Gaelic Football RIP

Started by High Fielder, July 21, 2018, 06:37:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Fear ón Srath Bán

#135
Quote from: Rossfan on July 26, 2018, 07:00:17 PM
Yep lads. It's FOOTball ;)

So is Rugby, or American, FFS! don't get too hung up on a name, a fraught place to begin in any debate.
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

smelmoth

Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 01:46:43 PM
Football now is more entertaining than it ever was. Good defending is an art. If you understand the game, understand what teams are trying to achieve, you will enjoy the match. Unfortunately some people just haven't that ability. They are Brexit voters, they want something different but they don't know what it is, or how to get it, but they want it.
They're just really confused and upset that one team just won't kick the ball away to give the other team ago. U-8 football would suit them better. Everyone is a winner, everyone is great, everyone gets a go, and everyone gets a medal, a drink and a packet of crisps.

In an earlier post I listed;
Keep ball to run down the clock,
side ways handpassing between unmarked players throughout the game,
uncontested short kick outs,
players turning their back on the play as soon as a ball is lost and running back into defensive positions and allowing the opponents to amble up the pitch with uncontested possession,
free kick restarts played backwards to restart this uncontested possession.

It would be impossible to claim that these are not features of modern football. It would be impossible to argue that in aggregate that they are not a major feature of modern football. Explain the entertainment that they deliver?

Just as a favour to us uninitiated

smelmoth

Quote from: Jinxy on July 26, 2018, 01:51:47 PM
Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 01:46:43 PM
Football now is more entertaining than it ever was. Good defending is an art. If you understand the game, understand what teams are trying to achieve, you will enjoy the match. Unfortunately some people just haven't that ability. They are Brexit voters, they want something different but they don't know what it is, or how to get it, but they want it.
They're just really confused and upset that one team just won't kick the ball away to give the other team ago. U-8 football would suit them better. Everyone is a winner, everyone is great, everyone gets a go, and everyone gets a medal, a drink and a packet of crisps.

It was at one time.
Now, it's a science.

Defending one on one within the rules is a joy to watch. Defending in numbers is not.

Many of time have fans raised their fists, arses and voices to hail a great block or risk taking interception. Nobody does this to hail a half forward jogging back into a sweeper position

BennyHarp

Quote from: APM on July 26, 2018, 07:22:25 PM
Right Trailer:
I don't want to abolish the handpass either.  But you surely accept that football rules have changed numerous times over the years to improve the game as a spectacle and to ensure that rules were easy to referee. See the following:
Free kick from the ground
The mark
Handpassed goals
Square ball
All the players in the middle for the throw in by a bishop
Sidelines on the ground

So changing the rules is as much a part of the GAA as some of the rules themselves.  No different to other sports when needs arise.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  Maybe you like what you're watching, but lots of good GAA people on here are fed up with what they are seeing and the attendances are falling. 

Based on this, can you not accept that there are aspects of today's game that can render games a poor spectacle as outlined by Zulu above.  What would you do to improve this?

I'm not adverse to rule changes in theory, the free from the hand, hand passed goals, throw in by bishops etc were all logical and designed to improve the game by correcting bad rules which inhibited the game. I've said before that I'd like to tighten up certain rules and ensure consistency by having full time refs. I wouldn't want more rules before the current rules are applied effectively.

My big problem with rule changes are when they are designed to offset tactics that teams are trying to implement. This is tinkering with the game in a way that the final outcome may or may not be successful. Let the other managers deal with the tactics of rival managers. It's not the rule makers responsibility. The black card has been the most frustrating addition to our rule book. The level of inconsistency riles players and supporters alike and who knows, it's success in stopping the defender from blocking the runner may have led us to the ultimate running game we see today. Whatever rule change will be manipulated by managers to gain an advantage and unintended consequences will ensue. Because no matter what anyone tries to tell you, for those who play the game, it's all about winning and not entertainment.
That was never a square ball!!

smelmoth

Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 02:55:21 PM
Because it wouldn't change the blanket defence. Where is the 2 point zone? Outside the 45? Not many players can kick a point from outside the 45, hence the reason the defence is inside the 45.
Why not go to 13 aside, and limit subs? There's two very simply changes that would make more of a difference than all the stupid 2 point kicks, or shot clocks, or forward marks, or no back passing, insert stupid idea here, rule changes.

13 aside risks increases ball carrying. Which is precisely the dull spectacle we are trying to challenge

smelmoth

Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 03:13:23 PM
What do 'fans' want to see?

Contested kick outs
High fielding
One on one battles
Kick passing
Defenders not protected by sweepers
Risk taking

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: smelmoth on July 26, 2018, 08:12:38 PM
Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 02:55:21 PM
Because it wouldn't change the blanket defence. Where is the 2 point zone? Outside the 45? Not many players can kick a point from outside the 45, hence the reason the defence is inside the 45.
Why not go to 13 aside, and limit subs? There's two very simply changes that would make more of a difference than all the stupid 2 point kicks, or shot clocks, or forward marks, or no back passing, insert stupid idea here, rule changes.

13 aside risks increases ball carrying. Which is precisely the dull spectacle we are trying to challenge

Or, it may increase the kicking quotient -- you don't know that for sure, like I don't, but it's equally or more probable, I'd say.
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

smelmoth

#142
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 26, 2018, 08:20:11 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on July 26, 2018, 08:12:38 PM
Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 02:55:21 PM
Because it wouldn't change the blanket defence. Where is the 2 point zone? Outside the 45? Not many players can kick a point from outside the 45, hence the reason the defence is inside the 45.
Why not go to 13 aside, and limit subs? There's two very simply changes that would make more of a difference than all the stupid 2 point kicks, or shot clocks, or forward marks, or no back passing, insert stupid idea here, rule changes.

13 aside risks increases ball carrying. Which is precisely the dull spectacle we are trying to challenge

Or, it may increase the kicking quotient -- you don't know that for sure, like I don't, but it's equally or more probable, I'd say.
Quote from: RedHand88 on July 26, 2018, 06:56:40 PM
Quote from: dec on July 26, 2018, 06:29:35 PM
Get rid of the handpass, it would make it a lot more difficult to play keep ball.

"Sorry lads, I know yous have been taught to handpass from you were 5 year old but we are completely changing the sport. You'll just have to suck it up".


If we are to change the game then that means to stop doing something that we are currently doing

Restricting the handpass might be more viable than a ban

APM

Quote from: BennyHarp on July 26, 2018, 08:12:20 PM
My big problem with rule changes are when they are designed to offset tactics that teams are trying to implement.

I think you could equally say:
My big problem with rule changes are when they are designed to offset tactics that MY team are is trying to implement.


If those tactics mean attendances are falling and the game as a spectacle is suffering do you not see the logic of change?

smelmoth

Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 07:06:00 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on July 26, 2018, 06:56:40 PM
Quote from: dec on July 26, 2018, 06:29:35 PM
Get rid of the handpass, it would make it a lot more difficult to play keep ball.

"Sorry lads, I know yous have been taught to handpass from you were 5 year old but we are completely changing the sport. You'll just have to suck it up".

This is what you're up against. Ban the handpass, like wtf?
I really worry for some people. They want change, not sure what they exactly want, but change, even if we have to introduce some ridiculous rules. Similar to those who voted Brexit. Some very confused people around.

Who is refusing to tell you what they want?

smelmoth

Quote from: BennyHarp on July 26, 2018, 08:12:20 PMBecause no matter what anyone tries to tell you, for those who play the game, it's all about winning and not entertainment.

And whether anybody gives a shit depends on whether it's entertaining.

Remember the bulk of the audience are neutral. They are there to be entertained

smelmoth

Quote from: BennyHarp on July 26, 2018, 08:12:20 PM
My big problem with rule changes are when they are designed to offset tactics that teams are trying to implement. This is tinkering with the game in a way that the final outcome may or may not be successful.

So you are ok with rule changes but not ones that tackle issues

smelmoth

Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on July 26, 2018, 08:20:11 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on July 26, 2018, 08:12:38 PM
Quote from: trailer on July 26, 2018, 02:55:21 PM
Because it wouldn't change the blanket defence. Where is the 2 point zone? Outside the 45? Not many players can kick a point from outside the 45, hence the reason the defence is inside the 45.
Why not go to 13 aside, and limit subs? There's two very simply changes that would make more of a difference than all the stupid 2 point kicks, or shot clocks, or forward marks, or no back passing, insert stupid idea here, rule changes.

13 aside risks increases ball carrying. Which is precisely the dull spectacle we are trying to challenge

Or, it may increase the kicking quotient -- you don't know that for sure, like I don't, but it's equally or more probable, I'd say.

Give it a go. I'm just pointing out a risk. If we are going to t**ker I would try other things first

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: smelmoth on July 26, 2018, 08:40:14 PM

Give it a go. I'm just pointing out a risk. If we are going to t**ker I would try other things first

Agreed, nothing is 'risk free', but maybe worth taking the chance on.
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

Substandard

Haven't fully kept up with this thread, so maybe this was suggested and shot down already, but if there was a limit of two to tackle the man in possession, would that prevent 'swarm' defence, as in a player getting surrounded and either losing possession or done for over-carrying?
Your very skilful players would have a greater chance of running at a defence and creating scoring opportunities, and wouldn't this open up the game?
The immediate flaws are it could lead to theatrics to win a free if one/ two defenders are trying to impede a run, and also at underage, your bigger, stronger players would be very hard to stop.
Also, any amendments to rules have to be referee-friendly.  It's hard enough to get right at the minute, and if there was to be rule changes, they'd have to be workable at Junior B league as well as in Croke Park on the big days.