2016, 01:00:56 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on December 02, 2016, 10:25:38 AM
Quote from: sligoman2 on November 30, 2016, 11:49:54 PM
Ye are some bunch of pessimists lads. Give it a chance at least
I knew the black card would be a disaster and it has proved to be so. This won't be a disaster - it will just have little impact and cause some confusion. It's a pretty pointless change with obviously very little thought gone into it. Or if a lot of thought has gone into it then it reflects terribly on those involved. As Buckass mentioned if a high catch is made from a kickout in recent times you very often see the fielder getting a handy free....and I've no problem with that versus the alternative of him being punished for overcarrying after a high catch and then being surrounded. So if that's what they're trying to achieve it's a waste of time. If they're trying to eliminate short kickouts this will be an utter failure.
The rule change though is in line with a lot of what the top brass are doing. To me they are totally out of touch with what they're seeing in front of them. Like - why don't we bring in a "mark" in hurling? Hurling guys somehow do a great job of protecting their game from this idiocy.
Personally I think all kick outs should be required to travel past the 45 meter line or 35 meters if that's too far. As a former midfielder who had good catching skills I applaud anything that brings the high catch back to the game. The current game has become difficult to watch with short kick outs packed defenses and hundreds of hand passes. I understand that this may cause confusion at the outset but I hope the next step is mandating that all kick outs need to go beyond he 45.
I also think that teams should be required to have a minimum of three players in the opponents half of the field at ALL times - we don't need 0-3 to 0-2 scores like we had in Donegal this year...
I don't disagree with you except that I'm certain this measure will do nothing to bring the high catch back to the game as you say. The other restrictions on shortness of kickout and numbers in certain sectors will actually have an impact if used. This one will have none.
Players should get an allocation of 3 handpasses per match.
The sad thing about modern Gaelic is that you don't need to be a good footballer to play intercounty in a good number of positions .
No country for fancy dans.
Quote from: Jinxy on December 02, 2016, 04:49:47 PM
No country for fancy dans.
There is no beauty in the game anymore. Just brute force and defence by numbers. Taliban stuff
I remember the fugees singing about killing Meath softly ..
Quote from: seafoid on December 04, 2016, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on December 02, 2016, 04:49:47 PM
No country for fancy dans.
There is no beauty in the game anymore. Just brute force and defence by numbers. Taliban stuff
I remember the fugees singing about killing Meath softly ..
True. Individualism has no place in the modern game. All play is programmed. Football by numbers.
Quote from: BennyCake on December 04, 2016, 10:47:54 PM
Quote from: seafoid on December 04, 2016, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on December 02, 2016, 04:49:47 PM
No country for fancy dans.
There is no beauty in the game anymore. Just brute force and defence by numbers. Taliban stuff
I remember the fugees singing about killing Meath softly ..
True. Individualism has no place in the modern game. All play is programmed. Football by numbers.
It's a team game ;)
I assume the "mark" will be in place for the All Ireland club semi finals and finals in the new year? Starting a competition with one set of rules and finishing with another is not ideal.
Quote from: BennyCake on December 04, 2016, 10:47:54 PM
Quote from: seafoid on December 04, 2016, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on December 02, 2016, 04:49:47 PM
No country for fancy dans.
There is no beauty in the game anymore. Just brute force and defence by numbers. Taliban stuff
I remember the fugees singing about killing Meath softly ..
True. Individualism has no place in the modern game. All play is programmed. Football by numbers.
It is very dull
Apart from Tipp getting to the semi this year was forgettable
I think mayo keeping the Dub forwards living off scraps and 3 of them getting all stars was
a sign of what is wrong.
GF should be about creating space rather than closing it down
Quote from: seafoid on December 05, 2016, 03:35:01 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on December 04, 2016, 10:47:54 PM
Quote from: seafoid on December 04, 2016, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on December 02, 2016, 04:49:47 PM
No country for fancy dans.
There is no beauty in the game anymore. Just brute force and defence by numbers. Taliban stuff
I remember the fugees singing about killing Meath softly ..
True. Individualism has no place in the modern game. All play is programmed. Football by numbers.
It is very dull
Apart from Tipp getting to the semi this year was forgettable
I think mayo keeping the Dub forwards living off scraps and 3 of them getting all stars was
a sign of what is wrong.
GF should be about creating space rather than closing it down
That's been the same for 8 or 9 years.
Time for 10 or 11 a side. Might help solve most of current problems with the game.
To be honest I think attacking play has to evolve and has scope to do so. It has not developed noticeably in recent years but I did see some signs that may be changing. I noticed some things in last years championship that may have been accident or design, I'm not sure, which might work at breaking the 40 metre iron curtains. I think teams are going to work off pods of 3/4 players to draw a group into a bunch and leave a gap in a defensive wall. Similar to how they sometimes in rugby artificially create "quick ball". Also, Dublin's "McManamon" tactic (for want of a better term) of playing it out to the corner and using McManamon's unique gift of carrying the ball at pace in tight spaces was very much to the fore in last years final replay. He drew some frees (which were scored) and when it didn't work they retreated back out.
The beauty of Tipp was they have two excellent footballers who could win high ball and despatch it. Most players in the FB line nowadays are under 6 foot and picked for their speed. If I had a good fielder I'd be grooming him to play inside rather than at midfield. Get it in fast.
Quote from: magpie seanie on December 06, 2016, 12:34:14 PM
To be honest I think attacking play has to evolve and has scope to do so. It has not developed noticeably in recent years but I did see some signs that may be changing. I noticed some things in last years championship that may have been accident or design, I'm not sure, which might work at breaking the 40 metre iron curtains. I think teams are going to work off pods of 3/4 players to draw a group into a bunch and leave a gap in a defensive wall. Similar to how they sometimes in rugby artificially create "quick ball". Also, Dublin's "McManamon" tactic (for want of a better term) of playing it out to the corner and using McManamon's unique gift of carrying the ball at pace in tight spaces was very much to the fore in last years final replay. He drew some frees (which were scored) and when it didn't work they retreated back out.
The beauty of Tipp was they have two excellent footballers who could win high ball and despatch it. Most players in the FB line nowadays are under 6 foot and picked for their speed. If I had a good fielder I'd be grooming him to play inside rather than at midfield. Get it in fast.
Handpassing makes it easier for defenders to control the game.
Accurate footpasses and decoy runs would suit forwards-. Plus fellas who can score from 40 yards out.
And say 4 points for a goal.
Quote from: seafoid on December 06, 2016, 02:37:49 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on December 06, 2016, 12:34:14 PM
To be honest I think attacking play has to evolve and has scope to do so. It has not developed noticeably in recent years but I did see some signs that may be changing. I noticed some things in last years championship that may have been accident or design, I'm not sure, which might work at breaking the 40 metre iron curtains. I think teams are going to work off pods of 3/4 players to draw a group into a bunch and leave a gap in a defensive wall. Similar to how they sometimes in rugby artificially create "quick ball". Also, Dublin's "McManamon" tactic (for want of a better term) of playing it out to the corner and using McManamon's unique gift of carrying the ball at pace in tight spaces was very much to the fore in last years final replay. He drew some frees (which were scored) and when it didn't work they retreated back out.
The beauty of Tipp was they have two excellent footballers who could win high ball and despatch it. Most players in the FB line nowadays are under 6 foot and picked for their speed. If I had a good fielder I'd be grooming him to play inside rather than at midfield. Get it in fast.
Handpassing makes it easier for defenders to control the game.
Accurate footpasses and decoy runs would suit forwards-. Plus fellas who can score from 40 yards out.
And say 4 points for a goal.
And 2 points for a score from outside a 40 m arc like the 3 pointer in basketball - lets force the defenders out to tackle.
Interesting ideas.
Personally, I think that if we rewarded a goal with 4 points, its make teams more defensive! Because giving up a goal would be seen as more costly that is currently the case.
2 points for a score outside an designated line/arc could have the desired effect of getting teams to push up a bit. But personally, I don't like the idea of a 'point' being worth 2 points!
And make throw points worth only half a point.
Quote from: Rossfan on December 06, 2016, 04:21:40 PM
And make throw points worth only half a point.
Ban them or allow similar for goals again. It's a ridiculous contradiction.
Any comments on the mark from people who saw games over the weekend?
I've seen a few people giving out that there were no marks, as if this was some sort of failure on behalf of the rule.
My gut feeling is that if a player catches a ball and decides to play on, most people watching will be too dumb to figure out what's going on.
The rule is unique I suppose in that it could be very effective without ever actually being availed of, i.e. players automatically back off the fielder.
Anyway, worst case scenario is it will have no impact at all.
Worse case scenario is it actually increases the amount of short kickouts, as coaches become too nervous of giving away free possession 50 yards from your own goal.
Then we'll bring in a rule to ban short kick outs.
Quote from: Jinxy on January 09, 2017, 12:05:40 PM
Then we'll bring in a rule to ban short kick outs.
:) We love new rules in the GAA :)
When was the last new rule brought into soccer? The active/passive offside rule?
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 09, 2017, 11:52:52 AM
Any comments on the mark from people who saw games over the weekend?
Remember a whistle going for one and Cathal Shine getting space to play on in another instance
Wouldn't it be an idea for the Refs to give a double hoot on the whistle for a mark to differentiate it from a free .
Most people still thinks it's a free he's blowing for.
Is this rule in place now for the remainder of the All-Ireland club football series?
I doubt it. Rule changes are tied to the start of a competition. i.e the Competition has to have started under that rule to use it in the latter stages. Otherwise it could be said to compromise the earlier games in the competition.
Unless they've changed that rule.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 09, 2017, 12:54:32 PM
I doubt it. Rule changes are tied to the start of a competition. i.e the Competition has to have started under that rule to use it in the latter stages. Otherwise it could be said to compromise the earlier games in the competition.
I agree that used to be the way but I think I read an article somewhere about one of the club semi finalists preparing for the new rule.
I don't think soccer changes the playing rules nearly as much. Extra Linesmen and Goal Line technology are not really what I'd consider playing rules. This is, as was the black card, as was the sin bin etc.
I don't mind rule changes either, as long as there is a clear understanding of why they are being introduced, and that some thought has been given to the consequences and to understanding the problem they are trying to solve. So many of our changes seem to be knee jerk reactions to media campaigns of one sort or another.
What you get sent off for in soccer seems to change every year.
Backpass rule change was the best one they ever made in soccer.
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 09, 2017, 02:13:11 PM
What you get sent off for in soccer seems to change every year.
Backpass rule change was the best one they ever made in soccer.
NO WAY!
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 09, 2017, 02:13:11 PM
What you get sent off for in soccer seems to change every year.
Backpass rule change was the best one they ever made in soccer.
That's more interpretation than rule changes though. I suppose the 'professional foul' was a new rule introduced alright.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 09, 2017, 12:10:26 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on January 09, 2017, 12:05:40 PM
Then we'll bring in a rule to ban short kick outs.
:) We love new rules in the GAA :)
When was the last new rule brought into soccer? The active/passive offside rule?
There was a new rule brought in this year regarding kickoff. Previously it had to travel forward which meant the team taking the kickoff required two players in the centre circle. Now the ball can travel in any direction.
How do the gaa go about devising new rules. I assume there is a committee but do they carry out experimental rules on some "testing ground" for lack of a better term. I'm just curious about this? How does it get decided as to what is best?
Quote from: thejuice on January 09, 2017, 02:42:44 PM
How do the gaa go about devising new rules. I assume there is a committee but do they carry out experimental rules on some "testing ground" for lack of a better term. I'm just curious about this? How does it get decided as to what is best?
I'd say it falls to a commiiitttttteeeeee like the Hurling Development Committee or whatever. I know for that rule about the hurling penalty, they brought a few lads to Thurles and made them take penalties on one another :)
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 09, 2017, 01:00:03 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 09, 2017, 12:54:32 PM
I doubt it. Rule changes are tied to the start of a competition. i.e the Competition has to have started under that rule to use it in the latter stages. Otherwise it could be said to compromise the earlier games in the competition.
I agree that used to be the way but I think I read an article somewhere about one of the club semi finalists preparing for the new rule.
Yeah, I'm fairly sure it's in for the club too.
Didn't make any impact in Mullingar. Short directed kickouts all day. Opposition intercepted one but didn't take the mark as it was more advantageous to keep running at goal. Another one caught on the chest just outside the 45. By the time he stopped and went back to the spot, the opposition were organised. Same as taking a deep lying free kick, completely unnecessary rule change.
Quote from: thejuice on January 09, 2017, 02:42:44 PM
How do the gaa go about devising new rules. I assume there is a committee but do they carry out experimental rules on some "testing ground" for lack of a better term. I'm just curious about this? How does it get decided as to what is best?
Eugene McGee just rings up Croke Park.
Quote from: Estimator on January 09, 2017, 02:35:58 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 09, 2017, 12:10:26 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on January 09, 2017, 12:05:40 PM
Then we'll bring in a rule to ban short kick outs.
:) We love new rules in the GAA :)
When was the last new rule brought into soccer? The active/passive offside rule?
There was a new rule brought in this year regarding kickoff. Previously it had to travel forward which meant the team taking the kickoff required two players in the centre circle. Now the ball can travel in any direction.
Yeah - I was a bit surprised when I saw this happening as I hadn't heard it was changed.
Is the mark being brought in for all age groups? I was under the impression it was senior football only?
I wonder how many marks we've had in the first two rounds of the NFL.
As the league progresses, it'd be interesting to see how often players take the free-kick as opposed to playing on.
It has worked out better than I expected so far to be fair. Jarlath Burns for president.
As we near the end of the league, what's the general view on this?
For me, it's had somewhere between a neutral and a positive impact, which is pretty good going for a rule change in gaelic football.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 21, 2017, 12:55:46 PM
As we near the end of the league, what's the general view on this?
For me, it's had somewhere between a neutral and a positive impact, which is pretty good going for a rule change in gaelic football.
Agree with that, hasn't had a big impact to be honest but what impact it has made, it certainly hasn't been negative at all.
Agree.
But I wouldn't be definitive about any rule change until it's had at least one championship! Lets see how the smartest managers set up to use it / nullify it during the championship.
Then we'll have a better idea of it's true worth.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 21, 2017, 12:55:46 PM
As we near the end of the league, what's the general view on this?
For me, it's had somewhere between a neutral and a positive impact, which is pretty good going for a rule change in gaelic football.
At least when a man catches the ball now from a kickout you don't have a bloody scrum forming around him.
Now if we could extend the black card to cynical stopping opponents taking quick frees....
Quote from: westbound on March 21, 2017, 04:16:06 PM
Agree.
But I wouldn't be definitive about any rule change until it's had at least one championship! Lets see how the smartest managers set up to use it / nullify it during the championship.
Then we'll have a better idea of it's true worth.
Cian O'Neill has Kildare using it well, set piece scores I call them. We have scored a lot points like this.
https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137 (https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137)
Bring back Nuxer.
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 21, 2017, 04:54:56 PM
Quote from: westbound on March 21, 2017, 04:16:06 PM
Agree.
But I wouldn't be definitive about any rule change until it's had at least one championship! Lets see how the smartest managers set up to use it / nullify it during the championship.
Then we'll have a better idea of it's true worth.
Cian O'Neill has Kildare using it well, set piece scores I call them. We have scored a lot points like this.
https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137 (https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137)
Clever simple tactic. Big brother is always watching https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155 (https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155)
Explain this tactic to me in more detail, Dinny.
Not even sure I watched the right clip.
This will encourage some teams to go long that dont have a 'sharp' keeper or dont have ball playing corner backs.
The mark will mean nothing to the counties who currently excel at short kickouts - they will continue with it as it is guaranteed posession.
If a rule was brought in from say under 16 (with an additional line on the field) that the ball must pass a 30metre line it would help this blight on our game
Quote from: Jinxy on March 22, 2017, 10:28:21 AM
Explain this tactic to me in more detail, Dinny.
Not even sure I watched the right clip.
It's just on movement, Feeley is the primary mark taker, as soon as claimed an inside forward makes a run, Moolick or another makes a support run in the direction of the ball, taking the pass from the inside forward moving into the space left behind, generally taps it over untouched.
Quote from: Croí na hÉireann on March 22, 2017, 10:04:54 AM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 21, 2017, 04:54:56 PM
Quote from: westbound on March 21, 2017, 04:16:06 PM
Agree.
But I wouldn't be definitive about any rule change until it's had at least one championship! Lets see how the smartest managers set up to use it / nullify it during the championship.
Then we'll have a better idea of it's true worth.
Cian O'Neill has Kildare using it well, set piece scores I call them. We have scored a lot points like this.
https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137 (https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137)
Clever simple tactic. Big brother is always watching https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155 (https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155)
At least he credited my observations,. One of the bether gaa journalists on Twitter in fairness worth a follow.
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 22, 2017, 12:35:35 PM
Quote from: Croí na hÉireann on March 22, 2017, 10:04:54 AM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on March 21, 2017, 04:54:56 PM
Quote from: westbound on March 21, 2017, 04:16:06 PM
Agree.
But I wouldn't be definitive about any rule change until it's had at least one championship! Lets see how the smartest managers set up to use it / nullify it during the championship.
Then we'll have a better idea of it's true worth.
Cian O'Neill has Kildare using it well, set piece scores I call them. We have scored a lot points like this.
https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137 (https://youtu.be/reObOgIks_0?t=137)
Clever simple tactic. Big brother is always watching https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155 (https://twitter.com/KCsixtyseven/status/844266452005937155)
At least he credited my observations,. One of the bether gaa journalists on Twitter in fairness worth a follow.
Absolutely, tossup between himself and John Fogarty for the best gaa journalist who regularly churns out articles.
I think the rule has the potential to open up the space between the FB line and HB/midfield, as if your midfielder takes a mark from an opposition kick-out, the players closest to him are effectively taken out of the game.
If you have a runner coming from your own half at pace, he can attack the space behind them in combination with a runner from the FF line.
Gives the attacking team the option of a quick one-two or even a ball over the top into the space that has been vacated by the runner from FF.
What do you all think of the mark at this stage then? I like it. Definitely rewards high fielding like Colm Cavanagh's catch today.
It is one of those rare rule changes that has had exactly the effect that was intended.
Definitely seeing more clean catches around the middle.
Doesn't slow the game down at all either.
Games are much more enjoyable and open when the kickouts go long.
Mind you, I could have done without seeing Kildare take three marks in a row off our kick-out in the first-half yesterday evening.
Quote from: Jinxy on June 18, 2017, 07:48:08 PM
It is one of those rare rule changes that has had exactly the effect that was intended.
Definitely seeing more clean catches around the middle.
Doesn't slow the game down at all either.
I have to say I was skeptical but I am now completely converted. It has done a great job at clearing out the midfield muddle after a high catch. The opposition seem to back off immediately instead of swarming the fielder and play can go on as normal without the need for a free unless the player goes to ground.
It was a rule change I was completely wrong about too, it has definitely improved the game.
I was in favour of the mark from day 1. Thankfully many doubters are coming round to it. Yesterdays game in Clones had many fine examples of it being a positive rule change. Colly Cavanaghs one in particular because he was arched back and caught it and landed on his back. Old rule would have sen him swarmed, and either get blown for over carrying or he would have just hand passed the ball out to anywhere, trying to avoid the over carrying.
Thankfully people see it doesn't slow the game down, at all, it isn't that hard to referee, and it opens new doors tactically. Would I be right in saying Mickey Harte wasn't a fan of it when it was first proposed? I'm sure he was happy with it yesterday, launched several attacks from good marks.
The rules gives men the confidence that they can launch themselves in the air to make a spectacular catch, without fear of being hounded when you land. It can only lead to more gravity defying catches. Which surely everyone enjoys?
As a former midfielder I was a huge fan of the mark and expected it to be successful. High catching is a feature of the game and should be encouraged.
My other two changes are
1). 2 refs
2). A clock so players know exactly how much time is left. Why should this be a mystery?
Quote from: omaghjoe on June 18, 2017, 09:16:14 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on June 18, 2017, 07:48:08 PM
It is one of those rare rule changes that has had exactly the effect that was intended.
Definitely seeing more clean catches around the middle.
Doesn't slow the game down at all either.
I have to say I was skeptical but I am now completely converted. It has done a great job at clearing out the midfield muddle after a high catch. The opposition seem to back off immediately instead of swarming the fielder and play can go on as normal without the need for a free unless the player goes to ground.
This is because the rule was drafted well in the sense that there is a clear punishment if players don't get out of the way properly and refs enforced this from day one. Basically if players don't retreat/get out of the way, the punishment is pretty much a guaranteed shot (albeit from a longish distance) at the posts. In the situation where a player has chosen to play on as opposed to taking the free, the team's long-distance kicker can be brought in to have a pop at the posts.
QuoteTaking the mark -
Once the player indicates he is taking the 'Mark', the opposing players must retreat 10m to allow the player space to take the kick. If an opposing player deliberately blocks or attempts to block the kick within 10m, or if an opposing player impedes the player while he is taking the kick, the Referee shall penalise the opposing team by bringing the ball forward 13m.
Playing on -
(ii) If the Player is illegally challenged, a free kick shall be awarded to his team from the point at which the challenge is made, and this free kick may be taken by any player on his team.
teams are going to start breaking the ball a lot more.
its hard for players to retreat if they don't know if the player is going to play on or try to take the mark
will be interesting to see how it develops
I though this would be a crap rule and was opposed to its introduction but I must say that so far it has had a very positive impact on the game.
However as the apocryphal story goes about what the Chinese PM replied when asked about the merits of the French revolution on its 200th anniversary "it's too early to tell".
Might be a wise stance on this issue lol.
Whilst I admit that the mark appears to be working and has been positive so far i would have a bit of concern about its future impact. I believe that teams were pushing up on short kick outs anyway and this has led more to the longer kick outs that we are seeing more than the introduction of the mark - Mickey Harte said as much after the game on Sunday. My worry is that the mark will create a further advantage to kicking long that the more conservative teams might deem as too high risk, therefore reverting to conceding the short kick out again - which in my view is an absolute blight on the game. So inadvertently the mark may slow down the move away from short kick outs that may have been happening anyway. Having said all this - I'll view the mark on its merits so far and agree that it appears to be a success.
Quote from: sligoman2 on June 19, 2017, 12:19:00 PM
As a former midfielder I was a huge fan of the mark and expected it to be successful. High catching is a feature of the game and should be encouraged.
My other two changes are
1). 2 refs
2). A clock so players know exactly how much time is left. Why should this be a mystery?
At Fraher Field in Dungarvan the clock was on the scoreboard. It was great for the supporters and the players.
Quote from: sligoman2 on June 19, 2017, 12:19:00 PM
As a former midfielder I was a huge fan of the mark and expected it to be successful. High catching is a feature of the game and should be encouraged.
My other two changes are
1). 2 refs
2). A clock so players know exactly how much time is left. Why should this be a mystery?
I would say 4 linesmen rather than 2 referees for county matches. So all areas of the pitch are covered
I would agree that a rugby style clock which is specifically stopped for injuries, substitutions, fights... should be implemented for county matches. It measn that there is no need for added-on time as this is automatically incorporated in the clock stopping. Then we don't get the farce like the Down v Armagh match running on for 11 minutes and no one knowing what the hell is going on.
In conjunction with the clock above, we should return the rule that the ball must go dead to end the game and that the next dead ball after the clock hits the defined time will cause this to happen.
I would like to see a citing commission. We more or less have it but it is very arbitrary. A citing officer should sit in the stand and note incidents. EVERY match is reviewed by a panel after and independent of referee action at the time have a right to cite a player for disciplinary action. so every match not just the incidents that Joe Brolly chooses to rant about on the Sunday Game.
Quote from: PAULD123 on June 20, 2017, 12:34:58 PM
Quote from: sligoman2 on June 19, 2017, 12:19:00 PM
As a former midfielder I was a huge fan of the mark and expected it to be successful. High catching is a feature of the game and should be encouraged.
My other two changes are
1). 2 refs
2). A clock so players know exactly how much time is left. Why should this be a mystery?
I would say 4 linesmen rather than 2 referees for county matches. So all areas of the pitch are covered
I would agree that a rugby style clock which is specifically stopped for injuries, substitutions, fights... should be implemented for county matches. It measn that there is no need for added-on time as this is automatically incorporated in the clock stopping. Then we don't get the farce like the Down v Armagh match running on for 11 minutes and no one knowing what the hell is going on.
In conjunction with the clock above, we should return the rule that the ball must go dead to end the game and that the next dead ball after the clock hits the defined time will cause this to happen.
I would like to see a citing commission. We more or less have it but it is very arbitrary. A citing officer should sit in the stand and note incidents. EVERY match is reviewed by a panel after and independent of referee action at the time have a right to cite a player for disciplinary action. so every match not just the incidents that Joe Brolly chooses to rant about on the Sunday Game.
The mark has worked brilliantly much to my surprise. It has worked so well that I would extend it to allow a mark for any kick pass of 40m caught cleanly. It would be a way of breaking down the blanket defences ie long passes into the full forward caught cleanly would be rewarded with the opportunity of a shot at goal rather than having 3 or 4 men surrounding the forward immediately.
Obviously I enjoyed the game on Sunday and especially Colm Cavanaghs' excellent catches. He was getting up great heights at some points and I was surprised that Donegal didn't try to keep it away from him more.
It was fascinating though how both teams changed their tactics of pushing up and I got the feeling Tyrone had planned for this more and were even trying to kick it over the midfielders onto a runner in the half forward line.
It meant rather than taking it short and slowly walking it up the pitch having to beat 14 men, they were now by-passing half the Donegal players and were on attack right away.
You could see the whole Donegal forward line sprinting back as fast as they could to get behind the ball again but often it was too late.
I think Mickey is often very shrewd with what he gives away to the media and I would imagine when he first said he didn't like the idea of the mark, he knew find well it would suit Colm and Sean Cavanagh with Morgan able to hit long accurate kickouts towards them making run into space. Sean caught a great one in the first 10 mins out on the left wing and his momentum took him over the sideline. Before the rule change of course that would not have been possible but I can see that happening more and more.
If you have a keeper who can kick it long and accurate and good fielders who can spring into space then I think we will see a hell of a lot more marks this summer.
Quote from: lenny on June 20, 2017, 12:50:06 PM
The mark has worked brilliantly much to my surprise. It has worked so well that I would extend it to allow a mark for any kick pass of 40m caught cleanly. It would be a way of breaking down the blanket defences ie long passes into the full forward caught cleanly would be rewarded with the opportunity of a shot at goal rather than having 3 or 4 men surrounding the forward immediately.
That is too much of a change to the game for me. I love the mark as it is now, but bringing it in for open play is taking the game too close to Aussie rules and will completely change the game.
The blanket defense is gone already and teams have already sussed how to beat it. Scoring is massively up on games 10 years ago and even further up on games 20 years ago. There's already very effective tactics for beating the blanket and it's being used expertly by the good sides.
Another good example of the mark working yesterday in the Down Monaghan game.
Plenty of high fielding in Killarney today.
You can't carry an average height 'runner' in midfield anymore.
This is a good thing.
This has worked really well in fairness.
Now all we need is a rule for the kick out to travel 'x' amount of distance or past a certain line (say a new 30m line)
Mickey Harte says the mark has nothing to do with the longer kickouts. . . we may delete the thread so!!
I thought it wouldn't improve things unless it was a forced kickout past the 45 but I'm glad to be proved wrong I think it's a great introduction and hasn't slowed the game down in the slightest bit!
Quote from: screenexile on July 11, 2017, 02:46:40 PM
Mickey Harte says the mark has nothing to do with the longer kickouts. . . we may delete the thread so!!
I thought it wouldn't improve things unless it was a forced kickout past the 45 but I'm glad to be proved wrong I think it's a great introduction and hasn't slowed the game down in the slightest bit!
Mickey acting the mick there.
Wouldn't want to be giving Jarlath and his cohorts any encouragement to look at any further rule changes
Gearoid McKiernan - spectactular catch by the Cavan man which led to a goal.
https://twitter.com/GAA_2018_TG4/status/965623418614935552
https://www.balls.ie/gaa/watch-cavanman-makes-monster-mark-set-beautiful-goal-383599
any other contenders so far?
He gets bonus points for bursting one of his teammates in the process.
I was pretty sceptical of this rule before it's introduction but now feel it's been one of the best tweaks to our games in a long time.
f**king clickbait.
He catches a ball to the chest in a midfield where nobody jumps. Gearoid Mc Kiernans one of the top midfielders in Ireland. I'd say that catch wouldn't even be in his top 50%.
next thing is to stop the runners going across the player looking to take a quick free
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on February 21, 2018, 08:04:15 AM
next thing is to stop the runners going across the player looking to take a quick free
that would just involve implementing a rule that has been there forever,
no chance
Quote from: trileacman on February 20, 2018, 08:32:00 PM
f**king clickbait.
He catches a ball to the chest in a midfield where nobody jumps. Gearoid Mc Kiernans one of the top midfielders in Ireland. I'd say that catch wouldn't even be in his top 50%.
agreed. i hadnt seen the catch at the time, seen the link on balls or joe.ie and was very much underwhelmed. its standard.