Getting this thread rolling.
Hard to see beyond a routine win for Donegal considering that they had too much for Monaghan who annihilated Meath in the 2nd round. Added to that Meath managed to lose against a beatable Armagh side in navan and have picked up a few injuries.
As they say in betting circles you could put your house on Donegal. In the past Meath have had poor performances in the league that were rescued by some of the big guns like Colm O'Rourke, Giles, Geraghty etc but we have no players on the team that could be regarded as a leader or a player other counties look up to.
Not sure whether I will go, have a season ticket but the last two games have tested the loyalty and have a few things on next weekend.
As I wrote on the other thread we have serious problems all over the field but I feel that Mick O'Dowd needs to supplement the backroom team and rapidly develop a defensive strategy or the perceived developments will be lost.
Regarding Donegal, a win here will power them further towards promotion exactly where they want to at this stage of the year.
Can anyone see beyond a home win by 5 plus points?
No.
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
If things go well, we don't know why.
If things go badly, we don't know why.
We are cannon fodder for teams that actually think about the game and how to play it.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 02, 2014, 04:28:06 PM
No.
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
If things go well, we don't know why.
If things go badly, we don't know why.
We are cannon fodder for teams that actually think about the game and how to play it.
Sin go díreach é. Surely our consistently appalling league campaigns will teach us something.
The remarkable thing is not that we do so badly in the league, but that in relative terms, we do so well in the championship.
I am not sure who will partner Shane O'Rourke in midfield. As far as I recall Conor Sheridan from Simonstown wasn't even on the panel on Saturday. Perhaps Menton. Menton hasn't exactly been setting the world alight at CHB. Maybe Kevin Reilly with Menton at FB and Harnan or Harrington at CHB.
I think that Meath should try a different approach on Sunday. We will probably lose no matter what strategy and I think we should try bringing a wing forward back into defence. I haven't seen the guys in training but I would pick Sheamus Kenny as a wing forward with an instruction to play in the space around half back and midfield to work on getting breaking balls.
Also the priority of the half forwards must be as a first line of defence so I would pick half forwards with that in mind.
Also, I would instruct Wallace to try and punch points if he comes close to goal.
For the amount of goal chances we create our conversion rate is pathetic.
Whatever happened to just putting her low and hard either side of the keeper?
Quote from: Jinxy on March 03, 2014, 03:43:04 PM
For the amount of goal chances we create our conversion rate is pathetic.
Whatever happened to just putting her low and hard either side of the keeper?
Health and Safety
Quote from: Jinxy on March 03, 2014, 03:43:04 PM
For the amount of goal chances we create our conversion rate is pathetic.
Whatever happened to just putting her low and hard either side of the keeper?
Sure you got a flukey goal against Armagh that wasn't a goal chance at all.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 02, 2014, 04:28:06 PM
No.
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
If things go well, we don't know why.
If things go badly, we don't know why.
We are cannon fodder for teams that actually think about the game and how to play it.
Interesting, Jinxy. Do you think the people around the Meath football team don't want to adapt to the way the game is played now?
If you don't have any consistency it's hard for players to develop confidence. I think that's one of the problems Galway have.
But maybe they just aren't arsed.
Quote from: seafoid on March 03, 2014, 10:37:02 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 02, 2014, 04:28:06 PM
No.
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
If things go well, we don't know why.
If things go badly, we don't know why.
We are cannon fodder for teams that actually think about the game and how to play it.
Interesting, Jinxy. Do you think the people around the Meath football team don't want to adapt to the way the game is played now?
If you don't have any consistency it's hard for players to develop confidence. I think that's one of the problems Galway have.
But maybe they just aren't arsed.
I do think the management are trying to develop a style of its own for the team that relies on pace and accuracy. I think it's too soon to write it off as a failure. But some regard has to be had to the new contact-free regime that's been imposed by the Tsars of "free-flowing football" and a strategy to defend in that context has to be developed.
I don't see anything other than bodies in defence being effective. If you can't touch anybody, all you can hope to do is to give them so little room that they have nobody in space to pass to. Combine that with a strategy of breaking at pace and you might have a workable formula.
If we have our first 15 available we can physically compete with most teams come championship.
However, there is a massive drop-off in terms of conditioning when you look at the fringe players.
I watched the highlights of Dublin vs. Cork and Kildare vs. Tyrone.
All the subs coming on were strong, fast and of a particular body type.
We have lads coming on with their jersey billowing in the wind.
In all the serious football powers now, any club player worth his salt knows what he has to do to get into his county squad.
He has to walk the walk basically.
We somehow manage to carry players that exhibit no discernible physical development despite being on the panel for a couple of years.
In my opinion, that's largely down to the players themselves.
And before anyone starts going on about gym monkeys, Dublin have the best footballers AND the best athletes.
It's not a zero sum game.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 02, 2014, 04:28:06 PM
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
Bring back Banty. ;D
He certainly ticks two of the three requirements.
Quote from: Hardy on March 03, 2014, 11:45:10 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 03, 2014, 10:37:02 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 02, 2014, 04:28:06 PM
No.
We still have not bought into the physical, mental and tactical requirements of modern inter-county football.
If things go well, we don't know why.
If things go badly, we don't know why.
We are cannon fodder for teams that actually think about the game and how to play it.
Interesting, Jinxy. Do you think the people around the Meath football team don't want to adapt to the way the game is played now?
If you don't have any consistency it's hard for players to develop confidence. I think that's one of the problems Galway have.
But maybe they just aren't arsed.
I do think the management are trying to develop a style of its own for the team that relies on pace and accuracy. I think it's too soon to write it off as a failure. But some regard has to be had to the new contact-free regime that's been imposed by the Tsars of "free-flowing football" and a strategy to defend in that context has to be developed.
I don't see anything other than bodies in defence being effective. If you can't touch anybody, all you can hope to do is to give them so little room that they have nobody in space to pass to. Combine that with a strategy of breaking at pace and you might have a workable formula.
A strategy to defend would be to block kicks, get a hand in to dispossess, a fair shoulder, etc. In my experience Meath lads were fairly good at all of the above. It wasn't all cut throat razors and hand grenades. That was just Mick Lyons. :)
That'd be fine, AZ if the hand in, the fair shoulder, etc. were not penalised more than half the time. The new rules are not being reffed any better than the old ones, as far as I can see, which simply confirms what we knew - the problem was not the rules but the refereeing. In fact, I think there's a new drive to be hard on defenders, with everyone, referees included, caught up in the enthusiasm for "free-flowing football" that's coming from all the hoo-ha about the new rules.
I haven't checked the numbers (but I will) but it seems clear already that scoring rates have soared in the league, with some ridiculous totals being run up. Most people actually seem to think that's a good thing. This has a self-reinforcing effect, in that it will be pointed to as proof that the new rules are working. Well, for me, defending is as integral a part of football as attacking. I'd be willing to bet, though, that the rate of frees being awarded is probably twice as high against defenders as against attackers in this new set-up.
Do we want to make our game even more like basketball than before? In that game, nearly every attack results in a score. The Harlem Globetrotters attract huge crowds wherever they go, with their brand of high scoring mixed with fancy tricks. In their shows, the defenders are only there to be the straight-men in the comedy routine. It's an exaggeration for effect, but I get the feeling our legislators have as little feel for the essence of Gaelic football as a Harlem Globetrotters audience has for sport.
Well put it like this. I'm a coach, and I'll be coaching my players, from #2 to #15, in the art of defending the ball. Near hand in, getting down on a lads foot to block, staying goalside when the attacker has the ball, anticipation and reading the game. All what I would call old school defending. In my mind this bolloxology of grabbing lads and dragging them down is not manly, and is not something that should be hankered after as some sort of golden age of defending. What it did was erode actual good defending technique, because it became easier to be a pure spoiler and lads basically fouled with impugnity out the field, and often took the lazy way out.
I think eliminating that from the game is a good thing. And if our defenders are suddenly unable to defend fairly, then it shows how much they were relying on the shitehawkery.
I don't think eliminating the drag down, the trip or the off the ball body check is reducing the manliness in the game. I think it is forcing you to play like a real man.
Only one thing left to say........
........take it away Doris http://youtu.be/yVuEC3r7a-o
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 04, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
Well put it like this. I'm a coach, and I'll be coaching my players, from #2 to #15, in the art of defending the ball. Near hand in, getting down on a lads foot to block, staying goalside when the attacker has the ball, anticipation and reading the game. All what I would call old school defending. In my mind this bolloxology of grabbing lads and dragging them down is not manly, and is not something that should be hankered after as some sort of golden age of defending. What it did was erode actual good defending technique, because it became easier to be a pure spoiler and lads basically fouled with impugnity out the field, and often took the lazy way out.
I think eliminating that from the game is a good thing. And if our defenders are suddenly unable to defend fairly, then it shows how much they were relying on the shitehawkery.
I don't think eliminating the drag down, the trip or the off the ball body check is reducing the manliness in the game. I think it is forcing you to play like a real man.
I couldn't disagree with much of that, AZ. But if it was meant as a rebuttal of what I said, I think we're talking about different things.
My point is that refereeing standards are miserable. The only consistent thing about them is their awfulness. The rules were fine but were rarely applied properly, consistently or, sometimes, at all. Last year's classic semi-final was under the old rules, remember.
All the new rules contribute is more opportunities for referees to make mistakes. (That is apart from the advantage rule, which is good, though predictably wildly differently interpreted by referees.) And, not unexpectedly, the mistakes they make are biased against defenders. Hence the cricket scores we're seeing now.
The definition of the tackle has not changed. It was always a tackle on the ball and not the man. The "near hand" stuff is just shite. It's just a directive and it's clearly designed to prevent incidental contact in the tackle. There was never anything wrong with incidental contact if the object was the ball. Now it's effectively outlawed, and even where it would have been allowed, players won't chance it because, nine times out of ten, they'll be blown.
Hence the ridiculous spectacle, that never existed in our game (and still doesn't in hurling - but of course hurling doesn't need cleaning up), of lads pirouetting and holding their hands up as players run past to show they're not making contact. It's not football and I hate it. The full-blooded collision, incidental to the contest for the ball, was central to the game. Now it's gone in a wrong-headed attempt to solve a problem that didn't exist, with the wrong solution and with the effect of turning the game into a farce.
If we think we're seeing some nonsensical scorelines in the league, where teams are somewhat evenly matched, look out for the Championship, when Dublin attackers meet Carlow defenders who are not allowed to defend.
Quote from: thejuice on March 04, 2014, 06:50:38 PM
Only one thing left to say........
........take it away Doris http://youtu.be/yVuEC3r7a-o
What about Gloria
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBR2G-iI3-I
Meath could just grant Donegal a walkover and go on a spa weekend
Quote from: Jinxy on March 04, 2014, 12:09:40 AM
If we have our first 15 available we can physically compete with most teams come championship.
However, there is a massive drop-off in terms of conditioning when you look at the fringe players.
I watched the highlights of Dublin vs. Cork and Kildare vs. Tyrone.
All the subs coming on were strong, fast and of a particular body type.
We have lads coming on with their jersey billowing in the wind.
In all the serious football powers now, any club player worth his salt knows what he has to do to get into his county squad.
He has to walk the walk basically.
We somehow manage to carry players that exhibit no discernible physical development despite being on the panel for a couple of years.
In my opinion, that's largely down to the players themselves.
And before anyone starts going on about gym monkeys, Dublin have the best footballers AND the best athletes.
It's not a zero sum game.
If that game against Armagh was a fair indication of where Meath are at, then a good place to start would be with the basic match fitness levels, stamina not muscle.
Meath just gradually disappeared from view in the last 15 minutes, I think I saw some players at the edge of the screen, actually bent over gasping for air.
Quote from: Hardy on March 04, 2014, 07:54:45 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 04, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
Well put it like this. I'm a coach, and I'll be coaching my players, from #2 to #15, in the art of defending the ball. Near hand in, getting down on a lads foot to block, staying goalside when the attacker has the ball, anticipation and reading the game. All what I would call old school defending. In my mind this bolloxology of grabbing lads and dragging them down is not manly, and is not something that should be hankered after as some sort of golden age of defending. What it did was erode actual good defending technique, because it became easier to be a pure spoiler and lads basically fouled with impugnity out the field, and often took the lazy way out.
I think eliminating that from the game is a good thing. And if our defenders are suddenly unable to defend fairly, then it shows how much they were relying on the shitehawkery.
I don't think eliminating the drag down, the trip or the off the ball body check is reducing the manliness in the game. I think it is forcing you to play like a real man.
I couldn't disagree with much of that, AZ. But if it was meant as a rebuttal of what I said, I think we're talking about different things.
My point is that refereeing standards are miserable. The only consistent thing about them is their awfulness. The rules were fine but were rarely applied properly, consistently or, sometimes, at all. Last year's classic semi-final was under the old rules, remember.
All the new rules contribute is more opportunities for referees to make mistakes. (That is apart from the advantage rule, which is good, though predictably wildly differently interpreted by referees.) And, not unexpectedly, the mistakes they make are biased against defenders. Hence the cricket scores we're seeing now.
The definition of the tackle has not changed. It was always a tackle on the ball and not the man. The "near hand" stuff is just shite. It's just a directive and it's clearly designed to prevent incidental contact in the tackle. There was never anything wrong with incidental contact if the object was the ball. Now it's effectively outlawed, and even where it would have been allowed, players won't chance it because, nine times out of ten, they'll be blown.
Hence the ridiculous spectacle, that never existed in our game (and still doesn't in hurling - but of course hurling doesn't need cleaning up), of lads pirouetting and holding their hands up as players run past to show they're not making contact. It's not football and I hate it. The full-blooded collision, incidental to the contest for the ball, was central to the game. Now it's gone in a wrong-headed attempt to solve a problem that didn't exist, with the wrong solution and with the effect of turning the game into a farce.
If we think we're seeing some nonsensical scorelines in the league, where teams are somewhat evenly matched, look out for the Championship, when Dublin attackers meet Carlow defenders who are not allowed to defend.
Not sure what you mean by that Hardy. The 'near hand' stuff is not a directive by anyone, it's just acknowledged as best practice/technique. If you are running side by side with a ball carrier, use your near hand to dispossess him because if you reach over with your outside hand you are a) off balance, b) liable to give away a free because you will tend to grab at him, and c) easier to turn if I sidestep behind you.
A good defender, who can run with a man carrying a ball, has a great chance to dispossess or force an overcarrying foul because the ball carrier has to hop the ball or solo it every 4 steps. Someone who is proficient at the near hand technique will have opportunities to dispossess or disrupt the ball carrier. That's good defending in my view.
In the same situation, if the defender graps 8 inches of real estate from the back of the jersey, or deliberately trips him up, that's not good defending. That's lazy, poor technique, cynicism, tiredness or a combination of all 4.
Quoteincidental contact in the tackle t
Is that code for flaking someone out of it and pretending you're going for the ball??
Quote from: Main Street on March 04, 2014, 09:15:52 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 04, 2014, 12:09:40 AM
If we have our first 15 available we can physically compete with most teams come championship.
However, there is a massive drop-off in terms of conditioning when you look at the fringe players.
I watched the highlights of Dublin vs. Cork and Kildare vs. Tyrone.
All the subs coming on were strong, fast and of a particular body type.
We have lads coming on with their jersey billowing in the wind.
In all the serious football powers now, any club player worth his salt knows what he has to do to get into his county squad.
He has to walk the walk basically.
We somehow manage to carry players that exhibit no discernible physical development despite being on the panel for a couple of years.
In my opinion, that's largely down to the players themselves.
And before anyone starts going on about gym monkeys, Dublin have the best footballers AND the best athletes.
It's not a zero sum game.
If that game against Armagh was a fair indication of where Meath are at, then a good place to start would be with the basic match fitness levels, stamina not muscle.
Meath just gradually disappeared from view in the last 15 minutes, I think I saw some players at the edge of the screen, actually bent over gasping for air.
Sure we are probably in the middle of our 'heavy training'.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 05, 2014, 09:55:39 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 04, 2014, 07:54:45 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 04, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
Well put it like this. I'm a coach, and I'll be coaching my players, from #2 to #15, in the art of defending the ball. Near hand in, getting down on a lads foot to block, staying goalside when the attacker has the ball, anticipation and reading the game. All what I would call old school defending. In my mind this bolloxology of grabbing lads and dragging them down is not manly, and is not something that should be hankered after as some sort of golden age of defending. What it did was erode actual good defending technique, because it became easier to be a pure spoiler and lads basically fouled with impugnity out the field, and often took the lazy way out.
I think eliminating that from the game is a good thing. And if our defenders are suddenly unable to defend fairly, then it shows how much they were relying on the shitehawkery.
I don't think eliminating the drag down, the trip or the off the ball body check is reducing the manliness in the game. I think it is forcing you to play like a real man.
I couldn't disagree with much of that, AZ. But if it was meant as a rebuttal of what I said, I think we're talking about different things.
My point is that refereeing standards are miserable. The only consistent thing about them is their awfulness. The rules were fine but were rarely applied properly, consistently or, sometimes, at all. Last year's classic semi-final was under the old rules, remember.
All the new rules contribute is more opportunities for referees to make mistakes. (That is apart from the advantage rule, which is good, though predictably wildly differently interpreted by referees.) And, not unexpectedly, the mistakes they make are biased against defenders. Hence the cricket scores we're seeing now.
The definition of the tackle has not changed. It was always a tackle on the ball and not the man. The "near hand" stuff is just shite. It's just a directive and it's clearly designed to prevent incidental contact in the tackle. There was never anything wrong with incidental contact if the object was the ball. Now it's effectively outlawed, and even where it would have been allowed, players won't chance it because, nine times out of ten, they'll be blown.
Hence the ridiculous spectacle, that never existed in our game (and still doesn't in hurling - but of course hurling doesn't need cleaning up), of lads pirouetting and holding their hands up as players run past to show they're not making contact. It's not football and I hate it. The full-blooded collision, incidental to the contest for the ball, was central to the game. Now it's gone in a wrong-headed attempt to solve a problem that didn't exist, with the wrong solution and with the effect of turning the game into a farce.
If we think we're seeing some nonsensical scorelines in the league, where teams are somewhat evenly matched, look out for the Championship, when Dublin attackers meet Carlow defenders who are not allowed to defend.
Not sure what you mean by that Hardy. The 'near hand' stuff is not a directive by anyone, it's just acknowledged as best practice/technique. If you are running side by side with a ball carrier, use your near hand to dispossess him because if you reach over with your outside hand you are a) off balance, b) liable to give away a free because you will tend to grab at him, and c) easier to turn if I sidestep behind you.
A good defender, who can run with a man carrying a ball, has a great chance to dispossess or force an overcarrying foul because the ball carrier has to hop the ball or solo it every 4 steps. Someone who is proficient at the near hand technique will have opportunities to dispossess or disrupt the ball carrier. That's good defending in my view.
In the same situation, if the defender graps 8 inches of real estate from the back of the jersey, or deliberately trips him up, that's not good defending. That's lazy, poor technique, cynicism, tiredness or a combination of all 4.
If only that were applied...... Defenders would have some chance.
However refs tend not to count any steps taken while a lad is being tackled in any shape or form.
Too lazy to look up the rule but I doubt if it says steps taken while being tackled don't count?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 05, 2014, 03:56:19 PM
If only that were applied...... Defenders would have some chance.
However refs tend not to count any steps taken while a lad is being tackled in any shape or form.
Too lazy to look up the rule but I doubt if it says steps taken while being tackled don't count?
That's a good point Rossfan. They do usually wait until the player has broken the tackle and start counting again.
1.4 When a player is in possession of the ball, it
may be:-
(a) carried for a maximum of four consecutive
steps or held in the hand(s) for no longer
than the time needed to take four steps;
(b) played from the foot to the hand(s) -toetapped;
(c) bounced once, and once after each toetap;
(d) changed from one hand to the other once,
with the original holding hand maintaining
contact until the change is completed;
(e) played away with:
(i) a fist
(ii) an open hand-in which instance there
shall be a definite underhand striking
action
(f) released for a kick, a toe-tap or a pass with
a fist or an open hand.
The ball may be knocked from an opponent's
hand(s) by flicking it with the open hand.
RULE 4 - TECHNICAL FOULS
4.1 To overcarry or overhold the ball.
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 05, 2014, 09:55:39 AM
Quote from: Hardy on March 04, 2014, 07:54:45 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on March 04, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
Well put it like this. I'm a coach, and I'll be coaching my players, from #2 to #15, in the art of defending the ball. Near hand in, getting down on a lads foot to block, staying goalside when the attacker has the ball, anticipation and reading the game. All what I would call old school defending. In my mind this bolloxology of grabbing lads and dragging them down is not manly, and is not something that should be hankered after as some sort of golden age of defending. What it did was erode actual good defending technique, because it became easier to be a pure spoiler and lads basically fouled with impugnity out the field, and often took the lazy way out.
I think eliminating that from the game is a good thing. And if our defenders are suddenly unable to defend fairly, then it shows how much they were relying on the shitehawkery.
I don't think eliminating the drag down, the trip or the off the ball body check is reducing the manliness in the game. I think it is forcing you to play like a real man.
I couldn't disagree with much of that, AZ. But if it was meant as a rebuttal of what I said, I think we're talking about different things.
My point is that refereeing standards are miserable. The only consistent thing about them is their awfulness. The rules were fine but were rarely applied properly, consistently or, sometimes, at all. Last year's classic semi-final was under the old rules, remember.
All the new rules contribute is more opportunities for referees to make mistakes. (That is apart from the advantage rule, which is good, though predictably wildly differently interpreted by referees.) And, not unexpectedly, the mistakes they make are biased against defenders. Hence the cricket scores we're seeing now.
The definition of the tackle has not changed. It was always a tackle on the ball and not the man. The "near hand" stuff is just shite. It's just a directive and it's clearly designed to prevent incidental contact in the tackle. There was never anything wrong with incidental contact if the object was the ball. Now it's effectively outlawed, and even where it would have been allowed, players won't chance it because, nine times out of ten, they'll be blown.
Hence the ridiculous spectacle, that never existed in our game (and still doesn't in hurling - but of course hurling doesn't need cleaning up), of lads pirouetting and holding their hands up as players run past to show they're not making contact. It's not football and I hate it. The full-blooded collision, incidental to the contest for the ball, was central to the game. Now it's gone in a wrong-headed attempt to solve a problem that didn't exist, with the wrong solution and with the effect of turning the game into a farce.
If we think we're seeing some nonsensical scorelines in the league, where teams are somewhat evenly matched, look out for the Championship, when Dublin attackers meet Carlow defenders who are not allowed to defend.
Not sure what you mean by that Hardy. The 'near hand' stuff is not a directive by anyone, it's just acknowledged as best practice/technique. If you are running side by side with a ball carrier, use your near hand to dispossess him because if you reach over with your outside hand you are a) off balance, b) liable to give away a free because you will tend to grab at him, and c) easier to turn if I sidestep behind you.
A good defender, who can run with a man carrying a ball, has a great chance to dispossess or force an overcarrying foul because the ball carrier has to hop the ball or solo it every 4 steps. Someone who is proficient at the near hand technique will have opportunities to dispossess or disrupt the ball carrier. That's good defending in my view.
In the same situation, if the defender graps 8 inches of real estate from the back of the jersey, or deliberately trips him up, that's not good defending. That's lazy, poor technique, cynicism, tiredness or a combination of all 4.
The 'near hand' thing seems to be more than just good practice at this stage, AZ. Referees now seem to be giving frees for using the outside hand, whether there's an actual foul or not. Especially if the tackled player decides to fall. That's why I assumed it was a directive to referees.
Quote
In the same situation, if the defender graps 8 inches of real estate from the back of the jersey, or deliberately trips him up, that's not good defending. That's lazy, poor technique, cynicism, tiredness or a combination of all 4.
Of course. Where does this come into the discussion? This was always a foul. That's not to say it was always penalised, which is my point, at the risk of labouring it. There was little wrong with the rules, but a lot wrong with the refereeing. Now, in a misguided attempt to fix things, we've created a whole set of new rules that do nothing about the problem of not implementing the old rules, but threaten to ruin the game as a spectacle. For everyone, that is, except those who enjoy non-contact exhibition basketball.
Quote from: macdanger2 on March 05, 2014, 11:05:11 AM
Quoteincidental contact in the tackle t
Is that code for flaking someone out of it and pretending you're going for the ball??
On the off chance you're being serious – no. I'm talking about playing within the (old) rules where you try to play the ball away from the player in possession as specified in the definition of the tackle. Nine times out of ten, it's impossible to do this without some contact, from the innocuous to the spectacular collision, since both players are in (usually fast) motion and not necessarily in the same direction. The new rules outlaw this, or at least are being interpreted as doing so. The result is that players are afraid to tackle and forwards are scoring unopposed in many cases. See scorelines like 3-18 to 4-11, 4-16 to 0-9, etc.
Back to the game itself...
Donegal team named. One change only. Lacey gets a rest (from the start at least). Eamon McGee back in (first start since his stamp against Mayo?). Patrick McBrearty is out injured. Once again ten starters from the 2012 AI winning team. The younger McHugh and MacNiallais will be pushing hard for first 15 places in Celtic Park if they maintain their form so far, although if Donegal win this game they'll probably get a rest from the seniors with the U-21s coming up. A win here would leave us on eight points, with a win in the home game against Louth probably enough to secure promotion. IF that happens, McGuinness can give the other younger lads a start against Down and Armagh.
Paul Durcan;
Eamon McGee, Neil McGee, Frank McGlynn;
Ryan McHugh, Leo McLoone, Anthony Thompson;
Rory Kavanagh, Martin McElhinney;
Mark McHugh, Christy Toye, Odhran MacNiallais;
Colm McFadden, Michael Murphy, Dermot Molloy.
Meath (FL v Donegal) -
P O'Rourke;
D Keogan, K Reilly, M Burke;
P Harnan, B Menton, E Harrington;
A Tormey, S O'Rourke;
D Tobin, D Carroll, B McMahon;
E Wallace, S Bray, M Newman
.
Subs - Conor McHugh, David Bray, Graham Reilly, Seamus Kenny, Dalton Mc Donagh, Paddy Gilsenan, David Larkin, Mark O'Sullivan, Sean Curran.
Don't see anything to indicate we'll have a more defensive approach this.
Tobin is actually a good wing forward option.
Well able to motor up and down and was always an attacking wing-back by trade.
First I heard of Mark O'Sullivan in a while. Paddy Gilsenan is surely worth a shot somewhere ... ahead of Harrington or Harnan maybe. Tobin in wing forward is an interesting move, but O'Dowd may be thinking of dropping him back behind the midfield. We'll see, I guess. I can't see us going close, but at least we're unpredictable.
Quote from: Hardy on March 04, 2014, 04:57:55 PM
That'd be fine, AZ if the hand in, the fair shoulder, etc. were not penalised more than half the time. The new rules are not being reffed any better than the old ones, as far as I can see, which simply confirms what we knew - the problem was not the rules but the refereeing. In fact, I think there's a new drive to be hard on defenders, with everyone, referees included, caught up in the enthusiasm for "free-flowing football" that's coming from all the hoo-ha about the new rules.
I haven't checked the numbers (but I will) but it seems clear already that scoring rates have soared in the league, with some ridiculous totals being run up. Most people actually seem to think that's a good thing. This has a self-reinforcing effect, in that it will be pointed to as proof that the new rules are working. Well, for me, defending is as integral a part of football as attacking. I'd be willing to bet, though, that the rate of frees being awarded is probably twice as high against defenders as against attackers in this new set-up.
Do we want to make our game even more like basketball than before? In that game, nearly every attack results in a score. The Harlem Globetrotters attract huge crowds wherever they go, with their brand of high scoring mixed with fancy tricks. In their shows, the defenders are only there to be the straight-men in the comedy routine. It's an exaggeration for effect, but I get the feeling our legislators have as little feel for the essence of Gaelic football as a Harlem Globetrotters audience has for sport.
Some interesting points there Hardy. I think that one of the drawbacks of having a sport that is isolated within one country is that we have total control over the rules of the game within this country. I cannot remember changes to soccer rules in my lifetime, perhaps some changes to the offside rule. It is nearly too easy to make changes to the rules and sometimes they are welcome but we have to be really really careful. It is like in any organisation or business......do you change the rules or do you properly implement your existing rules when problems are evident.
I am not certain of the dynamic of the ways the various committees operate when reviewing the state of the game but I suspect that the discussions move very quickly towards new ways of doing things. I know that it is difficult to get motions through Congress but, just because a motion gets through Congress, that doesn't mean that it is correctly worked through.
I was on a national GAA committee reviewing sliothar standards and tests a number of years ago. We were told up front that as the GAA is an amateur organisation we weren't being paid for our time except for some university guy who was coming from the UK who was being paid. Thinking back I just wonder are the GAA professional in some ways but not identifying core issues in other ways.
I remember in a manufacturing company I used to work that when there were problems we used to say to go back to basics. I am not sure if the GAA ever really looks at going back to basics. Refereeing standards are so varied across the country. I couldn't believe the way the Tyrone guy took at least 8 steps in the lead up to the winning goal last weekend and there has been very little about it. In my opinion the widespread misinterpretation of the steps rule is a bigger issue than the one-off Joe Sheridan last minute goal against Louth.
I heard the Meath team will line up a lot differently to what's named. Donal Keoghan at centre-back, Bryan Menton at midfield and Dalton McDonagh will start at centre-forward with a bit of a reshuffle going on in the forwards. Eamonn Wallace I heard won't start. I think Keoghan at centre-back would be a really positive move. I would like to see this position nailed down by someone once and for all and would love to see Keoghan given a go. Also the management need to change the midfield up a bit as it's still not working. The Tormey/O'Rourke partnership has struggled in the last two games.
::) for f**k sake, it was meant to be a secret
Poor start for Donegal. Meath scoring on four attacks in a row. Winning everything at midfield.
04-01
18 mins 05-01
06-01
6 point to 1.
Ah Donegal, stop messing with us.
7 to 2
Meath 0-07
Donegal 1-03
Lucky goal according to Highland
Meath 1-07
Donegal 1-03
Now a goal for Meath.
1-7 1-4
Just keeping our heads in front, seems like we are putting everything through Bray, sending it in long to him.
Donegal on top it seems now.
1-07 to 1-05
1-09 to 1-05
just back into the game
Highland server seems to be overloaded now. LMFM hasn't worked all day :-[ :-[
Meath 1-09
Donegal 1-08
14 mins gone,
McHugh for Donegal got a black card: Lacey on
sides are level. Meath kicking it away
Donegal 1-10
Meath 1-09
not making any real chances
Donegal 1-10
Meath 1-10
throwing away possession for the fun of it
Meath 1-11
Donegal 1-10
back in font. we need to keep control of possession and not be so eager to let it in so fast.
Meath 1-11
Donegal 1-11
anyones game, both teams kicking bad wides in the last few minutes
Meath 1-12
Donegal 1-11
Hon Biggy Reilly!!!
1 minute of normal time to go.
Donegal determined not to get a result here
Hit the post again
Free for Donwgal
Level
1-12 apiece FT
Stupid shite with Shane O'Rourke delaying taking the sideline ball. Stupid carry on. We had the ball and the lead and we threw away a very important win.
That said it was a much improved performance. Would have been happy with a draw during the week but honestly when you have the lead, stupid carry on like delaying a kick threw away what should have been a win.
You could argue Donegal should have won overall but when you have the lead at the end you shouldnt be making stupid errors like that.
I suppose we'd all have gladly taken a point before the match.
It's still frustrating to know that poor decision-making cost us the win.
I'd be a lot happier if Galway had lost today to be honest.
Yeah. Surprised by Galways win. It keeps the pressure on us. Wins against Down and Laois are crucial but I don't believe we'll get all 4 points so it'll be a nervous finish to the league.
From the Democrat... http://www.donegaldemocrat.ie/sport/gaelic-games/donegal-get-out-of-jail-against-meath-1-5924573
Donegal get out of jail against Meath
(http://www.donegaldemocrat.ie/webimage/1.5924572.1394384443!/image/1815222929.jpg_gen/derivatives/articleImgDeriv_628px/1815222929.jpg)
Cruching challenge from Mickey Burke, Meath against Mark McHugh of Donegal.
Donegal got out of jail in Sean MacCumhaill Park as Michael Murphy landed the equaliser with the last kick of the game to gain a share of the spoils.
Donegal 1-12
Meath 1-12
Trailing by a point with time up, Donegal were awarded a free in some 25m from goal and close to the sideline. Up stepped Michael Murphy to hit an equaliser that they scarcely deserved
Meath dominated most of the opening half and even though they were headed when Colm McFadden won and pointed a free with 18 minutes left, they twice went back in front and it seemed when half-time substitute Graham Reilly edged them in front 1-12 to 1-11 with four minutes left, they were going to take both league points.
But then, not for the first time, Michael Murphy, became Donegal's saviour. In fairness Donegal did have the better of the chances in the second half, creating two goal chances - Murphy denied by a goalline clearance and Colm McFadden with a timely block. They also hit the upright on two occasions in the second half.
Donegal also had Ryan McHugh black carded in the 13th minute of the second half, being replaced by Karl Lacey.
POOR OPENING QUARTER
At the start it took Donegal a long time to settle with Meath completely dominating affairs in the opening quarter.
Michael Murphy had given them the first score from a free but by the 19th minute Meath were 0-6 to 0-1 ahead with midfielder Andrew Tormey (2) and corner forward Michael Newman converting two long range frees, one from outside the 45m line almost on the sideline.
It looked as if Donegal were back in the contest when Frank McGlynn lobbed Patrick O'Rourke in the 27th minute but almost immediately Meath swept forward and Newman was on the end of the move to fire low past Paul Durcan.
Before half-time Christy Toye and Michael Murphy added points to leave two adrift at the break, 1-7 to 1-5.
The final result was a wake-up call for Donegal, who have sauntered through the league so far. There was a lack of urgency in the opening half and their tactics, especially from kick-outs just wasn't working.
That they escaped with a point will be a positive to take from the game, but there were plenty of things that they need to work on.
Their finishing was poor some bad wides and their pass completion left a lot to be desired.
Donegal: Paul Durcan; Eamon McGee, Neil McGee, Frank McGlynn (1-0); R McHugh, Leo McLoone, Anthony Thompson; Rory Kavanagh, Martin McElhinney; Mark McHugh, Christy Toye (0-2), Odhran MacNiallais; Colm McFadden (0-3,2f), Michael Murphy (0-6,6f), Dermot Molloy (0-1). Subs., Neil Gallagher for Kavanagh; Darach O'Connor for Molloy, both 43; Karl Lacey for R McHugh, black card 48; David Walsh for MacNiallais 56
Meath: Patrick O'Rourke; Donal Keogan, Kevin Reilly, Mickey Burke; Sean Curran, Bryan Menton, Eoghan Harrington; Andrew Tormey (0-2), Shane O'Rourke (0-1,f); Donncha Tobin, Damien Carroll (0-1), Brian McMahon (0-1); Dalton McDonagh (0-1), Stephen Bray, Micheal Newman (1-4,3f). Subs., Graham Reilly (0-1) for Bray; Padraic Harnan for Tobin, both ht; Seamus Kenny for Curran; Eamon Wallace (0-1) for McMahon, both 51; Mark O'Sullivan for Tormey 62; D Bray for Menton 68.
Referee: Padraig Hughes (Armagh)
Quote from: J70 on March 09, 2014, 05:17:02 PM
From the Democrat... http://www.donegaldemocrat.ie/sport/gaelic-games/donegal-get-out-of-jail-against-meath-1-5924573
Donegal get out of jail against Meath
(http://www.donegaldemocrat.ie/webimage/1.5924572.1394384443!/image/1815222929.jpg_gen/derivatives/articleImgDeriv_628px/1815222929.jpg)
Cruching challenge from Mickey Burke, Meath against Mark McHugh of Donegal.
Donegal got out of jail in Sean MacCumhaill Park as Michael Murphy landed the equaliser with the last kick of the game to gain a share of the spoils.
Donegal 1-12
Meath 1-12
Trailing by a point with time up, Donegal were awarded a free in some 25m from goal and close to the sideline. Up stepped Michael Murphy to hit an equaliser that they scarcely deserved
Meath dominated most of the opening half and even though they were headed when Colm McFadden won and pointed a free with 18 minutes left, they twice went back in front and it seemed when half-time substitute Graham Reilly edged them in front 1-12 to 1-11 with four minutes left, they were going to take both league points.
But then, not for the first time, Michael Murphy, became Donegal's saviour. In fairness Donegal did have the better of the chances in the second half, creating two goal chances - Murphy denied by a goalline clearance and Colm McFadden with a timely block. They also hit the upright on two occasions in the second half.
Donegal also had Ryan McHugh black carded in the 13th minute of the second half, being replaced by Karl Lacey.
POOR OPENING QUARTER
At the start it took Donegal a long time to settle with Meath completely dominating affairs in the opening quarter.
Michael Murphy had given them the first score from a free but by the 19th minute Meath were 0-6 to 0-1 ahead with midfielder Andrew Tormey (2) and corner forward Michael Newman converting two long range frees, one from outside the 45m line almost on the sideline.
It looked as if Donegal were back in the contest when Frank McGlynn lobbed Patrick O'Rourke in the 27th minute but almost immediately Meath swept forward and Newman was on the end of the move to fire low past Paul Durcan.
Before half-time Christy Toye and Michael Murphy added points to leave two adrift at the break, 1-7 to 1-5.
The final result was a wake-up call for Donegal, who have sauntered through the league so far. There was a lack of urgency in the opening half and their tactics, especially from kick-outs just wasn't working.
That they escaped with a point will be a positive to take from the game, but there were plenty of things that they need to work on.
Their finishing was poor some bad wides and their pass completion left a lot to be desired.
Donegal: Paul Durcan; Eamon McGee, Neil McGee, Frank McGlynn (1-0); R McHugh, Leo McLoone, Anthony Thompson; Rory Kavanagh, Martin McElhinney; Mark McHugh, Christy Toye (0-2), Odhran MacNiallais; Colm McFadden (0-3,2f), Michael Murphy (0-6,6f), Dermot Molloy (0-1). Subs., Neil Gallagher for Kavanagh; Darach O'Connor for Molloy, both 43; Karl Lacey for R McHugh, black card 48; David Walsh for MacNiallais 56
Meath: Patrick O'Rourke; Donal Keogan, Kevin Reilly, Mickey Burke; Sean Curran, Bryan Menton, Eoghan Harrington; Andrew Tormey (0-2), Shane O'Rourke (0-1,f); Donncha Tobin, Damien Carroll (0-1), Brian McMahon (0-1); Dalton McDonagh (0-1), Stephen Bray, Micheal Newman (1-4,3f). Subs., Graham Reilly (0-1) for Bray; Padraic Harnan for Tobin, both ht; Seamus Kenny for Curran; Eamon Wallace (0-1) for McMahon, both 51; Mark O'Sullivan for Tormey 62; D Bray for Menton 68.
Referee: Padraig Hughes (Armagh)
Harsh enough report IMO to say donegal scarcely deserved a draw is wrong over the course of the whole game donegal probably payed better. They werent up to the high standards they were at last few weeks but still payed some good football at times. Kick outs were an issue in the first half but not as much once Neil Gallagher came on. They hav some issues to work on but stay top of the league and IMO are well on their way to promotion
25m from goal, close to the sideline, last kick of the game, that's what you call a pressure kick.
That's getting out of jail in style.
Quote from: Main Street on March 09, 2014, 10:06:11 PM
25m from goal, close to the sideline, last kick of the game, that's what you call a pressure kick.
That's getting out of jail in style.
It was a great score I was in the stand directly in line with it. He had missed 1 from similar position earlier in the half which he took from the ground, he took this 1 from the hands. He is 1 of a few great players ATM that you would want in that position taking that kick. And he hadn't 1 of his better games today which he admitted himself after the game
Lads I wasn't in BalleyBofey so I'd appreciate any first hand opinions of how Shane O'Rourke and our midfield in general played.
My main hope for Shane is that he can play his way back to full fitness.
I'd also be interested in hearing how our defence played and whether we deployed any of our half forwards in defence.
I think Carroll picked up Mark McHugh but that was probably a roving commission.
Your midfield were totally on top on the 1st half jinky. We were trying out different tactics at kick outs and none were working. When Neil Gallagher came on we got a bit of a upper hand. All in all your midfield performed well but might of been different if Gallagher was on from the start
Not sure if yous had any forwards playing in defence hardy but yous played a defensive ganeplan yesterday getting loads of bodies behind the ball. When we ran directly at yous and moved the ball quickly yous struggled a bit but we didn't do this enough imo
All in all it was good enough game considering was played on a very heavy pitch, we had more than enough chances to win it (hit woodwork twice in 2nd half) we left happy with the point considering the kick it took to get the draw
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
Quote from: Jinxy on March 10, 2014, 02:54:51 PM
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
Yeah only frank be able to tell us if he meant it or not ;) a draw was a fair result but would say we were the applied of the 2 sides at the end, was a stupid free yous gave away right at the end which murphy scored from although it was far from easy to score from
Thanks for the info, men.
Quote from: Jinxy on March 10, 2014, 02:54:51 PM
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
You mean when he delicately floated the ball over the keeper from a tight angle with his left foot? ;) Nothing flukey about that!
That left foot has now scored 1-01 for Donegal - the point against Cork in 2012 being a bit more important in fairness.
Quote from: StephenC on March 10, 2014, 04:43:45 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 10, 2014, 02:54:51 PM
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
You mean when he delicately floated the ball over the keeper from a tight angle with his left foot? ;) Nothing flukey about that!
That left foot has now scored 1-01 for Donegal - the point against Cork in 2012 being a bit more important in fairness.
Was it with his left or right he scored the goal in the ulster final. Here is a link to see the free murphy scored yesterday to secure the draw
http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/ (http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/)
I hear we scored another of our speciality bouncing points yesterday too.
Quote from: donegal lad on March 10, 2014, 06:47:59 PM
Quote from: StephenC on March 10, 2014, 04:43:45 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 10, 2014, 02:54:51 PM
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
You mean when he delicately floated the ball over the keeper from a tight angle with his left foot? ;) Nothing flukey about that!
That left foot has now scored 1-01 for Donegal - the point against Cork in 2012 being a bit more important in fairness.
Was it with his left or right he scored the goal in the ulster final. Here is a link to see the free murphy scored yesterday to secure the draw
http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/ (http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/)
Jaysus!
There aren't any videos of the match floating around are there? I would like to see it, either in full or highlights.
Quote from: J70 on March 10, 2014, 08:44:31 PM
Quote from: donegal lad on March 10, 2014, 06:47:59 PM
Quote from: StephenC on March 10, 2014, 04:43:45 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on March 10, 2014, 02:54:51 PM
McGlynn got a bit of a flukey goal as well though in fairness (so I was told anyway).
You mean when he delicately floated the ball over the keeper from a tight angle with his left foot? ;) Nothing flukey about that!
That left foot has now scored 1-01 for Donegal - the point against Cork in 2012 being a bit more important in fairness.
Was it with his left or right he scored the goal in the ulster final. Here is a link to see the free murphy scored yesterday to secure the draw
http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/ (http://www.joe.ie/gaa/gaa-news/video-michael-murphy-kicked-an-almost-impossible-point-to-salvage-a-draw-for-donegal-yesterday/)
Jaysus!
Even with the 6 steps taken to widen the angle, it was a very good kick :)
How long was that kick (minus the 6 steps of course)?
I agree, should have been retaken.
I know ye are slagging but that bugs the shite out of me. If he was kicking from the ground he'd not be allowed place it in there, so why is he allowed run in there when kicking from the hands?
Should have been a black card.
Definitely - that sort of talent is just making fun of the game.
Seriously though - I wouldn't assume he stole yards as the clip doesn't show where the free was given from. Why presume he's starting his run from where it should be taken? I would assume he went back a few yards, as is normally done, though if the free was given for some sort of sideline kick infringement, he seems to be a`long way from the sideline when he kicks the free.
Donegal lads who were there - what's the (honest :) ) take?
O'Rourke was penalised for delaying a sideline kick, surely the free kick had to be close to the sideline?
Meath should demand a replay, sue the GAA if they get relegated on the basis of that result.
Quote from: Main Street on March 11, 2014, 12:29:30 AM
O'Rourke was penalised for delaying a sideline kick, surely the free kick had to be close to the sideline?
Meath should demand a replay, sue the GAA if they get relegated on the basis of that result.
You are right in part. Orourke was penalised for delaying the sideline for which Padraig Hughes threw the ball up on the 20 meter line where a foul was committed and the resulting free was granted.
He stole a few steps all right. But nothing too bad. I believe the free was given for the Meath lad not being 13 away when the ball was thrown up (when have you ever seen that happen!). But he was stupid enough to jump in and catch the ball before either of the 2 lads in the throw-in got near it.
A step or two extra or not .. that was still a might kick under pressure.
Quote from: StephenC on March 11, 2014, 08:32:43 AM
He stole a few steps all right. But nothing too bad. I believe the free was given for the Meath lad not being 13 away when the ball was thrown up (when have you ever seen that happen!). But he was stupid enough to jump in and catch the ball before either of the 2 lads in the throw-in got near it.
A step or two extra or not .. that was still a might kick under pressure.
Same thing happened in Mullingar. Ball thrown up, Gilligan comes flying in and punches the ball away before the 2 lads touch it, free in given.
yeah it was a mighty kick regardless.
The throw in/throw up is usually a period in time where anarchy reigns until the ball is won, it figures that the Meath player had to do something really dumb to get busted.
Quote from: Hardy on March 10, 2014, 11:36:52 PM
Definitely - that sort of talent is just making fun of the game.
Seriously though - I wouldn't assume he stole yards as the clip doesn't show where the free was given from. Why presume he's starting his run from where it should be taken? I would assume he went back a few yards, as is normally done, though if the free was given for some sort of sideline kick infringement, he seems to be a`long way from the sideline when he kicks the free.
Donegal lads who were there - what's the (honest :) ) take?
Good point. Mea Culpa. My point in general stands though :)