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

[tyronebhoy]

Hardy

Agree entirely that the best way to "punish" a cynical foul is to move the free to within a scoring distance.  The drag down foul epitomised by Sean Cavanagh and Conor Maginn are reasonably rare, but the body checks and cynical fouls further down the field are much more common especially in the latter stages of games when a team is holding onto a lead.  Dublin and Donegal are masters of fouling out the field to slow up the play.  By punishing these fouls with a 21 yd free would certainly make offenders think twice, particularly in a close game.

[bPreacher]

"What do i think of the black card now?" -  I understand that cynical fouling needs to be tackled but I think I wouldn't want to be a defender. Sure you'll have people saying that if you tackle correctly you'll be alright but what is this correct tackle? Quite often the defender can barely touch the forward particularly if that forward is of the small nippy variety.
What if a forward is powering through the middle and I step in front of him arms spread out in the normal tackle position - he then charges through\over me. Should the forward be black carded?

[AZOffaly]

No, because him charging over you is not a cynical foul, as clearly defined in the new rules. However it should be a free out, and if it is construed as deliberately foul play, then he is open to a yellow or red card as well.

[bPreacher]

That was probably a poor example on my part, I guess if I'm the defender I might consider it cynical - however I do take you're point.
What I was really trying to show was that forwards tend to get more of the benefit of the doubt. What about the scenario where the forward grabs the backs arm and simulates a take down - this goes on all the time and I understand its difficult for a referee to spot but I'd definitely consider that cynical. Should the forward get black carded?

[AZOffaly]

Yes, I agree with you. Any diving or faking of fouls to get other players in trouble should be a black card. Also, any jersey pulling where the intent is obviously to stop the man illegally should be the same. I think it's ridiculous they added the 'to the ground' wording.

I also feel that the problem in football was not necessarily defenders doing cynical fouls, it was the midfield, half forwards and full forwards, who were deliberately stopping counter attacks at source. That was the main problem with the spectacle.  A foul 40 metres in tends to be punished with a score anyway, and yellow and red cards where also there to be used.

I think the black card is helping to get rid of those bullshit 'small' cynical fouls, and that''s a good thing.

All that being said, I'd actually prefer the lads' suggestions above re an automatic 13 metre free or whatever, rather than dismissing the player. Would have the same effect.

[Hound]

I'd be against the 13m free idea. That would encourage diving far more than any other rule that's come in.

[AZOffaly]

I'd be against the 13m free idea. That would encourage diving far more than any other rule that's come in.

Not if there was a 13m free for diving too.

[Zulu]

I'd be against the 13m free idea. That would encourage diving far more than any other rule that's come in.

I would as well and for the same reason. I think the black card has been a resounding success so far. I felt the sin bin was the best solution but I was willing to see how the black card panned out and on the evidence so far I can't see merit in any anti-black card arguments. We were told it would encourage diving but it hasn't. We were told games would be ruined but that hasn't happened. We were told defenders would be afraid to tackle but that hasn't happened. It has eliminated off the ball blocking to a large degree, it has reduced attackers pulling down defenders to prevent a counter attack getting momentum (which was a serious problem), it has played a part in increasing scoring returns, it has forced defenders to tackle properly rather than to fling themselves at an attacker arms swinging like a kid running down a hill. I'm not saying the case is closed, we'll wait until the championship is over but I think it is quite clear that it has had a positive impact and hasn't heralded the negative aspects we were told would come with it.

Those saying the yellow card should be used properly just aren't being realistic and anyway, the yellow wasn't a deterrent. You could have 30 black card offences per game without one player seeing the line if you only got a yellow card. With the black card at least the offender knows his game is over if he commits the foul and it is clear that has been a deterrent.

[Bingo]

Its not the resultant penalty that is the problem ie a black card or 13m free, its the rules themselves and how hard it is for everyone to apply them.

Like all other rules, its the refs interpretation that is the problem or rather in some cases they are reluctant to use them.

Video ref is far from the answer as well.

[muppet]

I'd be against the 13m free idea. That would encourage diving far more than any other rule that's come in.

Not if there was a 13m free for diving too.

I prefer the Tutu suggesion.

[blewuporstuffed]

I'd be against the 13m free idea. That would encourage diving far more than any other rule that's come in.

I would as well and for the same reason. I think the black card has been a resounding success so far. I felt the sin bin was the best solution but I was willing to see how the black card panned out and on the evidence so far I can't see merit in any anti-black card arguments. We were told it would encourage diving but it hasn't. We were told games would be ruined but that hasn't happened. We were told defenders would be afraid to tackle but that hasn't happened. It has eliminated off the ball blocking to a large degree, it has reduced attackers pulling down defenders to prevent a counter attack getting momentum (which was a serious problem), it has played a part in increasing scoring returns, it has forced defenders to tackle properly rather than to fling themselves at an attacker arms swinging like a kid running down a hill. I'm not saying the case is closed, we'll wait until the championship is over but I think it is quite clear that it has had a positive impact and hasn't heralded the negative aspects we were told would come with it.

Those saying the yellow card should be used properly just aren't being realistic and anyway, the yellow wasn't a deterrent. You could have 30 black card offences per game without one player seeing the line if you only got a yellow card. With the black card at least the offender knows his game is over if he commits the foul and it is clear that has been a deterrent.

well its seems we just completely disagree then!
I cant see how you can possibly say its been a resounding success when we have incidents like the Tyrone penalty incident involving one of the best referees in ireland.
The black card rule is all very well in theory, but when you have referees in the heat of a game trying to implement it, its leads to inconsistency and controversy.

The only thing out of that which i agree with, is that it has cut out a lot of the body checking, but my point was , maybe we should have tried getting referees to implement the rule that was already there  (the yellow card) for this to see what effect that had first.
its easy to say, ah sure that would be no deterrent, when we dont know as its never been applied properly.

[Zulu]

I cant see how you can possibly say its been a resounding success when we have incidents like the Tyrone penalty incident involving one of the best referees in ireland.
The black card rule is all very well in theory, but when you have referees in the heat of a game trying to implement it, its leads to inconsistency and controversy.

But that's true of every single aspect of the game, in fact it's true of every sport the world over. Coldrick gave a free to Tyrone when the full back fell over with no contact and Down's first score came from a free when their full forward tripped himself while running. If a criticism of the black card is refs won't get it right 100% of the time, then giving any free is an issue.

The only thing out of that which i agree with, is that it has cut out a lot of the body checking, but my point was , maybe we should have tried getting referees to implement the rule that was already there  (the yellow card) for this to see what effect that had first.
its easy to say, ah sure that would be no deterrent, when we dont know as its never been applied properly.

I'm absolutely positive it wouldn't and I'm absolutely positive you wouldn't get referees apply the yellow consistently game in game out so I think there was no option but to introduce something else. I don't know how you can disagree with my statement that diving for black cards hasn't happened, I don't know how you can say the black card hasn't played a part in more scores, I don't know how you can disagree it hasn't reduced attackers pulling down players to halt counter attacks. These are all as clear as day.

[blewuporstuffed]

I'm absolutely positive it wouldn't and I'm absolutely positive you wouldn't get referees apply the yellow consistently game in game out so I think there was no option but to introduce something else.

This bit makes absolutely no sense to me.
so the referees arent capable of consistently implementing the rules we have, so the solution is to introduce another level of sanction that further complicates the decision process???

I am not just basing my view on seeing one or two county games since the rules came in but also in club games i have played in and i can honestly say they the black card rule has had very little if any positive influence in the way the game was played, but has resulted in numerous contentious calls and inconsistencies.

I think we must come from completely different view point to what constitutes a good game of football. Just because something leads to more scores doesn't mean it has improved the game.
If that was the case, sure why not just make the goals bigger and then we will have a fantastic sport.

[BennyHarp]

I was watching the live coverage on Sunday and Colm O'Rourke bought up a point that I had been discussing a few weeks ago with a few mates about the advantage rule. Now my argument, as it turns out, was similar to O'Rourkes, at what point does an advantage occur. For example, if a lad is running through and a defender tries to take him down and a free would be given but the attacker breaks free, gets through to a one on one situation and smacks the ball off the cross bar. Will the play be taken back for the free? Or is getting the shot away an advantage? Is it irrelevant if the player scores or not as they had a shot at goal?

[Jinxy]

Well, using the rugby example of drop goals in particular, if a scoring attempt fails during the advantage period then the ref is entitled to revert to the initial penalty.