Restriction on kick-outs being looked at by GAA
Jarlath Burns, chair of the standing committee, says that an anomaly has arisen in that players in the corners are both outside the 20-metre line and 13 metres from the ball and the idea of requiring the kick-out to go forward is being considered.
'Slip of hand'
"There is an argument that there is a slip of land on the field where it would be advisable to prohibit a player from receiving a kick-out if you wanted to make the ball go forward. When the rule on kick-outs was changed the rule wasn't correspondingly changed that the ball had to go forward 20 metres.
"It has been discussed and might be worth looking at. It wouldn't take a lot to change that but it might have a positive implication."
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/restriction-on-kick-outs-being-looked-at-by-gaa-1.2935222#.WHiWV4lToVE.twitter (http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/gaelic-games/restriction-on-kick-outs-being-looked-at-by-gaa-1.2935222#.WHiWV4lToVE.twitter)
I suppose it's basically closing a 'loophole' that the wording of Rule 2.7 didn't allow for.
Why did it take so long? Are they watching matches or drinking and eating in the hospitality?
If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?
Quote from: Jinxy on January 13, 2017, 10:23:59 AM
If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?
teams playing into a very strong wind
You'd have to move all football games out of Pearse Stadium.
Now if they could bring in a rule that all place kicks must go forward.....
Quote from: Jinxy on January 13, 2017, 10:23:59 AM
If you were to bring in a rule stating that ALL kick-outs must go beyond the 45m line (in conjunction with the new mark rule), who would object, and for what reason?
Anyone with commonsense.
Reason: the game is there with rules sufficient for it to be played. Changing the fundamentals regularly in some sort of misguided hope of giving a better spectacle is incompetent at best. The rule changes there have been have been by and large a failure. The GAA is so out of touch with players its ludicrous. There's nothing wrong with going sideways, there's nothing wrong with going short, theres nothing wrong with going backwards. To whoever comes up with this shite: stop changing the game to try to create some utopia which only ever existed in your head.
How about, all kick-outs are taken from the small parallelogram and they must cross the 20m line?
(http://www.linemarking.ie/uploads/2/0/8/6/20866968/4597066.gif)
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.
Quote from: Jinxy on January 13, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
How about, all kick-outs are taken from the small parallelogram and they must cross the 20m line?
No, none of it. I'd say go the other way, do whatever you want with your own kick.
I've never seen the sense in penalising players of the team who've been awarded a free kick. If they decide its advantageous to take it to a lad standing 1ft away from them, then fair enough. Similarly with kickouts. Take it as short as you want, distance should just apply to opposition.
Someone needs to pull the reins on Jarlath and his current gallop. Is he determined to bend the rules of Gaelic football towards his own vision of the game completely? The mark is already being exposed as the waste of time anybody with sense knew it would be, now this shite? "Kickouts must travel forward"..FFS, what next?
Quote from: David McKeown on January 13, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.
You've never seen the clip out to the corner back standing on the sideline that barely moves forward?
I think the ball should travel past the 45 (which shouldn't be an issue with a kicking tee and the ball on the 13). Jarlath Burns seemed to suggest they looked at this but the below doesn't sound right:
Quote"If the long kick-out were made compulsory, you'd find the full-forward line would have no reason to wait up there. The possibility of a short kick-out forces players to push up or concede possession. You'd end up with everyone dropping back towards the contest area.
That doesn't make sense to me? Surely yes you would have a contested breaking ball area but surely you want 1 or 2 FFs remaining in anticipation of clean possession and a quick kick pass into that area?
Quote from: screenexile on January 13, 2017, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on January 13, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.
You've never seen the clip out to the corner back standing on the sideline that barely moves forward?
I think the ball should travel past the 45 (which shouldn't be an issue with a kicking tee and the ball on the 13). Jarlath Burns seemed to suggest they looked at this but the below doesn't sound right:
Quote"If the long kick-out were made compulsory, you'd find the full-forward line would have no reason to wait up there. The possibility of a short kick-out forces players to push up or concede possession. You'd end up with everyone dropping back towards the contest area.
That doesn't make sense to me? Surely yes you would have a contested breaking ball area but surely you want 1 or 2 FFs remaining in anticipation of clean possession and a quick kick pass into that area?
As mentioned above, what about under-age teams or adult 'keepers kicking into a very strong wind.
Make them kick it forward if it makes that much difference but please don't go with this over the '45 thing.
Should the keeper be allowed to kick it out of his hands?
They could just bring it back to dropping the ball in from a helicopter instead of having kick outs.
Restart the game with a hop-ball on the edge of the square.
For those of you who say there's nothing wrong with the way the game currently is and it's okay to go sideways and even backwards, must not have to watch your team play this type of football much. Maybe we in Tyrone were spoiled with players like Canavan etc where we played some great open attacking football but if Canavan was playing today he'd be back in his own half back line with most of the rest of the forwards and then try to turn the ball over and attack at speed. That's great if the other team don't play the same way but when you play the top teams most of them do and so you have a horrible spectacle of a game.
I don't know if a rule change about kick-outs is going to affect that much but something needs to change as the entertainment value has gone completely out of it. Even when you win now, it's more a sense of relief than an actual enjoyable victory. Most pundits last year would say the best football was played at underage level.
What rules did Canavan play under?
Quote from: Fuzzman on January 13, 2017, 02:53:21 PM
For those of you who say there's nothing wrong with the way the game currently is and it's okay to go sideways and even backwards, must not have to watch your team play this type of football much. Maybe we in Tyrone were spoiled with players like Canavan etc where we played some great open attacking football but if Canavan was playing today he'd be back in his own half back line with most of the rest of the forwards and then try to turn the ball over and attack at speed. That's great if the other team don't play the same way but when you play the top teams most of them do and so you have a horrible spectacle of a game.
I don't know if a rule change about kick-outs is going to affect that much but something needs to change as the entertainment value has gone completely out of it. Even when you win now, it's more a sense of relief than an actual enjoyable victory. Most pundits last year would say the best football was played at underage level.
The standard of refereeing is as big a problem for the spectacle of the game. Now even lads talented like Canavan seem happier to buy a free than keep going. These rule changes have no impact, managers will manage and if something doesn't suit their team they'll work around it. The GAA with their rule changes are moving chairs on the titanic. We have got to the stage where Referees are sacred within Croke Park.
The Tyrone team of the 'puke football' era were a joy to watch compared to most of the teams outside Leinster nowadays.
Is Haranguerer Micky Harte?
Gaelic football is pretty awful to watch these days, but tinkering round with piecemeal rule changes is unlikely to improve that.
The advantage rule has helped a little but the problem is the tackle and steps rules belong to the era of catch and kick.
In the modern era it's become a running/carrying game almost like rubby but without the tackle (legal) to stop the runners or the strict application of 4 steps ( which isn't easy with the speed of players).
The toss ball was the final straw in ruining the game.
Most sports continually t**ker with their rules and they all certainly address issues with their sports if it's becoming a poorer spectacle. We need to be realistic about the world we are living in and will have to compete in the future. The bottom line is that a large number of football fans, not to mention, general sports fans increasingly find it a difficult sport to watch.
For me, football has never developed into the sport it can be but it is definitely regressing as a spectacle and that will harm the game in the future.
After the 90's, the quality and entertainment value decreased significantly.
Yes styles of play have tended to change over the years but sadly I cannot see the game ever returning to the attack minded game we used to enjoy back in the 80s and 90s that most of us here remember.
There is so much more tactical focus now on stopping the other team from playing rather than the more direct kick passing into space where a fast skillful forward can do damage. I cannot see this as just being a phase as it has been proven to be a successful tactic against teams with good forwards.
Dublin would be winning Sam quite easily I think if teams didn't play the swarm blanket defence.
Back in the 70s and 80s of course half forwards would sometimes come back and help out their defences but now it is much more pre-determined and planned.
Yet some will argue that teams are still managing to put up high scores despite this focus on defensive play which is hard to argue with in some instances.
Keepers should be made to drop kick the ball as far and as high as possible to ensure that we get the high fielding back into the game.
The failure to violently jump into the air after scoring a goal will become a black card offence.
(http://img.rasset.ie/000b37ee-500.jpg)
Just have it you can't pick up a kick out inside 21. Or move the large semi circle on 21 to the 15. Or all kick outs on 21 and no one can touch it in the semi circle.
Quote from: screenexile on January 13, 2017, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on January 13, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a goal kick go anything other than forward to some degree or other. Am I missing something.
You've never seen the clip out to the corner back standing on the sideline that barely moves forward?
I think the ball should travel past the 45 (which shouldn't be an issue with a kicking tee and the ball on the 13). Jarlath Burns seemed to suggest they looked at this but the below doesn't sound right:
Quote"If the long kick-out were made compulsory, you'd find the full-forward line would have no reason to wait up there. The possibility of a short kick-out forces players to push up or concede possession. You'd end up with everyone dropping back towards the contest area.
That doesn't make sense to me? Surely yes you would have a contested breaking ball area but surely you want 1 or 2 FFs remaining in anticipation of clean possession and a quick kick pass into that area?
Barely forward is still forward. Unless you make the ball go beyond a specific area of the pitch e.g the 45 I don't see how you would define forward. I don't like the current trend of sideways kick outs but I think the game itself is going to have to adopt to deal with this. I don't think difficult to enforce rules are going to do it.
How about the goalie shoots the ball out of a canon for a kick out. Canon must be supplied by O Neill's and will have 3 settings - normal, pearse stadium and u12.
Quote from: Fuzzman on January 13, 2017, 04:51:07 PM
Yes styles of play have tended to change over the years but sadly I cannot see the game ever returning to the attack minded game we used to enjoy back in the 80s and 90s that most of us here remember.
6 points to 4 was the most common final score between Kildare and Tyrone back in the 80's (happening twice with a 6 points apiece draw in between them.) There was plenty of shite in the 90's too.
They need to remove rules not make more.
Midfielders as in the old days are extinct. Restart after a goal with a hop in the centrefield. All other restarts are by kick out from hand.
Quote from: rrhf on January 13, 2017, 09:00:20 PM
They need to remove rules not make more.
Midfielders as in the old days are extinct. Restart after a goal with a hop in the centrefield. All other restarts are by kick out from hand.
Lad you just said no new rules and in next sentence you're proposing a new one!
All this fooking and faffing around with the symptoms, and not all of them phantom -- with the much greater levels of fitness these days there should be no more than 13 players on each side on the pitch, and that would cure at a stroke the perceived malaises at the heart of today's games.
Quote from: Itchy on January 13, 2017, 08:09:32 PM
How about the goalie shoots the ball out of a canon for a kick out. Canon must be supplied by O Neill's and will have 3 settings - normal, pearse stadium and u12.
;D Will the canon be allowed to have 3 stripes on the side of it or just 2, this is the key thing. :P
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on January 14, 2017, 01:49:38 AM
All this fooking and faffing around with the symptoms, and not all of them phantom -- with the much greater levels of fitness these days there should be no more than 13 players on each side on the pitch, and that would cure at a stroke the perceived malaises at the heart of today's games.
How the feck will two less players stop sledging?
Quote from: Syferus on January 14, 2017, 08:43:06 AM
How the feck will two less players stop sledging?
Four less players.
Quote from: vallankumous on January 14, 2017, 09:16:25 AM
Quote from: Syferus on January 14, 2017, 08:43:06 AM
How the feck will two less players stop sledging?
Four less players.
I was talking specifically about Tyrone. I want to know why they need 15 players to implement the tactic..
What about bringing back Dev to throw the ball into centre field after every score
(http://i2.wp.com/www.theirishstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/dev-football.jpg)
Quote from: Syferus on January 14, 2017, 09:35:54 AM
I was talking specifically about Tyrone. I want to know why they need 15 players to implement the tactic..
Most teams base tactics on 15 players.
Quote from: Ciarrai_thuaidh on January 14, 2017, 06:16:20 AM
Quote from: Itchy on January 13, 2017, 08:09:32 PM
How about the goalie shoots the ball out of a canon for a kick out. Canon must be supplied by O Neill's and will have 3 settings - normal, pearse stadium and u12.
;D Will the canon be allowed to have 3 stripes on the side of it or just 2, this is the key thing. :P
I suppose it's a step forward from the bishop throwing in balls to the Canon is having balls shot out of him.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on January 14, 2017, 01:49:38 AM
All this fooking and faffing around with the symptoms, and not all of them phantom -- with the much greater levels of fitness these days there should be no more than 13 players on each side on the pitch, and that would cure at a stroke the perceived malaises at the heart of today's games.
I think 13 a side makes sense on so many levels, and moving to 13-a-side would be forward thinking strategic decision to strengthen our games.
Reasons for:
1.More room, favours the flare players.
2.Less risk of contact injury
3.Emphasis on speed , mobility, as opposed to current tendency to promote size/bulk, cf rugby concerns re bulkier players leading to more serious injury(we are going the same way)
4.Means there is a place on the team for smaller skilful players, Then For smaller clubs who can't field a team of 6ft+ athletes , it levels the playing field. Similarly the current drive to bigger athletes relatively advantages counties with bigger GAA playing populations.
5.Easier to field teams Eg junior clubs, reserves, underage teams.
6.With the current tendency for smaller clubs playing 13 a side at underage, it means they would be better prepared for senior football which would also be 13-a-side.
7.Easier for referees
8.Decreased costs @ county and club level Eg transport ,pitch wear, jerseys ,player injury costs .
9. Likely to increase participation by securing current clubs , possibly resurrecting old clubs or allowing new clubs to develop, and current clubs adding 2nds,3rds teams etc, not to speak
Of making the games more attractive for all builds and ages of players, including less risk of injury
10.Most importantly of all it secures several small clubs which will be under pressure of folding in upcoming years due to demographic and social changes- the club in every community/parish concept is the bedrock of the GAA compared to other sports.
Several understandable rules improvements, and other issues in recent years have hit the smaller rural clubs hard Eg costs, demographics, governance regulations, county minors not allowed to play senior club, u17s not allowed to play senior. Changing to 13-a-side would reinvigorate our games throughout the country!
Bollocks. 15 is the right number - a ridiculous amount of ground to cover for 13.
Promoting 13 a side is just a lazy solution imo. It won't fix any of the problems mentioned, and will create a host more. Tactically gaa has a long way to go, but currently its clear that most of the pitch isn't used, which is why we see the bunching. Forward systems and runs in particular are by and large shite, and only use a small part of that area, making it easy for sweepers and hard for themselves.
When I see a post starting off with "Bollocks" I despair....
How about "I disagree"?
How about you write your posts and I'll write mine?
Don't like Mondays? ;D
Quote from: haranguerer on January 16, 2017, 08:17:55 AM
Bollocks. 15 is the right number - a ridiculous amount of ground to cover for 13.
Promoting 13 a side is just a lazy solution imo. It won't fix any of the problems mentioned, and will create a host more. Tactically gaa has a long way to go, but currently its clear that most of the pitch isn't used, which is why we see the bunching. Forward systems and runs in particular are by and large shite, and only use a small part of that area, making it easy for sweepers and hard for themselves.
I actually agree with this. When you see a game from an elevated vantage point, it's fairly obvious that as a rule, we are not making the most of space, nor are we delivering the ball quickly/accurately enough to maximise the benefit of the space we have. One of the hardest things I've found in coaching is getting our forwards to make space for themselves. It's only natural, I suppose, that an inside forward will want drift out the field to get on the ball, but it's actually self defeating, especially if your gameplan is to get the ball in diagonally, or direct, and quickly. Very often your inside man is running into a congested area, or else out to the sideline. Getting lads to make space in front of themselves by talking to their half forwards and by staying in close to the endline so that when they make their run, they are running to collect a ball 20 metres out, rather than running to collect a ball 40 metres out, after starting on the 20m line is one way of maximising the space we do have. Also intelligent angled runs and understanding those runs by the lads out the field are definitely ways to make it harder for a defence to deny the space. It's an area where I think the next tactical advance will be.