gaaboard.com

Honest opinions

Do the rules need to be changed?

Or should we just ride out this period of ultra defensive tactics by mediocre sides (bar Kerry)?

Do forwards need to improve their shooting with men hanging off them?

Or do these tactics make sense if you have players capable of breaking at speed?

The tactics do make sense

But they are shite to watch

We need rule changes so that defensive tactic cease to make sense

Ride it out. All games evolve and football in late eighties was way different than sixties e.g. There has been a couple of leap forwards since with Tyrone/Armagh 2002/03 and the Donegal  'initiative'.
Why shouldn t a coach like McGuinness come along and play it in a different way?

There s no going back anyway. That does not happen. We re in danger that the game will end up like rugby, with very good defensive systems and no place or space for smaller, skillful players. But messing about with rules and stuff isn t great either.

If anything, what today showed was not that we need a rule change, but that if you're going to play blanket you need (a) one or two very good forwards, and (b) exceptional fitness levels.  Without (a), you just won't score enough to win, and without (b), you'll concede a number of points during the last 10 minutes or so (as happened tonight, and in Dublin's win vs. Donegal in 2011).   

There's not that many teams that can play this system well enough to win.  Not counting counties that could play and win in more than one way, I count two.

For me, that doesn't merit a rule change. 

Would a start not be to let linesmen signal frees to the referee that are on his blindside. Could help reduce cynical play better than the black card.

Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on March 28, 2015, 11:46:21 PM
If anything, what today showed was not that we need a rule change, but that if you're going to play blanket you need (a) one or two very good forwards, and (b) exceptional fitness levels.  Without (a), you just won't score enough to win, and without (b), you'll concede a number of points during the last 10 minutes or so (as happened tonight, and in Dublin's win vs. Donegal in 2011).   

There's not that many teams that can play this system well enough to win.  Not counting counties that could play and win in more than one way, I count two.

For me, that doesn't merit a rule change.

Any rule change needs to be easy to referee. One fairly easy rule to introduce would be to not allow the ball to be passed backwards in your own half. This would mean teams would have to keep players up the pitch and the ball would go forward much quicker. It would also be fairly easy to police at all levels.

The game is becoming so predictable and so boring that crowds will start dropping off. A change is needed but the change needs to be easy to enforce at all levels. This counting handpasses and counting players in one half on the field would be very difficult to enforce.

One suggestion is 13 a side. Another is that 4 forwards should wear different colour shorts and these players cannot enter their own half of the field - different shorts to help the referree see the infringement.

Quote from: lenny on March 29, 2015, 08:44:39 AM

Any rule change needs to be easy to referee. One fairly easy rule to introduce would be to not allow the ball to be passed backwards in your own half. This would mean teams would have to keep players up the pitch and the ball would go forward much quicker. It would also be fairly easy to police at all levels.

Good point - this proposed rule would be a lot more easier to ref than counting the number of handpasses or rules limiting the number of players in one half of the field.

A bit more unorthodox but what about in a situation where in the event of a draw, whatever side has the higher number of wides wins?

It would only be a small measure but it would tilt the balance a bit more towards the team who shoot more and it would also be extremely  easy for refs/officials to implement.

You could even go a bit further and incorporate a system that punishes a team that has more cards i.e. if it's a draw and the one team has 1 player on a yellow while the other  team has had  2 players black carded and 4 who have picked up yellow cards, surely the team with 1 yellow should get the win as they have been less negative. Basically you punish foul play more and reward positive play more.

4 or 5 points for a goal?

No backward passes is a bit tough when say you are stuck in your corner back position trying to work the ball out.

I think a system linking a attacking metric (say shots or wides) in the case of a draw would certainly be something to make teams attack more.

Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 29, 2015, 09:12:26 AM
4 or 5 points for a goal?

No no no no no! The point is the  essence of gaelic football. Apart from that, incentivising goals will only further incentivise the packed defence.

Without  giving it too much thought as regards unforeseen consequences, etc., I like the sound of the 'no backpass' idea.

Quote from: mylestheslasher on March 29, 2015, 09:12:26 AM
4 or 5 points for a goal?

No backward passes is a bit tough when say you are stuck in your corner back position trying to work the ball out.

I think a system linking a attacking metric (say shots or wides) in the case of a draw would certainly be something to make teams attack more.

One problem with raising the number of points for a goal is that once a blanket team got a goal, they would have even less incentive to come out and attack. I could easily see a situation where you would have games where once a side got a goal they would pretty much give up on attacking completely.

What utopia are we chasing here? A game where every match is 3-20 to 2-23? The simple fact is that defensive tactics will always be implemented by weaker teams to make them competitive. This, in my mind is better than watching the Dubs trim everyone by 25 points. We tried changing the rules last year and it has lead to even more defensive play as teams are retreating even further to mark space rather than tackle and crucially they can easily run from deep safe in the knowledge that their runs won't get checked. The better teams will figure this out and the game will move on, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg in tactics in Gaelic football and the basis of these tactics is to keep your team in the game and maybe knick a win. Hopefully tactics will evolve to embrace better forward play.

This discussion is part of a series called draining the Shannon.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 29, 2015, 09:23:58 AM
What utopia are we chasing here? A game where every match is 3-20 to 2-23? The simple fact is that defensive tactics will always be implemented by weaker teams to make them competitive. This, in my mind is better than watching the Dubs trim everyone by 25 points. We tried changing the rules last year and it has lead to even more defensive play as teams are retreating even further to mark space rather than tackle and crucially they can easily run from deep safe in the knowledge that their runs won't get checked. The better teams will figure this out and the game will move on, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg in tactics in Gaelic football and the basis of these tactics is to keep your team in the game and maybe knick a win. Hopefully tactics will evolve to embrace better forward play.

The "utopia" is one where the teams with the better skill level wins the overwhelming majority of games.

If that means that the weaker teams get beaten comprehensively then so be it.

It takes very little in the way of actual skill to be a defender in a blanket.

The key attribute necessary for a defender in a blanket system is the ability to run for 70 minutes.

I doubt there is anyone who wants to do away with defending completely, however the current rules mean that limited teams who play defensively have too high a chance of grinding out a result.

If they implemented the rules that are currently there, the blanket would be less effective. Bernard Brogan must have been fouled between 15 and 20 times yesterday as he tried to get into space.

The ref in the Dublin Monaghan game last year penalised Monaghan for pretty much every indiscretion which completely negated their negative tactics.

It should be said though that the conditions also played a part in yesterday's game looking so bad, persistent rain and strong swirling wind.

I brought my 12 year old and he was begging me to go home at half time. He said "if we go home now I'll give them another chance, but if you make me stay for the whole game I'm never going to another game"!
Hopefully he doesn't keep that commitment but I don't think he'll watch us play an Ulster team for a while!

Dublin were cap last night and we're set up to stand off derry. The sheer lack of intensity from the so called better team is the problem.   They need to force the game. Instead Dublin who don't have any system and will be filleted accordingly in the championship by kerry let derry dictate the game.

Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

Quote from: twohands!!! on March 29, 2015, 09:48:54 AM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 29, 2015, 09:23:58 AM
What utopia are we chasing here? A game where every match is 3-20 to 2-23? The simple fact is that defensive tactics will always be implemented by weaker teams to make them competitive. This, in my mind is better than watching the Dubs trim everyone by 25 points. We tried changing the rules last year and it has lead to even more defensive play as teams are retreating even further to mark space rather than tackle and crucially they can easily run from deep safe in the knowledge that their runs won't get checked. The better teams will figure this out and the game will move on, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg in tactics in Gaelic football and the basis of these tactics is to keep your team in the game and maybe knick a win. Hopefully tactics will evolve to embrace better forward play.

The "utopia" is one where the teams with the better skill level wins the overwhelming majority of games.

If that means that the weaker teams get beaten comprehensively then so be it.

It takes very little in the way of actual skill to be a defender in a blanket.

The key attribute necessary for a defender in a blanket system is the ability to run for 70 minutes.

I doubt there is anyone who wants to do away with defending completely, however the current rules mean that limited teams who play defensively have too high a chance of grinding out a result.

That's not what sport is about! Just because you have better players doesn't mean we should adapt the rules so you win? Wise up! It takes a hell of a lot of skill to score against the packed defence and that pressurised aspect is much more intriguing than watching teams steam rollering other teams. I hate watching high scoring games where both teams hardly lay a finger on each other, anyone can score if given time and space.

Quote from: ha ha derry on March 29, 2015, 10:08:17 AM
Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

Two max and problem solved , natural footballers will be able to express themselves and show their skills and the gym monkeys won't be as sought after.

I watched one of the so called best games ever on tg4 recently, Derry v down in 94, I was actually laughing at times at how terrible some of the football was, for its time it was a brilliant game but when compared to today's game the tactics were so naive, basically keeper launches it down the middle, possession is won and it is hoofed into the full forward line where a forward and a defender scrap to win a 50 50 ball.

Is this the utopia we want to return to? Sure it was exciting but very primitive. I don't mind defensive football it's just another tactic a team can deploy.  Gaelic is one of the few sports were possession and keeping the ball is frowned upon. If you want a game with no tactics were you can score from anywhere and forwards scrap for 50 50 balls watch hurling.

If a player receives a ball from a short kick out inside his own 45 he has to kick it until it crosses the 45.

13 a side has the possibility of bridging the gap between best teams and worst teams, making it more competitive and SHOULD encourage quick attacking football due to the extra space

Quote from: rrhf on March 29, 2015, 09:57:53 AM
Dublin were cap last night and we're set up to stand off derry. The sheer lack of intensity from the so called better team is the problem.   They need to force the game. Instead Dublin who don't have any system and will be filleted accordingly in the championship by kerry let derry dictate the game.

Bullshit kerry haven't beaten us since 2009. I'd be more worried whether Tyrone will win an AI inside the next 25 years if I were you.

This is all Tyrone have to offer to Gaelic Football now. 15 trained monkeys to stand in one half of the field.

As I said in another thread let Ulster set up their own association playing this sort of rubbish and let the rest of us concentrate on playing Gaelic Football.

I was a defender myself but man marking as a skill now seems to be irrelevant in the modern game.

Were we not talking a few years ago how to make lesser teams more competitive, JmcG found the way and its been copied, would Donegal have been in 2 all-irelands if they didn't play this way not a chance, Cork trimmed the life out of them the year before they tired to play defensive

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 12:43:06 PM

Quote from: rrhf on March 29, 2015, 09:57:53 AM
Dublin were cap last night and we're set up to stand off derry. The sheer lack of intensity from the so called better team is the problem.   They need to force the game. Instead Dublin who don't have any system and will be filleted accordingly in the championship by kerry let derry dictate the game.

Bullshit kerry haven't beaten us since 2009. I'd be more worried whether Tyrone will win an AI inside the next 25 years if I were you.

This is all Tyrone have to offer to Gaelic Football now. 15 trained monkeys to stand in one half of the field.

As I said in another thread let Ulster set up their own association playing this sort of rubbish and let the rest of us concentrate on playing Gaelic Football.

I was a defender myself but man marking as a skill now seems to be irrelevant in the modern game.

+1

Quote from: Mario on March 29, 2015, 11:06:32 AM
I watched one of the so called best games ever on tg4 recently, Derry v down in 94, I was actually laughing at times at how terrible some of the football was, for its time it was a brilliant game but when compared to today's game the tactics were so naive, basically keeper launches it down the middle, possession is won and it is hoofed into the full forward line where a forward and a defender scrap to win a 50 50 ball.

Is this the utopia we want to return to? Sure it was exciting but very primitive. I don't mind defensive football it's just another tactic a team can deploy.  Gaelic is one of the few sports were possession and keeping the ball is frowned upon. If you want a game with no tactics were you can score from anywhere and forwards scrap for 50 50 balls watch hurling.

It was pretty awful to watch but probably great fun to play in and there's the nub of the problem.

(People who long for the good ol' days of catch and kick are only deluding themselves. Even in the era when Kerry and Dublin changed the face of Gaelic football for ever, the standard of play and general sportsmanship were truly appalling.)

Anyone who doubts me should check this incident out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc9VY7BKKCw



Players nowadays don't go out to enjoy themselves, they go out to win and to do so at all costs.The pressures on them from fans, management, media, sponsors and just about everywhere else that you can think of is unreal.

It's an amateur game on that players don't get paid but it's a truly professional in every other aspect.

Okay, so defensive tactics are the order of the day because many if not most managements believe that such a strategy gives them a better chance of winning that any other approach they might adopt.

Unless and until somebody comes along with a way to unlock a mass defense, teams will be quite happy to grind out 0-1 to 0-0 results all season long as long as they score that solitary point. 

As I see it, the game is in a continuous state of evolution and the days of the massed defenses will end when someone devises a better way to improve a team's chances of winning, No rocket science involved.   

Quote from: Dangleberrys on March 29, 2015, 12:35:20 PM
13 a side has the possibility of bridging the gap between best teams and worst teams, making it more competitive and SHOULD encourage quick attacking football due to the extra space

13 aside will just encourage more carrying the ball through the hand and more selections based on capacity to run rather than the wider skills of the game. A backward step.

No back passes in your own half. Interesting idea. The direct benefit of getting the ball moving forward is obvious. The indirect benefit of teams pressing higher up the pitch and therefore keeping men forward instead of retreating as soon as possession is conceded is potentially greater.

Bright, progressive coaches will be set a more intriguing challenge and will embrace it. Dull, one trick ponies will struggle. Good.

Quote from: Mario on March 29, 2015, 11:06:32 AM
I watched one of the so called best games ever on tg4 recently, Derry v down in 94, I was actually laughing at times at how terrible some of the football was, for its time it was a brilliant game but when compared to today's game the tactics were so naive, basically keeper launches it down the middle, possession is won and it is hoofed into the full forward line where a forward and a defender scrap to win a 50 50 ball.

Is this the utopia we want to return to? Sure it was exciting but very primitive. I don't mind defensive football it's just another tactic a team can deploy.  Gaelic is one of the few sports were possession and keeping the ball is frowned upon. If you want a game with no tactics were you can score from anywhere and forwards scrap for 50 50 balls watch hurling.

What a tragedy for Gaelic football it would be if we regressed to seeing more matches like Derry v  Down in 1994 instead of the wonderful, attractive modern day football epitomised by matches like Dublin v Derry last night.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 01:57:34 PM

Quote from: Dangleberrys on March 29, 2015, 12:35:20 PM
13 a side has the possibility of bridging the gap between best teams and worst teams, making it more competitive and SHOULD encourage quick attacking football due to the extra space

13 aside will just encourage more carrying the ball through the hand and more selections based on capacity to run rather than the wider skills of the game. A backward step.

I disagree
More space means more likely to bring the foot back to football.

The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Closed fist hand pass only

Minimum 5 players allowed in each half at all times.

if the consequences of not doing anythong is games like the dubs last night or the one I witnessed in Armagh (or Donegal vs Monaghan or many other games played in better conditions than last night's) then the status quo merchants should also be hit on the head with the wet fish

Quote from: Dangleberrys on March 29, 2015, 03:47:51 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 01:57:34 PM

Quote from: Dangleberrys on March 29, 2015, 12:35:20 PM
13 a side has the possibility of bridging the gap between best teams and worst teams, making it more competitive and SHOULD encourage quick attacking football due to the extra space

13 aside will just encourage more carrying the ball through the hand and more selections based on capacity to run rather than the wider skills of the game. A backward step.

I disagree
More space means more likely to bring the foot back to football.

Why?

When teams have space today they run through it not hit the ball over it.

If they have less men up front why would they hit it more?

Derry have no problem playing open football but they have fell to Donegal 3 times from 2011 against a very defensive setup. Attacking football struggles to break it down, Am sure if teams like Dongeal, Tyrone, Cavan and Monaghan played open more other teams wouldn't follow, funny though its only Kerry from outside ulster who reverted to a  defensive set up but again only to match what they are playing against. I Blame Jim McGuinness

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 04:26:33 PM
if the consequences of not doing anythong is games like the dubs last night or the one I witnessed in Armagh (or Donegal vs Monaghan or many other games played in better conditions than last night's) then the status quo merchants should also be hit on the head with the wet fish

I'm not saying maintain the status quo. I'm saying stop coming up with half-baked, not-thought-out "ideas" that if implemented would make the game worse.

Last night's game might have been an abomination, but here's something to remember - right up to the last throes, Derry could have won the game. Meanwhile over in the Leinster Championship, Dublin are at double scores at that stage - in every game.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Your point about the goals is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Any team that accrues more points then the opposition deserves to win the game. Again it shows the defensive mindset in some of the posters here.

Increasing a goal to 4 points would be a step in the right direction.

The other one I would use is that any free given away by anyone bar the named 6 backs in the attacking half of the field is automatically a 21 yard free straight in front of the posts.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 04:26:33 PM
if the consequences of not doing anythong is games like the dubs last night or the one I witnessed in Armagh (or Donegal vs Monaghan or many other games played in better conditions than last night's) then the status quo merchants should also be hit on the head with the wet fish

To be fair the rules had nothing to do with the quality of football in Armagh last night. Just poor play, terrible weather and a referee.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 04:34:05 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Your point about the goals is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Any team that accrues more points then the opposition deserves to win the game. Again it shows the defensive mindset in some of the posters here.

Increasing a goal to 4 points would be a step in the right direction.

The other one I would use is that any free given away by anyone bar the named 6 backs in the attacking half of the field is automatically a 21 yard free straight in front of the posts.

Sorry to tell you Indiana but you need to find a new sport. Gaelic football has a dual scoring system which (by accident or by design, who knows?) means that the better team usually win most games, but that a team trailing a match has a route back into it.

Despite this, last year's AI final was one of the worst matches I've ever seen, simply because the early goal gave Kerry enough space to play the most negative brand of football imaginable.

Had that goal been worth 4 pts, they would probably have found an unimaginably horrific  new way to ruin the game. So while you're a little sore that teams have found a way to stifle your beloved Dublin, you don't seem to understand why they're able to play this way.


Re your other point, you should really just go and watch shooting practice at training, and not bother with games at all.

Would Kerry have played negative if they were up against anybody else but Donegal, they played open enough against mayo in 2 classics in the semi.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:45:27 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 04:34:05 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Your point about the goals is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Any team that accrues more points then the opposition deserves to win the game. Again it shows the defensive mindset in some of the posters here.

Increasing a goal to 4 points would be a step in the right direction.

The other one I would use is that any free given away by anyone bar the named 6 backs in the attacking half of the field is automatically a 21 yard free straight in front of the posts.

Sorry to tell you Indiana but you need to find a new sport. Gaelic football has a dual scoring system which (by accident or by design, who knows?) means that the better team usually win most games, but that a team trailing a match has a route back into it.

Despite this, last year's AI final was one of the worst matches I've ever seen, simply because the early goal gave Kerry enough space to play the most negative brand of football imaginable.

Had that goal been worth 4 pts, they would probably have found an unimaginably horrific  new way to ruin the game. So while you're a little sore that teams have found a way to stifle your beloved Dublin, you don't seem to understand why they're able to play this way.


Re your other point, you should really just go and watch shooting practice at training, and not bother with games at all.

Spoken with the true arrogance of a Northern GAA man who is watching his province slowly decline into the sinking sea of shite of a type of game they created and told everyone else this is the way forward.

As I said before setup your own Association up there between 6-7 counties. We won't miss you. If the Border was re-created tomorrow with the premise that that teams couldn't travel north or south of the border you wouldn't be missed. Gaelic Football would become a better game and a better sport too.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 04:34:05 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Your point about the goals is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Any team that accrues more points then the opposition deserves to win the game. Again it shows the defensive mindset in some of the posters here.

Increasing a goal to 4 points would be a step in the right direction.

The other one I would use is that any free given away by anyone bar the named 6 backs in the attacking half of the field is automatically a 21 yard free straight in front of the posts.

Don't even know where to start with that nonsense

Quote from: Throw ball on March 29, 2015, 04:36:14 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 04:26:33 PM
if the consequences of not doing anythong is games like the dubs last night or the one I witnessed in Armagh (or Donegal vs Monaghan or many other games played in better conditions than last night's) then the status quo merchants should also be hit on the head with the wet fish

To be fair the rules had nothing to do with the quality of football in Armagh last night. Just poor play, terrible weather and a referee.

Really???

With the wind in the first half Louth kicked the ball into their FF line twice.
With the wind in the second half Armagh kicked the ball in 6 times. One of which was accurate.

If the rules were different (a long the lines of the suggestions above) you don't think both teams would have played differently and prepared differently? I would be amazed if you held that view.

The conditions and the performance of the ref are accepted but the set up of the 2 teams was a critical factor in a dreadful spectacle.

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 04:58:12 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 04:34:05 PM

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
The one rule change I would like to see more than any other is that if anyone proposes a rule change without exploring its consequences, they should be hit over the head 25 times with a wet fish.

Increasing the worth of a goal would only invite two major negatives: 1. Teams doing everything they can to protect the square, and 2. an increased number of games won the the less deserving side who fluke a couple of goals.

Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

As for anyone intent on adding sequence interruption rules (e.g. limit on hand passes, or force people to kick possession over 45s), all I can is the type of you would ruin sport. If you think Gaelic football is hard on the eye now, imagine it with a further litany of stoppages for something which is not a technical, aggressive or dissenting action.

Reducing the teams to 13 a side is the most horrible idea of all. Gaelic football is no fun to play - even at Junior B level - unless you're fit and creating more space on the field would make playing the game beyond unattractive for anyone who is slow or unfit. You miss the old days of big full backs and long balls? Well you'd never see either again.

So again, I ask, don't just shout ideas. Consider them before you speak of them. Every action has a reaction.

Your point about the goals is nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Any team that accrues more points then the opposition deserves to win the game. Again it shows the defensive mindset in some of the posters here.

Increasing a goal to 4 points would be a step in the right direction.

The other one I would use is that any free given away by anyone bar the named 6 backs in the attacking half of the field is automatically a 21 yard free straight in front of the posts.

Don't even know where to start with that nonsense

Would stop a lot of the lazy fouling by wing forwards (forward being the operative word where they have number 12 of their back but probably can't point  a 14 yard free in front of the posts)- if they are from Ulster they definitely can't score anyway.
All you have is forwards standing in the attacking half of the field fouling just outside scoring range. Now you'll probably tell us their is some skill in that. I just wonder how much more of this shit you can keep shovelling. They don't make any attempt to tackle properly and they are told actively to foul and take turns in it. And this is an organised tactic by many teams at club and county level

At least it looks like 2 teams from Ulster will be relegated from Div 1 - a step in the right direction.

You're absolutely right Indiana.

Of course you're so effing blinkered you don't even realise that the least competitive, most vacuous GAA competion in Ireland is the Leinster SFC, something that nordies cannot influence - and a competition that would die within a few years if the prize of an AI semi final don't exist.

You're also so bigoted that you'll ignore completely that Dublin won the 2013 AI only because they stopped trying to play Mayo at 15 v 15 at half time and went for blanket defence with counter attack, and that Kerry of 2014 were the most cynical and defensive side ever to win a trophy.

Go back to your bubble.

So who are these named 6 backs? Are coaches allowed to make positional switches? Has he to send the ref a memo? absolute nonsense of the highest order.

No-one enjoys this style of play but you see, this other stuff you peddle about all of the poorer elements of our game at the minute betrays the same underlying problem with your and most coaches' mindset... you want an easy silver bullet solution.

Coach / think your way out of it. If you can't, take your ball and go home

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 05:07:57 PM
So who are these named 6 backs? Are coaches allowed to make positional switches? Has he to send the ref a memo? absolute nonsense of the highest order.

No-one enjoys this style of play but you see, this other stuff you peddle about all of the poorer elements of our game at the minute betrays the same underlying problem with your and most coaches' mindset... you want an easy silver bullet solution.

Coach / think your way out of it. If you can't, take your ball and go home

I think we can probably stop discussing that particular rule change proposal

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 04:17:05 PM
Removing backwards passing is utterly insane. When you tackle someone and dispossess them, you should be able to accrue that advantage any way you choose. There are umpteen scenarios in football where not being able to then play the balls backwards to a runner would actually see you at a disadvantage, as holding onto the ball is the same as a turkey shoot. So why dispossess in the first place? Also there'd be referees battered all across the country for interpreting a sideways pass as either backwards or not at crucial stages of the game.

In your defensive half you would try dispossess the opposition because they are in a threatening position.
In your attacking half you would try to dispossess the opposition because (knowing that they can't play the ball backwards) they have to take a risk granting you the chance of turnover ball in an attacking position.

jeez Indiana, any body new reading your posts would think you had never seen a game in your live and yet you claim you have a celtic cross

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 05:07:57 PM
So who are these named 6 backs? Are coaches allowed to make positional switches? Has he to send the ref a memo? absolute nonsense of the highest order.

No-one enjoys this style of play but you see, this other stuff you peddle about all of the poorer elements of our game at the minute betrays the same underlying problem with your and most coaches' mindset... you want an easy silver bullet solution.

Coach / think your way out of it. If you can't, take your ball and go home

You guys enjoy it because its the only means your counties can use to keep the score down these days.

Thankfully the Black Death of Gaelic Football only permeates the ROI when you guys roll into town.

There is no skill in having 15 players in the one half of the field and you know it. The rules are completely lob sided in favour of this tactic flourishing. Its not a coaching issue -its a rules issue and you know it. Nonsense of the highest order to suggest its a coaching issue.

Field games develop organically through coaching but they also develop through the bloody rules too and the rules on this are the same since 1884!

Quote from: maigheo on March 29, 2015, 05:19:51 PM
jeez Indiana, any body new reading your posts would think you had never seen a game in your live and yet you claim you have a celtic cross

Its not a claim its a fact.

Indiana must have missed the bit in 1990 when all frees and sidelines were no longer kicked from the ground.

Or maybe his selective thought processes were running then too.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 05:28:19 PM
Indiana must have missed the bit in 1990 when all frees and sidelines were no longer kicked from the ground.

Or maybe his selective thought processes were running then too.

You may jest but  there was a bit more skill in that. You had to kick the ball let's not forget.

Rather then stand in your own half and hand-pass. No skill in being fit either. I can train a chimpanzee to get fit.

Indiana has nordie issues which are reflected in his posts BUT he is correct in that coaches coach around the rules and its the rules that need changing not necessarily the coaches (though some coaches would be found out by rule changes)

You're missing my point. The game changed seismically as a result of the rule change; it was a reply to your intimation that we've used the same rules for 130 years.

It was also the rule change that ushered in counter attacking football - possession became more important than territory for the first time in the game -  and ultimately allowed Donegal et co to refine it to the point they're not at.

It would only take 3 games on Tg4 gold for anyone to accept that reverting to the old system would be a giant step backwards. But the side effect of the quicker game produced by those rules has been defensive football to counteract it.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 05:31:04 PM
Indiana has nordie issues which are reflected in his posts BUT he is correct in that coaches coach around the rules and its the rules that need changing not necessarily the coaches (though some coaches would be found out by rule changes)

I have issues with the Nordies telling us we can't set our sights a bit higher then providing a game that people want to watch rather then one where they will turn off the TV.
Its the rules that need changing not the up-skilling of coaches. And for the record I'm not in favour of limiting handpassing. What I am in favour of is drastic changes to the penalties available to referees for the systemic and organised fouling that is killing the game due to teams having the entire range of personnel in their own half.

The black card has been a shambles because it wasn't allowed go far enough.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 05:31:04 PM
Indiana has nordie issues which are reflected in his posts BUT he is correct in that coaches coach around the rules and its the rules that need changing not necessarily the coaches (though some coaches would be found out by rule changes)

I have issues with the Nordies telling us we can't set our sights a bit higher then providing a game that people want to watch rather then one where they will turn off the TV.
Its the rules that need changing not the up-skilling of coaches. And for the record I'm not in favour of limiting handpassing. What I am in favour of is drastic changes to the penalties available to referees for the systemic and organised fouling that is killing the game due to teams having the entire range of personnel in their own half.

The black card has been a shambles because it wasn't allowed go far enough.

There is a hell of a lot wrong with football that started in Ulster but your are kidding yourself if you think clubs and counties in the south are not every bit as bad.

The black card should have included the jersey pull and at most only one dismissed player should be replaced

I blame the black card.   A bundle of feckin eejits promised us it would change gaelic football for the better. Some good gaa folk were called all sorts of names for telling the black card cheerleaders they didn't know what they were at.   1 year on. It's been a crock of shit really and it dealt with nowt. The guys who proposed these rules well what  football powerhouses were they from.  Hold on a minute  wasn't one of them from derry?

Anyway enough talk about whose fault it is.

The question is, what can be done to make out games more entertaining.

The first thing everyone needs to do is accept and understand that defensive football and cynical football are not one and the same thing.

The beauty and reward of every sport is in the challenge between attacking and defensive skills and strategy. In every game there absolutely needs to be a belief that defending your corner is important, as otherwise it's just shooting practice.

As such, I would be thoroughly opposed to any motions or suggestions devised to reduce the ability of teams and coaches to gain success through defensive strategy. Our game would be genuinely weaker if anything such was to pass.

Cynical football is, on the other hand, a genuine problem. There simply isn't a strong enough deterrent for players not to wind up opponents, block off runs, foul deliberately, or to slow up the game after a free is conceded. So not only are attacking teams faced with having to break down defensive shapes, it is often the case that a number of opponents are also operating outside the rules of the game. It's a double whammy against flowing football, and for us spectators, it's often gruesome to watch.

This is why the black card was introduced, and as an idea it is still one of the best ever conceived for our game.

But the problem is that referees are now so reluctant to use the black card, that it is almost a non existent aspect of our game... and after only 18 months. Such is the lack of black cards that one has to assume it's a centrally requested edict.

Just this Friday night I witnessed a player bearing down on goal, getting deliberately tripped up from behind at the 14 yard line. The most clear it cynical foul of all.  The outcome was a yellow card.

Anyway about a year ago this was already quite evident so I opened a thread where i suggested that it's time to get rid of the yellow card entirely; with the red for dangerous play, the black for cynical play, and effectively a pass for anything in between (such as a mistimed tackle).

It was roundly laughed off as an idea and I can see why.

But here's the thing: if we don't attack the scourge of cynical play, then more and more coaches will teach it, expect it and demand it from their players.

Players will only refuse these orders when the penalty or punishment  is too big, and at that time coaches will need to change their tune.

We will never be able to stop a man being dragged down in the last minute of a game. But we need our games refereed in such a way that every minute is as equally relevant as the last minute.

Some players would be hard done by, no doubt. But the game would be better for it.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 06:01:05 PM
Anyway enough talk about whose fault it is.

The question is, what can be done to make out games more entertaining.

The first thing everyone needs to do is accept and understand that defensive football and cynical football are not one and the same thing.

The beauty and reward of every sport is in the challenge between attacking and defensive skills and strategy. In every game there absolutely needs to be a belief that defending your corner is important, as otherwise it's just shooting practice.

As such, I would be thoroughly opposed to any motions or suggestions devised to reduce the ability of teams and coaches to gain success through defensive strategy. Our game would be genuinely weaker if anything such was to pass.

Cynical football is, on the other hand, a genuine problem. There simply isn't a strong enough deterrent for players not to wind up opponents, block off runs, foul deliberately, or to slow up the game after a free is conceded. So not only are attacking teams faced with having to break down defensive shapes, it is often the case that a number of opponents are also operating outside the rules of the game. It's a double whammy against flowing football, and for us spectators, it's often gruesome to watch.

This is why the black card was introduced, and as an idea it is still one of the best ever conceived for our game.

But the problem is that referees are now so reluctant to use the black card, that it is almost a non existent aspect of our game... and after only 18 months. Such is the lack of black cards that one has to assume it's a centrally requested edict.

Just this Friday night I witnessed a player bearing down on goal, getting deliberately tripped up from behind at the 14 yard line. The most clear it cynical foul of all.  The outcome was a yellow card.

Anyway about a year ago this was already quite evident so I opened a thread where i suggested that it's time to get rid of the yellow card entirely; with the red for dangerous play, the black for cynical play, and effectively a pass for anything in between (such as a mistimed tackle).

It was roundly laughed off as an idea and I can see why.

But here's the thing: if we don't attack the scourge of cynical play, then more and more coaches will teach it, expect it and demand it from their players.

Players will only refuse these orders when the penalty or punishment  is too big, and at that time coaches will need to change their tune.

We will never be able to stop a man being dragged down in the last minute of a game. But we need our games refereed in such a way that every minute is as equally relevant as the last minute.

Some players would be hard done by, no doubt. But the game would be better for it.

Booooooooo

Down with this sort of Nordie common sense

Just thinking there.......

When I begin a training session with the wains the first drill I think of is............

A hand pass drill.  Is it the Ulsterism in me or what?????

Also showed the English wains a match on YouTube and about a minute in a wee lad put up his hand and said "Mr. *\$|$*], can you kick the ball in this game?"

Before the black card we were told hawkeye was the answer.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 29, 2015, 06:01:05 PM
Anyway enough talk about whose fault it is.

The question is, what can be done to make out games more entertaining.

The first thing everyone needs to do is accept and understand that defensive football and cynical football are not one and the same thing.

The beauty and reward of every sport is in the challenge between attacking and defensive skills and strategy. In every game there absolutely needs to be a belief that defending your corner is important, as otherwise it's just shooting practice.

As such, I would be thoroughly opposed to any motions or suggestions devised to reduce the ability of teams and coaches to gain success through defensive strategy. Our game would be genuinely weaker if anything such was to pass.

Cynical football is, on the other hand, a genuine problem. There simply isn't a strong enough deterrent for players not to wind up opponents, block off runs, foul deliberately, or to slow up the game after a free is conceded. So not only are attacking teams faced with having to break down defensive shapes, it is often the case that a number of opponents are also operating outside the rules of the game. It's a double whammy against flowing football, and for us spectators, it's often gruesome to watch.

This is why the black card was introduced, and as an idea it is still one of the best ever conceived for our game.

But the problem is that referees are now so reluctant to use the black card, that it is almost a non existent aspect of our game... and after only 18 months. Such is the lack of black cards that one has to assume it's a centrally requested edict.

Just this Friday night I witnessed a player bearing down on goal, getting deliberately tripped up from behind at the 14 yard line. The most clear it cynical foul of all.  The outcome was a yellow card.

Anyway about a year ago this was already quite evident so I opened a thread where i suggested that it's time to get rid of the yellow card entirely; with the red for dangerous play, the black for cynical play, and effectively a pass for anything in between (such as a mistimed tackle).

It was roundly laughed off as an idea and I can see why.

But here's the thing: if we don't attack the scourge of cynical play, then more and more coaches will teach it, expect it and demand it from their players.

Players will only refuse these orders when the penalty or punishment  is too big, and at that time coaches will need to change their tune.

We will never be able to stop a man being dragged down in the last minute of a game. But we need our games refereed in such a way that every minute is as equally relevant as the last minute.

Some players would be hard done by, no doubt. But the game would be better for it.

And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 05:31:04 PM
Indiana has nordie issues which are reflected in his posts BUT he is correct in that coaches coach around the rules and its the rules that need changing not necessarily the coaches (though some coaches would be found out by rule changes)

I have issues with the Nordies telling us we can't set our sights a bit higher then providing a game that people want to watch rather then one where they will turn off the TV.
Its the rules that need changing not the up-skilling of coaches. And for the record I'm not in favour of limiting handpassing. What I am in favour of is drastic changes to the penalties available to referees for the systemic and organised fouling that is killing the game due to teams having the entire range of personnel in their own half.

The black card has been a shambles because it wasn't allowed go far enough.

As a genuine question as I do not know the answer. Which province, per head of population gets the biggest average attendance at matches?

Ulster

You have to be carefull 

You can't end up with a game. almost totally devoid of tactics otherwise its not a game or contest  worth playing ..even Curling has tactics. Gaa is an amateur sport but it depends how amateurish you want it to be (or remain).

Do people want it to be a bit of fun over the summer where teams simlpy ignore defence and decide to have a nice little game based on making sure the other team can basically- score at will? It's too late for that now

I totally agree something needs to happen about the handpassing. It's risk free and the game needs more risk .
Spillane is absolutely correct when he says that the ball travels faster kicking it than it takes to run it and it's probably gonna take a team to become so skilled at kicking that everyone will simply have to follow suit.

Also the tackle in football & hurling has always been ambiguous. How do you stop a man running at you with the ball in hand especially if he's already taken 3, 4 steps and is going to take another 3,4 steps until he's past you before he kicks or bounces?. A big feature in practically evey game of football/hurling is 6,7 step over-carry ,going completely unpunished.

I was in a pub in Galway 2 years ago watching a leinster  championship match & explaining the rules to a couple from New Zealand (in fairness it could have been any match in gaa) and their question was is there a special reason why certain players were allowed to take more steps than others without bouncing or kicking ?

I didn't know how to answer that other than say the rules are just guidelines lol

Quote from: ha ha derry on March 29, 2015, 10:08:17 AM
Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

I would be in favor of something along these lines. 

Quote from: Throw ball on March 29, 2015, 06:25:16 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 05:38:26 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 05:31:04 PM
Indiana has nordie issues which are reflected in his posts BUT he is correct in that coaches coach around the rules and its the rules that need changing not necessarily the coaches (though some coaches would be found out by rule changes)

I have issues with the Nordies telling us we can't set our sights a bit higher then providing a game that people want to watch rather then one where they will turn off the TV.
Its the rules that need changing not the up-skilling of coaches. And for the record I'm not in favour of limiting handpassing. What I am in favour of is drastic changes to the penalties available to referees for the systemic and organised fouling that is killing the game due to teams having the entire range of personnel in their own half.

The black card has been a shambles because it wasn't allowed go far enough.

As a genuine question as I do not know the answer. Which province, per head of population gets the biggest average attendance at matches?

Its Ulster but is that really to do with the quality of skill on display. More likely to be the more even spread of "quality" within the county (less games where the winner is clearly evident before throw in). After all there are plenty of fans in Ulster who couldn't give a rats arse about their team's performance or the quality of the spectacle. Winning is all that counts for them.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Quote from: rrhf on March 29, 2015, 06:20:51 PM
Before the black card we were told hawkeye was the answer.

Who told you that?

Quote from: Carmen Stateside on March 29, 2015, 06:45:25 PM

Quote from: ha ha derry on March 29, 2015, 10:08:17 AM
Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

I would be in favor of something along these lines.

sure thats the rule at the minute ffs

Quote from: redzone on March 29, 2015, 06:59:04 PM

Quote from: Carmen Stateside on March 29, 2015, 06:45:25 PM

Quote from: ha ha derry on March 29, 2015, 10:08:17 AM
Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

I would be in favor of something along these lines.

sure thats the rule at the minute ffs

I am sure someone will give you a link to the rules but I am fairly sure it was amended recently to say more than one person can tackle.

You're both wrong.

It was never the rule except in people's heads.

Quote from: redzone on March 29, 2015, 06:59:04 PM

Quote from: Carmen Stateside on March 29, 2015, 06:45:25 PM

Quote from: ha ha derry on March 29, 2015, 10:08:17 AM
Allow only one player to tackle the player in possession.

I would be in favor of something along these lines.

sure thats the rule at the minute ffs

No, multiple tacklers are allowed, hence the problem. It takes the skill factor away from both defending and attacking.Simple enough change in the rules would be more beneficial than the black card.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Hasn't done it any good because it's brief isn't wide enough. Players shouldn't be replaced for starters.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Watered down?

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 07:37:45 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Watered down?

The jersey pull wasn't included as the soundings indicated that it would not get through unless it was watered down in this respect

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 07:36:23 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Hasn't done it any good because it's brief isn't wide enough. Players shouldn't be replaced for starters.

The black card has some good points but could be improved on in my opinion. A cynical foul anywhere on the pitch should be punished with a 13 metre free. A cynical foul denying a goal scoring opportunity should be punished with a penalty. Punish teams on the scoreboard rather than losing a man. Draconian measures but it would cut out any cynicism if it ws going to cost teams on the scoreboard.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 07:36:23 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Hasn't done it any good because it's brief isn't wide enough. Players shouldn't be replaced for starters.

Agree about the replacement of players (another example of the watering down) but the card has done some good. The 3 cynical physical offences of blocking the runner, dragging the man down and tripping (listed in order of their frequency in the game) have reduced in frequency. The jersey pull remains de rigueur. The card never attempted to address negative play which is the key issue now

Quote from: lenny on March 29, 2015, 07:42:41 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 07:36:23 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Hasn't done it any good because it's brief isn't wide enough. Players shouldn't be replaced for starters.

The black card has some good points but could be improved on in my opinion. A cynical foul anywhere on the pitch should be punished with a 13 metre free. A cynical foul denying a goal scoring opportunity should be punished with a penalty. Punish teams on the scoreboard rather than losing a man. Draconian measures but it would cut out any cynicism if it ws going to cost teams on the scoreboard.

If you include the jersey pull as cynical then I would welcome a trial of that

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 07:46:59 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 07:36:23 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Hasn't done it any good because it's brief isn't wide enough. Players shouldn't be replaced for starters.

Agree about the replacement of players (another example of the watering down) but the card has done some good. The 3 cynical physical offences of blocking the runner, dragging the man down and tripping (listed in order of their frequency in the game) have reduced in frequency. The jersey pull remains de rigueur. The card never attempted to address negative play which is the key issue now

to be fair the most negative team in ireland are now in division 2.  Light bulbs anyone! It will regulate itself.  To win you need to play a bit.

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 07:39:53 PM

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 07:37:45 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Watered down?

The jersey pull wasn't included as the soundings indicated that it would not get through unless it was watered down in this respect

Soundings?

Is there any reason to believe this given that the FRC was the most militaryesqueioperation in my time involved with the association?

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 08:00:46 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 07:39:53 PM

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 07:37:45 PM

Quote from: smelmoth on March 29, 2015, 06:53:23 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on March 29, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
And to do any of that you have to change he rules. Who were the most vociferous opponents of the black card who ensured it's watering down?

The black card certainly hasn't done the game any harm and if had not have been watered down could have done the game a lot more good.

Watered down?

The jersey pull wasn't included as the soundings indicated that it would not get through unless it was watered down in this respect

Soundings?

Is there any reason to believe this given that the FRC was the most militaryesqueioperation in my time involved with the association?

Yes - before there was a vote McGee said that the FRC were excluding the jersey pull because in their consultations in the review and in the statements of the counties before their delegates were dispatched to congress that the black card motion would be defeated if it included the jersey pull

Quote from: DuffleKing on March 29, 2015, 07:08:34 PM

You're both wrong.

It was never the rule except in people's heads.

Thought I would put the rule up. If you scroll down to 'tackle' it says more than one player can tackle.

https://www.gaa.ie/about-the-gaa/rules-and-regulations/

Call me crazy, but watching The Sunday Game it hit me.

One nominated player is allowed to carry a hurl and have a sliotar in his pocket. Between the 50 and 40 he can score as long as the ball is also in that area.

Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Quote from: Jinxy on March 29, 2015, 11:27:13 PM
Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

What an irrelevant little post.

It's hard to believe that someone actually sat down, composed that, keyed it in & posted it.

The fact that it comes from Kerry only makes things worse.

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Reading your post I can only assume you are an idiot and trying to wind up people & generate responses. People go to matches in every sport to see their team win, but they want to enjoy the game as well. If you can honestly say you enjoy watching rubbish like last Saturday in Croke park, then I feel sorry for you. Legislators in all sports try to introduce rules to increase the entertainment for the public. That's what draws more fans & generates more income for the sport. If Gaelic football continues down this road of ultra defensive football then the only fans at the games will be the die hard supporters. The average fan will follow another sport he/she can actually enjoy watching

Quote from: Jinxy on March 29, 2015, 11:27:13 PM
Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

Half-hearted I thought. He didnt call out the Derry manager's blatant lie about "that's what happens when two teams play equally defensive"
You'd have to be an idiot to think Dublin played defensively yesterday, but there's one or two Derry lads on the match thread who can congratulate themselves on that achievement.

Derry can play whatever way they like given the lack of talent they have player and manager wise, but blaming the opposition just shows them up for what they are. 4 points in 70 minutes is laughably pathetic.

Quote from: dublin7 on March 29, 2015, 11:44:21 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Reading your post I can only assume you are an idiot and trying to wind up people & generate responses. People go to matches in every sport to see their team win, but they want to enjoy the game as well. If you can honestly say you enjoy watching rubbish like last Saturday in Croke park, then I feel sorry for you. Legislators in all sports try to introduce rules to increase the entertainment for the public. That's what draws more fans & generates more income for the sport. If Gaelic football continues down this road of ultra defensive football then the only fans at the games will be the die hard supporters. The average fan will follow another sport he/she can actually enjoy watching

As I said I don't enjoy it. Watched my own county playing it for few years. This year trying to expand. What I'm against is managers being dictated how they should set up their teams. If you didn't enjoy the tactical innovations from last few years fair enough but it was a new and interesting element. And no way should fans expect to be entertained. The GAA should not say for example Derry if you play Kerry you cannot bring any forwards back into your own half. The emphasis should be with Kerry to go ok we'll do this then.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on March 29, 2015, 11:40:11 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on March 29, 2015, 11:27:13 PM
Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

What an irrelevant little post.

It's hard to believe that someone actually sat down, composed that, keyed it in & posted it.

The fact that it comes from Kerry only makes things worse.

I didn't sit down.

Is Gaelic football really in such bad a state as continues to be stated. From a personal point of view I watched every single Armagh game in the league and championship last year. There were plenty of games were Armagh were poor but for me the league game against Meath was a great game. In the championship the first Monaghan game was exciting, the Roscommon game was very good too and the Donegal match was fascinating for different reasons. I enjoyed following my county. After some of the early championship dead rubbers were over there were some very good games in the championship. Monaghan v Kildare and Mayo v Kerry spring immediately to mind. We cannot have classics every week.

I remember in 2013 Armagh were slated because they tried to go out and play open attacking football. Cavan beat them in Breffni. Now they will probably be slated because they are an Ulster team that play with a defensive system. You cannot have it both ways. Were Dublin's exhibition matches in the Leinster championship better to watch than Monaghan's matches to win Ulster. Personally I do not think so. Rules to reduce teams ability to set up a particulate template would have to be very careful that they do not reduce the number of teams that can challenge. That would be a greater treat to football in the long term.

More than reducing defensive football the aim should be to cut out cynical play. For me that would include letting linesmen signal foul play to referees during play. I also feel that instead of the black card leading to a player being replaced it should lead to a sin bin. As it stands the rule favours the stronger teams who can risk a black card as they can bring on a player of equal standard. I feel a trick was missed when the bringing the ball forward 30m for arguing was not passed. Finally, I think a player making a clean catch from a kick out should be given a second or two after he catches the ball before he can be tackled.

Throwball +1

Agree with throwball, plus if there is any kore than one person tackling a player with the ball he should get a free. This idea of two lads round tge player with the ball,he cant move or get rid then he gets blown up for overcarrying is a joke

Okay I'm now getting sick of people asking for a one-man tackle rule.

Take a step back and think this one out. Then tell me how it would be any different to the current rule.

1. You can't draw imaginary 5m arcs around players in a free flowing game, as it's impossible for a referee to monitor both the arc and the tackle.

2. Even if you convince yourself that this is possible, you will need an active/inactive sub clause to ensure this rule doesn't prevent advantages. At which point, our coaches will exploit and our referees will suffer.

3. If the attacker carries the ball into a second opponent while the first is still in hot pursuit, is that a foul against the defence?

4. If the attacker carries the ball into two opponents, is that a foul against the defence?

The basic point I'm trying to make is that if two men approach an attacker and take it in turns to tackle him, then surely there is no adjustment to the rules that would stop them doing this? Yet this is the exact method most teams use to close down and strip opponents. It just happens to quickly that it looks like the tackles are happenings simultaneously.

Thinking that passing back when in the opposing defence is quite good; but would this lead to more defenders in the defensive half forcing (pushing men) back over the half-way line?

Surely if the county game was reduced to 13 a side there would be less scope for blanket defence and would free up space for a more skillful kicking game? For me it's always been a no brainer but I rarely hear people mention it. Fitness levels today are too high for a 15 a side county game.

I also think that it's no coincidence that the game is become too tactical since five subs replaced the previous three.

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Well said.  I don't see any calls for rule changes in soccer when teams camp out in their penalty area - it is a tactic and its up to the opposition to figure out a way to beat it.  The game is constantly evolving, and its up to the management to figure out strategies to counter different styles of play.  The blanket defense takes away one on one defending, but anybody it still takes a lot of work to put a tight and effective blanket defence in place while retaining enough potency up front to win a game.  It reminds when when I play squash against one particular individual and I constantly win point after point with a drop shot, he is forever huffing and yapping about it and basically thinks its rational to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit that shot as he can never get it therefore its not fair - seriously?!?

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on March 29, 2015, 04:49:30 PM
Would Kerry have played negative if they were up against anybody else but Donegal, they played open enough against mayo in 2 classics in the semi.

I don't see how someone can defend Kerry from playing super defensive against a defensive team?

Quote from: nrico2006 on March 30, 2015, 09:07:29 AM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Well said.  I don't see any calls for rule changes in soccer when teams camp out in their penalty area - it is a tactic and its up to the opposition to figure out a way to beat it.  The game is constantly evolving, and its up to the management to figure out strategies to counter different styles of play.  The blanket defense takes away one on one defending, but anybody it still takes a lot of work to put a tight and effective blanket defence in place while retaining enough potency up front to win a game.  It reminds when when I play squash against one particular individual and I constantly win point after point with a drop shot, he is forever huffing and yapping about it and basically thinks its rational to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit that shot as he can never get it therefore its not fair - seriously?!?

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on March 29, 2015, 04:49:30 PM
Would Kerry have played negative if they were up against anybody else but Donegal, they played open enough against mayo in 2 classics in the semi.

I don't see how someone can defend Kerry from playing super defensive against a defensive team?

That's the best way to beat the mass defences.  By playing attacking football you are only playing into the defensive teams hands. By going the defensive in the same way it becomes like against like, with the general rule being the team with the best forwards win. That's exactly how the All Ireland went.  In terms of the spectators, these types of games are putrid and terrible to watch & last years all ireland was the worst final I can remember.  If Kerry had played their traditional attacking football & lost the final they would have been hammered for playing into Donegal's hands. 

Lads it needs a rule change. You can't blame teams for trying to find means of winning football matches by whatever means necessary it's human nature and if your team is not blessed with better footballers then you're going to find a way to negate that by playing defensively and counter attacking.

We need a few rule changes:

1. Sin Bin - Black Card is a silly measure and players shouldn't be subbed and docking a player will open things up a bit more in that case

2. Clean catches from kickouts between the 2 45s are marks and a player can decide to play on or have a free kick... wills top scrums at midfield and reward my favourite skill of the game which is struggling!!

3. No more than 2 men tackling a player - at least gives the attacking player a chance

4. Every team must have 4 players in the opposition half at all times

There are 4 easily definable and refereed rules that could be implemented at any time without much fuss. The only fuss they could possibly cause is the Mickey Harte "I don't like change" brigade. Most right thinking people will understand what's needed to protect the game.

Also hurling should be left alone as it's fine!

Quote from: screenexile on March 30, 2015, 09:48:16 AM
Lads it needs a rule change. You can't blame teams for trying to find means of winning football matches by whatever means necessary it's human nature and if your team is not blessed with better footballers then you're going to find a way to negate that by playing defensively and counter attacking.

We need a few rule changes:

1. Sin Bin - Black Card is a silly measure and players shouldn't be subbed and docking a player will open things up a bit more in that case

2. Clean catches from kickouts between the 2 45s are marks and a player can decide to play on or have a free kick... wills top scrums at midfield and reward my favourite skill of the game which is struggling!!

3. No more than 2 men tackling a player - at least gives the attacking player a chance

4. Every team must have 4 players in the opposition half at all times

There are 4 easily definable and refereed rules that could be implemented at any time without much fuss. The only fuss they could possibly cause is the Mickey Harte "I don't like change" brigade. Most right thinking people will understand what's needed to protect the game.

Also hurling should be left alone as it's fine!

1 - Black card is the same as it but add a 10 minute sin-bin component.

2 - Agree for kick-outs beyond the 45

3 - Keepers/Defenders can't handpass inside their own 30 yard line and all kick-outs have to go past this line (it's an additional line on the pitch).

I think this thread has finally improved over the last couple of pages.

You can argue for rule changes or to let the game evolve. Personally, I'd be in the latter camp but I had always thought the black card rule should have been like the sin bin and the mark should have been introduced for kick-outs caught between the two forty-fives. Interesting that quite a few seem to agree.

Joe Brolly pointed out that when Armagh tried to go ultra-attack minded two years ago that it wasn't necessarily a bad tactic but that Armagh didn't apply it well enough. He compared it to Barcelona's high pressing except Armagh didn't go man-for-man. I think he might have a point.

What it will take is a manager with balls. To try something new at intercounty level when there's usually something to play for is difficult. Maybe a team languishing in Division 4 for years should try a five man full-forward line that plays inside the 13 metre line for the most part. This creates plenty of space for that full-forward line to run into. If the opposition bring back a few sweepers then there'll be plenty of space for the attack-minded team to play their running game from deep.

That's just off the top of my head and might fall flat on its face but would any manager try it?

The thought that our officials (I should say official as they other six are allowed to do so little) being able to apply rules involving forward only hand passing or numbers of players within a certain line is unrealistic.

Over to you coaches of the future.

Sin bin won't work at club games unless you have at least two officials available, with the second man responsible for timings and how stoppages affect them - do we really want to double refereeing costs for every GAA match.

The mark works in Aussie Rules and rugby simply because if it didn't exist, then a clean catch would inevitably result in a turnover, and therefore nobody would clean catch. Football is a different game, and this type of artificial stop/start control goes against its ethos.

See earlier point about one-man tackles. This sounds like a good idea until you try to implement it.

4 men in opponent's half is again something that would need a second official to police. It would also result in some absolutely bizarre scenarios when a ball is kicked up the field but doesn't quite reach the halfway line. Plus, what happens if a team gets a couple of players sent off - does it still apply?

As for defenders not being able to fist pass, oh ffs think this one out. Against any forward line that presses high this will result in only one option for corner backs - boot it over the sideline. You'll be giving possession back anyway, so you might as well make the angle more awkward. It's idiocy.

The only change I would like to see trailed would be the international rules tackle implemented. It would mean you could also drop the yellow card as every other offence would be a black or a red.

Quote from: thewobbler on March 30, 2015, 10:45:41 AM
As for defenders not being able to fist pass, oh ffs think this one out. Against any forward line that presses high this will result in only one option for corner backs - boot it over the sideline. You'll be giving possession back anyway, so you might as well make the angle more awkward. It's idiocy.

Yeah, defenders not being able to handpass is a ridicolous idea.

Personally, I don't think the rules need to be changed much if at all. If we enforced the rules we have, it'd sort out a lot of the problems.

Defending is not the same as cynicism, and it's only if the defending team use cynical means to stop the attacker that they even overlap. The Black Card was deisgned to deal with cynicism, not defensive tactics. The jury may be out on the black card's effectiveness, but don't assign it a purpose it was never intended to fulfill, and then berate it for not doing so.

As regards the defensive tactics, and the poor viewing spectacle it engenders, I suppose there are two competing elements at play here. The first, which is holding sway at the moment apparently, is the need for managers and coaches to produce results. If the quickest and least risky way of doing that is to make sure you don't concede big scores, then it's natural for teams to do whatever it takes to win. Within the rules, there's absolutely nothing 'wrong' with that approach. Defending is a perfectly valid art form, and while I, myself, appreciate the art of man to man defending more than the systematic approaches in place to block out space there's nothing technically or even conceptually wrong with either approach when viewed through the prism of 'do what it takes to win'.

The second element, however, is probably the one that's a bit more concerned with how the game is perceived as entertainment, or as a spectacle. This is where I expect the GAA to at least investigate some way of increasing the scoring through tinkering with rules. A 0-8 to 0-6 game can, occasionally, be fascinating for the neutral but will more likely only hold the interest of the protagonists themselves. If neutrals start to be turned off watching the games because it's a hardship, then we will have a problem. Not necessarily a problem for today, but a problem for 10, 20 years time. If people stop watching the game, they will stop bringing their kids to play it. And if they stop watching the game, advertisers will stop paying money to sponsor teams or buy ads on RTE. And if that happens, there will be a drop off in the amount of games on TV, and the amount of money flowing into the association.

Some people will herald that as a good thing, but I think if there is any chance of that happening, or any trend in that direction, the GAA will step in and legislate some, probably hare brained, rule to try and increase the scoring in a game. It wouldn't be unusual across sports either. Rugby went from 4 to 5 for a try, and brought in the bonus point in several tournaments. The NFL has constantly legislated against defensive tactics to encourage more scoring. Soccer brought in the professional foul rule, and removed the backpass to the goalie. All of these were in a bid to increase the entertainment value of the sport. To please the punter. Obviously all of these are professional sports, where pleasing the paying punter is the only means they have of survival.

The GAA, nowadays, is chasing the money (for noble purposes I hasten to add) and when you chase the money, these sort of considerations have to come to the fore.

My own point of view is that this stuff is horrible to watch, but as a coach who would be more attack minded, it is a fascinating challenge. How do you get your best forwards on the ball, with space, to do damage? It's intriguing from that perspective, but it is a horrendous watch at times.

I wonder will lads start playing their best forwards as half backs or midfielders. Try and get those lads on the ball and moving, further out the field. Break through the lines with the ball rather than trying to find space to receive a pass inside. Anyway, that's a slight tangent to my point. There's nothing wrong with what these coaches are doing if they feel this is their best chance to win games, but it is not something that I think the GAA will allow to continue for too much longer, especially if it starts to affect viewing figures.

Quote from: Hound on March 29, 2015, 11:46:42 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on March 29, 2015, 11:27:13 PM
Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

Half-hearted I thought. He didnt call out the Derry manager's blatant lie about "that's what happens when two teams play equally defensive"
You'd have to be an idiot to think Dublin played defensively yesterday, but there's one or two Derry lads on the match thread who can congratulate themselves on that achievement.

Derry can play whatever way they like given the lack of talent they have player and manager wise, but blaming the opposition just shows them up for what they are. 4 points in 70 minutes is laughably pathetic.

the lack of respect and arrogance from the likes of yourself and that Indiana bin lid show towards other counties is ott. Derry played one defensive damage limitation game in the hope of not getting a tanking in the lead up to the championship game. The Derry v Down will probably be the only open game in Ulster this year.

No-one, including those from counties who play the ultra defensive system, want to watch this kind of football week in week out. Its maddening. In modern times, Derry have been blasted within the county for being far too open. This is grand when playing the likes of Mayo and Kerry in Div 1 but does the county zero good when playing against the blanket (see the Donegal 2104 championship as a perfect example). What Derry need to do is mix it up a bit more. If we adopted a  full ultra defensive gameplan week in week out, I would vote with my feet as would many others. This is the dilemma the game is currently in.

You say we have a lack of talent. That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I say we do. What we dont have is a squad of full time athletes who's only job  outside of  training is get up their arse's to answer the door when their pre-prepared meals are delivered. The Dubs need to think of all the advantages they have over every other county in the country before firing shots from their ivory towers

13 a side is the only rule change I would consider, it leaves the games much more open, with more space and it is harder to enforce the blanket defense.

Matches now are of a higher standard than they have ever been. They are maybe slightly harder to watch than those of say 10 years ago but go back even 20 years and the football played was poor compared to today, just watch an episode of 'All Ireland Gold' on TG4 if you don't believe me.

Quote from: oakleaflad on March 30, 2015, 11:23:09 AM
13 a side is the only rule change I would consider, it leaves the games much more open, with more space and it is harder to enforce the blanket defense.

Matches now are of a higher standard than they have ever been. They are maybe slightly harder to watch than those of say 10 years ago but go back even 20 years and the football played was poor compared to today, just watch an episode of 'All Ireland Gold' on TG4 if you don't believe me.

Again, I have a problem with that sort of statement. It depends on what you define as a higher standard? In terms of 'watchability' I would prefer to watch a higher scoring, more direct game with a lot of 50-50, mano a mano battles. That makes for a more exciting, and entertaining spectacle.

If you define a higher standard in terms of fitness, speed and tactical appreciation, then yes, today's games are a long way removed from games in the 70s, 80s and even 90s.

If you are talking about skills of the game, i.e kicking, shooting, catching then I think there's no indication that today is of a higher standard. There's some great skillful players today, but there were great technically gifted players back then too.

Quote from: oakleaflad on March 30, 2015, 11:23:09 AM
13 a side is the only rule change I would consider, it leaves the games much more open, with more space and it is harder to enforce the blanket defense.

Matches now are of a higher standard than they have ever been. They are maybe slightly harder to watch than those of say 10 years ago but go back even 20 years and the football played was poor compared to today, just watch an episode of 'All Ireland Gold' on TG4 if you don't believe me.

is this 13 a side game being mooted across the board, club and county?

1/2 man tackle max could be a consideration.

something definitely needs doing. This years championship will bring it to a head I'd say

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 30, 2015, 11:28:28 AM

Quote from: oakleaflad on March 30, 2015, 11:23:09 AM
13 a side is the only rule change I would consider, it leaves the games much more open, with more space and it is harder to enforce the blanket defense.

Matches now are of a higher standard than they have ever been. They are maybe slightly harder to watch than those of say 10 years ago but go back even 20 years and the football played was poor compared to today, just watch an episode of 'All Ireland Gold' on TG4 if you don't believe me.

Again, I have a problem with that sort of statement. It depends on what you define as a higher standard? In terms of 'watchability' I would prefer to watch a higher scoring, more direct game with a lot of 50-50, mano a mano battles. That makes for a more exciting, and entertaining spectacle.

If you define a higher standard in terms of fitness, speed and tactical appreciation, then yes, today's games are a long way removed from games in the 70s, 80s and even 90s.

If you are talking about skills of the game, i.e kicking, shooting, catching then I think there's no indication that today is of a higher standard. There's some great skillful players today, but there were great technically gifted players back then too.

I think there is indication though, these 50-50 mano a mano battles don't happen anywhere near as often because the passing is more accurate, admittedly not all kick passes.
Agree that there were great players in every generation. It is because the game now is so different to previous generations that i would always give caution when comparing players today with previous generations.

Quote from: JoG2 on March 30, 2015, 11:30:01 AM

Quote from: oakleaflad on March 30, 2015, 11:23:09 AM
13 a side is the only rule change I would consider, it leaves the games much more open, with more space and it is harder to enforce the blanket defense.

Matches now are of a higher standard than they have ever been. They are maybe slightly harder to watch than those of say 10 years ago but go back even 20 years and the football played was poor compared to today, just watch an episode of 'All Ireland Gold' on TG4 if you don't believe me.

is this 13 a side game being mooted across the board, club and county?

1/2 man tackle max could be a consideration.

something definitely needs doing. This years championship will bring it to a head I'd say

Yes it could be across club and county as this is something that one ref could handle unlike some other propositions. Our own county has 13 a side club cup competitions and whilst not the most important games of the year they are usually entertaining to watch.

Quote from: JoG2 on March 30, 2015, 11:20:13 AM

Quote from: Hound on March 29, 2015, 11:46:42 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on March 29, 2015, 11:27:13 PM
Good to see Kevin McStay had the guts to firmly point the finger of blame in a northerly direction.

Half-hearted I thought. He didnt call out the Derry manager's blatant lie about "that's what happens when two teams play equally defensive"
You'd have to be an idiot to think Dublin played defensively yesterday, but there's one or two Derry lads on the match thread who can congratulate themselves on that achievement.

Derry can play whatever way they like given the lack of talent they have player and manager wise, but blaming the opposition just shows them up for what they are. 4 points in 70 minutes is laughably pathetic.

the lack of respect and arrogance from the likes of yourself and that Indiana bin lid show towards other counties is ott. Derry played one defensive damage limitation game in the hope of not getting a tanking in the lead up to the championship game. The Derry v Down will probably be the only open game in Ulster this year.

No-one, including those from counties who play the ultra defensive system, want to watch this kind of football week in week out. Its maddening. In modern times, Derry have been blasted within the county for being far too open. This is grand when playing the likes of Mayo and Kerry in Div 1 but does the county zero good when playing against the blanket (see the Donegal 2104 championship as a perfect example). What Derry need to do is mix it up a bit more. If we adopted a  full ultra defensive gameplan week in week out, I would vote with my feet as would many others. This is the dilemma the game is currently in.

You say we have a lack of talent. That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I say we do. What we dont have is a squad of full time athletes who's only job  outside of  training is get up their arse's to answer the door when their pre-prepared meals are delivered. The Dubs need to think of all the advantages they have over every other county in the country before firing shots from their ivory towers

Indeed! The Dubs are some craic as the saviours of Football when they choked last year against Donegal and look like they'll struggle again this year with the same problem. Surely a County with the resources/back room team the Dubs have they would be able to work it out. I think the problem is that we didn't go down and roll over to them again. Either we get beat by 20 pts again and have everybody boo us or play that negative shite and keep it within 5 and stil get booed. I know I'd rather run the Dubs close.

We have a number of problems in Derry which we are well aware of but we need to be able to perform like that and do it better if we are to prosper in the Ulster Championship!

Lads , I would be very careful about changing any rules that fundamentally change the way the game is played. Even the slightest rule change can lead to unexpected ( and sometimes unwanted ) side effects.
IMO one of the main reasons that mangers have opted to pull etra defensive players back is becuase it has become so difficult to defend one on one in the current game with the reduction in physicality and introduction of the 'tick' etc. (i.e. it is some much esier to pick up cards in the modern game than it was in the past and this leaves tight marking so much more difficult).
.

I don't know the answers but some times a tight game between two good teams can be "entertaining" as scores are at a premium and can be interesting to watch the tactical game going on. However, that is only the case in knockout and when the stakes are high.

Saturdays game was none of this. It lacked the pace and intensity but had all the bad elements.

What is telling is that once Derry went behind they had no answer and couldn't change as the players where dead on their feet. Maybe if Dublin had taken the lead earlier they'd have been forced to change. Mind you Dublin played a part.

Something will change but not for the better. Each year teams are getting fitter and stronger and under the current professional set ups, this isn't going to change. So teams are going to get better at this type of set up and continue it.

Change will only come from the top when the crowds turn away and this will happen. If Derry and Dublin meet again, how many will pay to see it? Not the same numbers from the weekend. This can the case for many counties. It says a lot that the soccer was easier to watch last night and had far more of an atmosphere than a lot of Gaelic matches, and it was far from a classic but you had two teams trying to win rather than trying not to lose.

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 30, 2015, 12:14:54 PM
Lads , I would be very careful about changing any rules that fundamentally change the way the game is played. Even the slightest rule change can lead to unexpected ( and sometimes unwanted ) side effects.
IMO one of the main reasons that mangers have opted to pull etra defensive players back is becuase it has become so difficult to defend one on one in the current game with the reduction in physicality and introduction of the 'tick' etc. (i.e. it is some much esier to pick up cards in the modern game than it was in the past and this leaves tight marking so much more difficult).
.

What is this 'reduction of physicality' you speak of... what kind of physicality is missing from the game now do you think??

I don't understand this myth that physicality is gone. The only physicality that should be in our game is going for 50/50 balls and shoulder to shoulder tackles which are all still allowed. Wailing the f**k out of somebody with a closed fist has always been a foul and still is!

A 13 a side game wouldn't solve the problem either. The space teams are defending en masse is that inside the 45m line. If teams wanted to they could still fill this space with 11 or 12 players. 11v11 or 12v12 inside the 45 still leaves no room

Bonus points in League competitions?
3 points for a win
1 additional league point for 10 or more scores, 2 for 20 or more scores.
If a team has to spend their league campaign focused on trying to get scores it should be more difficult to to revert to the defensive mindset come Championship.

Quote from: screenexile on March 30, 2015, 12:19:36 PM

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 30, 2015, 12:14:54 PM
Lads , I would be very careful about changing any rules that fundamentally change the way the game is played. Even the slightest rule change can lead to unexpected ( and sometimes unwanted ) side effects.
IMO one of the main reasons that mangers have opted to pull etra defensive players back is becuase it has become so difficult to defend one on one in the current game with the reduction in physicality and introduction of the 'tick' etc. (i.e. it is some much esier to pick up cards in the modern game than it was in the past and this leaves tight marking so much more difficult).
.

What is this 'reduction of physicality' you speak of... what kind of physicality is missing from the game now do you think??

I don't understand this myth that physicality is gone. The only physicality that should be in our game is going for 50/50 balls and shoulder to shoulder tackles which are all still allowed. Wailing the f**k out of somebody with a closed fist has always been a foul and still is!

What I mean is there is far less physical contact is tollerated in the tackle/contesting a ball now than in the past.
A forward and defender going for a '50-50' ball is a prime example.
In the past the defender would have been more inclined to take the risk and try and win it clean by getting a hand in or whatever, alot of the time this type of strategy leads to physical contact, or coming together of the two players. The chances now of getting a free given against you for doing this are now far higher than they used to be.
The fact that attacking players now going to ground looking for the free (and getting it) far more often doesnt help either.

Now some of this contact may indeed be a foul, some of it may not, but the point is, it is refereed now more to favour the attacker than it used to be.

Defenders now would tend to allow the attacker to gain possession (not always, but certainly more often) and the try and turn him over with the help of teammates who have funnelled back.

Anyway, my main point isnt really about the physicallity of the game now, its more how rule changes can affect the game in unforseen ways.
That is why i would be very careful about any suggestion for change, and any new rule needs to be well thought through, not just a kneejerck reaction to a couple of seasons of some teams playing an ultra defensive style.

Increase the value of a goal to 5 points. This might mean that teams defend deeper to protect the goal but might open more point scoring chances.

Quote from: GJL on March 30, 2015, 02:25:15 PM
Increase the value of a goal to 5 points. This might mean that teams defend deeper to protect the goal but might open more point scoring chances.

Or it might mean that once a team does get a goal, they just retreat back and try and shut up shop, knowing that if they can restrict the to point scoring chances from distance, its likely game over.

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 30, 2015, 02:27:42 PM

Quote from: GJL on March 30, 2015, 02:25:15 PM
Increase the value of a goal to 5 points. This might mean that teams defend deeper to protect the goal but might open more point scoring chances.

Or it might mean that once a team does get a goal, they just retreat back and try and shut up shop, knowing that if they can restrict the to point scoring chances from distance, its likely game over.

They have to get it first!

Quote from: GJL on March 30, 2015, 02:41:19 PM

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 30, 2015, 02:27:42 PM

Quote from: GJL on March 30, 2015, 02:25:15 PM
Increase the value of a goal to 5 points. This might mean that teams defend deeper to protect the goal but might open more point scoring chances.

Or it might mean that once a team does get a goal, they just retreat back and try and shut up shop, knowing that if they can restrict the to point scoring chances from distance, its likely game over.

They have to get it first!

True, although I just think a change like that changes the whole dynamic of the sport.
The current defensive systems may be hard to watch, but this is a fundamental change in the game we are talking about, which affects ALL games, not just ones where a team is playing defensively.
I actually would be more inclined towards reducing the numbers to 13 aside than changing the value of the goal. Allthough that change in itself poses a whole range of other issues.

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 09:27:25 AM

Quote from: nrico2006 on March 30, 2015, 09:07:29 AM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Well said.  I don't see any calls for rule changes in soccer when teams camp out in their penalty area - it is a tactic and its up to the opposition to figure out a way to beat it.  The game is constantly evolving, and its up to the management to figure out strategies to counter different styles of play.  The blanket defense takes away one on one defending, but anybody it still takes a lot of work to put a tight and effective blanket defence in place while retaining enough potency up front to win a game.  It reminds when when I play squash against one particular individual and I constantly win point after point with a drop shot, he is forever huffing and yapping about it and basically thinks its rational to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit that shot as he can never get it therefore its not fair - seriously?!?

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on March 29, 2015, 04:49:30 PM
Would Kerry have played negative if they were up against anybody else but Donegal, they played open enough against mayo in 2 classics in the semi.

I don't see how someone can defend Kerry from playing super defensive against a defensive team?

That's the best way to beat the mass defences.  By playing attacking football you are only playing into the defensive teams hands. By going the defensive in the same way it becomes like against like, with the general rule being the team with the best forwards win. That's exactly how the All Ireland went.  In terms of the spectators, these types of games are putrid and terrible to watch & last years all ireland was the worst final I can remember.  If Kerry had played their traditional attacking football & lost the final they would have been hammered for playing into Donegal's hands.

You must have a seriously bad memory or be about 10 years old.  Off-hand I can think of a few finals that were over long before half-time when Kerry handed Cork and Mayo their asses in finals, more than once, in the last 10 years alone.

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 30, 2015, 03:25:14 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 09:27:25 AM

Quote from: nrico2006 on March 30, 2015, 09:07:29 AM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:33:29 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:17:48 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 11:08:38 PM

Quote from: Tubberman on March 29, 2015, 11:00:35 PM

Quote from: mrdeeds on March 29, 2015, 10:55:50 PM
Having read this forum since page 1. Just watching Sunday Game and McStay said GAA legislators need to do something to stop this tactic. I'm sorry but you cannot stop a manager using whatever tactics he wants or innovation. Is it going to be forwards stay in their half and hoof it in? What other sport would dictate rigid formations and style of play? Madness.

Offside?

Doesn't dictate a formation or how many players you can put in a half of field. Every sport the manager has to use innovation. Gaelic football is only at its infancy regards tactics so lets see how it develops. Also why should weaker teams have their bellys tickled by going for it and ultimately be bet out the gate.

It puts restrictions on the formations and tactics you can play. There hasn't even been a proposal yet on how to limit the ultra-defensive football we're seeing, but something is needed. Winning in a game of this type may be seen as justifiable in the short term, but if it damages the support and playing numbers in the longer term, it needs to be legislated against.

But why should we stop ultra defensive football? It's up to managers and players for that. Are you going to tell a talented wing half forward sorry you cannot pass the half way line a play one twos. Stay where you are and let the half back hoof it in to full forward. As for the paying punter you're paying in to support your county, not be entertained. If that's all you want go to the cinema. I'm not saying I agree with defensive football but legislators have no right to dictate to managers. Some of whom haven't kicked a ball in twenty to thirty years.

Well said.  I don't see any calls for rule changes in soccer when teams camp out in their penalty area - it is a tactic and its up to the opposition to figure out a way to beat it.  The game is constantly evolving, and its up to the management to figure out strategies to counter different styles of play.  The blanket defense takes away one on one defending, but anybody it still takes a lot of work to put a tight and effective blanket defence in place while retaining enough potency up front to win a game.  It reminds when when I play squash against one particular individual and I constantly win point after point with a drop shot, he is forever huffing and yapping about it and basically thinks its rational to argue that I shouldn't be allowed to hit that shot as he can never get it therefore its not fair - seriously?!?

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on March 29, 2015, 04:49:30 PM
Would Kerry have played negative if they were up against anybody else but Donegal, they played open enough against mayo in 2 classics in the semi.

I don't see how someone can defend Kerry from playing super defensive against a defensive team?

That's the best way to beat the mass defences.  By playing attacking football you are only playing into the defensive teams hands. By going the defensive in the same way it becomes like against like, with the general rule being the team with the best forwards win. That's exactly how the All Ireland went.  In terms of the spectators, these types of games are putrid and terrible to watch & last years all ireland was the worst final I can remember.  If Kerry had played their traditional attacking football & lost the final they would have been hammered for playing into Donegal's hands.

You must have a seriously bad memory or be about 10 years old.  Off-hand I can think of a few finals that were over long before half-time when Kerry handed Cork and Mayo their asses in finals, more than once, in the last 10 years alone.

Those games were over early due to kerry putting on a show and poor performances by the opposition. Last year the mom award should have gone to the poor unfortunate who had to put together the highlights package for the Sunday game. The only positive thing for neutrals was it didn't go to a replay. Tactical genius McGuinness got found out. When Donegal needed to push up on Kerry all the Donegal players could do was defend like the programmed robots they were. No one to take charge and change tactics.

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Brolly had a good rant against Tyrone on the radio this evening. Don't have a link unfort. Said Tyrone should be playing behind closed doors. 

And where's he from..

There is a distinct lack of the joy in Ulster football. Is it indicative of a greater malaise I wonder ?

Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

http://www.sportsjoe.ie/gaa/poll-would-you-rather-win-doing-whatever-it-takes-or-lose-playing-entertaining-football/19426

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Cork match would be a good example. Very good game.

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Brolly just told Mickey Harte he could go and f**k off live on radio earlier in relation to his duty to provide entertainment. I don't know why the sudden outrage after this weekends games though. Some pundits must have thought this type of negative handball was only a passing fad that would disappear with the retirement of Jimmy McGuinness, however his legacy lives on and who could blame young players for looking at other sports where they are able to express themselves rather than become part of an army camp playing militaristic football where caution and systems are the buzz words.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:10:31 PM

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Come on beny u will have to think a bit harder than that son. think a bit about it and don't just jump the gun.

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 10:27:25 PM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:10:31 PM

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Come on beny u will have to think a bit harder than that son. think a bit about it and don't just jump the gun.

So what are you saying? We would keep 4 players inside the 45? It's not netball you know, we can move with the ball. If a man wins a ball and runs out of his zone - what happens? You need to think about it harder! Bollocksy rules that restrict the flow of a game are not the way forward.

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Last year against dublin it was the same ultra defensive tactic. 13/14 men behind the ball. Any dublin kick out Monaghan dropped almost every player back behind their 45m line. On this message board the only ones who seem to enjoy watching this era of blanket defences seem to be from Ulster. I can't think of anything more depressing going to games knowing it's going to be dour battle between 2 teams playing 13-2 formation looking for a victory by 5-4 or something equivalently boring. No enjoyment in that & must be depressing as hell as a forward to be train and work your guts out to make a county panel/team only to be told to play as defender and be expected to spend more time in your own half than the oppositions

Quote from: yellowcard on March 30, 2015, 10:20:30 PM

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Brolly just told Mickey Harte he could go and f**k off live on radio earlier in relation to his duty to provide entertainment. I don't know why the sudden outrage after this weekends games though. Some pundits must have thought this type of negative handball was only a passing fad that would disappear with the retirement of Jimmy McGuinness, however his legacy lives on and who could blame young players for looking at other sports where they are able to express themselves rather than become part of an army camp playing militaristic football where caution and systems are the buzz words.

Joe spent a fair bit of the last 4 years hanging out of Jim McGuinness' hole so it's interestng that he has such strong views on entertaining football. I'd challenge Joe to put his money where his mouth is and take Derry next year and play the entertaining football that he thinks is the duty. Or at least, explain, in detail, how he'd go about it during his analysis on the Sunday Game. I'd imagine he'd soon find out that it's not quite as simple as trotting out sound bites on radio shows and maybe he will have a little bit more respect for the likes of Mickey Harte.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:10:31 PM

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Good idea but impossible to police except at the highest level. Any rule changes need to be effective at all levels.

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 10:34:13 PM

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Last year against dublin it was the same ultra defensive tactic. 13/14 men behind the ball. Any dublin kick out Monaghan dropped almost every player back behind their 45m line. On this message board the only ones who seem to enjoy watching this era of blanket defences seem to be from Ulster. I can't think of anything more depressing going to games knowing it's going to be dour battle between 2 teams playing 13-2 formation looking for a victory by 5-4 or something equivalently boring. No enjoyment in that & must be depressing as hell as a forward to be train and work your guts out to make a county panel/team only to be told to play as defender and be expected to spend more time in your own half than the oppositions

Stereotyping by saying the only people who enjoy this football are from Ulster is ridiculous. IM from Ulster and detest this type of football. Kerry won an All Ireland playing turgid stuff last year and whilst Im sure the end justified the means I'd say there are a few proud Kerry men who were disgusted at the way they done so. Then there are those in denial who try and claim the footballing moral high ground and claim that their great footballing county would never resort to such football. The Dubs have short memories, have they forgotten Gilroys system in 2011 and some of Gavin's tactics during the League. It makes me laugh hearing some supporters claiming that their own counties are the Brazilians of Gaelic football. Just recognise that the virus has spread and is in bad need of some drugs to fix the ailment.

I'm amazed that the result of the poll is 50/50. So almost 50% of people on here are happy with the spectacle, that's not the impression I get on the ground.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:44:18 PM

Quote from: yellowcard on March 30, 2015, 10:20:30 PM

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Brolly just told Mickey Harte he could go and f**k off live on radio earlier in relation to his duty to provide entertainment. I don't know why the sudden outrage after this weekends games though. Some pundits must have thought this type of negative handball was only a passing fad that would disappear with the retirement of Jimmy McGuinness, however his legacy lives on and who could blame young players for looking at other sports where they are able to express themselves rather than become part of an army camp playing militaristic football where caution and systems are the buzz words.

Joe spent a fair bit of the last 4 years hanging out of Jim McGuinness' hole so it's interestng that he has such strong views on entertaining football. I'd challenge Joe to put his money where his mouth is and take Derry next year and play the entertaining football that he thinks is the duty. Or at least, explain, in detail, how he'd go about it during his analysis on the Sunday Game. I'd imagine he'd soon find out that it's not quite as simple as trotting out sound bites on radio shows and maybe he will have a little bit more respect for the likes of Mickey Harte.

I agree, I thought he was out of order but knowing Brolly he probably thought he was being funny. I don't know why he thinks managers should be held accountable though, the bottom line is that their number 1 priority is in getting results. His anger should be directed towards those at the top of the game and the rule makers.

Quote from: lenny on March 30, 2015, 10:46:59 PM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:10:31 PM

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Good idea but impossible to police except at the highest level. Any rule changes need to be effective at all levels.

You just hammer systematic fouling until teams don't do it any-more. If we end up with 12v 11- all the better.

its the only way to eradicate the problem. certain offences get a black card where players can't be replaced and a penalty awarded to the opposition.

Quote from: INDIANA on March 30, 2015, 11:05:30 PM

Quote from: lenny on March 30, 2015, 10:46:59 PM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 30, 2015, 10:10:31 PM

Quote from: redzone on March 30, 2015, 09:50:24 PM

Quote from: CD on March 30, 2015, 09:35:45 PM
Do you all remember this time last year we were discussing the very high scoring national league and the suggestion was that the black card rule was creating more open defences?? Or was it just because there were only two Ulster sides in division one?

I like the zonal idea a la netball. There must be 4 players in the offensive 45 at all times. An easy rule to introduce and monitor and it would stretch the game. I think anything is worth a try because at the moment it's terrible to watch!

yes good idea that

This idea of keeping 4 players in an attacking zone is pure nonsense. It's not easy to implement or monitor, imagine controlling that in a Div 3 league club match. So during a game a player races out to pick up a ball and has to stop as he reaches the edge of the zone? That's just unworkable.

Good idea but impossible to police except at the highest level. Any rule changes need to be effective at all levels.

You just hammer systematic fouling until teams don't do it any-more. If we end up with 12v 11- all the better.

its the only way to eradicate the problem. certain offences get a black card where players can't be replaced and a penalty awarded to the opposition.

If only they had that rule in '95 eh....?

brolly has said he won't go to another Derry match. He also told Mickey Harte to fck off. Some nights work.

(http://i61.tinypic.com/28chi79.jpg)

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 10:34:13 PM

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Last year against dublin it was the same ultra defensive tactic. 13/14 men behind the ball. Any dublin kick out Monaghan dropped almost every player back behind their 45m line. On this message board the only ones who seem to enjoy watching this era of blanket defences seem to be from Ulster. I can't think of anything more depressing going to games knowing it's going to be dour battle between 2 teams playing 13-2 formation looking for a victory by 5-4 or something equivalently boring. No enjoyment in that & must be depressing as hell as a forward to be train and work your guts out to make a county panel/team only to be told to play as defender and be expected to spend more time in your own half than the oppositions

Yes that was one game from last year, one week previously we played out an entertaining high-scoring game with Kildare. Against Dublin that approach was deemed to be our best chance at the start of the game against what was at the time a rampant Dubs side who looked unstoppable. Obviously it didn't work out too well that day but there you go.

Now I'm not saying we play free flowing football week after week, but your original post was a lazy stereotype about a whole province, when you've clearly watched little football involving the teams you're giving out about. The example you've used to back up your point is a game from last year involving your own county. As Throw ball said, Monaghan-Cork was an entertaining game played only weeks ago.

The whole anti-Ulster shite is wearing thin. There's plenty more counties around the country playing defensively, and equally Ulster counties don't set up with 14 men behind the ball each and every game. Of course I'd love to see free flowing football between all counties every week but not all counties have equal quality and resources.

https://vodhls.rasset.ie/manifest/audio/2015/0330/20150330_rte2fm-gameon-mondaysgam_c20754805_20754806_261_.m3u8

Brolly tells Mickey Harte to f**k off and says he's not going to any more Derry matches while they play like that!

Hard to argue with his premise. I wonder has anyone who has played this way found it enjoyable??

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 10:34:13 PM

Quote from: Schkite on March 30, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 30, 2015, 08:00:32 PM

Dublin's last game is in clones against Monaghan. A lot of people like myself would normally go, but watching last Saturday night was bad enough. Don't need to watch same defensive s**te again and see one team win 7-6 on a bank holiday weekend. Far more interesting things to do like watch paint dry!

Why would you automatically assume all Ulster sides will play the same way? Apart from the game away to Donegal, Monaghan have been involved in some quite good games this league.

Last year against dublin it was the same ultra defensive tactic. 13/14 men behind the ball. Any dublin kick out Monaghan dropped almost every player back behind their 45m line. On this message board the only ones who seem to enjoy watching this era of blanket defences seem to be from Ulster. I can't think of anything more depressing going to games knowing it's going to be dour battle between 2 teams playing 13-2 formation looking for a victory by 5-4 or something equivalently boring. No enjoyment in that & must be depressing as hell as a forward to be train and work your guts out to make a county panel/team only to be told to play as defender and be expected to spend more time in your own half than the oppositions

Just looked at the division 1 tables there. Dublin matches this year have seen an average of 0.5 points per game scored than Derry matches. And Derry have been crap. Dublin seem to have a bigger problem in the entertainment stakes than playing Ulster teams.

I believe when Michael Murphy retires he will come out and state he did not enjoy his football as he didn't get to express himself  as good he knows (and we know) he can play.

Quote from: screenexile on March 31, 2015, 12:14:03 AM
https://vodhls.rasset.ie/manifest/audio/2015/0330/20150330_rte2fm-gameon-mondaysgam_c20754805_20754806_261_.m3u8

Brolly tells Mickey Harte to f**k off and says he's not going to any more Derry matches while they play like that!

Hard to argue with his premise. I wonder has anyone who has played this way found it enjoyable??

I believe when Michael Murphy retires he will come out and state he did not enjoy his football as he didn't get to express himself  as good he knows (and we know) he can play.

If Nordie teams concentrated on developing the skills of Gaelic football we would not be at this impasse.

Why are they so scared of playing football as it should be played ?

Wum

Kevin Cassidy has been fairly critical of this approach as well on twitter.

Quote from: Mike Sheehy on March 31, 2015, 01:14:41 AM
If Nordie teams concentrated on developing the skills of Gaelic football we would not be at this impasse.

Why are they so scared of playing football as it should be played ?

What an idiotic statement. Skill levels have never been higher. Coaching courses in Ulster are streets ahead of the other provinces, that's why I drive from Sligo to them. The issue is the tactics used inside the rules of the game. Nothing will change until the rules do. No manager or coach is doing anything wrong. We are guided by the rules and it's the rules that decide how the game is played.

What rule change would you suggest?

Cassidy, Brolly, Narkinson and a million and 1 other interneters, who have really important stuff to say , every hour of every day, only have  a limited amount of material to work with. Derry play the only blanket defence game I've seen in my time of going to matches (early 80s) and its a godsend for these folk. Derry will go back to the norm against Cork on Sunday and Down in June.

There is mass hysteria from the Dubs as they know they will get dumped out on their ear again this year when playing against a side well versed in the defensive game despite having invested an incredible amount of money trying to win Sam. 

Seeing as gaelic football seems to be morphing into an ultra defensive gig the game plan of which is now the same as other games like basketball in particular. How about introducing a 2 or a 3 pointer line out the field? It would reward long range point shooting and possibly reduce the emphasis on defence.

My God there are some shite talkers on here spouting nonsense. Quoting Kevin Cassidy! And Joe Brolly! Sure them two spoofers will be saying the complete opposite next week. Didnt Joe Brolly make the most withering personal attack on Grimley when he was managing Armagh for not setting up defensively against Cavan a couple of years ago.

And fantasising that Michael Murphy will be regretting his role for Doneagal playing defensively. A role which has took him within  a hair of a 2nd Celtic cross. What a pile of steaming sh**e.

Reading this board is like going to a county match and having to listen to the most astonishing drivel from people who have most obviously never played football and go to one or two matches a year at most, and are then are espousing the latest crackpot theory they've seen on last week's SG as if it's their own original and dearly held thoughts.

So you're in favour of it so? And I think you'd find there's a fair bit of football played by people on this board too.

As I said earlier on, from the persepective of winning the games, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

From the perspective of trying to keep our game popular, and keep people wanting to watch and play it, there's a lot wrong with that sort of spectacle.

It's my belief that as soon as the GAA perceive a risk of people walking away from the game as punters or TV viewers, something will change. They'll probably make an arse of it, but they will try to address it.

Quote from: CavanCola on March 31, 2015, 09:59:50 AM
Seeing as gaelic football seems to be morphing into an ultra defensive gig the game plan of which is now the same as other games like basketball in particular. How about introducing a 2 or a 3 pointer line out the field? It would reward long range point shooting and possibly reduce the emphasis on defence.

+1.

2 points for a score kicked outside the 45 metre line maybe. 2 points for a score kicked from "tramlines".

You will be savaged here by the many posters well able to point out the problems but not the solutions.

Call me a sentimental old fool but I like watching open football. Tribal grappling matches not my scene tbh.

There's this misconception that an open game can't be 'intense'. Of course it can. The players bring the intensity, so a man on man battle for possession can be every bit as intense as  4 lads surrounding a ball carrier who has traipsed into their web. As I said before, I think defending is an artform itself, but the art of man for man defending, blocking, harrying, is far more pleasing to me than a schematic which involves relieving individual players of that responsibility, and instead giving them a role in a space denying structure.

How about we implement the rules we have for a start before introducing new rules.

For a start, players / managers should be made aware that any sort of a jersey pull will be blown up, doesn't matter if it's only for a second if you pull the jersey it's a free. Applied to both forwards and backs equally

Simple enough to enforce as well as it's one offence where you can't "accidentally" grab someone's jersey

Quote from: macdanger2 on March 31, 2015, 10:35:01 AM
How about we implement the rules we have for a start before introducing new rules.

For a start, players / managers should be made aware that any sort of a jersey pull will be blown up, doesn't matter if it's only for a second if you pull the jersey it's a free. Applied to both forwards and backs equally

Simple enough to enforce as well as it's one offence where you can't "accidentally" grab someone's jersey

And apply the overcarrying rule correctly. If a defender knows an opposition player has to release the ball (whether that be an attempted pass to a team mate, a shot at goal or a solo/bounce) after 4 steps then it makes it a hell of a lot easier to defend against. At the minute it's anybody's guess how many steps will be allowed which makes defending so much more difficult

Quote from: take_yer_points on March 31, 2015, 10:44:38 AM

Quote from: macdanger2 on March 31, 2015, 10:35:01 AM
How about we implement the rules we have for a start before introducing new rules.

For a start, players / managers should be made aware that any sort of a jersey pull will be blown up, doesn't matter if it's only for a second if you pull the jersey it's a free. Applied to both forwards and backs equally

Simple enough to enforce as well as it's one offence where you can't "accidentally" grab someone's jersey

And apply the overcarrying rule correctly. If a defender knows an opposition player has to release the ball (whether that be an attempted pass to a team mate, a shot at goal or a solo/bounce) after 4 steps then it makes it a hell of a lot easier to defend against. At the minute it's anybody's guess how many steps will be allowed which makes defending so much more difficult

I would agree with both of those posts.

Making a  point from distance worth 2 points sounds ok in theory, but again its a fundamental change in the game just to adress a current tactical trend, its too drastic IMO.
Apart form that its another call for a referee to make on where  the ballw as struck from etc and would make a difficult job even moreso.

I also agree with them, but it's much more likely the GAA will decide to try something innovative to be seen to send a message about that 'sort of thing'.

If I was a betting man, I'd say something along the lines of 4 men having to stay in the opposition half. But whatever Brolly starts harping on about will be the preferred approach. (Not that he'd set the agenda per se, but he'd pick up on it, and start being the voice of it).

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 31, 2015, 10:08:33 AM
My God there are some shite talkers on here spouting nonsense. Quoting Kevin Cassidy! And Joe Brolly! Sure them two spoofers will be saying the complete opposite next week. Didnt Joe Brolly make the most withering personal attack on Grimley when he was managing Armagh for not setting up defensively against Cavan a couple of years ago.

And fantasising that Michael Murphy will be regretting his role for Doneagal playing defensively. A role which has took him within  a hair of a 2nd Celtic cross. What a pile of steaming sh**e.

Reading this board is like going to a county match and having to listen to the most astonishing drivel from people who have most obviously never played football and go to one or two matches a year at most, and are then are espousing the latest crackpot theory they've seen on last week's SG as if it's their own original and dearly held thoughts.

Nonsense. There is a genuine issue here and it is harming the game. AZ says the GAA will do something once people start walking away from the game, I'd suggest it could be too late at that stage.

I've read some fairly bizarre stuff on this thread, like go to the cinema if you want entertainment!! Jesus wept, what is sport when your a spectator if not a form of entertainment?

Others have asked should teams just roll over and take a hammering. That might have some merit if we were talking about Carlow or Waterford but we're talking about the top teams in the country, if they are certain to get hammered unless they play defensively then what the hell are they doing in their academies? Anyway, nobody is saying a team shouldn't play a sweeper or track back but if the only way you can keep competitive is to get ALL 15 players into their own 45 then we have a problem in our game.

Others have bizarrely tried to blame the opposition and not on the team getting 15 back, they show a lack of imagination apparently. Well if any of you have coached a team you'll know that there is no truly effective counter plan to this system other than mimic it. You can't drag defenders out by positioning players wide or getting them to run into certain areas because defenders are told to leave them off and we'll meet them when they come back into the scoring zone.

Others again ask why is getting everybody back such a problem when sports like soccer or basketball do it, are these boys serious?

Others seem happy to be beaten in a close game playing shite football rather than beaten more comfortably (is that a guarantee?) going for the game? I seem to remember underdogs winning in the past having a go but apparently you only have a chance against a team a bit better than you if you play everyone in your own 45.

This defensive shite is football tumbling to the lowest common denominator where games are low scoring and won by soft frees and/or a mistake leading to a goal. How anyone can argue this is not a serious issue is beyond me.

Zulu, I'm saying they will do that if the perceive a risk of that happening. I'd suggest that's already in motion.

I can see both aspects here, but I think we have to protect the game as a spectacle. We shouldn't punish defending per se, but we should try and legislate against over negative tactics. I would like to see the 'steps' and the jersey pull enforced.

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 31, 2015, 10:52:38 AM

Quote from: take_yer_points on March 31, 2015, 10:44:38 AM

Quote from: macdanger2 on March 31, 2015, 10:35:01 AM
How about we implement the rules we have for a start before introducing new rules.

For a start, players / managers should be made aware that any sort of a jersey pull will be blown up, doesn't matter if it's only for a second if you pull the jersey it's a free. Applied to both forwards and backs equally

Simple enough to enforce as well as it's one offence where you can't "accidentally" grab someone's jersey

And apply the overcarrying rule correctly. If a defender knows an opposition player has to release the ball (whether that be an attempted pass to a team mate, a shot at goal or a solo/bounce) after 4 steps then it makes it a hell of a lot easier to defend against. At the minute it's anybody's guess how many steps will be allowed which makes defending so much more difficult

I would agree with both of those posts.

I would agree with the three posts :) It would also help if refs stopped giving frees to every ball carrier who falls down when any defender comes near.
One rule I'd bring in would be that all place kicks between the 20 metre lines have to be kicked forward - ( 20m thingy to allow you hit a free in from the 13 m out on the sideline  to someone behind you) and of course curtail the effin handpass. Any other frees,sidelines hit backwards - free to other team.
This 4 forwards having to stay in the opposition half is silly, impossible to police and what would be the punishment? 

QuoteThis defensive shite is football tumbling to the lowest common denominator where games are low scoring and won by soft frees and/or a mistake leading to a goal. How anyone can argue this is not a serious issue is beyond me.

I agree with you Zulu that it is becominga serious issue, I just dont think a kneejerk rule change like some of those being suggested is the best way to adress it.
If a rule change is to be introduced it needs to have all the implications well thought through, not just something that adresses the current issue and creates a different one.

Ah I know what you're saying AZ and I agree I'm just pointing out that we shouldn't wait until you can see the numbers dropping.

I too see both sides insofar as good defending is an essential element of football (all sports) but a game where players turn their back on the ball and sprint back to a prearranged position so that you have a mass of bodies there when the ball arrives (if it does at all) will destroy the game. And the thing is, many teams are now using the league to try out different ways of playing but once you get to knockout championship we may well find that most games turn into the worst type of defensive game. How many teams will be willing to risk going for it when they fear if they fall 4 or 5 points behind the other team may well go ultra defensive to hold that lead?

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 31, 2015, 11:47:11 AM

QuoteThis defensive shite is football tumbling to the lowest common denominator where games are low scoring and won by soft frees and/or a mistake leading to a goal. How anyone can argue this is not a serious issue is beyond me.

I agree with you Zulu that it is becominga serious issue, I just dont think a kneejerk rule change like some of those being suggested is the best way to adress it.
If a rule change is to be introduced it needs to have all the implications well thought through, not just something that adresses the current issue and creates a different one.

Oh absolutely, I agree. I wouldn't change any rules yet but I do think we need to keep a close eye on this. I thought we might move away from defensive football, or at least some teams would, but there is a fairly clear trend towards all teams now wanting this in their armoury and once they see the other crowd start it they'll copy it and we'll seamer and more utterly unwatchable games. Football shouldn't be a game with a few watchable games, it should be a sport where most games (involving teams of similar standards) are very watchable. How confident are people will see 2-5 great games this summer? And this at a time when Dublin, Kerry, Cork, Donegal, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon and Tipperary all have teams as good or better than they've had for a long time.

The defensive game has been here since 2002. Why are people getting so worked up about it now? There have been some great matches with teams set up defensively. At the moment the weather is shocking, it was awful for Derry v Dublin. Teams can play whatever way they want, get over it.

Rather than making 4 forwards be inside the 45 at all times, what about  adding a rule that a team has to have all 6 forwards inside the attacking 45 for oposition kickouts (similar to when the ball is thrown in at the start of the game).
this would eliminate the current tactic of dropping players back immediatly and conceding possesion to the short kickout, and effectivly palying  a  forward(s) as a permanent defender, which is the basis to most of these defensive systems.
While it doesnt stop teams filtering players back eventually, it make its it more difficult to do it, and would also have the effect of encouraging teams to kick it long from the kickout and try and get the ball into the forward line early before players can get back.

This may not work either, just thinking out loud really  :-\

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 11:55:58 AM
The defensive game has been here since 2002. Why are people getting so worked up about it now? There have been some great matches with teams set up defensively. At the moment the weather is shocking, it was awful for Derry v Dublin. Teams can play whatever way they want, get over it.

Nonsense. What great games have we had with both teams setting up defensively? And we've had defensive football since the GAA started but we've only recently started seeing teams get all 15 of their players inside their own 45. The weather was fine for last years all Ireland final and for the Dublin Donegal semi a few years ago. Blaming the weather is pure head in the sand stuff.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 10:12:53 AM
So you're in favour of it so? And I think you'd find there's a fair bit of football played by people on this board too.

As I said earlier on, from the persepective of winning the games, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

From the perspective of trying to keep our game popular, and keep people wanting to watch and play it, there's a lot wrong with that sort of spectacle.

It's my belief that as soon as the GAA perceive a risk of people walking away from the game as punters or TV viewers, something will change. They'll probably make an arse of it, but they will try to address it.

The crowds for the the hurling championship overtook the crowds for the football championship in 2013 for the first time ever  (the replayed final helped but still the replay in 2012 wasn't enough ) The average gate figure being 25k for a hurling match and 15k for a football match really give a strong indication of what the public are saying. Obviously the hurling championship in that it's has the advantage of having only the top half teams competing, whereas the football championship is handicapped by having the bottom-half teams taking part in it.

The good news is that in a few years the blanket will be great for all these Division 4 and Division 3 teams who have no chance of actually winning anything but are primarily concerned with keeping the margin of their loss down.

QuoteThe accounts do not incorporate provincial championships but take in qualifiers, All-Ireland quarter-finals, semi-finals and the final.

With €2.8m generated from the hurling replay between Clare and Cork it brought total hurling gate receipts to €11,918,974, a 12pc increase on 2012 and around €50k more than a much greater number of football games yielded. Even with the Kilkenny/Galway replay factored in, 2012 figures for hurling did not surpass football with almost €300,000 in the difference, €10,943,294 for football, €10,649,887 for hurling.

The average attendance for the 15 All-Ireland hurling championship matches played in 2013, attended by 382,338 people, was 25,489 compared to 15,996 for 31 football games attended by a total of 495,889.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/hurling/gaa-reap-rewards-of-magical-campaign-29976311.html

It would also make for some amusing sights from up in the stands. Kick out comes and the charge of the light brigade ensues to fly back to defensive positions.

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 11:59:58 AM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 11:55:58 AM
The defensive game has been here since 2002. Why are people getting so worked up about it now? There have been some great matches with teams set up defensively. At the moment the weather is shocking, it was awful for Derry v Dublin. Teams can play whatever way they want, get over it.

Nonsense. What great games have we had with both teams setting up defensively? And we've had defensive football since the GAA started but we've only recently started seeing teams get all 15 of their players inside their own 45. The weather was fine for last years all Ireland final and for the Dublin Donegal semi a few years ago. Blaming the weather is pure head in the sand stuff.

Armagh and Tyrone had some classics. I enjoyed last years All Ireland. The weather has been at fault for many games been poor in recent weeks. Not just games with defensive systems. Teams need to come up with ways to beat the defensive system and force them to come out. Crying and trying to get rule changes is laughable.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:03:03 PM
It would also make for some amusing sights from up in the stands. Kick out comes and the charge of the light brigade ensues to fly back to defensive positions.

I suppose the point is that it would be of limited benefit to get men back at that stage so teams wouldnt be as inclided to do it.
It would place more of a focus on trying to win first phase possesion in the middle of the feild in order to get the ball quickly to the forwards.
Like I said, maybe it would work, but if a rule chaneg is needed I would prefer it was somewhat of a tweak rather than a fundamental change.

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:06:06 PM

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 11:59:58 AM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 11:55:58 AM
The defensive game has been here since 2002. Why are people getting so worked up about it now? There have been some great matches with teams set up defensively. At the moment the weather is shocking, it was awful for Derry v Dublin. Teams can play whatever way they want, get over it.

Nonsense. What great games have we had with both teams setting up defensively? And we've had defensive football since the GAA started but we've only recently started seeing teams get all 15 of their players inside their own 45. The weather was fine for last years all Ireland final and for the Dublin Donegal semi a few years ago. Blaming the weather is pure head in the sand stuff.

Armagh and Tyrone had some classics. I enjoyed last years All Ireland. The weather has been at fault for many games been poor in recent weeks. Not just games with defensive systems. Teams need to come up with ways to beat the defensive system and force them to come out. Crying and trying to get rule changes is laughable.

If you read my posts I'm not looking for rule changes and if you think commenting on things you don't like in your sport is 'crying' well what can I say? If you enjoyed last years All Ireland you are in a small minority so that should tell you something. The fact you can only reference two teams, neither which were as defensive as teams are currently playing highlights the paucity of your argument.

I wouldn't be looking for rule changes yet but if you think everything is fine then you're nuts but on the upside you'll soon have no problem getting tickets for the big football matches as most people won't pay to watch it.

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 12:12:51 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:06:06 PM

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 11:59:58 AM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 11:55:58 AM
The defensive game has been here since 2002. Why are people getting so worked up about it now? There have been some great matches with teams set up defensively. At the moment the weather is shocking, it was awful for Derry v Dublin. Teams can play whatever way they want, get over it.

Nonsense. What great games have we had with both teams setting up defensively? And we've had defensive football since the GAA started but we've only recently started seeing teams get all 15 of their players inside their own 45. The weather was fine for last years all Ireland final and for the Dublin Donegal semi a few years ago. Blaming the weather is pure head in the sand stuff.

Armagh and Tyrone had some classics. I enjoyed last years All Ireland. The weather has been at fault for many games been poor in recent weeks. Not just games with defensive systems. Teams need to come up with ways to beat the defensive system and force them to come out. Crying and trying to get rule changes is laughable.

If you read my posts I'm not looking for rule changes and if you think commenting on things you don't like in your sport is 'crying' well what can I say? If you enjoyed last years All Ireland you are in a small minority so that should tell you something. The fact you can only reference two teams, neither which were as defensive as teams are currently playing highlights the paucity of your argument.

I wouldn't be looking for rule changes yet but if you think everything is fine then you're nuts but on the upside you'll soon have no problem getting tickets for the big football matches as most people won't pay to watch it.

That post looks a lot like crying to me. :D Last years All Ireland was a very good match. Two teams playing defensively against eachother doesn't happen often. Armagh v Tyrone was superb stuff through the last decade. Tyrone v Dublin was a very good game this year in the league. The wind and rain of recent weeks has ruined all matches. When the weather gets better the games will get better. This whole whingefest will be laughed at come the end of the year.

You're entitled to your opinion even if you couldn't be more wrong if you tried!

An opinion can't be wrong. :D

I was at last years final and it was dire. Felt like goin home after 50 min

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:26:28 PM
An opinion can't be wrong. :D

I used to think that too  ;)

Quote from: redzone on March 31, 2015, 12:30:49 PM
I was at last years final and it was dire. Felt like goin home after 50 min

Are you from Kerry or Donegal?

Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 12:31:27 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:26:28 PM
An opinion can't be wrong. :D

I used to think that too  ;)

:D We'll see who's opinion was wrong at the end of the year!

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

Quote from: Rossfan on March 31, 2015, 11:42:22 AM

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 31, 2015, 10:52:38 AM

Quote from: take_yer_points on March 31, 2015, 10:44:38 AM

Quote from: macdanger2 on March 31, 2015, 10:35:01 AM
How about we implement the rules we have for a start before introducing new rules.

For a start, players / managers should be made aware that any sort of a jersey pull will be blown up, doesn't matter if it's only for a second if you pull the jersey it's a free. Applied to both forwards and backs equally

Simple enough to enforce as well as it's one offence where you can't "accidentally" grab someone's jersey

And apply the overcarrying rule correctly. If a defender knows an opposition player has to release the ball (whether that be an attempted pass to a team mate, a shot at goal or a solo/bounce) after 4 steps then it makes it a hell of a lot easier to defend against. At the minute it's anybody's guess how many steps will be allowed which makes defending so much more difficult

I would agree with both of those posts.

I would agree with the three posts :) It would also help if refs stopped giving frees to every ball carrier who falls down when any defender comes near.
One rule I'd bring in would be that all place kicks between the 20 metre lines have to be kicked forward - ( 20m thingy to allow you hit a free in from the 13 m out on the sideline  to someone behind you) and of course curtail the effin handpass. Any other frees,sidelines hit backwards - free to other team.
This 4 forwards having to stay in the opposition half is silly, impossible to police and what would be the punishment?

This would mean, you foul and then you retreat and wait for the ball to be kicked to you.  In open play you could kick anyway you liked, but when fouled, you lose this advantage. It would pay to foul.

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

Ah Teo if you really think last years All Ireland final was a very good match you're so far gone you'll soon be Greece soccer fan! If last year's final was a very good match I've no doubt you'll consider this year a classic regardless of how God awful the rest of us think it is.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 12:38:12 PM
Ah Teo if you really think last years All Ireland final was a very good match you're so far gone you'll soon be Greece soccer fan! If last year's final was a very good match I've no doubt you'll consider this year a classic regardless of how God awful the rest of us think it is.

There'll only be 40,000 at the All Ireland final, I'll have a huge choice of seats to watch the classic unfold.

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

:D Ach that was a good one!

Donegal v Tyrone was decent a few years back. A lot of their 2012 games were entertaining actually.

On Saturday night last a major portion of the blame lay at Dublin's feet and hands. They took the wrong and mostly stupid options and showed themselves up to be poor decision makers - this is from a Dublin supporter. Derry did as expected, play behind the ball and break fast but their problem was that the had no  forward who could score from 30/40 yds. Their full forwards were dire in their shooting.
Perhaps it is time as said previously that referees blow for absolutely every foul. we can say what we like about tactics but if you do not have THINKING FOOTBALLERS on teams then you will also have the stuff we have now.

A few simple solutions
1. All frees and sidelines to be kicked off ground
2. Maximum 2 fist passes in a row
3. Forwards must take frees in forward half, backs in defence
4. Kick outs resulting from goals and wides taken from 21yard line, points from 14yard line
5. All kickouts must cross the 50yard line

Worth a go couldn't be any worse than what we have now

How would any of that affect someone's defensive tactic?

I think the rule book should handed over to the big counties. They can then change the rules when they don't like smaller counties making games difficult for them.

I agree. Let them tell us what way it should be played. They do that anyway :)

There should be 7 points for a ball that bounces before it goes over the bar.

And 8 points for a ball thrown over the line from a seated position.

Quote from: The Raven on March 31, 2015, 02:41:20 PM
A few simple solutions
1. All frees and sidelines to be kicked off ground
2. Maximum 2 fist passes in a row
3. Forwards must take frees in forward half, backs in defence
4. Kick outs resulting from goals and wides taken from 21yard line, points from 14yard line
5. All kickouts must cross the 50yard line

Worth a go couldn't be any worse than what we have now

1. I dont see how this does anything other than slow the game down.
2.Very difficult to referee and doesnt really do anything to adress the issue of overly defensive strategies, if anything it will lead to alot more aimless kickpassing just to get rid of it.
3.Again and extra thing for the referee to implement, and Im not sure of the benefit (or even that it isnt predominently like that now anyway) What happens if a player starts the game at WHF but is switched to WHB or vice versa?
4.Not sure how there is any advantage in thiseither? its lieka cross between what we have now and the way teh kickouts used to be....
5.There may be some benefit to this, but only if there is some way of preventing teams just crowding the midfeild area.

QuoteWorth a go couldn't be any worse than what we have now

Thats the thing, changing rules just for the sake of it and we could indeed have something worse than the current game.
The ultra defensive game is a relatively new development (there was playing defesively before, but never to the extreme we have seen in ths NL campaign), I wouldnt panic just yet.
I would prefer we let the tactics evolve, than change the rules off the back of a few poor games.

This time last year we were discussing how the black card had changed the game with record high scoring games etc. Smug black carders like Joe Brolly were telling us that they told us so and the game is some much better. What's the solution now? Keep changing the rules until it no longer resembles Gaelic football? (Although to be fair, some games recently don't resemble gaelic football)

By the way, you don't follow your county or club for entertainment, you follow your club and county because it hurts, because it is torture, because it is where you are from, because they are your mates out there, because it is painful to watch them most of the time whether they are playing defensively or not, because you like to moan about what they are doing wrong and how you could do better, because you hope that some day on maybe that one rare occasion they manage to pull off a result that makes you feel like you are top of the world - you soon forget that it was a shite game. So I don't buy into the entertainment putting people off - its the painfulness of it all that is the attraction. Bring on more turgid games - its the purgatory that we love. I shall be strapping the barbed wire to myself under my Tyrone top for the visit to Ballybofey in the a few weeks, bring it on!

Benny, using the black card as a stick to beat those who are proposing rule changes is unfair. The Black card was brought into deal with cynical fouling, not legal, defensive, strategies. The performance of the black card is debatable, but it's a separate debate in my view.

As regards the pain etc, yes, I agree with you. I would much prefer Offaly to win a shit game that ended 0-3 to 0-2 than lose a cracker 4-15 to 3-12. But that's a very narrow, partisan view. The two protagonists in a given game would be a minority of the overall viewing public, especially on highlights or live TV. If all the games are shit, and the only ones getting any sort of buzz out of them are the two teams taking part in each game, then we are fucked.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 31, 2015, 02:55:44 PM
This time last year we were discussing how the black card had changed the game with record high scoring games etc. Smug black carders like Joe Brolly were telling us that they told us so and the game is some much better. What's the solution now? Keep changing the rules until it no longer resembles Gaelic football? (Although to be fair, some games recently don't resemble gaelic football)

By the way, you don't follow your county or club for entertainment, you follow your club and county because it hurts, because it is torture, because it is where you are from, because they are your mates out there, because it is painful to watch them most of the time whether they are playing defensively or not, because you like to moan about what they are doing wrong and how you could do better, because you hope that some day on maybe that one rare occasion they manage to pull off a result that makes you feel like you are top of the world - you soon forget that it was a shite game. So I don't buy into the entertainment putting people off - its the painfulness of it all that is the attraction. Bring on more turgid games - its the purgatory that we love. I shall be strapping the barbed wire to myself under my Tyrone top for the visit to Ballybofey in the a few weeks, bring it on!

Well said young fella.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 02:58:38 PM
Benny, using the black card as a stick to beat those who are proposing rule changes is unfair. The Black card was brought into deal with cynical fouling, not legal, defensive, strategies. The performance of the black card is debatable, but it's a separate debate in my view.

I remember posting at the time that the black card would lead to even more defensive play. Teams would retreat further and fill up spaces rather than tackle in groups in fear of making a cynical tackle. It has made it even more attractive to run from deep as the player (quite rightly) cant be checked in his run so the emphasis is push back, fill up the space, force a turn over and attack by running from deep. The running from deep bit hasn't really been mastered yet but it is being worked on. These are tactics that have been developed as a direct response to the black card. Yes, teams were defensive before but not to the level we are seeing.

What we are seeing now is managers after having a year to consider the implications of the changes and come up with a way to utilise a rule change to their advantage. People are talking about clamping down on fouls, Tyrone played Dublin in this defensive style a few weeks ago and only conceded 5 fouls the whole game. Teams aren't even tackling now they are filling up spaces - the game has changed. This is why it is relevant to bring up the black card when discussing new rules. Managers will look at rules and exploit them. We need to be very careful what rules we change. Someone mentioned before about clamping down on current rules and I agree, with the main emphasis on being the 4 steps in possession - for me, that changes a lot because it means that a legal tackle is much more likely and it will stop the runs from deep and holding onto possession and may force players to move the ball a bit quicker.

I can appreciate both sides of this debate, though if you look through my post history, I'm all on for more open football (like the vast majority) and very much a critic of the blanket. In an ideal world, we, both as spectators and players / managers would love open, hard hitting, high scoring games week in week out. County football should be the pinnacle as regards the spectacle. At the minute, for a lot of people its far from it. Indeed many would say that intermediate club football is currently the best to watch as its it fairly open and hasn't yet been infested by the blanket. Senior club matches mirroring county defensive setups can be particularly sore on the eyes, as the players don't have the speed and athleticism to counter at speed, rendering many of these matches as pretty much unwatchable.

In the race for Sam, 2 teams are well ahead of the chasing pack. Kerry and Dublin. Kerry are, well just Kerry. Dublin have the population, the money, a huge backroom team, coaches, pre prepared meals etc etc etc and a massive squad of professionally conditioned athletes who play all their championship matches at home. Do we expect the chasing pack who do not have the same advantages as Dublin to go toe to toe? Only its not toe to toe as Dublin have all these advantages. The playing field is far from even. Dublin folk's sense of entitlement, and sheer arrogance on this board  seems to think these counties should, and, particularly in the Leinster championship (which is pretty much a non-event at the minute...no disrespect to the other 11 counties) be on the receiving end of a humiliating tanking. Alot of these contests are not a million miles away from professional v amateur. The booing of the Derry team on Sat evening was a disgrace imo. You've a squad of players making huge sacrifices for little reward (like most players / counties). Derry have not won a provisional championship in 17 years. You've a county known for their, often naive open football, setting up defensively (for the 1st time I might add) to avoid a hammering on the eve of the Ulster championship throwing in. The Dublin natives arrived expecting Derry to roll over and take a rogering. This didn't happen, the natives didn't get the cricket score they were entitled to and booed. Derry setup up defensively, but Dublin happily reverted to 12/13 inside the 45. Their shot selection and shooting were well below par. Their counter attack, especially in the first half was extremely laboured , yet, naturally the entire blame lays at the feet of the northerners who came to visit the 'ROI' to play their game. I said previously that if Derry did adopt a defensive / blanket type style, I'd consider staying away. The truth is, I wouldn't stay away. Regardless of how they play, I'll go.

Mayo are part of the chasing pack. A county littered with brilliant footballers who have been on the cusp in recent years. Like most counties, can be cynical, but play a good brand of football, not overly defensive. They are a dying breed though and sooner or later, they will have adopt a more defensive approach to try to get over the line. McGuinness's mass defence was bore out of necessity. Its the only way Donegal could compete with the big guns in Croke Pk. Micky Harte has resorted to the most defensive setup I've ever seen. Again, out of necessity to compete. These counties take a serious amount of flack for their setup, but why would they change if its reaping results, if its extending their summer? It allows a team who do not have the same advantages of Dublin to compete with Dublin. There's a few  counties who, if all the stars align perfectly, might reach the semi-final, and a few counties who might, at a huge push reach a quarter-final. The vast majority haven't a chance  With the sacrifices being made, it makes sense for counties to go defensive, to nullify a better team and try and sneak a slim victory. More often than not, its far from pretty. From here on, with the setup they have, Dublin will always be in the mix. Something most counties can only dream of.

I've thought about all the suggestions in this thread. I honestly don't know what to do. The mass defence, the swarm tackle, and even the 1 man / 2 man tackle are the games Achilles's heel. It will take a mighty effort resolve this dilemma.
   

Well I don't know what all the fuss is about. There have been a few really turgid games in the league, some okay ones and a few crackers. Last year's championship was pretty much the same. As was last years league and the years before championship etc etc etc.

It has ever been thus, and to suggest that a 0-8 to 0-4 scoreline in a crap game on a horrible evening in March is an aberration and is the death of the game requiring fundamental rule changes won't bear much scrutiny. Ive been to loads of open high scoring games that were sh*te as well.

But sure theres a bandwagon and it gives the media something to climb onto. Last year it was cynical play, next year it ll be something else.

Nothing to see here.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 02:58:38 PM
Benny, using the black card as a stick to beat those who are proposing rule changes is unfair. The Black card was brought into deal with cynical fouling, not legal, defensive, strategies. The performance of the black card is debatable, but it's a separate debate in my view.

Not sure AZ. I think Benny has a very valid point. If you think about it logically the effect of defenders having to be more and more careful does translate into more players becoming defenders to simply fill space and channels on the pitch without having to really put in a tackle which could see them get a black card.

I agree they are separate debates but I do believe the black card has had an indirect effect on systems teams now employ.

Alot of this is us as a nation loving to whinge about something and a poor enough game on a bad night is a good excuse. TV and the egos and wallets of pundits and commentators throws petrol on the fire too.

We'll have some shit games this year and some brilliant ones too. It's always been that way.

I'm with Keyser. Nothing to see here.

He has a point there, but that's not how I took his original post. I thought he was claiming that the black card was being touted as a solution to negative tactics, and it was never that.

I accept that, in a very depressing development, some coaches have decided that if they can't cynically foul anymore, they'll just pack out the defences and choke space instead.

Again, I can see their point of view. It's up to us, as the GAA at large, to decide if that tactic is unpalatable for the game at large. As a coach I understand the will to do whatever it takes in the rules to win. As a spectator I couldn't be arsed paying to watch it.

Yes, we reserve that right for sure. The GAA need to be very careful though. The black card experience is a good example of this.

I've not heard one workable or sensible solution yet or even a clear definition of what the problem is. That's the place to start.

There are as many scores on average in games as there have ever been.

What exactly is the problem we are trying to solve? what are the outcomes we want?

Why are lads claiming it is the same it ever was? It isn't. Of course there were always good, bad and mediocre games, true of every sport, but now we are seeing teams adopt a style of play that not only ensures games will be poor spectacles but threatens many of the basic skills of the game. Having 15 lads in your own half will make the game a running, supporting, ball retention sport with little kicking, fewer goals, fewer scores from play, fewer tackles, blocks, high fetching, scores in general and games that will be closed out with 15 minutes to go if teams go a few points up. Anybody not concerned by the trend (not one game) is not concerned enough about the game the say they support. I couldn't care less who wins the next 10 All Irelands but I'd love to think we could be talking about the sport in a positive manner due to the quality of the games and contests we get. I doubt though. Anybody who says teams need to get 15 players behind the ball to be competitive needs to think about that statement a bit more.

Just remember Derry lost to Dublin last Saturday.
So whether they go all gung ho and lose 4-17 to 0-9 or defensive and lose 0-8 to 0-4      ...... they still lose and get no League points.

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 04:35:18 PM
Why are lads claiming it is the same it ever was? It isn't. Of course there were always good, bad and mediocre games, true of every sport, but now we are seeing teams adopt a style of play that not only ensures games will be poor spectacles but threatens many of the basic skills of the game. Having 15 lads in your own half will make the game a running, supporting, ball retention sport with little kicking, fewer goals, fewer scores from play, fewer tackles, blocks, high fetching, scores in general and games that will be closed out with 15 minutes to go if teams go a few points up. Anybody not concerned by the trend (not one game) is not concerned enough about the game the say they support. I couldn't care less who wins the next 10 All Irelands but I'd love to think we could be talking about the sport in a positive manner due to the quality of the games and contests we get. I doubt though. Anybody who says teams need to get 15 players behind the ball to be competitive needs to think about that statement a bit more.

Well how many players were Dublin putting behind the ball?

Is that meant to be a counter argument? Dublin were reacting to the set up of Derry but that's neither here nor there. Teams don't need to have 15 players in their own half to effectively defend but that's whats happening as the mindset of coaches is negative and fearful. Worst of all the damn thing isn't even effective anymore unless you count losing by less as being effective. It isn't a tactic to win games but to lose them by less.

It can win games if your opponents walk into the buzzsaw, and you have quick counter attacking players to hit them on the break. Donegal were very good at that, and Dublin were the buzzsaw victims.

That's my point AZ, it's been found out. The likes of Dublin and Kerry will now simply leave their half backs in position and the forwards midfield will track back with the breaking runners if a Donegal or Tyrone turn them over. It was effective as long as the other team played conventional enough and got sucked in but now they just keep their defenders and pass the parcel until they win a free or an opening appears.

Quote from: Zulu on March 31, 2015, 05:07:55 PM
Is that meant to be a counter argument? Dublin were reacting to the set up of Derry but that's neither here nor there. Teams don't need to have 15 players in their own half to effectively defend but that's whats happening as the mindset of coaches is negative and fearful. Worst of all the damn thing isn't even effective anymore unless you count losing by less as being effective. It isn't a tactic to win games but to lose them by less.

So it's a tactic more suited to the NFL then?  :-\

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 04:10:33 PM
He has a point there, but that's not how I took his original post. I thought he was claiming that the black card was being touted as a solution to negative tactics, and it was never that.

I accept that, in a very depressing development, some coaches have decided that if they can't cynically foul anymore, they'll just pack out the defences and choke space instead.

Again, I can see their point of view. It's up to us, as the GAA at large, to decide if that tactic is unpalatable for the game at large. As a coach I understand the will to do whatever it takes in the rules to win. As a spectator I couldn't be arsed paying to watch it.

AZ my original point was that we need to be careful when we change the rules as the solution to one problem can inadvertently create another. I'm not blind enough that when I look at football I don't see the current problems but I possibly have more faith in the managers coming up with tactics to overcome the blanket defence, than I would have in a task force coming up with a new rule to sort out the problem. I think you are right we need to address this situation as an association if we feel it's a big enough issue. Managers will find ways around new rules if they feel they have been forced upon them. We have to encourage managers to get their players kicking the ball again because it is beneficial to them and utilise tactics that are more forward looking than backward looking. I've said before that my solution would be to enforce more rigorously the rules that we have. Firstly, enforce the 4 step rule to encourage clean tackling which will mean players will be forced to kick more often as they are likely to get caught in possession, this might encourage forwards to tackle further up the pitch as they may feel that they have a legitimate chance of turning over possession. It will also force those in possession think more quickly, speeding up the game. Secondly, enforce the closed fist pass with a clean striking movement, remember we tried this before but gave up on it? I think this will make it more difficult to shuffle the ball side ways or behind to a supporting player. He would have to turn his body fully to execute a legitimate fist pass, the positioning of the opposition player could make this difficult, perhaps forcing him to look forward rather than back. Hopefully both these rules would encourage kicking the ball and we can get back to coaching our players how to play with their heads up rather than looking sideways. In Tyrone we have a generation of good ball players with good positional sense but very little ability to look up and pick a pass. Why? Because it's been coached out of them.

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 31, 2015, 03:45:53 PM
Well I don't know what all the fuss is about. There have been a few really turgid games in the league, some okay ones and a few crackers. Last year's championship was pretty much the same. As was last years league and the years before championship etc etc etc.

It has ever been thus, and to suggest that a 0-8 to 0-4 scoreline in a crap game on a horrible evening in March is an aberration and is the death of the game requiring fundamental rule changes won't bear much scrutiny. Ive been to loads of open high scoring games that were sh*te as well.

But sure theres a bandwagon and it gives the media something to climb onto. Last year it was cynical play, next year it ll be something else.

Nothing to see here.

+1
This is the most sensible post on here.

Quote from: oakleaflad on March 31, 2015, 06:17:50 PM

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 31, 2015, 03:45:53 PM
Well I don't know what all the fuss is about. There have been a few really turgid games in the league, some okay ones and a few crackers. Last year's championship was pretty much the same. As was last years league and the years before championship etc etc etc.

It has ever been thus, and to suggest that a 0-8 to 0-4 scoreline in a crap game on a horrible evening in March is an aberration and is the death of the game requiring fundamental rule changes won't bear much scrutiny. Ive been to loads of open high scoring games that were sh*te as well.

But sure theres a bandwagon and it gives the media something to climb onto. Last year it was cynical play, next year it ll be something else.

Nothing to see here.

+1
This is the most sensible post on here.

The facts are this is rubbish to watch. Its not  a blanket defence -it's the Alamo in comparison.

Rules need to be changed and soon.

This year's Connacht College's A final was a defensive arm-wrestle.

Summerhill were favourites and had beaten Ros CBS in the league final by 3-11 to 0-9. Summerhill were a blanket/counter-attacking unit all year.
The teams met again in the Championship final and this time Ros decided to play Summerhill at their own game. In one photo I saw only Sligo keeper in his own half. I know it s only a snap shot in time but was not unusual I was told. Anyway it worked and CBS won 8-7 and are now in an AI final. That s a 12 point turnabout in a few weeks by going defensive.

The fact that coaches are doing this type of thing in schools - in Connacht of all places - would suggest it will soon be the normal way to play for many players/teams.

Teams are picking and choosing when to use these defensive systems. Mayo v Roscommon was a dire match last year if I remember with Roscommon playing very defensively. When Armagh played them in a game they felt they could win the football was much more open.

The overall judgement on the state of football can only be made at the end of the championship.

What counties are still playing a relatively traditional style - i.e. at least 3-4 forwards always in the opposition's half?

I don't know about Fermanagh but I'd say Ulster are not in the list.

Meath? Mayo?

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on March 31, 2015, 02:54:25 PM

Quote from: The Raven on March 31, 2015, 02:41:20 PM
A few simple solutions
1. All frees and sidelines to be kicked off ground
2. Maximum 2 fist passes in a row
3. Forwards must take frees in forward half, backs in defence
4. Kick outs resulting from goals and wides taken from 21yard line, points from 14yard line
5. All kickouts must cross the 50yard line

Worth a go couldn't be any worse than what we have now

1. I dont see how this does anything other than slow the game down.
2.Very difficult to referee and doesnt really do anything to adress the issue of overly defensive strategies, if anything it will lead to alot more aimless kickpassing just to get rid of it.
3.Again and extra thing for the referee to implement, and Im not sure of the benefit (or even that it isnt predominently like that now anyway) What happens if a player starts the game at WHF but is switched to WHB or vice versa?
4.Not sure how there is any advantage in thiseither? its lieka cross between what we have now and the way teh kickouts used to be....
5.There may be some benefit to this, but only if there is some way of preventing teams just crowding the midfeild area.

QuoteWorth a go couldn't be any worse than what we have now

Thats the thing, changing rules just for the sake of it and we could indeed have something worse than the current game.
The ultra defensive game is a relatively new development (there was playing defesively before, but never to the extreme we have seen in ths NL campaign), I wouldnt panic just yet.
I would prefer we let the tactics evolve, than change the rules off the back of a few poor games.

To elaborate on my suggestions 1 maybe slowing the game down might be a good thing, less emphasis of fitness and more on skill ie kicking off ground, high fielding, 1 v1 marking not rugby scrums. 2 after  1 or 2 fist passes a kick pass again more skill. 3 reduces this waste of time of goal keepers taking 50's or as I've witnessed in some cases 21 yard frees. Both forwards and backs would need to learn the art of free taking and high fielding skills again. 4 21 yard kick out would help the team conceding the goal and penalise the team kicking the wide. 5 kickouts must cross the 50 eliminates short kickouts which is where a lot of this ultra defensive play begins again returning the skill of high fielding.
Our coaches from under 6 up teach our kids the essential skills of the game kicking, catching, blocking, shooting, toe lift, fist pass, the side step, the solo ( remember that, the good old toe tap, how often do you see that now). We want our players to express themselves, show individuality and flare, great players from the past are remembered for skill, individuality and flare but if things progress the way they are going all we will need is 15 runners who can pass the ball backwards

Slow the game down by having sidelines off the ground and you give players even more time to funnel back. Teams will just kick the ball out knowing it gives them a few seconds to regroup. It'd be like kicking to touch in rugby.

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 31, 2015, 10:33:48 PM
Slow the game down by having sidelines off the ground and you give players even more time to funnel back. Teams will just kick the ball out knowing it gives them a few seconds to regroup. It'd be like kicking to touch in rugby.

I very much doubt that would happen, more likely it would bring back man to man marking. Surely the last thing any team would want to do is give up possession in their own half

Quote from: ONeill on March 31, 2015, 10:05:19 PM
What counties are still playing a relatively traditional style - i.e. at least 3-4 forwards always in the opposition's half?

I don't know about Fermanagh but I'd say Ulster are not in the list.

Meath? Mayo?

Our forwards don't move around a whole lot.

Quote from: The Raven on March 31, 2015, 10:46:32 PM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 31, 2015, 10:33:48 PM
Slow the game down by having sidelines off the ground and you give players even more time to funnel back. Teams will just kick the ball out knowing it gives them a few seconds to regroup. It'd be like kicking to touch in rugby.

I very much doubt that would happen, more likely it would bring back man to man marking. Surely the last thing any team would want to do is give up possession in their own half

I was being a bit facetious with my remark about kicking the ball to touch like rugby, but waiting for sideline kicks and defensive free to be taken off the ground would definately give players time to regroup into defensive positions.

There was plenty of sh1te games years ago as well, people are looking through rose tinted glasses

There is nothing wrong with the GAA in the main, apart from the standard of referees which is very poor. Kerry got in to last years final at the expense of Mayo due to some poor decisions

Leave the game alone and it will keep evolving and take different paths in the process,  the main reason that the blanket/mass defence is highly prized is because teams who play against this system dont use fast quick ball in to the forwards, kicked from 40-50 yards which wont allow a defence to set up

Was at the Tyrone Donegal match at the weekend and the only way to describe Tyrone's attacking plan was laboured and lacking speed
Sideways across the pitch which played in to Donegals hand


QUICK FAST LONG BALLS IN TO SPACE 
   
Galway always played a beautiful brand of football but they once had the players to carry this out

Quote from: anfheardubh on March 31, 2015, 10:58:31 PM
There was plenty of sh1te games years ago as well, people are looking through rose tinted glasses

There is nothing wrong with the GAA in the main, apart from the standard of referees which is very poor. Kerry got in to last years final at the expense of Mayo due to some poor decisions

Leave the game alone and it will keep evolving and take different paths in the process,  the main reason that the blanket/mass defence is highly prized is because teams who play against this system dont use fast quick ball in to the forwards, kicked from 40-50 yards which wont allow a defence to set up

Was at the Tyrone Donegal match at the weekend and the only way to describe Tyrone's attacking plan was laboured and lacking speed
Sideways across the pitch which played in to Donegals hand


QUICK FAST LONG BALLS IN TO SPACE 
   
Galway always played a beautiful brand of football but they once had the players to carry this out

The whole point of the blanket defence is that there is no space! You look up and see 20+ players inside the 45m line and there is no space to hit. The only real way as pointed out previously is to go almost like for like and hope to win as you have better forwards.

Quote from: dublin7 on March 31, 2015, 11:24:24 PM

Quote from: anfheardubh on March 31, 2015, 10:58:31 PM
There was plenty of sh1te games years ago as well, people are looking through rose tinted glasses

There is nothing wrong with the GAA in the main, apart from the standard of referees which is very poor. Kerry got in to last years final at the expense of Mayo due to some poor decisions

Leave the game alone and it will keep evolving and take different paths in the process,  the main reason that the blanket/mass defence is highly prized is because teams who play against this system dont use fast quick ball in to the forwards, kicked from 40-50 yards which wont allow a defence to set up

Was at the Tyrone Donegal match at the weekend and the only way to describe Tyrone's attacking plan was laboured and lacking speed
Sideways across the pitch which played in to Donegals hand


QUICK FAST LONG BALLS IN TO SPACE 
   
Galway always played a beautiful brand of football but they once had the players to carry this out

The whole point of the blanket defence is that there is no space! You look up and see 20+ players inside the 45m line and there is no space to hit. The only real way as pointed out previously is to go almost like for like and hope to win as you have better forwards.

Mate at some stage within the game the team operating the blanket has to attack and if turned over  there is an abundance of space to attack

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 31, 2015, 10:57:51 PM

Quote from: The Raven on March 31, 2015, 10:46:32 PM

Quote from: BennyHarp on March 31, 2015, 10:33:48 PM
Slow the game down by having sidelines off the ground and you give players even more time to funnel back. Teams will just kick the ball out knowing it gives them a few seconds to regroup. It'd be like kicking to touch in rugby.

I very much doubt that would happen, more likely it would bring back man to man marking. Surely the last thing any team would want to do is give up possession in their own half

I was being a bit facetious with my remark about kicking the ball to touch like rugby, but waiting for sideline kicks and defensive free to be taken off the ground would definately give players time to regroup into defensive positions.

I cant believe anyone is proposing we go back to frees from the ground.  :-\
The reason that frees from the hand where brought in was to speed the game up and it has certain done that.
If anything, forcing a  team to take the free from the ground would encourage more fouling as it completly disrupts the attack and does away with the chance to use the quick free.

Quote from: anfheardubh on March 31, 2015, 11:29:57 PM

Quote from: dublin7 on March 31, 2015, 11:24:24 PM

Quote from: anfheardubh on March 31, 2015, 10:58:31 PM
There was plenty of sh1te games years ago as well, people are looking through rose tinted glasses

There is nothing wrong with the GAA in the main, apart from the standard of referees which is very poor. Kerry got in to last years final at the expense of Mayo due to some poor decisions

Leave the game alone and it will keep evolving and take different paths in the process,  the main reason that the blanket/mass defence is highly prized is because teams who play against this system dont use fast quick ball in to the forwards, kicked from 40-50 yards which wont allow a defence to set up

Was at the Tyrone Donegal match at the weekend and the only way to describe Tyrone's attacking plan was laboured and lacking speed
Sideways across the pitch which played in to Donegals hand


QUICK FAST LONG BALLS IN TO SPACE 
   
Galway always played a beautiful brand of football but they once had the players to carry this out

The whole point of the blanket defence is that there is no space! You look up and see 20+ players inside the 45m line and there is no space to hit. The only real way as pointed out previously is to go almost like for like and hope to win as you have better forwards.

Mate at some stage within the game the team operating the blanket has to attack and if turned over  there is an abundance of space to attack

If you get a turnover in their half of the field they still have most of their players behind the ball. Your idea only works if you can get a on turnover around your own 45 otherwise you are too far back to hit your forwards accurately. What  happens if the team with a blanket defence has a 2/3 point lead in the 2nd half. They are not going to push many men forward. If it was as simple as you suggest teams would have beaten the system long ago

There is a wile lot of chat on here about saturday's game being a lowscoring snorefest. And it was a snorefest. Though Ive seen plenty just as bad, at least the closeness of the scores kept me watching.

However would I not be correct in thinking that during that match on saturday night both teams had ample, relatively simple, chances to increase their score? Derry certainly butchered 2 goal chances in the first half and kicked a few easy wides and short ones. Dublin kicked at least 5 wides and at least 3 relatively straightforward kicks into the keepers hands at the start of the second half. The scoreline on either or both sides could easily have been doubled with a bit more accuracy or on a better night.

there's a real danger of common sense and reality breaking out here.

derry could/should have scored 1-10 easily. dublin probably a similar tally points wise.

there has been some crap talked this week.

What crap has been talked?

Is there a very defensive mindset creeping into the game now (or has already done so) as coaches realise that it's the best way to keep the score down?
Is this affecting the game as a spectacle?

If the answers to those two are yes, and yes, then I don't think there's been a lot of crap talked. I think it's a discussion on whether we need to do anything about it. Do we care about the spectacle, or do we only care about our team winning, and we are happy if every other game our team is not involved in is a dour, defensive arm wrestle?

Some people would fall into the latter category, especially coaches, and I can understand the sentiment. As I've said before, I'd prefer my team to win a crap game than lose a cracker. But that's a very narrow minded view of the world, based on your team.

As a neutral, which everyone is the vast majority of games they see on TV, or maybe even live, I would expect you like to see good open, intense, games. So how do we square that circle? How can we reconcile our team doing what it takes, but wanting to be entertained in games not featuring our team?

I don't think it's crap, I think it's an interesting, and complex enough, topic.

chill AZ. There has been crap talked. Alot of it misinformed and I don't want to rehash it.

There has been some good constructive stuff too of course.

It is a very complex topic, you're spot on there.

I asked yesterday for someone to define what the problem is exactly. I'm still waiting.

The problem with arugments like 'some games are not great to watch' simply don't work when you apply any type of analysis to it.

How do you fix something based on entertainment factor? How do you even measure entertainment?

Edit: going back to my last post, if the score had been Derry 1-10 Dublin 0-14, would we even be having this conversation? In different conditions and on another night that's what the score would have been.

Noone is calling for armageddon after the game in ballybofey which was equally as defensive as derry and dublin.

I'm not getting irate, don't worry :) I'm just curious as to what the 'crap' that has been talked is, because I think it's an interesting debate.

I think I have pointed out what most people would consider to be the problem statement.

"
Is there a very defensive mindset creeping into the game now (or has already done so) as coaches realise that it's the best way to keep the score down?
Is this affecting the game as a spectacle?
"

Most people posting here would answer yes to those two questions, and I said, the rest is a discussion on whether we need to do anything about it.

Some people obviously answer 'no' to the above, which is fine if that's their opinion.
Some people answer 'yes' but don't feel we need to do anything about it, either because they don't care about spectacle, or because they think it will work itself out through organic development. Again, that's fine no problem with it.
Some people answer yes, to the above, and also want to see changes in rules and are making some proposals. Some are mental, some are worthy of consideration in that context.

I don't see much 'crap' to be honest.

In the 60's Down reinvented the game playing the ball into space and to the wings for forwards to run onto.

They beat Kerry.

The whole place erupted.

"This is not Gaelic football" screamed the masses.

"Gaelic football is a manly pursuit whereby each ball is contested in the air by two strapping sons of Ireland," said whoever was the buck eejit equivalent of Joe Brolly in the mid 60's.

This is no different.

The only thing that has really changed since then is the amount of analysis and airtime given to it in all forms of media. We analyse everything to death and the same happens in rugby and soccer to a degree. However, we are worse because we think we're above all that.

Let the game be.

I'm off to get my hurl.

Absolutely, tactics change and innovations are made which make people react. I don't remember such a negative tactic though? And negative tactics, by their nature, are going to make the game a lower scoring, less exciting game. The down tactic, or the Kerry long ball into the twin towers, or the ulster handpassing game of the 90s were all predominantly offensive innovations or tactics.

If you're comfortable with it, then that's fine, that's a valid opinion. As I said before, my coaches hat wouldn't have a problem with it either. My spectator's hat says I'm not going to watch many games as a neutral if what's on offer is two teams playing with 13 in their own half, slow, lateral 'build ups' and low scoring.

Good posts by AZ as usual.
Last year at the Cavan v Ros Championship game in Breffni an ex Cavan footballer sat behind me.
He spent most of the first half saying " ahh that's not football at all ".
He left at half time saying he won't be back till teams start playing football again.
Don't know who he was but the Cavanites around me knew him well - in his fifties I'd say.
Coaches will do what they have to so it's up to administrators to look at rules and possible changes.
Mr Burns already looking into it I believe.

 http://www.sportsjoe.ie/gaa/if-joe-brolly-thinks-entertainment-is-derry-being-destroyed-fk-off-behind-closed-doors-and-watch-dublins-shooting-practice/19596 (http://www.sportsjoe.ie/gaa/if-joe-brolly-thinks-entertainment-is-derry-being-destroyed-fk-off-behind-closed-doors-and-watch-dublins-shooting-practice/19596)

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 10:29:19 AM
I'm not getting irate, don't worry :) I'm just curious as to what the 'crap' that has been talked is, because I think it's an interesting debate.

I think I have pointed out what most people would consider to be the problem statement.

"
Is there a very defensive mindset creeping into the game now (or has already done so) as coaches realise that it's the best way to keep the score down?
Is this affecting the game as a spectacle
Most people posting here would answer yes to those two questions, and I said, the rest is a discussion on whether we need to do anything about it.

Some people obviously answer 'no' to the above, which is fine if that's their opinion.
Some people answer 'yes' but don't feel we need to do anything about it, either because they don't care about spectacle, or because they think it will work itself out through organic development. Again, that's fine no problem with it.
Some people answer yes, to the above, and also want to see changes in rules and are making some proposals. Some are mental, some are worthy of consideration in that context.

I don't see much 'crap' to be honest.

Well I wouldnt agree with that last statement, though by no means has all the crap talked been done on this tread or even this board. Im thinking of some of the crap spouted by messrs Parkinson, Brolly and Burns as instances of people who have completely taken leave of their senses in reaction to seeing a crap match. Or maybe more accurately they have a column to write or some airtime to fill. There have been loads of people on here spouting dung about rules changes like  ;):

- widening the pitch
- narrowing the pitch
- having a smaller goalie
- keepin four players in the attacking half of the field at all times
- introducing the mark at kickouts
- introducing offside, corners and mucks and rauls
- taking frees off the ground
- having a big overweight lad at full forward
- getting some pompous ass to have a review
- all handpasses must go forward

Ive no problem if people have an issue with spectacle but all this 'death of gaelic football' ballacks is crap and i dont see how you can deny that, as it would sicken anybody's hoop.

Who said it's the death of gaelic football? I didn't see that.

As for the rules suggestions, yeah, some are mad, but some are more realistic, and whether we should apply any rule changes kind of comes back to your position on those two questions. You are in the Yes to #1 and No to #2 it appears. That's grand and I'd never tell you you were talking ballacks :)

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 11:26:20 AM
Who said it's the death of gaelic football? I didn't see that.

As for the rules suggestions, yeah, some are mad, but some are more realistic, and whether we should apply any rule changes kind of comes back to your position on those two questions. You are in the Yes to #1 and No to #2 it appears. That's grand and I'd never tell you you were talking ballacks :)

the new chairman of the GAA rules committee!!!!

that's one piece of crap I was referring to and didn't want rehashed, but since we're here and all...

I was referring to this thread. There's a pile of crap spoken every day in the media, but I'm talking about the discussion here.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 11:26:20 AM
Who said it's the death of gaelic football? I didn't see that.

As for the rules suggestions, yeah, some are mad, but some are more realistic, and whether we should apply any rule changes kind of comes back to your position on those two questions. You are in the Yes to #1 and No to #2 it appears. That's grand and I'd never tell you you were talking ballacks :)

Emmmm AZ I don't think #1 & 2 were even suggested on here, as I made most of the list up as it's April 1st. Though the fact that it would hard to pick out the made up ones from the things peeps have been suggesting on this and other threads might say everything about the level of debate.

My questions 1 and 2 i mean!

i.e. you would agree that there is an influx of defensive tactics but
No, you wouldn't agree it's affecting the spectacle.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 11:45:14 AM
My questions 1 and 2 i mean!

i.e. you would agree that there is an influx of defensive tactics but
No, you wouldn't agree it's affecting the spectacle.

I think there has been a huge increase in defensive tactics and yes it as made the game poorer to watch in alot of cases (but certainly not all)
What i wouldnt do though is look for the rules of the game to be changed off the back of a national league game (largely a dead rubber in terms of importance of result), played in horrific conditions in march.
I know its not the only game to be ultra defensive, but its the one thart has sparked all the debate.
The reaction to it has been magnified by the fact that :
1. it was live on tv
2. dublin where involved

With respect AZ those aren't the issues. It's the level of debate surrounding these issues that is the problem. The weeping and gnashing of teeth may have been replaced by the twitter spat but it's equally as wearisome.

The proposed outcome: a football review committee who need to "DO SOMETHING" is equally tedious.

Last year we were all talking about how great the Kerry-Mayo Semi Finals were. I'm sure this year there will be some great and some poor matches too - as with every year. Some people are really over-reacting here mainly because of one poor game played in terrible conditions.

Stats have showed scoring is at an all time high and fouls at an all time low. Derry Dublin game has caused this and it was played in monsoon conditions. Social media generation, exaggeration and hyperbole.

Do ye think the only dour, negative game this year is the Dublin - Derry game? If so, I think ye are mad. It's obviously the one with a big exposure that's caused the shit storm to break out, but I think this has been getting more prevalent every year, as more and more teams adopt the 'if you can't beat them, join them' maxim.

What's the Provincial breakdown between the all is not well and the all is grand camps??
Latter mainly from Ulster I suspect ;D

As I said scoring is at an all time high. And I never said it was only low scoring game but there's being plenty of high scoring games too. People just want to highlight whatever backs their blinkered opinion. And where a team is inferior to the opposition why wouldn't they play defensive tactics. Everyone should just hoof it in and attack and we'll let Dublin Kerry etc.... have their annual procession to all Ireland finals. All suggestions on how to change rules to stop negative tactics but no mention why they were used in first place.

I don't think scoring is at an all time high. I read somewhere that the scoring spiked last year, but has reverted back to roughly the average now. Time of year might have a lot to do with it too. Hard to score on a shitty day.

As I said, I see it as an interesting debate. I think it's undeniable that more teams are adopting the defensive approach, as their go-to tactic, and that will inevitably lead to lower scoring games. It's not this year it has started, but it's spreading.

I agree it's spreading but the gap between the elite and also rans has never being bigger. When more counties have a chance of winning an All Ireland in hurling than football then times have indeed changed. Negative tactics are a result of this. How many full time coaches in Dublin compared to Leitrim???? This needs to be adressed in order to marrow the gap and therefore weaker counties might feel they can compete.

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

I was at the Kildare game. I didn't think it was a classic by any means. It was my first exposure to Donegal under Jimmy 'in the flesh' and I thought they were so cagey it was unreal. It had a good finish alright, but was a harbinger.

Quote from: J70 on April 01, 2015, 01:17:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

Last years Dublin game was a great game due to how Dublin played rather than Donegal, if Dublin played as Donegal then it could have been awful. Donegal have been involved in some of the worst games of all time too which is unfortunately the way things seem to be going.

Quote from: Zulu on April 01, 2015, 01:51:42 PM

Quote from: J70 on April 01, 2015, 01:17:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

Last years Dublin game was a great game due to how Dublin played rather than Donegal, if Dublin played as Donegal then it could have been awful. Donegal have been involved in some of the worst games of all time too which is unfortunately the way things seem to be going.

I'm with J70 on this one, Donegal were superb, if only they played like that more often.
That semi final was  an 'awesome' experience. If you were to begrudge Donegal that performance then there's objectivity serious lacking.
But they were back to type for the final.

I'm not saying this is everyone that's criticising the way teams play but a lot of the criticism in coming from anti-Northern bias. The truth is that many don't like to see Ulster teams coming down here and beating most teams. It comes from their hated of nordies in general. The style of football is just an excuse.

Some amount of chips on showlders there Leo ::)

No chips, I'm not from Ulster.

I presume you are Laois invoking the great Leo.

Quote from: Zulu on April 01, 2015, 01:51:42 PM

Quote from: J70 on April 01, 2015, 01:17:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

Last years Dublin game was a great game due to how Dublin played rather than Donegal, if Dublin played as Donegal then it could have been awful. Donegal have been involved in some of the worst games of all time too which is unfortunately the way things seem to be going.

You're wasting your time Zulu. Asking an ulster-man to change his siege mentality view on the merits of defensive Gaelic Football is like asking him to revoke the Good Friday Agreement.

Discussions on how to make the game more expansive and more appealing are best left to those who enjoy coaching skills at training. Where training a team excites the coach. Most of the coaches up in Ulster get up early in the morning, look into the mirror and smile just to get it out of the way for the day.

Just in time to go down to the local club's mini-leagues and teach johnny where to stand in own half of the pitch instead of how to kick with both feet or tell him just to hand-pass the ball off the wall- because that's what he will spend most of the game-time doing.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 07:04:32 PM
I presume you are Laois invoking the great Leo.

Leo, the main man!

I think my point has been proven by that anti Ulster rant above!

Quote
You're wasting your time Zulu. Asking an ulster-man to change his siege mentality view on the merits of defensive Gaelic Football is like asking him to revoke the Good Friday Agreement.

Discussions on how to make the game more expansive and more appealing are best left to those who enjoy coaching skills at training. Where training a team excites the coach. Most of the coaches up in Ulster get up early in the morning, look into the mirror and smile just to get it out of the way for the day.

Just in time to go down to the local club's mini-leagues and teach johnny where to stand in own half of the pitch instead of how to kick with both feet or tell him just to hand-pass the ball off the wall- because that's what he will spend most of the game-time doing.

You're an awful riser Indiana, but I love that line 😄

Quote from: Teo Lurley on April 01, 2015, 06:36:44 PM
I'm not saying this is everyone that's criticising the way teams play but a lot of the criticism in coming from anti-Northern bias. The truth is that many don't like to see Ulster teams coming down here and beating most teams. It comes from their hated of nordies in general. The style of football is just an excuse.

In fairness Leo ulster's reign is over when you look at the roll of honour since 2008.

I've no hatred of Nordies -some of the my best friends are from the North.

However when it comes to this they can't see the wood from the trees. Even my Northern friends.

the blanket defence to an Ulster GAA man is like turban to a Sikh

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 07:04:32 PM
I presume you are Laois invoking the great Leo.

Great player is right. He put an end to Dermot Earley's managerial career at inter county level in 1996.

He has been exiled in Kildare for the last 10 years or so. I believe he's managing Leixlip this year.

Quote from: INDIANA on April 01, 2015, 08:04:09 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on April 01, 2015, 06:36:44 PM
I'm not saying this is everyone that's criticising the way teams play but a lot of the criticism in coming from anti-Northern bias. The truth is that many don't like to see Ulster teams coming down here and beating most teams. It comes from their hated of nordies in general. The style of football is just an excuse.

In fairness Leo ulster's reign is over when you look at the roll of honour since 2008.

I've no hatred of Nordies -some of the my best friends are from the North.

However when it comes to this they can't see the wood from the trees. Even my Northern friends.

the blanket defence to an Ulster GAA man is like turban to a Sikh

Ha, I love this line!

Good to see that its not Derry ruining football anyways!!

Absolutely.  1 damage limitation game against the professionals in their home super stadium and the amount of column inches written about Derry being the death of football as wee know it !

Up Derry

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 01, 2015, 07:18:34 PM

Quote
You're wasting your time Zulu. Asking an ulster-man to change his siege mentality view on the merits of defensive Gaelic Football is like asking him to revoke the Good Friday Agreement.

Discussions on how to make the game more expansive and more appealing are best left to those who enjoy coaching skills at training. Where training a team excites the coach. Most of the coaches up in Ulster get up early in the morning, look into the mirror and smile just to get it out of the way for the day.

Just in time to go down to the local club's mini-leagues and teach johnny where to stand in own half of the pitch instead of how to kick with both feet or tell him just to hand-pass the ball off the wall- because that's what he will spend most of the game-time doing.

You're an awful riser Indiana, but I love that line 😄

Even if it isn't original.

Quote from: INDIANA on April 01, 2015, 07:05:53 PM

Quote from: Zulu on April 01, 2015, 01:51:42 PM

Quote from: J70 on April 01, 2015, 01:17:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

Last years Dublin game was a great game due to how Dublin played rather than Donegal, if Dublin played as Donegal then it could have been awful. Donegal have been involved in some of the worst games of all time too which is unfortunately the way things seem to be going.

You're wasting your time Zulu. Asking an ulster-man to change his siege mentality view on the merits of defensive Gaelic Football is like asking him to revoke the Good Friday Agreement.

Discussions on how to make the game more expansive and more appealing are best left to those who enjoy coaching skills at training. Where training a team excites the coach. Most of the coaches up in Ulster get up early in the morning, look into the mirror and smile just to get it out of the way for the day.

Just in time to go down to the local club's mini-leagues and teach johnny where to stand in own half of the pitch instead of how to kick with both feet or tell him just to hand-pass the ball off the wall- because that's what he will spend most of the game-time doing.

The discussion was about whether or not Donegal, in their current guise, had been involved in classic games. That is all.

But nice rant! ;D

Quote from: Zulu on April 01, 2015, 01:51:42 PM

Quote from: J70 on April 01, 2015, 01:17:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:42:14 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:38:32 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:37:17 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on March 31, 2015, 12:35:00 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on March 31, 2015, 12:33:56 PM
Armagh v Tyrone in the 00s wasn't in the same parish as what we've seen in the past couple of years.

Donegal have been apart of some classics also.

They have. Miles apart.

What teams are you talking about?

Sorry, a lame attempt at a joke. You said Donegal had been 'apart' of some classics. I said they had been miles apart from classics. :)

I honestly can't think of a great game involving Donegal of the last few years off the top of my head. Maybe the semi final against Kerry was good. The Dublin game wasn't bad because of Dublin's kamikaze tactics. Not classics though.

Cork semi 2012 was a classic. Arguably one of the county's best ever performances.

Kildare quarter in 2011, after a dour first half hour,  was a superb match.

As for the Dubs game last year, go back and read the comments in that thread to see how people enjoyed it. Doesn't make it a classic, but how many classic games have any other teams been in?

Last years Dublin game was a great game due to how Dublin played rather than Donegal, if Dublin played as Donegal then it could have been awful. Donegal have been involved in some of the worst games of all time too which is unfortunately the way things seem to be going.

And if Donegal hadn't thrown men forward when they won the ball, unlike 2011, it could also have been awful.

But anyway, which worst games of all time?

The 2011 semi.

2011 Antrim game was poor enough, as was Down 2013, but no worse than many other games not involving us.

This year's Monaghan game in the league was certainly a low point (as was your game last week).

That aside, I'm struggling to think of "worst game of all time" contenders we've been involved in.

My personal nadir was the appalling first round game we played against Fermanagh in Ulster in 2003. Not a blanket in sight, but the quality of the football from both sides was simply shocking.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 01, 2015, 08:59:50 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on April 01, 2015, 08:04:09 PM

Quote from: Teo Lurley on April 01, 2015, 06:36:44 PM
I'm not saying this is everyone that's criticising the way teams play but a lot of the criticism in coming from anti-Northern bias. The truth is that many don't like to see Ulster teams coming down here and beating most teams. It comes from their hated of nordies in general. The style of football is just an excuse.

In fairness Leo ulster's reign is over when you look at the roll of honour since 2008.

I've no hatred of Nordies -some of the my best friends are from the North.

However when it comes to this they can't see the wood from the trees. Even my Northern friends.

the blanket defence to an Ulster GAA man is like turban to a Sikh

Ha, I love this line!

Some of my best friends from the North are black.

Posted elsewhere on the board, but a decent peice in opposition to Brollys hyperbole

https://ewanmackenna.wordpress.com/2015/04/07/agendas-over-analysis-are-the-real-reason-for-footballs-crisis-talk/ (https://ewanmackenna.wordpress.com/2015/04/07/agendas-over-analysis-are-the-real-reason-for-footballs-crisis-talk/)

Ewan McKenna believes in nothing, and has no opinion on anything. He is simply a contrarian, who takes up the opposite position to the popular view on everything. This is not because he genuinely believes the opposite, in my view, but because he wants people to argue with him and increase his notoriety. He is the Yin to Brolly's Yang.

I dislike that approach to punditry, and both McKenna's and Brolly's style are good examples of a type of publicity seeking argumentativeness that I find very annoying and off-putting. I don't read anything McKenna writes or tweets anymore because it's vacuous. It doesn't mean anything. It's not a heartfelt opinion, it's the verbal equivalent of poking a wasps nest while wearing a protective suit. The consequences of what you do won't hurt you because you don't care about it, but the pokee gets irate and upset so it's a pleasant distraction for you.

Anyone suggested giving the players sticks, reducing the size of the ball, stuffing it etc?

Anyway. I was at my first football match in ages recently (https://deiseach.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/football-not-so-crazy/) and there didn't seem to be much wrong with the game at that level. It's no disrespect to Waterford and Antrim to say they don't have the protein-induced fitness of the top order teams, so it meant that even though there was plenty of blanket defence tried there was also scope for players to find space and take their shot - being there really does make you appreciate the skill of getting that ball over the bar. Is the simple solution not to reduce the size of teams to 14 or even 13? Maybe allow more changes in the style of Aussie Rules if that's too disruptive, although that would keep players fresh for yet more defensive duty.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 08, 2015, 10:02:20 AM
Ewan McKenna believes in nothing, and has no opinion on anything. He is simply a contrarian, who takes up the opposite position to the popular view on everything. This is not because he genuinely believes the opposite, in my view, but because he wants people to argue with him and increase his notoriety. He is the Yin to Brolly's Yang.

I dislike that approach to punditry, and both McKenna's and Brolly's style are good examples of a type of publicity seeking argumentativeness that I find very annoying and off-putting. I don't read anything McKenna writes or tweets anymore because it's vacuous. It doesn't mean anything. It's not a heartfelt opinion, it's the verbal equivalent of poking a wasps nest while wearing a protective suit. The consequences of what you do won't hurt you because you don't care about it, but the pokee gets irate and upset so it's a pleasant distraction for you.

He's not a journalist I'm overly familiar with but I can't believe he spent the first half of his article having a go at Joe Brolly in the exact same disrespectful manner for which Brolly has been accused. In the second half he analyses the statistics which contradict Brolly's notion of a game in the doldrums which is fair enough but his attack in the first instance is personal and that's just the criticism that has been levelled against Brolly on this board. Was he deliberately being ironic or is that a step beyond the mainstream vacuous type of punditry we're now subject to?

Ewan spent months on Twitter lambasting anyone who did not denounce RTÉ for their failure to ask the hard questions of drugs cheat Cian O'Connor. All that time he had reference in his profile to how he was ghost-writing the autobiography of Bill O'Herlihy! Neck, jockey, bollocks.

Cd, that's what I mean. He will say ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING that he thinks will get a reaction. He will publicly slate things people enjoy, just to get people responding to him so he can stay relevant (in his own mind). An exampls And this is not healthy challenging of the status quo, this is just infantile 'wumming' which is grand if you are a poster on GAA Board, but not if you are supposedly a professional journalist.

I respect journalists who have a conviction or an opinion which is genuinely held, no matter whether I agree with them or not. I dislike the style of journalism that McKenna exhibits. "Opinion, of course I have an opinion, in fact I have loads of them even on the same subject, depending on who I'm arguing with". As I said, vacuous.

Quote from: deiseach on April 08, 2015, 10:48:59 AM
Ewan spent months on Twitter lambasting anyone who did not denounce RTÉ for their failure to ask the hard questions of drugs cheat Cian O'Connor. All that time he had reference in his profile to how he was ghost-writing the autobiography of Bill O'Herlihy! Neck, jockey, bollocks.

What ever the opinion on McKenna, its good to see someone quoting stats that can be held up to counter all the arguments put forward for rule changes and the 'death of football' rubbish.

As far as I know, the 'Death of Football' phrase was a stupid one used by Jarlath Burns, which is very worrying when you consider his position. As I said on the other thread (and I think this discussion is duplicated in fairness) this sort of hyperbole is not useful.

Football is not dead. It's not even sick. But we have to evaluate the current tactical direction it is taking and see if it is something we need to worry about in the future. If games become stale, turgid affairs, as teams get better and better at the defensive set ups, then crowds and neutral interest will be affected in my view.

So all we need to do as an organisation is to assess the current trend towards defensive tactical set ups, and form a view on whether we need to interfere or just let the game find its level organically. If there are a load of low scoring defensive struggles in the championship, you might find that the majority of GAA people want to loosen it up a bit.

We wouldn't be unique in that by the way, Soccer, American Football, Rugby, Basketball and hell, even Baseball, have made far more rule changes and tweaks to encourage attacking and scoring than they ever have to protect or encourage the defenders.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 08, 2015, 11:08:52 AM
As far as I know, the 'Death of Football' phrase was a stupid one used by Jarlath Burns, which is very worrying when you consider his position. As I said on the other thread (and I think this discussion is duplicated in fairness) this sort of hyperbole is not useful.

Football is not dead. It's not even sick. But we have to evaluate the current tactical direction it is taking and see if it is something we need to worry about in the future. If games become stale, turgid affairs, as teams get better and better at the defensive set ups, then crowds and neutral interest will be affected in my view.

So all we need to do as an organisation is to assess the current trend towards defensive tactical set ups, and form a view on whether we need to interfere or just let the game find its level organically. If there are a load of low scoring defensive struggles in the championship, you might find that the majority of GAA people want to loosen it up a bit.

We wouldn't be unique in that by the way, Soccer, American Football, Rugby, Basketball and hell, even Baseball, have made far more rule changes and tweaks to encourage attacking and scoring than they ever have to protect or encourage the defenders.

Thats fair enough, but I think its definatly something they should be monitoring over the course of the championship, not just proposing drastic rule changes off the back of a poor national league game played in terrible conditions.
If the whole championship turns out to be a lowscoring defensive struggle (and i mean the WHOLE championship, not just one or two poor games) then by all means look at ways of adressing this.
The thing is, the game over the last few years ISNT any lower scoring than in the past ( infact the oposite), and has LESS fouling in it than it ever did, so alot of the arguemnts made dont stack up.
Contary to popular opinion, i dont think its any less skillfull either.
What we have now is a tactic, like the 3rd midfielder, the attacking half backs, the sweeper and all the other tactical trends that have went before it. Lets see how the game itself deals with it before the baby is thrown out with the bathwater.

That's a fair enough position. I certainly think it merits monitoring. More teams are defaulting to this position, and more teams are getting better at it. This is not just 2015, or even 2014, 2013 or 2012. It's been spreading over the past 5 or 6 years. Scoring averages meant nothing when we discussed the black card's impact apparently, but now they are sacrosanct when discussing this issue.

I think the evidence of your eyes, and your enjoyment of games as a neutral (rather than the tension and excitement when your team are involved) will be the real indicator of whether we have an issue, and so far my gut feel is that we are at the very least brewing one. We've always had bad games and good games, but normally that was determined by performances on the day, or poor (or good) skill levels. Systematic choking of space and eliminating risk is what is in question today, and it may take some time for an offensive tactic to become effective in beating it. We can either wait and hope that happens, or try and legislate against it in the rule book.

Assuming, as you say, that the pattern is clearly spreading and impacting the spectacle. If not, then it's all academic, as I said.

Also, I think we should be careful to separate this topic from the cynical, fouling discussion. This is a perfectly legal, legitimate tactic. I haven't heard anyone suggest the blanket is responsible for more fouls, at least directly. To be honest if the blanket was causing fouls, it would probably be done away with because the nature of the blanket means a lot of those fouls would be in scoring range and would be self defeating.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 08, 2015, 11:31:32 AM
Also, I think we should be careful to separate this topic from the cynical, fouling discussion. This is a perfectly legal, legitimate tactic. I haven't heard anyone suggest the blanket is responsible for more fouls, at least directly. To be honest if the blanket was causing fouls, it would probably be done away with because the nature of the blanket means a lot of those fouls would be in scoring range and would be self defeating.

true, but the two things that are constantly held up as important for a 'good' game are high scoring count and low foul count (i dont necessarily agree with this) and conversely, this is what is ued to berate a 'poor' game, if its low scoring and full of fouling.
The problem is, most of the rest of what is good or bad in a game is very subjective.

Not sure where you are seeing that in relation to this discussion though. I agree that a free ridden game is probably not a great spectacle, but I don't think people are equating the blanket with a load of frees. I might be wrong of course.

A low scoring game, which is low scoring because the teams are constantly fouling in the opponents half (on a turnover) would be a bad game in my view :) To be honest that's what I think the black card has helped reduce.

I take Benny's point that the corollary may be that teams are funneling back into the blanket defense rather than cynically fouling to stop momentum, but again, that's a slight tangent in my view.

The blanket (for want of a better word), in my opinion, if carried out correctly will indeed reduce fouls by filling spaces so attacking players don't even venture into that area, reduces the need for tackling and therefore potential fouls. Tyrone's foul count during this league for example has been very low. The key to the whole system is attacking in numbers at pace, which is the aspect of the blanket that most teams haven't perfected yet. Donegals goal v Mayo at the weekend in my opinion was an example of this at its best, who cares if the ball isn't kicked. (1min 7secs in) http://www.gaa.ie/gaa-news-and-videos/daily-news/1/0804151023-video-allianz-league-superscores-week-10/

Also, some the long range points on display in that video last weekend are superb. Maybe teams are working on this, if this becomes a bigger feature if our game as a result of the "blanket" then I'm all for it.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 08, 2015, 11:40:56 AM
The blanket (for want of a better word), in my opinion, if carried out correctly will indeed reduce fouls by filling spaces so attacking players don't even venture into that area, reduces the need for tackling and therefore potential fouls. Tyrone's foul count during this league for example has been very low. The key to the whole system is attacking in numbers at pace, which is the aspect of the blanket that most teams haven't perfected yet. Donegals goal v Mayo at the weekend in my opinion was an example of this at its best, who cares if the ball isn't kicked. (1min 7secs in) http://www.gaa.ie/gaa-news-and-videos/daily-news/1/0804151023-video-allianz-league-superscores-week-10/

Also, some the long range points on display in that video last weekend are superb. Maybe teams are working on this, if this becomes a bigger feature if our game as a result of the "blanket" then I'm all for it.

I think thats a fair point Benny, the blanket defensive could well develop the skills of the game  (such as long range score taking) as much as stifle them.
I actually think the quality of tackling (also a skill of teh game) has improved alot of the past few years.

I agree to an extent Benny. I think the issue we may see as (if) this continues to spread is there will be less scope to counter attack as other teams leave men at home. Dublin v Donegal was probably the ideal game for a blanket theorist. Dublin attacked in waves, and as each attack was repulsed Donegal burned them with speedy counter attacks against an undermanned rearguard. Result = Devastation for Dublin.

The final was the halfway house which made it a poor game to watch, but gave Kerry a good chance to beat it. They set up normally, kept their half backs at home when they attacked, even though there was no Donegal player in the parish, and were already in place to cut off counter attacks before they could do damage. They also funnelled their half forwards back after the turnover to supplement the traditional 6. Having 6 men back when you are attacking, marking 1 or 2 Donegal lads looks defensive, but is perfectly sensible and pragmatic.

The nightmare scenario for a spectacle is when both sides line out with withdrawn half forwards and full forwards leaving only one or two in the opponents half. This leads to the defenses completely outnumbering the attackers, on both sides, and counter attacks fading to nothing like a wave washing up on a sandy shore. Jerome posted some schools game up north recently and it was putrid. I think one team held the ball, going back and forward, for something like 3 and half minutes before they finally lost it.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 08, 2015, 11:49:53 AM
I agree to an extent Benny. I think the issue we may see as (if) this continues to spread is there will be less scope to counter attack as other teams leave men at home. Dublin v Donegal was probably the ideal game for a blanket theorist. Dublin attacked in waves, and as each attack was repulsed Donegal burned them with speedy counter attacks against an undermanned rearguard. Result = Devastation for Dublin.

The final was the halfway house which made it a poor game to watch, but gave Kerry a good chance to beat it. They set up normally, kept their half backs at home when they attacked, even though there was no Donegal player in the parish, and were already in place to cut off counter attacks before they could do damage. They also funnelled their half forwards back after the turnover to supplement the traditional 6. Having 6 men back when you are attacking, marking 1 or 2 Donegal lads looks defensive, but is perfectly sensible and pragmatic.

The nightmare scenario for a spectacle is when both sides line out with withdrawn half forwards and full forwards leaving only one or two in the opponents half. This leads to the defenses completely outnumbering the attackers, on both sides, and counter attacks fading to nothing like a wave washing up on a sandy shore. Jerome posted some schools game up north recently and it was putrid. I think one team held the ball, going back and forward, for something like 3 and half minutes before they finally lost it.

I agree AZ and the biggest problem is that this being encouraged at school level and underage where stifling the opponent has become the main tactic. What you refer in Jerome's post is at schools level the kids don't have the tactical or positional sense to know when or how to break forward in numbers. This is the difficult part of a defensive system, the easy thing to do is just funnel everyone back, hence we have some putrid games, especially at club level. Kerry are leading the way with tactics to overcome this and attacking the wings, hugging the sideline and moving the ball quickly across the front if the blanket looking for an opening to attack, seems to be the way forward.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 08, 2015, 11:40:56 AM
The blanket (for want of a better word), in my opinion, if carried out correctly will indeed reduce fouls by filling spaces so attacking players don't even venture into that area, reduces the need for tackling and therefore potential fouls. Tyrone's foul count during this league for example has been very low. The key to the whole system is attacking in numbers at pace, which is the aspect of the blanket that most teams haven't perfected yet. Donegals goal v Mayo at the weekend in my opinion was an example of this at its best, who cares if the ball isn't kicked. (1min 7secs in) http://www.gaa.ie/gaa-news-and-videos/daily-news/1/0804151023-video-allianz-league-superscores-week-10/

Also, some the long range points on display in that video last weekend are superb. Maybe teams are working on this, if this becomes a bigger feature if our game as a result of the "blanket" then I'm all for it.

While I'd agree with you to a point, I do care if there is no kicking in football. AZ has posted a lot of things I agree with, the issue isn't simply if a game is good or bad but how football is developing as a sport. I enjoyed the Tyrone Kerry game last weekend and there were some magnificent scores in the game but even then you could see the seeds of a game is going down a worrying path. On more than one occasion the teams attacked unhindered to past the halfway line and then it turned into rugby with the ball going across the field back and forth until a deep runner 'broke the line'.

Likewise I was struck by how similar some attacks in the Tyrone/Kerry game and Mayo/Donegal were, with 40/50 yard passes backwards when teams were having difficulty breaking their opponents defensive lines. At one point in the Mayo game a long ball kicked back to Lee Keegan went over his head and after he went back to pick it up he failed initially so had to pick it the second time. As we watched this at no point could you see a Donegal man on the screen. I think we have to be worried about that trend. Yes, there were long balls into the full forward line too (Cavanagh and Donaghy spring to mind) but there was a definite trend to both games of short quickest, minimal defending high up and rugby style attacking in the final third. If the quality of scoring in Omagh wasn't so high it could have been an awful game too.

I learned my football through the 70's and 80's when Gaelic Football was predominantly a man to man game where the primary emphasis was to deliver fast accurate ball into your forwards who were expected to get out in front and win their own ball. The only defensive tactic we ever employed apart from man to man marking was if we were playing against a wind in the second half and had something to defend,  we brought a corner forward back to play sweeper between full and half back lines.

The only other sport I see with a similar nature to this now is Aussie Rules. Looking at gaelic football now it seems to have much more in common with rugby than anything else. When defending having 13 players behind the ball with tackling being done by at least 3 defenders to the man in possession and when in possession moving the ball laterally until you find an opportunity to break the defensive line and get a score.

Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

The pitch would be alot bigger for a satrt which would make it more difficult

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
I learned my football through the 70's and 80's when Gaelic Football was predominantly a man to man game where the primary emphasis was to deliver fast accurate ball into your forwards who were expected to get out in front and win their own ball. The only defensive tactic we ever employed apart from man to man marking was if we were playing against a wind in the second half and had something to defend,  we brought a corner forward back to play sweeper between full and half back lines.

The only other sport I see with a similar nature to this now is Aussie Rules. Looking at gaelic football now it seems to have much more in common with rugby than anything else. When defending having 13 players behind the ball with tackling being done by at least 3 defenders to the man in possession and when in possession moving the ball laterally until you find an opportunity to break the defensive line and get a score.

Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

Pretty sure I read an article which said they did go through something similar for a while. I'll try to find it as I can't remember if there were rule changes or whether it was proving ultimately ineffective.

Tyrone and Donegal played today and it finished 4-13 a piece. And hardly a word about it.

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Quote from: Ohtoohtobe on April 12, 2015, 03:20:05 AM

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Good post.

Gaelic football's biggest rival for crowds is hurling.
So negative comment doesn't really drive crowds to another sport.
Rugby is not a competitor for the majority of counties and neither is soccer.
Would I be right in saying that the AFL has much more control over media issues than the GAA?
Eg pundits, managers, players

There is very little insightful punditry in the GAA that does an indepth analysis of games. English soccer also has the same problem.
If you read papers in Italy, Spain or the USA the sports writers will really breakdown games and teams and explain what coaches and players were doing.
The same with tb shows. But they don't tend to cast judgement on the tactics usef

mnf on sky sports with carragher and Neville are really  good at analysis.other than that its generally rubbish

Quote from: Ohtoohtobe on April 12, 2015, 03:20:05 AM

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Very Good post.

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 08:56:50 AM

Quote from: Ohtoohtobe on April 12, 2015, 03:20:05 AM

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Good post.

Gaelic football's biggest rival for crowds is hurling.
So negative comment doesn't really drive crowds to another sport.
Rugby is not a competitor for the majority of counties and neither is soccer.
Would I be right in saying that the AFL has much more control over media issues than the GAA?
Eg pundits, managers, players

There is very little insightful punditry in the GAA that does an indepth analysis of games. English soccer also has the same problem.
If you read papers in Italy, Spain or the USA the sports writers will really breakdown games and teams and explain what coaches and players were doing.
The same with tb shows. But they don't tend to cast judgement on the tactics usef

Clearly you are not from Ulster, Connacht or North Leinster. Hurling the biggest rival for crowds to Football. That made me laugh!

So we're saying that we need to commoditise the sport more and with that include the punditry within the productisation of the game. Oh that would be class.  :-\

Plastic paddies everywhere

Quote from: From the Bunker on April 12, 2015, 10:31:23 AM

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 08:56:50 AM

Quote from: Ohtoohtobe on April 12, 2015, 03:20:05 AM

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Good post.

Gaelic football's biggest rival for crowds is hurling.
So negative comment doesn't really drive crowds to another sport.
Rugby is not a competitor for the majority of counties and neither is soccer.
Would I be right in saying that the AFL has much more control over media issues than the GAA?
Eg pundits, managers, players

There is very little insightful punditry in the GAA that does an indepth analysis of games. English soccer also has the same problem.
If you read papers in Italy, Spain or the USA the sports writers will really breakdown games and teams and explain what coaches and players were doing.
The same with tb shows. But they don't tend to cast judgement on the tactics usef

Clearly you are not from Ulster, Connacht or North Leinster. Hurling the biggest rival for crowds to Football. That made me laugh!

Most GAA people don't go near rugby or soccer games

Are you nuts? There's a huge crossover between GAA and rugby/soccer fans.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 11:11:23 AM
Are you nuts? There's a huge crossover between GAA and rugby/soccer fans.

Maybe, maybe not.
In the likes of Galway there is a definite soccer crowd (just about), rugby, football and hurling crowd.
My original point about the analysis of GAA games being very poor still stands

Oh I agree the analysis of football is incredibly poor and only the GAA seems to be viewed through the prism of whether it was entertaining or not - "was it a good championship lads?"

That's not to say I agree with the 'it's a results business' crowd either, sport is entertainment too and we should be more innovative and adventurous in our tactics and mindset. 15 men behind the ball is evidence of a tactically bankrupt mind.

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 10:51:04 AM

Quote from: From the Bunker on April 12, 2015, 10:31:23 AM

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 08:56:50 AM

Quote from: Ohtoohtobe on April 12, 2015, 03:20:05 AM

Quote from: fearglasmor on April 08, 2015, 02:00:51 PM
Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

I live in Australia and watch a fair bit. Scoring rates are far down on what they used to be and some games turn into a terrible rolling maul where scores are at a premium and 15 men are back for both sides.

The difference is that they don't use the odd bad game to destroy their sport's image because they don't have a couple of loudmouth pundits determined to make a name for themselves.

Gaelic football is the only sport I know of that is subject to this. There are boring games in soccer, rugby and AFL but people can write them off for what they are - the odd boring game.

In Australia they know they're in a battle with other codes and leap at every opportunity for self-promotion. To me Gaelic football is an infinitely superior watch to any of the three sports I've mentioned and yet everyone is talking about it like it's on its death bed.

The reality is that there are more classic games every summer now than any time I can remember with the possible exceptions of the mid-2000s. Watch Dublin-Donegal or Kerry-Mayo last year or Kerry-Dublin 2013. Then tell me which games from 1980-1995 you thought were better. What do people want from football? Every game to be 2-20 each?

Good post.

Gaelic football's biggest rival for crowds is hurling.
So negative comment doesn't really drive crowds to another sport.
Rugby is not a competitor for the majority of counties and neither is soccer.
Would I be right in saying that the AFL has much more control over media issues than the GAA?
Eg pundits, managers, players

There is very little insightful punditry in the GAA that does an indepth analysis of games. English soccer also has the same problem.
If you read papers in Italy, Spain or the USA the sports writers will really breakdown games and teams and explain what coaches and players were doing.
The same with tb shows. But they don't tend to cast judgement on the tactics usef

Clearly you are not from Ulster, Connacht or North Leinster. Hurling the biggest rival for crowds to Football. That made me laugh!

Most GAA people don't go near rugby or soccer games

Not the case in Donegal at least, where even the senior county players would be lining out for their local soccer teams in the winters, at least till very recently.

In my years living and playing soccer in Dublin, I also came across the senior county player on the field, even at my modest level.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 12:10:40 PM
Oh I agree the analysis of football is incredibly poor and only the GAA seems to be viewed through the prism of whether it was entertaining or not - "was it a good championship lads?"

That's not to say I agree with the 'it's a results business' crowd either, sport is entertainment too and we should be more innovative and adventurous in our tactics and mindset. 15 men behind the ball is evidence of a tactically bankrupt mind.

Depends on the talent available and the opposition.  Tactics are about finding ways to win. If you're winning, the results can hardly be termed bankrupt.

15  behind the ball is simply taking the most bog basic reality and employing it as a tactic. Of course getting everybody back into the scoring zone will make it more difficult for the opposition to score but if you feel that is necessary then you aren't much of a thinker on the game. Waterford against Dublin in an All Ireland semi final, I could understand the Waterford coach employing it, a top 10 team doing it is simply a bankrupt, cowardly, negative mindset.

EDIT: I wasn't saying you aren't much of a thinker on the game in the second line of the above post but that a coach that employs 15 behind the ball isn't much of a thinker.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 12:33:13 PM
15  behind the ball is simply taking the most bog basic reality and employing it as a tactic. Of course getting everybody back into the scoring zone will make it more difficult for the opposition to score but if you feel that is necessary then you aren't much of a thinker on the game. Waterford against Dublin in an All Ireland semi final, I could understand the Waterford coach employing it, a top 10 team doing it is simply a bankrupt, cowardly, negative mindset.

Again, you fail to understand that an effective defensive system employs attacking from deep in numbers. It's not just about sitting inside your own 45 and not moving. The better teams can carry this out.

I'm not failing to understand that at all Benny. In fact it seems you are failing to understand that that element of the tactic has been found out and when teams come up against the mass defence they simply leave their half backs in place thus negating the offensive element of the tactic. The only thing a massed defence achieves now is a turgid low scoring game. Donegal or Tyrone would have as much chance of beating Dublin in a conventional game as they would in a defensive game.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 12:41:05 PM
I'm not failing to understand that at all Benny. In fact it seems you are failing to understand that that element of the tactic has been found out and when teams come up against the mass defence they simply leave their half backs in place thus negating the offensive element of the tactic. The only thing a massed defence achieves now is a turgid low scoring game. Donegal or Tyrone would have as much chance of beating Dublin in a conventional game as they would in a defensive game.

Has this tactic been found out? You just talk about men behind the ball, you never consider the attacking element to it. Donegal didn't get to an AI final last year by just sticking 15 men behind the ball, they were a poor kick out away from winning the AI, so when did these tactics become redundant? The problem lies when poor teams fail to apply an attacking element and that is poor coaching or poor implementation of tactics and we get the turgid games you talk of.

 If it's only poor teams who can't play the system that leads to poor games why was last years All Ireland final so poor? The attacking element is found out and and all good teams will revert to keeping their half backs in place to counter mass defensive teams so when they break at speed they'll be held up by the half backs and the retreating forwards will ensure that the mass defence team meets a mass defence when they attack rather than the acres of space the system was designed to create. And therefore we'll get more brutal games.

There was poor AI finals long before the blanket defence came along. With regards to keeping 6 defenders in position, has this been verified as a perfect solution to attacking from deep? I haven't seen too much evidence for that just yet. I think your being a bit premature with that sweeping analysis. But we'll wait and see.

Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

Maybe your right, the blanket defence has been found out and the game will move on, teams will have to adapt -  no need for any rules changes then so. Fingers crossed!

I wouldn't be in favour of rule changes yet Benny but if the best teams can come up with is a mass defence and ball carrying attack then we'll have to look at ways in which we change that as the game as a spectacle would suffer immensely.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 01:00:03 PM
Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

Maybe
But I doubt that CBS team would have got near that Hogan Cup final without being very defensive.
You have to admire teams who have a gameplan that is formulated on the players available and they execute it very well

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 05:16:46 PM

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 01:00:03 PM
Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

Maybe
But I doubt that CBS team would have got near that Hogan Cup final without being very defensive.
You have to admire teams who have a gameplan that is formulated on the players available and they execute it very well

At senior level you can say it's all about the results but when managers at underage level start employing it, they should be sacked.  At that level it should about the skills of the game.  It's not like the teachers are under pressure to get results from the school principal.  Depressing to see school teams play like that yesterday.  No skill in parking 13 players in front of goal. 

Quote from: dublin7 on April 12, 2015, 05:39:49 PM

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 12, 2015, 05:16:46 PM

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 01:00:03 PM
Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

Maybe
But I doubt that CBS team would have got near that Hogan Cup final without being very defensive.
You have to admire teams who have a gameplan that is formulated on the players available and they execute it very well

At senior level you can say it's all about the results but when managers at underage level start employing it, they should be sacked.  At that level it should about the skills of the game.  It's not like the teachers are under pressure to get results from the school principal.  Depressing to see school teams play like that yesterday.  No skill in parking 13 players in front of goal.

Idealism and reality rarely mix well.

If results don't count at schools and children's game why do they keep a score then?

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 01:00:03 PM
Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

In fairness when Donegal won the 2012 All Ireland they had the right balance between defence and attack. Their games against Cork,Kerry,Mayo where all good games to watch and last year against Dublin was also a good game however the final was poor because Kerry chose to go more defensive after the shoot out they had against Mayo.

But that's my point, every team will do as Kerry did when they come up against Donegal from now on. If they do the game will almost certainly be poor.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 01:00:03 PM
Absolutely but the infamous Dublin Donegal semi final was brutal, the All Ireland final was poor, Donegal v Antrim was brutal. All games where the opposition kept players back against a mass defence. Yesterday's colleges A final was a poor spectacle as well and again when had a massed defence team playing a team set up for them. There's two clear trends there, shite games but the better football team still wins.

So by naming every poor game you can think of that's football poor? If I name games that were exciting are you proved wrong? And Jesus wept, Donegal Antrim??? How would that ever be a good game.

It will show who is good enough to kick under pressure from 45 yards.. Dublin didn't manage that to well in the second half against Donegal last year..

Ciaran McDonald on Second Captains said he no problem with how the game is.

Why couldn't have been, any other pairings you can guarantee will be poor so we can warn people? If you think I listed out every poor game I could think then I don't know what to tell you. The point I was making was that mass defensive teams will now face more and more teams who leave their defenders in place and this will invariably produce poor games.

Quote from: rodney trotter on April 12, 2015, 06:04:31 PM
It will show who is good enough to kick under pressure from 45 yards.. Dublin didn't manage that to well in the second half against Donegal last year..

Ciaran McDonald on Second Captains said he no problem with how the game is.

He didn't quite say that but even if he did that doesn't make it so.

Yeah because you want everyone to play like Dublin. ffs

What does that even mean?? ffs

Quote
At senior level you can say it's all about the results but when managers at underage level start employing it, they should be sacked.  At that level it should about the skills of the game.  It's not like the teachers are under pressure to get results from the school principal.  Depressing to see school teams play like that yesterday.  No skill in parking 13 players in front of goal.

It is a knockout competition where the players are representing their school that most of them will be finished with in 3 months time.
It is not a GoGames blitz.
You cannot improve skills if you are beaten in the first round.

Should schools rugby, soccer etc not be about winning too?
In fact, for most school rugby players it would be the highlight of their sporting lives.
Teenagers like to win stuff. Go figure.

I think today's games showed that you can play defensively and at the same time rack up a healthy score. Zulu, you talk about Kerry's game plan to counteract and I agree and posted as much on more than one occasion but not everyone has the personnel that Kerry have to carry that off.

They were league games today Benny and the Cork Donegal game in particular had little intensity. In championship with teams fitter and working harder and attackers with more pressure we won't see those types of scores. Teams have figured out the mass defence and will be more successful against it but at the expense of the spectacle. The best part of today was McManus who had the space to run into and gather kicked ball to score. The massed defence is designed to take that away and football will be all the poorer for it. Looking at todays game I was struck by how few scoring attempts full forwards were getting compared to midfielders and half backs. If I was managing an IC team now you'd have to seriously consider playing the likes of McManus or O'Neill in the half back line and defenders in your full forward line who will come out deep. That isn't a good thought or a positive direction for football.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 09:32:22 PM
They were league games today Benny and the Cork Donegal game in particular had little intensity. In championship with teams fitter and working harder and attackers with more pressure we won't see those types of scores. Teams have figured out the mass defence and will be more successful against it but at the expense of the spectacle. The best part of today was McManus who had the space to run into and gather kicked ball to score. The massed defence is designed to take that away and football will be all the poorer for it. Looking at todays game I was struck by how few scoring attempts full forwards were getting compared to midfielders and half backs. If I was managing an IC team now you'd have to seriously consider playing the likes of McManus or O'Neill in the half back line and defenders in your full forward line who will come out deep. That isn't a good thought or a positive direction for football.

Ah come on, Dublin v Derry was a league game and people were describing it as the death of football. Goalposts just can't be moved to suit the argument.

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 09:32:22 PM
They were league games today Benny and the Cork Donegal game in particular had little intensity. In championship with teams fitter and working harder and attackers with more pressure we won't see those types of scores. Teams have figured out the mass defence and will be more successful against it but at the expense of the spectacle. The best part of today was McManus who had the space to run into and gather kicked ball to score. The massed defence is designed to take that away and football will be all the poorer for it. Looking at todays game I was struck by how few scoring attempts full forwards were getting compared to midfielders and half backs. If I was managing an IC team now you'd have to seriously consider playing the likes of McManus or O'Neill in the half back line and defenders in your full forward line who will come out deep. That isn't a good thought or a positive direction for football.

Do we need to put wheels on the goalposts or will you stop moving them now, Zu?

Why do people say that? Dublin Derry was only the latest instalment in a trend where teams come not to lose. As I said, even though today's games were quite enjoyable you could still see the elements of the game that are worrying. Benny we've probably gone about this every way possible at this stage so if you're happy with massed defence football that's fine. I'm not and I'm a bit concerned with the direction the game is going. I hope coaches take a more positive attitude to winning games and move away from massed defences but if they don't then administrators must step in.

Quote from: Syferus on April 12, 2015, 09:45:07 PM

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 09:32:22 PM
They were league games today Benny and the Cork Donegal game in particular had little intensity. In championship with teams fitter and working harder and attackers with more pressure we won't see those types of scores. Teams have figured out the mass defence and will be more successful against it but at the expense of the spectacle. The best part of today was McManus who had the space to run into and gather kicked ball to score. The massed defence is designed to take that away and football will be all the poorer for it. Looking at todays game I was struck by how few scoring attempts full forwards were getting compared to midfielders and half backs. If I was managing an IC team now you'd have to seriously consider playing the likes of McManus or O'Neill in the half back line and defenders in your full forward line who will come out deep. That isn't a good thought or a positive direction for football.

Do we need to put wheels on the goalposts or will you stop moving them now, Zu?

What does that mean?

Quote from: Zulu on April 12, 2015, 09:47:37 PM
Why do people say that? Dublin Derry was only the latest instalment in a trend where teams come not to lose. As I said, even though today's games were quite enjoyable you could still see the elements of the game that are worrying. Benny we've probably gone about this every way possible at this stage so if you're happy with massed defence football that's fine. I'm not and I'm a bit concerned with the direction the game is going. I hope coaches take a more positive attitude to winning games and move away from massed defences but if they don't then administrators must step in.

I realise we aren't going to agree on this but I do understand where you are coming from with your argument, I just feel that the managers and players are better positioned to work out tactics to see us through the current tactical issues that are creating a defensive game. If you feel that teams have already worked out the defensive game plan then it won't be long until alternative, possibly more attacking tactics are implemented. I find this a much more interesting solution than trusting a few administrators to come up with another rule change which may have further unintended consequences.

I agree but I wouldn't give managers too much time either as it's easier to become competitive by being negative and most managers don't have the time or players to anything more than competitive.

I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

Quote from: Hardy on April 13, 2015, 10:00:35 AM
I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

Stop lying

Quote from: macdanger2 on April 13, 2015, 11:52:02 AM

Quote from: Hardy on April 13, 2015, 10:00:35 AM
I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

Stop lying

There are a few. Though the word "supporter" may convey a greater amount of commitment than that which prevails among this species.

Quote from: Hardy on April 13, 2015, 10:00:35 AM
I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

Don't believe it.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 13, 2015, 06:00:55 PM

Quote from: Hardy on April 13, 2015, 10:00:35 AM
I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

Don't believe it.

Totally unbelievable........no Cork supporter can count that high  :P

Quote from: Hardy on April 13, 2015, 10:00:35 AM
I didn't watch the League semi-finals but somebody (a Cork supporter) told me in the pub last night he counted twenty-three consecutive hand passes by Cork in one move yesterday.

FFS could you imagine sitting behind him?

One boy!
Two boy!!
Three boy!!!
Four boy!!!!

Ah feck...

One boy!
Two boy!!
Three boy!!!
Four boy!!!!
Five boy!!!!!
Six boy!!!!!!
Seven boy!!!!!!!
Eight boy!!!!!!!!

Ah feck...

One boy!
Two boy!!
Three boy!!!
Four boy!!!!
Five boy!!!!!
Six boy!!!!!!
Seven boy!!!!!!!
Eight boy!!!!!!!!
Nine boy!!!!!!!!!
Ten boy!!!!!!!!!!
.......
<life is too short>
.......
Twenty three boy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ah feck......

One boy!
...

I recall that Monaghan strung together a string of manly fisted passes, amidst some  lovely (retro) foot passes, in the game against Dublin.

Zulu may recall that his beloved Dubs had McManus double and triple marked in the first half  but strangely left just one man on him in the second half, I'm pretty sure Gavin will sort out that defensive failing in the next weeks.

Quote from: Main Street on April 14, 2015, 12:47:00 AM

Zulu may recall that his beloved Dubs had McManus double and triple marked in the first half  but strangely left just one man on him in the second half, I'm pretty sure Gavin will sort out that defensive failing in the next weeks.

Those players weren't marking McManus in any sort of a defensive capacity, they were just following him back there as part of their all-out attacking system

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCjmt0FW8AAvCwG.jpg:large)

May already have been discussed but what are the positives and negatives for limiting the hand pass as can be seen above it is definitely on the rise? (Taking it to the extreme, have it like the solo, a hand pass must be followed by a foot pass, easier to implement for referees).

Positives:
Teams would leave more bodies in a forward or open position to offer outlet to retain possession
The game would/should appeal more due to increased foot passing and a greater margin of error

Negatives:
Too many short instep passes like we see now at free kicks where the defence is set.
Overcarries/infringements of the rule would become more commonplace (initially anyway)

Forward hand-passing is not a problem. You see can some really inventive short passes in attack, many of which are harder to execute correctly than lumping a ball 40 metres up a field in the general area of a FF and hoping he can win a ball 2-to-1. Charts of numbers of hand-passes and the like don't really convey much useful information.

It's when teams are going backwards and backwards with the ball that problems present themselves.

Ban the fcukin thing and put the FOOT back into FOOTball!!!

Quote from: Rossfan on April 14, 2015, 07:16:31 PM
Ban the fcukin thing and put the FOOT back into FOOTball!!!

Maybe we should ban handling the ball altogether and only use the FOOT because it's FOOTball.

Quote from: Syferus on April 14, 2015, 06:30:30 PM
Forward hand-passing is not a problem. You see can some really inventive short passes in attack, many of which are harder to execute correctly than lumping a ball 40 metres up a field in the general area of a FF and hoping he can win a ball 2-to-1. Charts of numbers of hand-passes and the like don't really convey much useful information.

It's when teams are going backwards and backwards with the ball that problems present themselves.

Of course they do, especially when added to what you see with your own eyes. 7 of the top ten happened in the last few months, one game nearly reaching 500, that can't be entirely ignored. I wouldn't however be in favour of any kind of limitation of the hand pass. I'd be more in favour of telling managers to wise up and stop being so f**king cowardly, go out and try to win games by having a go. I guarantee you most teams would do as well playing largely conventionally as they do playing ultra conservatively. There seems to be this idea that there was never more than 6 lads back when teams defended which is nonsense, there was often 10 or more lads in their own half (sure you've 9 in a conventional set up). However, now lads are drifting back before the ball is kicked out or simply sprinting back if the ball is turned over. You don't have to do that to defend effectively but it is the easiest way to defend effectively, the one that needs the least individual skill and coaching. The payoff though is you've few if anyone in attack when you do get the ball back so you have to run and hand pass the ball back up the field. In an era where we have full forwards like James O'Donoghue,  Cillian O'Connor, Colm O'Neill, Brian Hurley, Bernard Brogan, Micheal Murphy, Paddy McBrearty, Jamie Clarke, Ciaran McManus, Colm Cooper etc. I can only hope managers and coaches grow some balls and focus more on maximising the immense talent in we have football rather than stifling it.

Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Quote from: rrhf on April 14, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Has the Black Card not already done this, leading to an all out retreat by some teams?

I think the more advantages we give to the forward, the more likely some managers will pull back players to help defend. It simply seems to be in the nature of many managers to prefer to lose a game 0-0 0-1 than lose 5-19 5-20.

Until their own supporters boo them off the park every time it happens, it will continue.

Colm O'Rourke's article in last weekends Sunday Independent is worth a read.

In next weekends edition he is putting forward a 'template for change'. He is also looking for suggestions.

Fair play to Colm on this, at least he is brave enough to publish some suggestions for change.

It should make some interesting reading .

Here is a link to his piece last Sunday...

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same-31135174.html

Quote from: highorlow on April 15, 2015, 02:09:32 PM
Colm O'Rourke's article in last weekends Sunday Independent is worth a read.

In next weekends edition he is putting forward a 'template for change'. He is also looking for suggestions.

Fair play to Colm on this, at least he is brave enough to publish some suggestions for change.

It should make some interesting reading .

Here is a link to his piece last Sunday...

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same-31135174.html

Brave? Everyone and their mother thinks they know what needs to be fixed and don't mind broadcasting it. The real answer is that there is no perfect solution.

QuoteEveryone and their mother thinks they know what needs to be fixed and don't mind broadcasting it.

I don't recall reading anyone else's template for change?

Can you send me a link to anything you have read, I'd be interested in seeing what other ex players and county managers have had to say on this.

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 08:34:54 AM

Quote from: rrhf on April 14, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Has the Black Card not already done this, leading to an all out retreat by some teams?

I think the more advantages we give to the forward, the more likely some managers will pull back players to help defend. It simply seems to be in the nature of many managers to prefer to lose a game 0-0 0-1 than lose 5-19 5-20.

Until their own supporters boo them off the park every time it happens, it will continue.

Think you misunderstood the point there.  They can pull 15 men back but they will be kicking the ball to each other rather than handpassing and thats dangerous if the other team pushes up on them.  Any team worth its salt will be driving to the half back line and up the fiield as soon as possible so they can get at the bould handpassing again. but it leaves only one half of the pitch for each team to fist pass.   

Quote from: Syferus on April 15, 2015, 02:16:13 PM

Quote from: highorlow on April 15, 2015, 02:09:32 PM
Colm O'Rourke's article in last weekends Sunday Independent is worth a read.

In next weekends edition he is putting forward a 'template for change'. He is also looking for suggestions.

Fair play to Colm on this, at least he is brave enough to publish some suggestions for change.

It should make some interesting reading .

Here is a link to his piece last Sunday...

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same-31135174.html

Brave? Everyone and their mother thinks they know what needs to be fixed and don't mind broadcasting it. The real answer is that there is no perfect solution.

Typical gaa answer to everything in my view . See no evil hear none either

Quote from: rrhf on April 15, 2015, 06:21:39 PM

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 08:34:54 AM

Quote from: rrhf on April 14, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Has the Black Card not already done this, leading to an all out retreat by some teams?

I think the more advantages we give to the forward, the more likely some managers will pull back players to help defend. It simply seems to be in the nature of many managers to prefer to lose a game 0-0 0-1 than lose 5-19 5-20.

Until their own supporters boo them off the park every time it happens, it will continue.

Think you misunderstood the point there.  They can pull 15 men back but they will be kicking the ball to each other rather than handpassing and thats dangerous if the other team pushes up on them.  Any team worth its salt will be driving to the half back line and up the fiield as soon as possible so they can get at the bould handpassing again. but it leaves only one half of the pitch for each team to fist pass.

Ok I see what you mean.

I would be concerned it could lead to a sort of aerial tennis that we see Ireland play in rugby, as in once a team gets pressed near its own line they will simply kick it back to the opposite who will camp at half way. Although your idea of giving the attacking team an advantage of the hand-pass might discourage them from kicking in straight again, as happens now in rugby.

It's the over handpassing that has grated me most over the last 5 years. Limit that and managers can't. really design a sturdy enough blanket , ?thats my opinion anyway.

Take the leauge semi's this weekend. I saw all four teams equally handpassing up the field (15-20 passes) then someone takes a shot at the bar. On at least 3 of those occasions I counted  the ball wasn't even kicked at the bar -it was handpassed over it meaning the only kick involved in the entire move was the goalie"s shot kick out. Add the fact that you have fellas taking 6-10 carrying steps going unpunished then it's just  not very inspiring.

If your a foreinger watching this (and sometimes you have to put yourself in the position of an outsider for a balanced view) then sometimes you might even strugle to call it a game or a sport at all.

In the cork /donegal game at least. cork's goals relieved the monotony a bit although there were several goal opportunities from both teams

I counted one goal chance in the Dublin/Monaghan game, a fluffed half chance from a dub half- forward. Thats one goal chance from both teams in 70mins of football.

Look forward to Colm's antidotes cause the handpas handpass handpass kick over the bar is as tough (if not tougher)  to appreciate even than massed defences imo.

I'm not convinced at all that this will just sort itself out anymore.

Quote from: Whitnail on April 15, 2015, 08:24:07 PM
It's the over handpassing that has grated me most over the last 5 years. Limit that and managers can't. really design a sturdy enough blanket , ?thats my opinion anyway.

Take the leauge semi's this weekend. I saw all four teams equally handpassing up the field (15-20 passes) then someone takes a shot at the bar. On at least 3 of those occasions I counted  the ball wasn't even kicked at the bar -it was handpassed over it meaning the only kick involved in the entire move was the goalie"s shot kick out. Add the fact that you have fellas taking 6-10 carrying steps going unpunished then it's just  not very inspiring.

If your a foreinger watching this (and sometimes you have to put yourself in the position of an outsider for a balanced view) then sometimes you might even strugle to call it a game or a sport at all.

In the cork /donegal game at least. cork's goals relieved the monotony a bit although there were several goal opportunities from both teams

I counted one goal chance in the Dublin/Monaghan game, a fluffed half chance from a dub half- forward. Thats one goal chance from both teams in 70mins of football.

Look forward to Colm's antidotes cause the handpas handpass handpass kick over the bar is as tough (if not tougher)  to appreciate even than massed defences imo.

I'm not convinced at all that this will just sort itself out anymore.

Give me strength! I think we've finally lost the run of ourselves!

All told people want to see more high catches, more goals, and more kicking the ball - and they don't give a fiddler's if they ruin the game in pursuit of their ideals.



A summary conclusion to this thread could be something along the lines of "thank the Lord that these people who want to radically change Gaelic football have neither the initiative nor influence to make it happen".

Quote from: thewobbler on April 15, 2015, 08:44:34 PM
All told people want to see more high catches, more goals, and more kicking the ball - and they don't give a fiddler's if they ruin the game in pursuit of their ideals.

I think they believe that they are improving the game. But it isn't easy, if you fiddle with one thing you affect another and simplistic solutions may do more damage than good.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 16, 2015, 12:26:17 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on April 15, 2015, 08:44:34 PM
All told people want to see more high catches, more goals, and more kicking the ball - and they don't give a fiddler's if they ruin the game in pursuit of their ideals.

I think they believe that they are improving the game. But it isn't easy, if you fiddle with one thing you affect another and simplistic solutions may do more damage than good.

Exactly and the quicker the people who spout this 'ban the hand pass' nonsense realise that the better.
Has anyone stopped to think what a game with NO hand passing would actually look like?

Quote from: armaghniac on April 16, 2015, 12:26:17 AM

Quote from: thewobbler on April 15, 2015, 08:44:34 PM
All told people want to see more high catches, more goals, and more kicking the ball - and they don't give a fiddler's if they ruin the game in pursuit of their ideals.

I think they believe that they are improving the game. But it isn't easy, if you fiddle with one thing you affect another and simplistic solutions may do more damage than good.

+1.

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 06:34:02 PM

Quote from: rrhf on April 15, 2015, 06:21:39 PM

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 08:34:54 AM

Quote from: rrhf on April 14, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Has the Black Card not already done this, leading to an all out retreat by some teams?

I think the more advantages we give to the forward, the more likely some managers will pull back players to help defend. It simply seems to be in the nature of many managers to prefer to lose a game 0-0 0-1 than lose 5-19 5-20.

Until their own supporters boo them off the park every time it happens, it will continue.

Think you misunderstood the point there.  They can pull 15 men back but they will be kicking the ball to each other rather than handpassing and thats dangerous if the other team pushes up on them.  Any team worth its salt will be driving to the half back line and up the fiield as soon as possible so they can get at the bould handpassing again. but it leaves only one half of the pitch for each team to fist pass.

Ok I see what you mean.

I would be concerned it could lead to a sort of aerial tennis that we see Ireland play in rugby, as in once a team gets pressed near its own line they will simply kick it back to the opposite who will camp at half way. Although your idea of giving the attacking team an advantage of the hand-pass might discourage them from kicking in straight again, as happens now in rugby.

I think anyone advocating limiting hand passing is missing the point. Hand passes are not the malaise, they are a symptom. Teams hand pass as there is nowhere to kick it to.

The number of good forwards in the game and current fitness levels mean that losing possession anywhere on the field is more likely to  result in a turnover* score (apologies for using this term for want of better terminology). Possession therefore becomes king.
The dearth of great defenders (or at least Managers willing to expose them 1 on 1) coupled with the lack of a clearly defined tackle means that multiple bodies are the easiest way to secure your defense. As a result the 15 yard hand pass to a moving target is safer than a 40 yard kick pass into a crowd.

In my opinion we need to clearly define the tackle and what that 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 battle should look like rather than the knee jerk reaction of "there are too many hand passes, ban the hand pass". IT is akin to the more recent "there are too many fouls not being properly penalised with yelow / red cards, add a new a card instead of implementing the existing penalties".

Quote from: LeoMc on April 16, 2015, 08:18:18 AM

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 06:34:02 PM

Quote from: rrhf on April 15, 2015, 06:21:39 PM

Quote from: muppet on April 15, 2015, 08:34:54 AM

Quote from: rrhf on April 14, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Only allow the handpass in the opposition half ie on the attack.
Kickouts will probably go long. Ball will move quicker and be kicked out of this zone early.  Limits defensive options an gives the forwards a slight advantage.

Has the Black Card not already done this, leading to an all out retreat by some teams?

I think the more advantages we give to the forward, the more likely some managers will pull back players to help defend. It simply seems to be in the nature of many managers to prefer to lose a game 0-0 0-1 than lose 5-19 5-20.

Until their own supporters boo them off the park every time it happens, it will continue.

Think you misunderstood the point there.  They can pull 15 men back but they will be kicking the ball to each other rather than handpassing and thats dangerous if the other team pushes up on them.  Any team worth its salt will be driving to the half back line and up the fiield as soon as possible so they can get at the bould handpassing again. but it leaves only one half of the pitch for each team to fist pass.

Ok I see what you mean.

I would be concerned it could lead to a sort of aerial tennis that we see Ireland play in rugby, as in once a team gets pressed near its own line they will simply kick it back to the opposite who will camp at half way. Although your idea of giving the attacking team an advantage of the hand-pass might discourage them from kicking in straight again, as happens now in rugby.

I think anyone advocating limiting hand passing is missing the point. Hand passes are not the malaise, they are a symptom. Teams hand pass as there is nowhere to kick it to.

The number of good forwards in the game and current fitness levels mean that losing possession anywhere on the field is more likely to  result in a turnover* score (apologies for using this term for want of better terminology). Possession therefore becomes king.
The dearth of great defenders (or at least Managers willing to expose them 1 on 1) coupled with the lack of a clearly defined tackle means that multiple bodies are the easiest way to secure your defense. As a result the 15 yard hand pass to a moving target is safer than a 40 yard kick pass into a crowd.

In my opinion we need to clearly define the tackle and what that 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 battle should look like rather than the knee jerk reaction of "there are too many hand passes, ban the hand pass". IT is akin to the more recent "there are too many fouls not being properly penalised with yelow / red cards, add a new a card instead of implementing the existing penalties".

Exactly Leo, very good post.

QuoteIn my opinion we need to clearly define the tackle and what that 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 battle should look like rather than the knee jerk reaction of "there are too many hand passes, ban the hand pass".

The Tackle
The Tackle is re-defined as:
"The Tackle is a skill by which a player may dispossess an opponent or frustrate his objective within the Rules of Fair Play. The tackle is aimed at the ball, not the player. The tackler may use his body to confront the opponent but deliberate bodily contact (such as punching, slapping, arm holding, pushing, tripping, jersey pulling or a full frontal charge) is forbidden. The only deliberate physical contact can be a Fair Charge i.e. Shoulder-to-shoulder with at least one foot on the ground. More than one player can tackle the player in possession."

Just published and effective from 11th April 2015.

I'm not sure if the line in italics is correct. It's on the GAA website as the definition but not in the PDF document? I don't think this is a re-definition per se as I'm not sure we ever had a definition for the tackle before.

Quote from: highorlow on April 16, 2015, 03:26:58 PM

QuoteIn my opinion we need to clearly define the tackle and what that 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 battle should look like rather than the knee jerk reaction of "there are too many hand passes, ban the hand pass".

The Tackle
The Tackle is re-defined as:
"The Tackle is a skill by which a player may dispossess an opponent or frustrate his objective within the Rules of Fair Play.The tackle is aimed at the ball, not the player. The tackler may use his body to confront the opponent but deliberate bodily contact (such as punching, slapping, arm holding, pushing, tripping, jersey pulling or a full frontal charge) is forbidden. The only deliberate physical contact can be a Fair Charge i.e. Shoulder-to-shoulder with at least one foot on the ground. More than one player can tackle the player in possession."

Just published and effective from 11th April 2015.

I'm not sure if the line in italics is correct. It's on the GAA website as the definition but not in the PDF document? I don't think this is a re-definition per se as I'm not sure we ever had a definition for the tackle before.

To complement the tackle being on the ball rather than the player, I think  we must ensure that the 4 steps rule is enforced and be 100% strict with it. This gives the tackler a chance of making a clean tackle as he knows the ball will be played one way or another after 4 steps. If we give people a chance of making a clean tackle then managers may be more willing to take his chances on leaving a defender 1 on 1, and push the tackling up the field. A forward line of well coached tacklers who pressed defenders up the pitch knowing they have a chance of turning over possession may just be a very effective tactic. It may also force teams to play long rather than risk turn overs inside their own 45. Then people will probably complain that forwards don't traditionally tackle and we are ruining the game with all the turn overs.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 15, 2015, 08:37:30 PM

Quote from: Whitnail on April 15, 2015, 08:24:07 PM
It's the over handpassing that has grated me most over the last 5 years. Limit that and managers can't. really design a sturdy enough blanket , ?thats my opinion anyway.

Take the leauge semi's this weekend. I saw all four teams equally handpassing up the field (15-20 passes) then someone takes a shot at the bar. On at least 3 of those occasions I counted  the ball wasn't even kicked at the bar -it was handpassed over it meaning the only kick involved in the entire move was the goalie"s shot kick out. Add the fact that you have fellas taking 6-10 carrying steps going unpunished then it's just  not very inspiring.

If your a foreinger watching this (and sometimes you have to put yourself in the position of an outsider for a balanced view) then sometimes you might even strugle to call it a game or a sport at all.

In the cork /donegal game at least. cork's goals relieved the monotony a bit although there were several goal opportunities from both teams

I counted one goal chance in the Dublin/Monaghan game, a fluffed half chance from a dub half- forward. Thats one goal chance from both teams in 70mins of football.

Look forward to Colm's antidotes cause the handpas handpass handpass kick over the bar is as tough (if not tougher)  to appreciate even than massed defences imo.

I'm not convinced at all that this will just sort itself out anymore.

Give me strength! I think we've finally lost the run of ourselves!

Just rename it to "gaelige handball" then . Then it doesn't need to be discussed or modified and we can all pretend that that we enjoy watching 15-20 handpasses at a time .  Do you remember the game being less skillfull? Handpassing is effective it insures any team can hold on to the ball by keeping it going sideways backways &sideways again inching their way to shooting range.
It's obvious managers are advocating this afterall why risk kicking the ball anymore if you can get the ball to your man in the same place via 6,7 handpasses absolutely risk free.




Looking back over the last few pages and I can't see anyone advocating "banning" the handpass. Im not sure what those false hysterics are about. There are lots however advocating "limiting" the hanpass for the purpose of skill & entertainment to counteract the (almost pointless) spectacle its fast becoming at senior level.
At junior level I've seen alot of games where I'd say the ratio of kicking to handpassing was probably about 1:4. or 1:5 which is a pretty healthy stat . They kick the ball because they want to kick it and are allowed to. At senior inter-county level now the ratio is probably more like 1:10 in most matches - thats is a joke.
And its not because there's no one to kick it to or no space to kick it into , its because it's considered too risky & too nieve. It doesn't fit the model of getting the ball from A to B in the safest most reliable odds-on risk free method possible.
How to solve it ?-i don't know but im looking fir to colm's suggestions
But jesus cant we acknowledge it ffs without the negetivity & false hysterics.

False hysterics? Take a look at yourself, with your made up ratios and nonsense about it not being a sport anymore. The hysterics are from those wanting to change rules due to a temporary shift in the pattern of play. I've put forward many times how I think we can move on from this without bastardising the game, but maybe I'm just being hysterical and we should change the rules ASAP everytime there is a few bad games.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 06:58:45 AM
False hysterics? Take a look at yourself, with your made up ratios and nonsense about it not being a sport anymore. The hysterics are from those wanting to change rules due to a temporary shift in the pattern of play. I've put forward many times how I think we can move on from this without bastardising the game, but maybe I'm just being hysterical and we should change the rules ASAP everytime there is a few bad games.

You want some sauce for that chip on your shoulder. It's a sad fact that to be an inter county footballer, more emphasis is placed on fitness than kicking the ball.  Players are expected to have stamina levels of the energizer bunny to hand pass the ball up and down the pitch. It's all about keeping possession in todays game so most managers adopt a safety first approach of pulling players back behind the ball, hand pass it up the field to reduce the chances of losing possession & then race back into defence when/ if you do lose the ball or it goes out of play.

Kicking skills have declined over the last few years.  Personally I'd reduce teams to 13 a side.  More space for players to display their skills and blanket defences would be far harder to implement.  Most people agree something has to change as if things continue the way they are, fewer people will go to games, people will change the channel when football is on the tv and none of that is good for football or hurling.  But for some reason the majority of posters from Ulster counties seem to think there is nothing wrong & nothing to see here.  This is probably why Ulster championship games, admittedly the most competitive provincial games they are also the toughest to watch from a neutrals perspective, with the negative tactics, cyncical/off the ball fouls and generally dour games

QuoteKicking skills have declined over the last few years

What is the evidence of that? True the ball may not be kicked as often, but i dont see any evidence that the actual skill level has decreased.
This notion that in the past all Intercounty players were fabulous long kick passers is a myth.
Alot of the time the ball was just booted up the field for the forwards to fight for.

Point taking from distance is as good if not better than it's ever been, this suggests kicking skills haven't declined. I don't have a chip on my shoulder, I just don't want our game changed every 2 seasons with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Kicking skills have improved, the last four championships at inter county have been the highest scoring of all times, in an era of mass defence, meaning that instead of 3/4 players being best at kicking points, there are 9/10/11 players scoring points and from distance also. Players fist the ball because they can see there is no space to kick the ball into, but coaching has been better than ever and with that the overall standard of kicking has also improved. But when we played the Australians last Autumn they gave our best players a lesson on kick passing, but for me it was about their ability to kick the ball at the player, whilst we are taught to kick at space, our target is much bigger than theres and that explained for me why there kicking was more accurate.

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
....with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Pity you weren't around in 1974 or so when they brought in the fcukin hand pass without trials or negotiations.

Quote from: Rossfan on April 17, 2015, 11:41:10 AM

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
....with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Pity you weren't around in 1974 or so when they brought in the fcukin hand pass without trials or negotiations.

So you agree then that bringing in laws without proper thought or trial is not a good thing. That's the point I'm making.

13 a side might work and improve things but not on it's own.

Someone mentioned the lesson we got off the aussies last year in kicking. They have the mark that's likely the reason for that.

The mark from kickouts only might be worth considering on a trial basis with perhaps another mark / free kick [taken from the hands] option from the subsequent kick.   

It's a bit of an extreme proposal but no more so than introducing an additional card and a whole set of rules for this new card.

Quote from: Rossfan on April 17, 2015, 11:41:10 AM

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
....with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Pity you weren't around in 1974 or so when they brought in the fcukin hand pass without trials or negotiations.

Rossfan, do you really want to go back to a game with NO handpassing?

One rule chnage/tweak that may be worth trialling is to enforce teams to line up as per the trow in for every kickout (i.e 6 forwards, 2 midfeilders,6 defenders) and the kickout must at least cross the 45.
This would elininate the short kickout, encourage more high feilding and make it more difficult for a team to set up defensively with extra bodies behind the ball.
Im sure someone might come up witha negative aspect of this i havent thought of, but i think if the game needs changing it should be more a tweak like this rather than just 'ban the handpass' or 'reduce the teams to 13' type thing

Quote from: highorlow on April 17, 2015, 12:44:33 PM
13 a side might work and improve things but not on it's own.

Someone mentioned the lesson we got off the aussies last year in kicking. They have the mark that's likely the reason for that.

The mark from kickouts only might be worth considering on a trial basis with perhaps another mark / free kick [taken from the hands] option from the subsequent kick.   

It's a bit of an extreme proposal but no more so than introducing an additional card and a whole set of rules for this new card.

Was this not tried out before at one stage or am I imagining it? Round about the time they experimented with the kickouts from the hand, maybe the late '80's?

I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

lots of people mentioning going to 13 a side. Which 2 positions would drop out?

Full Back, Full Forward I'd imagine. I played in the states and it was 13 a side, without a #3 and #14. It was great for a forward.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 17, 2015, 03:36:39 PM
Full Back, Full Forward I'd imagine. I played in the states and it was 13 a side, without a #3 and #14. It was great for a forward.

Was this not mainly because the pitches weren't big enough for 15 v 15?. When I played there it was on American football pitches with soccer goals and American football posts. It was 13 a side but you'd hardly notice such was the size of the pitch. I've also played full forward 13 a side on full size pitches in England, it's a killer if you are getting on a bit and not particularly fit.  :) People are already giving off about the game being made up of athletes, you need to be an athlete in 13 a side in Croke Park. I can't see teams leaving 2 on 2 inside with that kind of space.

It was yeah, but I suppose the same root cause. 15 a side would have meant no space at all, so making it 13 a side made it feel more like home. But most of them played orthodox, so as a corner forward you had loads of space to pull the older, fatter, corner backs into.

I'm sure making it 13 a side here would just mean a different configuration of the blanket. Probably 12 behind the ball and only 1 left up front!

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on April 17, 2015, 01:46:05 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on April 17, 2015, 11:41:10 AM

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
....with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Pity you weren't around in 1974 or so when they brought in the fcukin hand pass without trials or negotiations.

Rossfan, do you really want to go back to a game with NO handpassing?

Yes. Fisted passes ok but not the current half throw. Also ban the half throwing the ball over the bar.

Quote from: tonto1888 on April 17, 2015, 03:35:45 PM
lots of people mentioning going to 13 a side. Which 2 positions would drop out?

Why would it matter? It's not like rugby where you have a scrum which requires players with specialist skills. The 3-3-2-3-3 formations are purely notional these days anyway. And there's many a game which started with only 13 players on one or both of the teams!

Quote from: Rossfan on April 17, 2015, 04:27:20 PM

Quote from: blewuporstuffed on April 17, 2015, 01:46:05 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on April 17, 2015, 11:41:10 AM

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 17, 2015, 11:17:06 AM
....with fly by night rule changes that aren't thought out, trialled or negotiated with those actually playing and managing in the game.

Pity you weren't around in 1974 or so when they brought in the fcukin hand pass without trials or negotiations.

Rossfan, do you really want to go back to a game with NO handpassing?

Yes. Fisted passes ok but not the current half throw. Also ban the half throwing the ball over the bar.

I agree, we could be more strict on the fisted pass. But we tried it a few years ago and for about 3 weeks the refs blew foul on nearly every hand pass, but after a while they seemed to forget about the rule and it appears to have disappeared again.

Quote from: deiseach on April 17, 2015, 04:44:48 PM

Quote from: tonto1888 on April 17, 2015, 03:35:45 PM
lots of people mentioning going to 13 a side. Which 2 positions would drop out?

Why would it matter? It's not like rugby where you have a scrum which requires players with specialist skills. The 3-3-2-3-3 formations are purely notional these days anyway. And there's many a game which started with only 13 players on one or both of the teams!

I agree,  both teams should line out inside their own 45 metre lines.  The team that win the toss chose the way they want to play,  the team that loses the toss then start with the ball on their own 45.  They start the game by kicking it to the opposition with the only restriction being that it must pass the other 45 m line.  After that they can play wherever they like.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Seems a good idea to me and something that would be easy enough to judge, unlike the tackle which causes most of the officiating problems.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

That is easy.

The referee will bring the oldest member of his own club, get him to wear a green jacket and watch the game through a giant, Waterford made, magnifying glass. Anytime time a point is scored from outside the 40 metre line this official will, as dramatically as possible, wave two fingers at the referee. The ref will then acknowledge that two points have been scored, instead of one, by waving two fingers at both benches.

Quote from: INDIANA on April 17, 2015, 08:05:02 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

What's that got to do with anything?

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Hawkeye.
Seriously, we're not talking about tiny margins here, it's pretty obvious where someone is relative to the 45m line when they kick a ball, for example.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 18, 2015, 05:28:09 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Hawkeye.

All very well for Croke Park, not much use anywhere else.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 18, 2015, 05:23:52 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on April 17, 2015, 08:05:02 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

What's that got to do with anything?

He's got loads of friends who are from the North, he probably just wants to ask if you know any of them!

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 18, 2015, 05:30:33 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 18, 2015, 05:23:52 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on April 17, 2015, 08:05:02 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

What's that got to do with anything?

Yes got loads of friends who are from the North, he probably just wants to ask if you know any of them!

Fair enough so, I should have spotted that myself.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 18, 2015, 05:28:09 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Hawkeye.
Seriously, we're not talking about tiny margins here, it's pretty obvious where someone is relative to the 45m line when they kick a ball, for example.

I don't think it is that obvious, certainly not to the referee who will in all likliehood not be standing on the 45 to adjudicate.
Not all referees are county standard & levels of fitness in some cases are questionable!!

On top of that how does the referee let people know what is a one or two pointer? Will we have arm waving or lifting of the left knee or a buck lep??

For entertainment alone it might be worth a go!!

He does the special '2 point shuffle'.
In my head, it looks a bit like the moon walk.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 18, 2015, 05:43:31 PM
He does the special '2 point shuffle'.
In my head, it looks a bit like the moon walk.

Haha, how about a few steps from the "Siege of Ennis"?

The sideline has existed since the start of the GAA and people seem able to see which side of the line people are on.It isn't that hard.

Quote from: armaghniac on April 18, 2015, 06:22:47 PM
The sideline has existed since the start of the GAA and people seem able to see which side of the line people are on.It isn't that hard.

Only because we have linesmen!!

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 18, 2015, 05:23:52 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on April 17, 2015, 08:05:02 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

What's that got to do with anything?

Would explain why you shoot down every alternative offered here

Quote from: INDIANA on April 18, 2015, 07:25:08 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 18, 2015, 05:23:52 PM

Quote from: INDIANA on April 17, 2015, 08:05:02 PM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 17, 2015, 07:44:00 PM

Quote from: seafoid on April 17, 2015, 07:10:35 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 17, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
I'd change the pitch markings by adding a line at 40m.
Any score kicked from outside that is worth 2 points.
Would encourage long-range kicking and force defences to push up.
Plenty of lads out there who can kick scores from that distance as we saw last weekend.

Very good idea, Jinxy

Whose going to adjudicate whether the player is inside or outside the line? What about the marginal calls where the player stars the kick outside the 40 but finishes the kick on or inside the line?
A recipe for mayhem & more abuse for officials.

Are you from the North?

What's that got to do with anything?

Would explain why you shoot down every alternative offered here

Every alternative!!!!!  That's a laugh. This is the only rule change option I have criticised on this thread for the reasons given.

A little anti Northern bias on display in your post but as it happens I am from the North, Donegal to be precise.

I don't think there is a lot wrong with the game as it stands as last weeks league semis & today's U21 semis show. There are a couple of small changes I would make however.

1 Ban pass backs to the keeper.
2 Stop keepers coming out to take free kicks.
3 Take all kickouts from the 21 yd line & make them go to the 50 yd line.

All easy to police & would not alter the nature of the game.

I would also consider banning the handpass entirely in favour of closed fist passing which would I think cut down on it's use.
I would also consider penalising teams who foul a lot by awarding 14 yd frees once a certain number of fouls have been committed in each half.

One thing I do strongly believe is that any changes must be easy to police. Life for the officials is difficult enough as it is.

So Colm's rule changes that he teased us about last weekend...

"A few simple rule changes then. A goalkeeper must kick the ball out beyond a certain point: 45 metres is too far but a dotted line at 35 would suffice. A maximum of three handpasses in a row and no back passing to the goalkeeper. I would add in too that a black card in the last quarter of a game should mean no substitution as players don't mind taking a player down to protect a lead and a fresh player comes on anyway."

Quote from: BennyHarp on April 19, 2015, 11:28:16 PM
So Colm's rule changes that he teased us about last weekend...

"A few simple rule changes then. A goalkeeper must kick the ball out beyond a certain point: 45 metres is too far but a dotted line at 35 would suffice. A maximum of three handpasses in a row and no back passing to the goalkeeper. I would add in too that a black card in the last quarter of a game should mean no substitution as players don't mind taking a player down to protect a lead and a fresh player comes on anyway."

Good idea, effective & easy to implement.

But how will you know when it's the last quarter?
We'll need someone to time it accurately, and we'll probably have to get spare watches for all the officials, and then we'll need some sort of alarm to let everyone know it's the final quarter... no, it just won't work.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 20, 2015, 08:41:38 AM
But how will you know when it's the last quarter?
We'll need someone to time it accurately, and we'll probably have to get spare watches for all the officials, and then we'll need some sort of alarm to let everyone know it's the final quarter... no, it just won't work.

Would it be too hard for a ref to check his watch when giving out the black card, check if there is 15mins or less left in the games (not taking into account injury time) and inform the player that a replacement can or can't be brought on?

A rule which makes kickouts go past the 45m line would create a scrum in the middle third as the team defending the kickouts bring three or four (or 5) of their forwards out into that area to contest breaking ball.
Unfortunately most rule changes will lead to a new problem, that's why they need to be carefully thought through

Quote from: time ticking away on April 20, 2015, 10:27:18 AM
A rule which makes kickouts go past the 45m line would create a scrum in the middle third as the team defending the kickouts bring three or four (or 5) of their forwards out into that area to contest breaking ball.
Unfortunately most rule changes will lead to a new problem, that's why they need to be carefully thought through

Yeah i agree, which is why any rule change about the distance the kickout has to travel would also need something that limits the number of players in the MF sector.
There is no one simple solution though and if any rule changes are to be made they need to be trialed extensivly before they are implemented.

I think we should have 15 zones on the pitch.

Each team will have a player nominated to contest each zone. A player must not leave his zone, except midfielders who may travel from zone to zone as they see fit, and forwards may run into the goalkeepers zone once the ball is in there.

Zones shall be lined with ropes to mark the limit of each player's zonal area. Players shall wear gloves, big gloves. To get from one zone to another players will have to jump the ropes. This will go down well, as fans seem to love players jumping.

This will also ensure the game returns to its traditional style of 15 contests.

Finally, Ger Canning will get much more use of the phrase 'he is in the zone'.

So what happens if a Goal Keeper takes his kick out and makes a mistake and the ball drops a meter or two short of the 45 line what punishment will the ref apply?

Quote from: illdecide on April 20, 2015, 12:36:21 PM
So what happens if a Goal Keeper takes his kick out and makes a mistake and the ball drops a meter or two short of the 45 line what punishment will the ref apply?

Free in where it lands. But in that case I would think a 45 rule is too much. On some days with a strong breeze, this would be very hard everytime and lead to a lot of time wasting.

30m broken line be ideal. Free in where ball lands or throw up where ball lands.

Why on earth would anyone (outside of Ulster) want to penalise the short kickout?

Conceding short kickouts is the one downside to operating the blanket defence, in that it gives the opposition free reign to start an attack with easy possession. Forcing long kickouts would force every team to implement blanket defence as there'd be no reason to leave forwards up top!

I like the idea of a "2 pointer" point for long range efforts. Although small downside would be you'd need to draw a new arc in each half, like the basketball 3 pointer arc.

Quote from: illdecide on April 20, 2015, 12:36:21 PM
So what happens if a Goal Keeper takes his kick out and makes a mistake and the ball drops a meter or two short of the 45 line what punishment will the ref apply?

Black card.

I want to to leave this thread alone as it's clearly full of people who can't count past 10, but I have to do this:

1. There's a 30 mph breeze, and your keeper gets hurt. So a sub corner back gets fired in nets. Are really telling me that as if his day isn't ruined enough, he also has to kick every ball a distance that's beyond him? FFS think about this one you twits.

2. I'm Stephen Cluxton (I'm not really, but let's pretend), and I'm up hitting a free and it drops short. The resultant clearance goes to our centre back who lays it back to me on the halfway line to restart the attack. Foul? f**k off. What about once we start getting even more clever. We are slowing the game down and tossing the ball around our full back line. I step out beyond my full back line, where MDMA fists it back to me. Foul? f**k off. Let's say we all agree that this isn't a foul, but Johnny Cooper the cute wee b**tard decides to step in behind me in nets. I pass it back to him. Foul? f**k off. Seriously, think this one out twits. A goalkeeper is identical in football apart from a couple of rules to allow him to fulfil his job. This is not soccer. Passes to a keeper are not a problem. Not even remotely close.

3. Look, only an idiot shoots from 40m when there's a free man closer to goal. Being able to kick a ball a long way is not as important as being able to play football. If you want to come up with schemes that reward idiocy, go and join Sinn Fein. Leave the GAA alone.

Quote from: thewobbler on April 20, 2015, 05:55:46 PM
I want to to leave this thread alone as it's clearly full of people who can't count past 10, but I have to do this:

1. There's a 30 mph breeze, and your keeper gets hurt. So a sub corner back gets fired in nets. Are really telling me that as if his day isn't ruined enough, he also has to kick every ball a distance that's beyond him? FFS think about this one you twits.

2. I'm Stephen Cluxton (I'm not really, but let's pretend), and I'm up hitting a free and it drops short. The resultant clearance goes to our centre back who lays it back to me on the halfway line to restart the attack. Foul? f**k off. What about once we start getting even more clever. We are slowing the game down and tossing the ball around our full back line. I step out beyond my full back line, where MDMA fists it back to me. Foul? f**k off. Let's say we all agree that this isn't a foul, but Johnny Cooper the cute wee b**tard decides to step in behind me in nets. I pass it back to him. Foul? f**k off. Seriously, think this one out twits. A goalkeeper is identical in football apart from a couple of rules to allow him to fulfil his job. This is not soccer. Passes to a keeper are not a problem. Not even remotely close.

3. Look, only an idiot shoots from 40m when there's a free man closer to goal. Being able to kick a ball a long way is not as important as being able to play football. If you want to come up with schemes that reward idiocy, go and join Sinn Fein. Leave the GAA alone.

I agree, Colm O'Rourke is a twit.

Quote from: Jinxy on April 20, 2015, 05:42:35 PM

Quote from: illdecide on April 20, 2015, 12:36:21 PM
So what happens if a Goal Keeper takes his kick out and makes a mistake and the ball drops a meter or two short of the 45 line what punishment will the ref apply?

Black card.

😃 some brilliant stuff in this thread but jinxy... What a poster
I feel like a stalker following you around the gaaboard having little giggles to myself. I love muppets idea of having to jump over the ropes too, especially with big gloves

Quote from: thewobbler on April 20, 2015, 05:55:46 PM
I want to to leave this thread alone as it's clearly full of people who can't count past 10, but I have to do this:

1. There's a 30 mph breeze, and your keeper gets hurt. So a sub corner back gets fired in nets. Are really telling me that as if his day isn't ruined enough, he also has to kick every ball a distance that's beyond him? FFS think about this one you twits.

2. I'm Stephen Cluxton (I'm not really, but let's pretend), and I'm up hitting a free and it drops short. The resultant clearance goes to our centre back who lays it back to me on the halfway line to restart the attack. Foul? f**k off. What about once we start getting even more clever. We are slowing the game down and tossing the ball around our full back line. I step out beyond my full back line, where MDMA fists it back to me. Foul? f**k off. Let's say we all agree that this isn't a foul, but Johnny Cooper the cute wee b**tard decides to step in behind me in nets. I pass it back to him. Foul? f**k off. Seriously, think this one out twits. A goalkeeper is identical in football apart from a couple of rules to allow him to fulfil his job. This is not soccer. Passes to a keeper are not a problem. Not even remotely close.

3. Look, only an idiot shoots from 40m when there's a free man closer to goal. Being able to kick a ball a long way is not as important as being able to play football. If you want to come up with schemes that reward idiocy, go and join Sinn Fein. Leave the GAA alone.

I liked your first two points.

Quote from: time ticking away on April 20, 2015, 08:08:46 PM

Quote from: Jinxy on April 20, 2015, 05:42:35 PM

Quote from: illdecide on April 20, 2015, 12:36:21 PM
So what happens if a Goal Keeper takes his kick out and makes a mistake and the ball drops a meter or two short of the 45 line what punishment will the ref apply?

Black card.

😃 some brilliant stuff in this thread but jinxy... What a poster
I feel like a stalker following you around the gaaboard having little giggles to myself. I love muppets idea of having to jump over the ropes too, especially with big gloves

As long as it's just around the gaaboard.

I've kept an eye on this thread and I've noted with interest how most of these "remedies" are all being suggested without the slightest bit of thought as to how managers and players will react once they are brought in. And let's not forget, that's a large part of the reason why we've gotten to where we are in the first place. If I recall correctly, Aidan O'Rourke was the only manager who came out and said what I suspected myself a couple of years ago, that if you put in place a rule whereby a defender is going to get black carded every time he pulls down a forward in a one on one situation, his manager is going to make pretty damn sure that he never leave the defender in that situation - he's going to make sure he has at least one and ideally two players covering the backsman, so he's never forced to foul cynically.

So rather than repeat the mistake, how about we think logically about what's going to happen in a lot of these situations? For example the 40m line with points worth two outside of that - well then obviously I'm going to move the ball over and back across that line, looking to draw a free, or to get my long range shooter in place to shoot. If I get a lot of frees, we have more dead time while goalkeepers trek up the field to take six or seven of these kicks per game, killing a minute or more every time. How's that for drama! And what's the opposition going  to do - PULL MORE MEN BACK TO COVER THIS AREA!!! Pretty soon there will be no forwards left.

That's before we consider the fact that for every spectacular point from long range, there will be three wild punts that drift well wide of the target. Again, let's not forget that most people who play football aren't senior intercounty, they're underage or junior.

Three handpasses in a row - so aside from the fact that I'm giving under pressure referees even more stuff to think about (and while the likes of Joe McQuillan and Maurice Deegan will be fine, I'm not sure that you're average Junior B ref will be able for it) I'm also going to lead to a situation where lads kick the ball backwards just to break the run of handpasses, rather than slip the ball to a guy moving at pace and keep forward momentum going. Or possibly more aimless booting down the field, ideally aiming for the corner of your attack, and hoping that the opposition gets there first so that you can smother them, or force a kick off their own goal-line. None of this will be attractive.

Max distance on kickouts - aside from the fact that it's unenforceable (I was at a senior schools game this year where the wind was ferocious - no points against the wind, neither keeper could get the ball beyond his own 45m line) - it also means that every forward will pull back into that area and crowd out the dropping ball. If the backs follow them, they'll have 50 yards of open country. If they don't, they'll be idle spectators. I'll spend the whole game playing to make the opposition kick it out.


Aside from the fact that I don't think the sport is in too much trouble, can we please think before making more rule changes - and I don't mean think about what's the problem now, but think about what the knock on effect of all these changes might be.

Quote from: Hound on April 20, 2015, 01:28:03 PM
Why on earth would anyone (outside of Ulster) want to penalise the short kickout?

Conceding short kickouts is the one downside to operating the blanket defence, in that it gives the opposition free reign to start an attack with easy possession. Forcing long kickouts would force every team to implement blanket defence as there'd be no reason to leave forwards up top!

I like the idea of a "2 pointer" point for long range efforts. Although small downside would be you'd need to draw a new arc in each half, like the basketball 3 pointer arc.

Ask Colm. Its his proposal. We are only discussing its merits and the potential side affects without dismissing it and appearing too Northern.

No easy answers by the looks of things, maybe we should just leave well enough alone & allow the game develop by itself.

Looking at the two league semis & the U21 semis we might be getting into a twist about nothing.

Yes, there are going to be games that stink the place out, but that has always been the way.

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 21, 2015, 10:14:53 AM
No easy answers by the looks of things, maybe we should just leave well enough alone & allow the game develop by itself.

Looking at the two league semis & the U21 semis we might be getting into a twist about nothing.

Yes, there are going to be games that stink the place out, but that has always been the way.

I didn't see the Dublin-Tipp match but there was far too much trench warfare in Sligo to mark it out  an example of a good game.

Ok, for this week's column I have been really thinking hard about this. I want to stick rigidly to the time honoured traditions of an old fashioned knee-jerk reaction. But I also want to adhere to the media pundit school of thinking, or rather of appearing to have thought things through but not really bother my arse doing so.

So in that regard here are just five problems I think could easily be solved.

Problem: Nowadays is there is no space for forwards as teams rapidly funnel hundreds of forwards back as soon as they lose the ball. (that is about as much analysis as I could be arsed with).

Solution: Re-shape the pitch completely so that the pitch narrows to around 1.5 metres at the middle and widens out enormously near the goals. This would cause a bottleneck in midfield when teams try to funnel players back and leave loads of space for forwards in front of the goals. Trying to handpass is through such a narrow middle would be folly so teams would have to kick it long.

Problem: Some teams don't contest kickouts and many believe the art of high fielding is in terminal decline.

Solution: Further to the above solution, you could have posts at halfway, either side of the narrowest 1.5 metre wide part of the pitch. Any kickout that passes through the posts would be awarded 1/⑂ points. (No I don't know either but it looks like I thought about it a lot).

Problem: The are so many meaningless and one-sided games in the Provinces and the competition only really starts at the semi-final stage.

Solution: Provincial Champions play all matches with a man less the following year. All-Ireland Finalists play with 2 men less and All-Ireland Champions play with 4 men less. All except for Meath, who traditionally play better with less men, so they play with an extra man when they win a title.

Problem: Officiating at games has been in decline. Many believe the increased fitness of the players is a big part of the problem. (Again that is about as much analysis as I will bother with).

Solution: All officials will be required to use Segways in the Championship, including umpires. Training in the use of Segways should commence immediately. Each Segway will be modified to include large indicators for yellow, black and red cards and should have the capacity to be modified for any absurd cards that may be introduced in the future. The Segway should also have massive 150dB horns, to help officials break up schemozzles and to waken crowds put to sleep by any blanket defences.

Quote from: Syferus on April 21, 2015, 10:20:04 AM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 21, 2015, 10:14:53 AM
No easy answers by the looks of things, maybe we should just leave well enough alone & allow the game develop by itself.

Looking at the two league semis & the U21 semis we might be getting into a twist about nothing.

Yes, there are going to be games that stink the place out, but that has always been the way.

I didn't see the Dublin-Tipp match but there was far too much trench warfare in Sligo to mark it out  an example of a good game.

Going to be hard to take trench warfare out of Gaelic football without stripping the game of it's soul.

I enjoy a bit of oul fashioned trench warfare, gets the blood flowing!!

Looks like O'Rourke got a bit carried away with himself last week with his "template for change" and either rowed back or got rowed back. Then again he has been inconsistent in his articles and was on about the 3 handpass rule etc before and didn't think of the consequences. This is what he said back in Feb -  The solution is to limit the number of handpasses. Three should be enough. There are those who feel referees have enough problems without counting, but counting to three should not be too taxing. All handpasses in your own half of the field should have to be forward and no passes back to the goalkeeper should be allowed.

The one thing he did mention is the trial on the mark way back when. He said it didn't work as "midfielders were unwilling to risk a catch in case their direct opponent beat them to it". I'm not sure how this came about and I think Colm means that both teams just went about breaking the ball and no clean catching unfolded and this was a policy of the managers? I don't remember the trial matches and would've liked to have seen it but I would add that the second play after the initial mark should also be a mark option.

This would create more risk and reward. It would cause more  1 on 1 defense's and the reward would be that the subsequent mark would be a free score chance. The risk is that placing the 2nd midfielder and possibly a CHB up front to win the 2nd mark leaves the team vulnerable to the counter attack if unsuccessful. All mark kicks must be taken as forward ones.

I'd imagine there are some small downsides to this [I'll leave this part to the Lone Shark] but I visualize more high fielding and kicking which is what we are looking for in the game. I also visualize a more naked defence arrangement as a quickly taken initial mark from midfield will diminish and nullify the sweeper position, i.e, spare defence man on the attacking team can run into a scoring position to accept the 2nd mark, meanwhile the blanket sweeper is isolated and no use to his defence.

Its certain that teams with blankets would definitely have to re-think if this is a rule.

Quote from: Syferus on April 21, 2015, 10:20:04 AM

Quote from: BluestackBoy on April 21, 2015, 10:14:53 AM
No easy answers by the looks of things, maybe we should just leave well enough alone & allow the game develop by itself.

Looking at the two league semis & the U21 semis we might be getting into a twist about nothing.

Yes, there are going to be games that stink the place out, but that has always been the way.

I didn't see the Dublin-Tipp match but there was far too much trench warfare in Sligo to mark it out  an example of a good game.

Ah jesus i dunno.
What exactly do you want from a game?
The U21 game had some fantastic long range score taking, some acurate kick passing (im sure not as much as you would like, but it was still there), some good defending, a small bit of high feilding,defenders raiding up the feild to take a few scores, a devastaing inside forward performance from young Brennan and two teams going at it,without a  backwards step taken.
It may not have been a bonefide classic, but it was certain a more than decent game.

Quote from: highorlow on April 21, 2015, 11:08:13 AM
Looks like O'Rourke got a bit carried away with himself last week with his "template for change" and either rowed back or got rowed back. Then again he has been inconsistent in his articles and was on about the 3 handpass rule etc before and didn't think of the consequences. This is what he said back in Feb -  The solution is to limit the number of handpasses. Three should be enough. There are those who feel referees have enough problems without counting, but counting to three should not be too taxing. All handpasses in your own half of the field should have to be forward and no passes back to the goalkeeper should be allowed.

The one thing he did mention is the trial on the mark way back when. He said it didn't work as "midfielders were unwilling to risk a catch in case their direct opponent beat them to it". I'm not sure how this came about and I think Colm means that both teams just went about breaking the ball and no clean catching unfolded and this was a policy of the managers? I don't remember the trial matches and would've liked to have seen it but I would add that the second play after the initial mark should also be a mark option.

This would create more risk and reward. It would cause more  1 on 1 defense's and the reward would be that the subsequent mark would be a free score chance. The risk is that placing the 2nd midfielder and possibly a CHB up front to win the 2nd mark leaves the team vulnerable to the counter attack if unsuccessful. All mark kicks must be taken as forward ones.

I'd imagine there are some small downsides to this [I'll leave this part to the Lone Shark] but I visualize more high fielding and kicking which is what we are looking for in the game. I also visualize a more naked defence arrangement as a quickly taken initial mark from midfield will diminish and nullify the sweeper position, i.e, spare defence man on the attacking team can run into a scoring position to accept the 2nd mark, meanwhile the blanket sweeper is isolated and no use to his defence.

Its certain that teams with blankets would definitely have to re-think if this is a rule.

Managers will simply look at the risk reward. As Colm alluded to previously if there is a risk the opposition will get a free kick from a mid-fielder catching their own kick out the defending team will simply try to break the ball every time leading to increased congestion.

If there is a second mark available on the edge of the square the risk is higher so it will be made more congested.
At club level Managers will substitute size for skill. Doesn't matter if a man cant perform any of the other basics, if he is 6'6"" he will be placed on the edge of the square to win marks. Perhaps we could introduce the lift from Rugby!

QuoteManagers will simply look at the risk reward. As Colm alluded to previously if there is a risk the opposition will get a free kick from a mid-fielder catching their own kick out the defending team will simply try to break the ball every time leading to increased congestion.

If there is a second mark available on the edge of the square the risk is higher so it will be made more congested.
At club level Managers will substitute size for skill. Doesn't matter if a man cant perform any of the other basics, if he is 6'6"" he will be placed on the edge of the square to win marks. Perhaps we could introduce the lift from Rugby!

1st bold point = Based on the pace of the game nowadays the faster midfielder along with the best goalie will be rewarded in this instance. The 2nd mark is the bigger reward so this will lead to the best midfielders getting a return and lead to longer kick outs. By your logic, which is fair enough and I would agree with it, if the congestion increases around the midfield because of a reward mark then this will nullify the congestion in the defence and thus decrease the blanket influence?

2nd bold point = That's a fair point but I've addressed that as the best defending team will then be able to counter attack at pace. It also rewards the forward that can field the ball with his free score chance for mark 2.

3rd bold point = I thought of that also but I don't believe this to be the case. It is also contradicted by your initial point. If the midfield gets congested and the ball gets broken more often that fast skilled players are needed. Runners and skilled goal scorers will still be needed for the breaking ball on the initial marked kick into the forward line. High fielding is also a skill, but you probably have forgotten that since the blanket arrived. I don't believe a team of 15 Kieran Donaghy's would be any use, but one or two on every team would be necessary along with a load of Doohers and Geezers. What's the harm in that? Also the 2nd mark would not necessarily have to be a high hoof into the square as you seem to visualize. It can be a quick 15 yard tap to the nearest half or full forward.

For the 4th bold point = we already have "phases" and I'm waiting for commentators to use the phrase "linebreaks" soon in relation to the blanket.

I've tried to visualize how it would pan out and you have done the same. My conclusions are clearly from a playing perspective whereas I'd guess you are only giving a spectator perspective, which is welcome enough I suppose.

Quote from: highorlow on April 21, 2015, 11:08:13 AM
Looks like O'Rourke got a bit carried away with himself last week with his "template for change" and either rowed back or got rowed back. Then again he has been inconsistent in his articles and was on about the 3 handpass rule etc before and didn't think of the consequences. This is what he said back in Feb -  The solution is to limit the number of handpasses. Three should be enough. There are those who feel referees have enough problems without counting, but counting to three should not be too taxing. All handpasses in your own half of the field should have to be forward and no passes back to the goalkeeper should be allowed.

The one thing he did mention is the trial on the mark way back when. He said it didn't work as "midfielders were unwilling to risk a catch in case their direct opponent beat them to it". I'm not sure how this came about and I think Colm means that both teams just went about breaking the ball and no clean catching unfolded and this was a policy of the managers? I don't remember the trial matches and would've liked to have seen it but I would add that the second play after the initial mark should also be a mark option.

This would create more risk and reward. It would cause more  1 on 1 defense's and the reward would be that the subsequent mark would be a free score chance. The risk is that placing the 2nd midfielder and possibly a CHB up front to win the 2nd mark leaves the team vulnerable to the counter attack if unsuccessful. All mark kicks must be taken as forward ones.

I'd imagine there are some small downsides to this [I'll leave this part to the Lone Shark] but I visualize more high fielding and kicking which is what we are looking for in the game. I also visualize a more naked defence arrangement as a quickly taken initial mark from midfield will diminish and nullify the sweeper position, i.e, spare defence man on the attacking team can run into a scoring position to accept the 2nd mark, meanwhile the blanket sweeper is isolated and no use to his defence.

Its certain that teams with blankets would definitely have to re-think if this is a rule.

And just to finish the visualization a few skirts and blouses plimsolls and ya got yerself a great game a netball with a bigger target to aim at.jaysus

Quote from: muppet on April 21, 2015, 10:33:28 AM
Ok, for this week's column I have been really thinking hard about this. I want to stick rigidly to the time honoured traditions of an old fashioned knee-jerk reaction. But I also want to adhere to the media pundit school of thinking, or rather of appearing to have thought things through but not really bother my arse doing so.

So in that regard here are just five problems I think could easily be solved.

Problem: Nowadays is there is no space for forwards as teams rapidly funnel hundreds of forwards back as soon as they lose the ball. (that is about as much analysis as I could be arsed with).

Solution: Re-shape the pitch completely so that the pitch narrows to around 1.5 metres at the middle and widens out enormously near the goals. This would cause a bottleneck in midfield when teams try to funnel players back and leave loads of space for forwards in front of the goals. Trying to handpass is through such a narrow middle would be folly so teams would have to kick it long.

Problem: Some teams don't contest kickouts and many believe the art of high fielding is in terminal decline.

Solution: Further to the above solution, you could have posts at halfway, either side of the narrowest 1.5 metre wide part of the pitch. Any kickout that passes through the posts would be awarded 1/⑂ points. (No I don't know either but it looks like I thought about it a lot).

Problem: The are so many meaningless and one-sided games in the Provinces and the competition only really starts at the semi-final stage.

Solution: Provincial Champions play all matches with a man less the following year. All-Ireland Finalists play with 2 men less and All-Ireland Champions play with 4 men less. All except for Meath, who traditionally play better with less men, so they play with an extra man when they win a title.

Problem: Officiating at games has been in decline. Many believe the increased fitness of the players is a big part of the problem. (Again that is about as much analysis as I will bother with).

Solution: All officials will be required to use Segways in the Championship, including umpires. Training in the use of Segways should commence immediately. Each Segway will be modified to include large indicators for yellow, black and red cards and should have the capacity to be modified for any absurd cards that may be introduced in the future. The Segway should also have massive 150dB horns, to help officials break up schemozzles and to waken crowds put to sleep by any blanket defences.

I'm usually very conservative in my views on rule changes and generally think that the game will work itself out. But these proposals have completely changed my view on that and I don't think I can pick a fault in any of them. The re-shaping of the pitch is such an obvious solution, I can't believe it hasn't been considered before! Good work Muppet!

Quote from: muppet on April 21, 2015, 10:33:28 AM
Ok, for this week's column I have been really thinking hard about this. I want to stick rigidly to the time honoured traditions of an old fashioned knee-jerk reaction. But I also want to adhere to the media pundit school of thinking, or rather of appearing to have thought things through but not really bother my arse doing so.

So in that regard here are just five problems I think could easily be solved.

Problem: Nowadays is there is no space for forwards as teams rapidly funnel hundreds of forwards back as soon as they lose the ball. (that is about as much analysis as I could be arsed with).

Solution: Re-shape the pitch completely so that the pitch narrows to around 1.5 metres at the middle and widens out enormously near the goals. This would cause a bottleneck in midfield when teams try to funnel players back and leave loads of space for forwards in front of the goals. Trying to handpass is through such a narrow middle would be folly so teams would have to kick it long.

Problem: Some teams don't contest kickouts and many believe the art of high fielding is in terminal decline.

Solution: Further to the above solution, you could have posts at halfway, either side of the narrowest 1.5 metre wide part of the pitch. Any kickout that passes through the posts would be awarded 1/⑂ points. (No I don't know either but it looks like I thought about it a lot).

Problem: The are so many meaningless and one-sided games in the Provinces and the competition only really starts at the semi-final stage.

Solution: Provincial Champions play all matches with a man less the following year. All-Ireland Finalists play with 2 men less and All-Ireland Champions play with 4 men less. All except for Meath, who traditionally play better with less men, so they play with an extra man when they win a title.

Problem: Officiating at games has been in decline. Many believe the increased fitness of the players is a big part of the problem. (Again that is about as much analysis as I will bother with).

Solution: All officials will be required to use Segways in the Championship, including umpires. Training in the use of Segways should commence immediately. Each Segway will be modified to include large indicators for yellow, black and red cards and should have the capacity to be modified for any absurd cards that may be introduced in the future. The Segway should also have massive 150dB horns, to help officials break up schemozzles and to waken crowds put to sleep by any blanket defences.

;D
Can't get the image of Marty Duffy whizzing around the field on a segway out of my head.

Quote from: highorlow on April 21, 2015, 01:15:11 PM

QuoteManagers will simply look at the risk reward. As Colm alluded to previously if there is a risk the opposition will get a free kick from a mid-fielder catching their own kick out the defending team will simply try to break the ball every time leading to increased congestion.

If there is a second mark available on the edge of the square the risk is higher so it will be made more congested.
At club level Managers will substitute size for skill. Doesn't matter if a man cant perform any of the other basics, if he is 6'6"" he will be placed on the edge of the square to win marks. Perhaps we could introduce the lift from Rugby!

1st bold point = Based on the pace of the game nowadays the faster midfielder along with the best goalie will be rewarded in this instance. The 2nd mark is the bigger reward so this will lead to the best midfielders getting a return and lead to longer kick outs. By your logic, which is fair enough and I would agree with it, if the congestion increases around the midfield because of a reward mark then this will nullify the congestion in the defence and thus decrease the blanket influence?

2nd bold point = That's a fair point but I've addressed that as the best defending team will then be able to counter attack at pace. It also rewards the forward that can field the ball with his free score chance for mark 2.

3rd bold point = I thought of that also but I don't believe this to be the case. It is also contradicted by your initial point. If the midfield gets congested and the ball gets broken more often that fast skilled players are needed. Runners and skilled goal scorers will still be needed for the breaking ball on the initial marked kick into the forward line. High fielding is also a skill, but you probably have forgotten that since the blanket arrived. I don't believe a team of 15 Kieran Donaghy's would be any use, but one or two on every team would be necessary along with a load of Doohers and Geezers. What's the harm in that? Also the 2nd mark would not necessarily have to be a high hoof into the square as you seem to visualize. It can be a quick 15 yard tap to the nearest half or full forward.

For the 4th bold point = we already have "phases" and I'm waiting for commentators to use the phrase "linebreaks" soon in relation to the blanket.

I've tried to visualize how it would pan out and you have done the same. My conclusions are clearly from a playing perspective whereas I'd guess you are only giving a spectator perspective, which is welcome enough I suppose.

I'm glad we are not depending on your guesses to redefine the game.

I would agree that high fielding is one of the skills of the game but we should not be elevating it (excuse the pun) above the other skills. A potential free score simply for being able to catch the ball is an over-reward and will place undue emphasis on being able to counter it.

Quote from: muppet on April 21, 2015, 10:33:28 AM
Ok, for this week's column I have been really thinking hard about this. I want to stick rigidly to the time honoured traditions of an old fashioned knee-jerk reaction. But I also want to adhere to the media pundit school of thinking, or rather of appearing to have thought things through but not really bother my arse doing so.

So in that regard here are just five problems I think could easily be solved.

Problem: Nowadays is there is no space for forwards as teams rapidly funnel hundreds of forwards back as soon as they lose the ball. (that is about as much analysis as I could be arsed with).

Solution: Re-shape the pitch completely so that the pitch narrows to around 1.5 metres at the middle and widens out enormously near the goals. This would cause a bottleneck in midfield when teams try to funnel players back and leave loads of space for forwards in front of the goals. Trying to handpass is through such a narrow middle would be folly so teams would have to kick it long.

Problem: Some teams don't contest kickouts and many believe the art of high fielding is in terminal decline.

Solution: Further to the above solution, you could have posts at halfway, either side of the narrowest 1.5 metre wide part of the pitch. Any kickout that passes through the posts would be awarded 1/⑂ points. (No I don't know either but it looks like I thought about it a lot).

Problem: The are so many meaningless and one-sided games in the Provinces and the competition only really starts at the semi-final stage.

Solution: Provincial Champions play all matches with a man less the following year. All-Ireland Finalists play with 2 men less and All-Ireland Champions play with 4 men less. All except for Meath, who traditionally play better with less men, so they play with an extra man when they win a title.

Problem: Officiating at games has been in decline. Many believe the increased fitness of the players is a big part of the problem. (Again that is about as much analysis as I will bother with).

Solution: All officials will be required to use Segways in the Championship, including umpires. Training in the use of Segways should commence immediately. Each Segway will be modified to include large indicators for yellow, black and red cards and should have the capacity to be modified for any absurd cards that may be introduced in the future. The Segway should also have massive 150dB horns, to help officials break up schemozzles and to waken crowds put to sleep by any blanket defences.

I like the on about reshaping the pitch. That just might work. I read recently that in a recent county match the ref had one of these gps systems on as well as the teams and he ended up finishing well above any of the players in terms of ground covered. The segway could be useful then especially for the older refs.

The segway might fall victim to pitch conditions though.
On a wet day, you could have the ref spinning his wheels out in the middle of the field while there's a shemozzle in the large parallelogram.
Also, it would probably need to have a periscope fitted so it could navigate around the Hyde.

I haven't read through this whole thread as frankly I couldn't be arsed but there seems to be toing and froing (I've never actually written that down but it doesn't look right,  it looks like 2 characters out of Game of Thrones or something!!)  over what changes need to be made, how can we improve our game etc etc.  I have a radical suggestion,  why not leave the f**king rules alone and spend more time investing time and money in improving the level of coaching that's going on and I don't mean just picking-the-ball up coaching etc.  Intercounty football has become too hard to watch as the focus is on not losing,  fear of failure is the key factor.  Managers play conservative, keep ball style football as they don't want to expose their team, their level of knowledge of how the game is played (by that I mean the players) and therefore the managers own inadequacies at coaching.   Most teams are on a fairly level par in terms of conditioning these days at the level they are playing with 1 or 2 exceptions so why not just let the feckers play????  Lose the fear and you may lose 1 battle or 2 battles but long term the war will be won and the game will be played the way it should be.

I do like the ideas of the Segway for referees though one or 2 club referees might need 2 of them strapped together!!!

Bcb, I think to be fair that the fear of losing is a big factor in most counties, or maybe the pressure to win. It's easier to coach a defensive system (in the sense of less risky) than to throw off the shackles and have a cut. My inclination would be the latter, but I'm sure if I was taking a team who had been regularly hockeyed in the past, the first order of business would be to tighten them up, and try to make us hard to beat. That's human nature. You'd have to be fairly secure and confident to approach a game with an attacking mindset when you are probably going to be dashing your attacking waves off the rocks of a massed defense.

Dublin were hammered for being naive last year. Kerry were slated for being defensive. But what Kerry did was perfect. What Dublin did was kamikaze. What would you do?

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 11:10:31 AM
Bcb, I think to be fair that the fear of losing is a big factor in most counties, or maybe the pressure to win. It's easier to coach a defensive system (in the sense of less risky) than to throw off the shackles and have a cut. My inclination would be the latter, but I'm sure if I was taking a team who had been regularly hockeyed in the past, the first order of business would be to tighten them up, and try to make us hard to beat. That's human nature. You'd have to be fairly secure and confident to approach a game with an attacking mindset when you are probably going to be dashing your attacking waves off the rocks of a massed defense.

Dublin were hammered for being naive last year. Kerry were slated for being defensive. But what Kerry did was perfect. What Dublin did was kamikaze. What would you do?

I think the problem is that every season for a manager is seen in a very singular light.  What will I do this year?  What happens if I let them play football and they get beaten?  The people at the top need to say well hold on here let's give this boy a chance to improve the players but the problem is that the coaching at club level is focused on defensive methods completely with an absolute fear of losing.  I was at an underage game the other night where one team was being beaten and had to chase the game.  They continued to play a sweeper as it has become ingrained in their psyche that they have to.  What is happening in too many clubs is that the coaching structures are focusing on the systems as opposed to the skills ergo when the 'better' players go to the county teams they are focused on playing a system instead of being truly comfortable in their own basic ability.  Coaching systems does not improve players, coaching players improves players.  I played a sweeper against my own better judgement recently as my selectors think it's a good idea.  I won't do it again.  We were losing no matter what the sweeper did.  When we went to a flat 15 we brought it back level and only a last minute score against us due to  player dropping a pass short robbed us of at least a draw. 

I see and hear of coaches being the 'drills' kings.  Running the training session like a flow chart from an IT consultancy and that is wrong.  Focus on the basic skills in warm up drills and then play football.  The only way that players develop game awareness is through playing games and that has to be the focus.  But what would I know I only have a Level 1 coaching badge!

Has Basketball increased in popularity recently?  A good footballer would also be a good basketball player. 

I agree with nearly all of that. In fact I agree with all of it. I think everyone, and most importantly the supporters, are guilty of demanding success , or relative success, quickly and any sort of plan that involves pain in the early days is seen as an immediate failure and reason to change the manager, or at least get him to change the plan. I think most coaches would prefer to play a more attacking style, but the original point stands. They are afraid that if they lose heavily, or look naive in losing, that the players, supporters and club behind them will lose faith and belief in the manager/coach.

Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on April 22, 2015, 11:06:17 AM
I haven't read through this whole thread as frankly I couldn't be arsed but there seems to be toing and froing (I've never actually written that down but it doesn't look right,  it looks like 2 characters out of Game of Thrones or something!!)  over what changes need to be made, how can we improve our game etc etc.  I have a radical suggestion,  why not leave the f**king rules alone and spend more time investing time and money in improving the level of coaching that's going on and I don't mean just picking-the-ball up coaching etc.  Intercounty football has become too hard to watch as the focus is on not losing,  fear of failure is the key factor.  Managers play conservative, keep ball style football as they don't want to expose their team, their level of knowledge of how the game is played (by that I mean the players) and therefore the managers own inadequacies at coaching.   Most teams are on a fairly level par in terms of conditioning these days at the level they are playing with 1 or 2 exceptions so why not just let the feckers play????  Lose the fear and you may lose 1 battle or 2 battles but long term the war will be won and the game will be played the way it should be.

I do like the ideas of the Segway for referees though one or 2 club referees might need 2 of them strapped together!!!

Exactly, it's the mindset of us all that needs to be changed not the rules. As AZ says above Dublin were slated for being naive last year, they weren't naive at all, they were courageous, brave and confident in their own game, as well they should. Donegal got a few breaks in that game but they could easily have been beaten out the gate too. I can however, understand why Dublin will replicate Kerry this year if they play a Donegal type team again. The structure of the football season doesn't lend itself to teams having a go so I'm not sure if football can get out of this negative mindset. It won't prove successful for most teams anymore but if will reduce games to pedestrian conservative borefests where the poorer team will win every now and again due to a mistake or a bit more efficiency in attack. A worrying future for those of us who love the game and believe it is much more than a 'results business shite'.

Quote from: thewobbler on April 20, 2015, 05:55:46 PM
I want to to leave this thread alone as it's clearly full of people who can't count past 10, but I have to do this:

1. There's a 30 mph breeze, and your keeper gets hurt. So a sub corner back gets fired in nets. Are really telling me that as if his day isn't ruined enough, he also has to kick every ball a distance that's beyond him? FFS think about this one you twits.

2. I'm Stephen Cluxton (I'm not really, but let's pretend), and I'm up hitting a free and it drops short. The resultant clearance goes to our centre back who lays it back to me on the halfway line to restart the attack. Foul? f**k off. What about once we start getting even more clever. We are slowing the game down and tossing the ball around our full back line. I step out beyond my full back line, where MDMA fists it back to me. Foul? f**k off. Let's say we all agree that this isn't a foul, but Johnny Cooper the cute wee b**tard decides to step in behind me in nets. I pass it back to him. Foul? f**k off. Seriously, think this one out twits. A goalkeeper is identical in football apart from a couple of rules to allow him to fulfil his job. This is not soccer. Passes to a keeper are not a problem. Not even remotely close.

3. Look, only an idiot shoots from 40m when there's a free man closer to goal. Being able to kick a ball a long way is not as important as being able to play football. If you want to come up with schemes that reward idiocy, go and join Sinn Fein. Leave the GAA alone.

:o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D lol

Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2015, 11:04:11 AM
The segway might fall victim to pitch conditions though.
On a wet day, you could have the ref spinning his wheels out in the middle of the field while there's a shemozzle in the large parallelogram.
Also, it would probably need to have a periscope fitted so it could navigate around the Hyde.

We have the technology:

The Men in Black Segway - Hyde Park Model...

(http://www.streetmove.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/segway-off-road.jpg)

Quote from: Denn Forever on April 22, 2015, 11:32:00 AM
Has Basketball increased in popularity recently?  A good footballer would also be a good basketball player.

Whatever about increasing in popularity it is a brilliant second sport for a Gaelic footballer.  I play it on a recreational basis at this stage and coach it.  The great thing is that it generally runs in the 'off season' for Gaelic football.  My sons play it at a competitive level and my eldest plays at a good level.  The hand eye co-ordination is a brilliant transferable skill.  We have played it in Cross every winter for underage players for years (albeit at a semi scrum level!!!) but I know that it helped us in terms of our ball handling and fast transfer of the ball between players.

Hand Passing Heathens!!!!!!!!

Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on April 22, 2015, 11:27:46 AM

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 11:10:31 AM
Bcb, I think to be fair that the fear of losing is a big factor in most counties, or maybe the pressure to win. It's easier to coach a defensive system (in the sense of less risky) than to throw off the shackles and have a cut. My inclination would be the latter, but I'm sure if I was taking a team who had been regularly hockeyed in the past, the first order of business would be to tighten them up, and try to make us hard to beat. That's human nature. You'd have to be fairly secure and confident to approach a game with an attacking mindset when you are probably going to be dashing your attacking waves off the rocks of a massed defense.

Dublin were hammered for being naive last year. Kerry were slated for being defensive. But what Kerry did was perfect. What Dublin did was kamikaze. What would you do?

I think the problem is that every season for a manager is seen in a very singular light.  What will I do this year?  What happens if I let them play football and they get beaten?  The people at the top need to say well hold on here let's give this boy a chance to improve the players but the problem is that the coaching at club level is focused on defensive methods completely with an absolute fear of losing.  I was at an underage game the other night where one team was being beaten and had to chase the game.  They continued to play a sweeper as it has become ingrained in their psyche that they have to.  What is happening in too many clubs is that the coaching structures are focusing on the systems as opposed to the skills ergo when the 'better' players go to the county teams they are focused on playing a system instead of being truly comfortable in their own basic ability.  Coaching systems does not improve players, coaching players improves players.  I played a sweeper against my own better judgement recently as my selectors think it's a good idea.  I won't do it again.  We were losing no matter what the sweeper did.  When we went to a flat 15 we brought it back level and only a last minute score against us due to  player dropping a pass short robbed us of at least a draw. 

I see and hear of coaches being the 'drills' kings.  Running the training session like a flow chart from an IT consultancy and that is wrong.  Focus on the basic skills in warm up drills and then play football.  The only way that players develop game awareness is through playing games and that has to be the focus.  But what would I know I only have a Level 1 coaching badge!

Again I agree 100%. We rarely do drills with any age group in training and instead our primary focus is on creating decision makers. We play loads of games and ask the players loads of questions about what they did and why they did it. We try to develop a mindset that there is no wrong answer and that in certain situations what would normally be crazy is the right thing to do. We also encourage self expression and risk taking so we do a lot of flick passes and trick shots for fun and to explore the game and what can be done. Football as a game offers so much to young players and coaches of underage teams should be going out with the mind set of winning 6-19 to 6-18 rather than 0-8 to 0-7. Create good footballers who can attack and defend and by the time they are adults if you need them to play a system they'll be able to do it as they'll have the skills and the ability to think through the game.

Zulu, how do ye teach techniques and skills if ye don't do drills? I find games and conditioned games the best and most enjoyable for repetition and game situations, but I haven't found a good teaching alternative to drills/exercises.

I do a lot of teaching through the warm up. As our kids often don't know what skills are in the game until we introduce them we drip feed them into warm ups and build on them over weeks. We do drills on the odd occasion but we usually do the basics in the warm then use minimal pressure to develop the skills, i.e 1 defender v 10 soloers, 2 defenders v 8 attackers keeping possession with the handpass. I think players will develop technically more slowly this way but will be able to use the skills in game situations much more effectively in time. Of course we will use drills a bit with younger players especially and if the kids are really struggling but we tend to vary from the traditional drills or use them for a minute or two between small games.

OK, interesting. I still do drills for teaching, but I usually structure the sessions

1 - warm up incorporating FMS
2 - small sided games
3 - 1 or 2 max teaching drills on a specific skill
4 - conditioned or short sided games focused on rewarding that skill

For older players the last game can be a full sided game every so often if numbers allow.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 12:10:15 PM
OK, interesting. I still do drills for teaching, but I usually structure the sessions

1 - warm up incorporating FMS
2 - small sided games
3 - 1 or 2 max teaching drills on a specific skill
4 - conditioned or short sided games focused on rewarding that skill

For older players the last game can be a full sided game every so often if numbers allow.

I would swap 2 & 3 around and use the 'drills' as part of the warm-up.  Then if you were focusing on a particular skill in the 'drills' I would emphasize that in the small games, eg footpassing only, handpssing only.  Then push onto the 'bigger' game. 

Hahaha Zulu you're the wilest spoofer, what a complete load of sh1te you talk.

Just roar at them until they do it right.

We do that.

Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on April 22, 2015, 12:19:54 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 12:10:15 PM
OK, interesting. I still do drills for teaching, but I usually structure the sessions

1 - warm up incorporating FMS
2 - small sided games
3 - 1 or 2 max teaching drills on a specific skill
4 - conditioned or short sided games focused on rewarding that skill

For older players the last game can be a full sided game every so often if numbers allow.

I would swap 2 & 3 around and use the 'drills' as part of the warm-up.  Then if you were focusing on a particular skill in the 'drills' I would emphasize that in the small games, eg footpassing only, handpssing only.  Then push onto the 'bigger' game.

I'm comfortable with the way I'm doing it at the moment for kids. I find the first game helps calm them for the skills.

For adults or older kids the first game is usually a possession or support game to get their blood pumping.j

Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2015, 12:52:05 PM
Just roar at them until they do it right.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 01:10:17 PM
We do that.

"Put out that fag!"

Quote from: Keyser soze on April 22, 2015, 12:46:41 PM
Hahaha Zulu you're the wilest spoofer, what a complete load of sh1te you talk.

why do you say that? I think he has some very good ideas and tries a lot of new things.

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 01:54:17 PM

Quote from: Keyser soze on April 22, 2015, 12:46:41 PM
Hahaha Zulu you're the wilest spoofer, what a complete load of sh1te you talk.

why do you say that? I think he has some very good ideas and tries a lot of new things.

Well anybody that is seriously claiming to be coaching or managing and is happy to instil a mindset among the team that he would happily concede 6-19 needs their head examined and can't really ask to be taken seriously.

Ah, I see what you mean. I doubt he really would be happy to concede 6-19, but sure he can speak for himself I suppose :)

We had a soccer manager who had a philosophy 'They score 4, we score 5'. He lasted one year. There were far more 4-1 defeats than 5-4 victories :)

Quote from: Keyser soze on April 22, 2015, 02:12:42 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on April 22, 2015, 01:54:17 PM

Quote from: Keyser soze on April 22, 2015, 12:46:41 PM
Hahaha Zulu you're the wilest spoofer, what a complete load of sh1te you talk.

why do you say that? I think he has some very good ideas and tries a lot of new things.

Well anybody that is seriously claiming to be coaching or managing and is happy to instil a mindset among the team that he would happily concede 6-19 needs their head examined and can't really ask to be taken seriously.

Oh dear, you've stumbled into a big boys discussion and are struggling to follow. I picked two exaggerated score lines to illustrate the point that underage coaches and managers should be coaching in a positive, go out a win mentality using the skills of the game rather than one focused on systems and tactics that make you 'difficult to break down'. If your underage system is producing skilled, rounded, intelligent footballers they will quickly be able to play any system that coaches require when they are older. More importantly they'll be able to think their way through opponents tactics and have the skill set to execute.

By the way, if my U14 or U12 teams conceded 6-19 and scored 6-20 I'd be perfectly happy, winning is the name of the game according to some so why should you be happy to win a game 0-6 to 0-5 but unhappy to win one 6-19 to 6-20?