The official dark arts/cynical play thread

Started by BennyHarp, May 09, 2015, 08:47:35 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

westbound

Quote from: Esmarelda on July 06, 2015, 04:31:59 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on July 06, 2015, 01:14:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 06, 2015, 12:30:08 PM
I thought it was expanding on the point. In fact, I should have said that while we anticipated that the black card would do nothing about the main issue its supporting PR hooha purported to address, we didn't anticipate that it would make this particular problem even worse, by providing an additional incentive for the last-minute, score-saving drag-down - the opportunity to run down the clock while the ref foosters with black cards.

I think it's a non-sequitur. "See, the black card has done nothing about the score saving foul".

Joe Brolly aside, and his idiotic rant about Sean Cavanagh, I think most people understand the black card is designed to stop cynical fouling, primarily drag downs and body checks, occurring throughout the game. I often point to Declan O'Sullivan dragging down the Cavan full back in the Cavan backline, in order to stop a counter attack. *That* was the insidious cynicism which was in danger of pervading the whole game, not just the headline of a man running through on goal and getting dragged down.

People were using the cynical foul as a deliberate ploy to get set after a turnover, or to impede counter attacks with off the ball blocking of runs etc. I absolutely think the black card has curtailed a lot of that behaviour.

It was never going to stop Sean Cavanagh taking down the Monaghan man that time, and Joe Brolly undermined his whole argument (as usual) by making it all about Cavanagh's foul. Of course the foul was a great example of the type of tacklethe rule (which had already been voted in) was going to address, but in reality that situation isn't going to be stopped by a black card, yellow card or even red card a lot of times. People will take one for the team. But will they drag down a full back for the team? I don't think so.

And if the ref wasted a minute black carding the guy, he should have added a minute.
If the sin bin had been brought in as many people suggested then the team, as well as the individual, would have been punished. Players might still do it but at least they'd have to fight on with 14 men or less.

Don't forgot that the original proposal for the black card was that no replacement would be allowed. That was until some influential managers voiced their opinions. If no replacement was allowed then teams would have to fight on with 14 men.
Personally, I'd be in favour of allowing only 1 replacement for a black card (rather than 3 at present). I think 3 replacements for black cards is too many.

Canalman

Tweaking of black card rule all that is needed imo. For example, a black card in the last 10/ 15  minutes could reduce your substitutions in the next game by 2 to a maximum of 4.

Maybe the player who did it in the last 10/15  minutes will be suspended for the next game.

Amazing really the amount of people who should know better (tv pundits , commentators etc) who have not got a clue what a black card offence is.

macdanger2

Quote from: Canalman on July 07, 2015, 10:00:08 AM
Tweaking of black card rule all that is needed imo. For example, a black card in the last 10/ 15  minutes could reduce your substitutions in the next game by 2 to a maximum of 4.

Maybe the player who did it in the last 10/15  minutes will be suspended for the next game.

Amazing really the amount of people who should know better (tv pundits , commentators etc) who have not got a clue what a black card offence is.

Maybe no replacement for a black card in the last 10 minutes

smort

Quote from: macdanger2 on July 07, 2015, 10:09:57 AM
Quote from: Canalman on July 07, 2015, 10:00:08 AM
Tweaking of black card rule all that is needed imo. For example, a black card in the last 10/ 15  minutes could reduce your substitutions in the next game by 2 to a maximum of 4.

Maybe the player who did it in the last 10/15  minutes will be suspended for the next game.

Amazing really the amount of people who should know better (tv pundits , commentators etc) who have not got a clue what a black card offence is.

Maybe no replacement for a black card in the last 10 minutes

Don't think that would work. Is the last 10 minutes from the 60th minute? what if there was 5 minutes injury time, that team would be down a player for 15 minutes, which would lead to inconsistencies from game to game. I don't like the black card. If referees had of produced yellow cards correctly there would have been no need to introduce it. It does nothing to stop the cynical stopping of play in the last period of a game. In fact, i would guess that we actually see more of these deliberate drag downs at the end of close games than before the introduction of the black card.

Esmarelda

It seems that the simpel 10 minute sin bin is too simple for the GAA. 10 minutes off then you're back on. If it happens in the last 10 minutes then you don't get back on. Simple.

Hardy

The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

AZOffaly

Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

Define 'failed'. Why did it fail? Did it really fail, or was it simply rejected because managers kicked up such a fuss?

As for your other point, I think it has some merit. A lot of these were talked about back at the genesis of the black card. The black card wouldn't be my preference, but it has had an impact on the type of fouling it was designed for. The fact that it hasn't eradicated all cynical play is hardly its fault.

I'm very wary of the diving culture as well, and I'm not sure the drag down is that hard to feign, (see the traditional forwards looping of the arm and falling down dragging the man on top of him) but any rule designed to punish fouling runs the risk of increasing diving. That's why I'd treat diving as every bit as cynical as any foul.

westbound

Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

If we want to eradicate the cynical drag down, this is definitely the most effective way of doing that.
The counter argument is that the punishment is too severe and will led to a complete lack of tackling out the field and would lead to even more massed defenses. For this reason I'd be against it. It would definitely solve the cynical pull down problem but I reckon it would create a bigger problem.

I think we need to carefully consider the unintended consequences before any rule change is implemented.

nrico2006

I know it can't really fall into this category as it is a Kerry player and not a Tyrone one, but Geaney's reaction after the goal the other day was very nice. 
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

Jinxy

Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

Excuse me Hardy, it's actually Einstein's 'Theory of Insanity'.
E = mc3

If you were any use you'd be playing.


johnneycool

Quote from: AZOffaly on July 07, 2015, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

Define 'failed'. Why did it fail? Did it really fail, or was it simply rejected because managers kicked up such a fuss?

As for your other point, I think it has some merit. A lot of these were talked about back at the genesis of the black card. The black card wouldn't be my preference, but it has had an impact on the type of fouling it was designed for. The fact that it hasn't eradicated all cynical play is hardly its fault.

I'm very wary of the diving culture as well, and I'm not sure the drag down is that hard to feign, (see the traditional forwards looping of the arm and falling down dragging the man on top of him) but any rule designed to punish fouling runs the risk of increasing diving. That's why I'd treat diving as every bit as cynical as any foul.

The sin bin never really got a proper hearing as indeed all the high profile intercounty managers railed against it early on, I don't even think it seen the end of the preseason tournaments IIRC.

I'd introduce a mix of black card and sin bin, get a black card and your replacement can't come on for 10 minutes, but then again the no matter what system is put in place referees have to enforce it and the GAA support them in doing that, neither of which is happening with the current set of rules we have in either code.

Jinxy

Quote from: johnneycool on July 21, 2015, 09:32:46 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on July 07, 2015, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

Define 'failed'. Why did it fail? Did it really fail, or was it simply rejected because managers kicked up such a fuss?

As for your other point, I think it has some merit. A lot of these were talked about back at the genesis of the black card. The black card wouldn't be my preference, but it has had an impact on the type of fouling it was designed for. The fact that it hasn't eradicated all cynical play is hardly its fault.

I'm very wary of the diving culture as well, and I'm not sure the drag down is that hard to feign, (see the traditional forwards looping of the arm and falling down dragging the man on top of him) but any rule designed to punish fouling runs the risk of increasing diving. That's why I'd treat diving as every bit as cynical as any foul.

The sin bin never really got a proper hearing as indeed all the high profile intercounty managers railed against it early on, I don't even think it seen the end of the preseason tournaments IIRC.

I'd introduce a mix of black card and sin bin, get a black card and your replacement can't come on for 10 minutes, but then again the no matter what system is put in place referees have to enforce it and the GAA support them in doing that, neither of which is happening with the current set of rules we have in either code.



"Ten minutes son. In you get."
If you were any use you'd be playing.

joemamas

Quote from: Jinxy on July 21, 2015, 01:30:00 PM
Quote from: johnneycool on July 21, 2015, 09:32:46 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on July 07, 2015, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: Hardy on July 07, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
The sin bin was tried and it failed. We all know the definition of insanity.

There is no deterrent to  the last-minute, score-saving drag-down. Every player will do it to save the game. So the only option is not deterrence, but penalty - not a personal/team penalty but a playing penalty that provides an opportunity to get the score that was denied by the foul. It's unnecessarily complicated to have different penalties for different times of the game or different parts of the field. So I would penalise a drag-down at any time, anywhere on the pitch except inside the 13 metre line with a 20-metre free in the centre. Any drag-down inside the 13 is a penalty.

I'm wary that any strengthening of penalties for any foul provides an increased incentive for diving and feigning. It's very difficult, though, to feign being dragged down, so I don't think that's an effective counter argument in this case.

Define 'failed'. Why did it fail? Did it really fail, or was it simply rejected because managers kicked up such a fuss?

As for your other point, I think it has some merit. A lot of these were talked about back at the genesis of the black card. The black card wouldn't be my preference, but it has had an impact on the type of fouling it was designed for. The fact that it hasn't eradicated all cynical play is hardly its fault.

I'm very wary of the diving culture as well, and I'm not sure the drag down is that hard to feign, (see the traditional forwards looping of the arm and falling down dragging the man on top of him) but any rule designed to punish fouling runs the risk of increasing diving. That's why I'd treat diving as every bit as cynical as any foul.

The sin bin never really got a proper hearing as indeed all the high profile intercounty managers railed against it early on, I don't even think it seen the end of the preseason tournaments IIRC.

I'd introduce a mix of black card and sin bin, get a black card and your replacement can't come on for 10 minutes, but then again the no matter what system is put in place referees have to enforce it and the GAA support them in doing that, neither of which is happening with the current set of rules we have in either code.



"Ten minutes son. In you get."

Could we also have one for commentators.

trileacman

Lads the refs aren't even dishing out black cards now when they should be. What f**king hope have you got of getting them to sin-bin players?
Fantasy Rugby World Cup Champion 2011,
Fantasy 6 Nations Champion 2014