The issue of the square ball rule has arisen on the Donegal v. Armagh thread. Martin McHugh said on TV the rule should be dropped. I'd agree on the basis that it's impossible to determine accurately whether a forward is in the square before the ball, particularly when the ball is coming from one direction, in the air and the forward is coming from the other.
However, I think you'd have to have some rule to prevent goal-hanging and the clogging up of the goalmouth. I suggested considering making the small square a total exclusion zone for forwards, but Tacadoir Ard Mhacha rightly pointed out that it would be unreasonable to prevent a forward from netting a ball spilled by the goalie.
What do people think? Is the rule OK as it stands or should it be dropped and, if so, what, if anything should replace it?
Part of the problem is that the umpires seem reluctant to rule a square ball. Yes, it is difficult to call if you're not watching for it but surely that's what the umpires should be doing. There's no way the umpires at yesterdays game couldn't call it. They just don't want the responsibility.
QuoteI think you'd have to have some rule to prevent goal-hanging and the clogging up of the goalmouth.
Jaysus, you'll have the armagh-folk calling for the banning of kidney punches next. :P
One alternative to the present rule would be to allow an opposing player enter the square after
1. the ball had been handled by a defender/goalie
2. the ball had touched the ground in the square
3. the ball had hit the woodwork
these would be easier to assess than a ball high in the air
Spangler you need to get your facts straight - upmires dont give square balls, refs do. Even at the Ulster Council umipres course 2 weeks ago (yes such a thing exists) umpires were instructed not to signal squar balls. in the refs handbook it goes through the role of all the officials including the umpire, and it clearly states that umpires are NOT to signal square balls. So its time to get off their backs McHugh and co
Is it within the umpires remit to call a square ball? In fact what are umpires allowed to call on?
Yes, square balls rule!
(http://www.craftbits.com/images/1471_main_IMGP2000.JPG)
Quote from: Square Ball on May 28, 2007, 04:00:42 PM
Is it within the umpires remit to call a square ball? In fact what are umpires allowed to call on?
from the 2004 referees handbook
see point 12
(http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9269/ump1sv9.jpg)
(http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/7776/ump2hy6.jpg)
It's nigh on impossible to judge that as a referee who is about 40 yards away like yesterday. Even if you are right beside it it is nearly impossible unless the ball is coming in very low. A big long hanging kick like yesterdays is just a pure guess, from the forward's point of view as well.....
However getting rid of the rule would be anarchy. Lads like Kieran Donaghy would just camp out on the goal-line. I like the amendment to Hardy's 'exclusion zone' rule. Forwards are only allowed in the small square if a defender or goalkeeper has touched the ball in there, or if the ball has come off the post.
The only thing is I can see a scenario where we are trying to see did a lad cross the line before the ball was touched or afterwards. You might end up with the same amount of contentious decisions.
www.squareball.com (http://www.squareball.com)
The best I know of ;)
QuoteSpangler you need to get your facts straight - upmires dont give square balls, refs do.
Well that's clearly where the problem is. When a ball comes into the square from 40 yards you can be sure the ref is at least 40 yards away. There's no way he can judge a square ball.
Ahh the guidelines condradict themselves there. I was always of the opinion that upires could not signal technical infrimgements, however the guidelines and the rule book both stated bring to the attention of the referee any instances of foul play. A technical infringement such as square bball is in the rule book foul play. This is a mattered that really needs to be addressed. I think to that players should be allowed to run in whilst either they or the team mate (whos already in the small sqaure) are in possesion of the ball. Apart from that I like Armaghniac suggestion
Nickey Brennan criticised those judging our games on TV a few weeks ago and said if the TV companies requested he would be happy to send in GAA experts to explain the rules situation on TV.
Would love to hear their views on this matter, as it's very complicated
A lot of these slightly grey areas emerge each summer, like the Donegal player re-entering the field after injury to thump the Fermanagh player last year, it would be good to hear the official line on these matters
Personally I think the goal should not have stood
If they do chance the rule, i hope they realise that it is essential that the riules stays in hurling. Too often hurling rules are changed due to problems in football.
No doubt it was a square ball yesterday but the ref missed it ., still the keeper dropped it . Hearty is a big man and messed up . Armagh were the better team and deserved at least a draw.All the talk of chaning rules is non sense .
this could turn into another argument for the use of a third umpire who uses television replays to determine whether it is a square ball or not...only one or two replays of yesterdays goal would have been conclusive and the apple eaters would still be gunning for the ulster title...
Hearty filled them - he saw Kevin Cassidy out of the side of his eye and dropped it - simple -
Only the GAA can do it. They turn a round ball into a square ball, a 50 into a 45 and the best of all they throw a hop ball in the air :D
Sunday was not Armaghs day - unluckily for them. I believe that theres probaly a certain amout of Karma in that decision as payback for all the titles Armagh shouldnt have won over the years, Does anybody else here remember the knavery of the 2005 Ulster final replay and the 2003 All Ireland semi- a game infamous for the Mc Entee elbow charge. If ever there was a square ball Sundays was it - but Hearty still filled the Togs and Goalies are basically meant to be brave.
My sentiments exacyly Neutral - Hearty filled them - but did you ever see Kevin Cassidy close up ? He's scary looking.
Lads - just to clarify - I started this thread as a discussion on the square ball rule and whether it's time to review or scrap it. I took the discussuion off the Armagh v. Donegal thread for that purpose. The question of the contents of Hearty's shorts or whether Sunday's goal should stand is neither here nor there in this discussion.
Does every thread have to become a discussion about Armagh?
QuoteDoes every thread have to become a discussion about Armagh?
Don't be silly Hardy.
Some of them are about Tyrone.
;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
QuoteDoes every thread have to become a discussion about Armagh?
[/color]
What are you on??? Of course they shouldn't all
become a discussion about Armagh - they should only be about ARMAGH!!!!!!!
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Quote from: screenmachine on May 28, 2007, 09:50:15 PM
this could turn into another argument for the use of a third umpire who uses television replays to determine whether it is a square ball or not...only one or two replays of yesterdays goal would have been conclusive and the apple eaters would still be gunning for the ulster title...
The only singularly conclusive camera angle would be from directly above, and that is not exactly practical. Otherwise you'll have to give umpires a minute or three to pour over several camera angles to tell for sure. I couldn't even tell for sure from the angles I've seen from RTE - from behind the goal, it looks like Cassidy was in the square, but even from that angle its not totally clear if he entered the square before the ball, which was still very high in the air when it crossed the line. You'd nearly need Sky Sports' computer capabilites to make a conclusive evaluation (assuming their system is water-tight, obviously!).
Not necessarily J70, it was proven on the Sunday Game that Cassidy was indeed in the small square before the ball, from an oblique angle but, critically, capturing both the height and relative position of the ball and Cassidy's position in the same frame. Not that much to pore over I'd say for the e-Umpire ;)
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on May 30, 2007, 11:48:31 PM
Not necessarily J70, it was proven on the Sunday Game that Cassidy was indeed in the small square before the ball, from an oblique angle but, critically, capturing both the height and relative position of the ball and Cassidy's position in the same frame. Not that much to pore over I'd say for the e-Umpire ;)
I don't get to see the Sunday Game. Must have been some angle to be able to make a conclusive judgement on when the ball crossed the 6-yard line and the side line of the square and get Cassidy in the picture too!
In my opinion talk about the introduction of a video umpire is extremely nonsensical. If a solution is to be found it needs to be applicable across all grades and levels of football. It is obvious that leaving the decision on whether to rule a square ball or not to the referee is far from ideal as the referee will be too far away. In truth, from my own experience it is a complete lottery when the ball goes into the square and, being a defender, just hope the decision goes my way. If it doesn't then I know there is little point in arguing because I don't even know myself.
My feelings on what could be done are that a rule should be brought in stating that if the attacking player is static in the square at any time prior to the ball arriving in the square then it should be deemed square ball. If a player has run in and is on teh move when the ball arrives then there should't be a problem. If a player challenges a goalkeeper from a standing start this too should be deemed a square ball. Surely both referees and umpires would be able to make decisions if these were the rules. What do you think of this?
Bollocks-----Umpires are allowed to indicate a square ball and are expected to do so. The referee has of course the power to over-rule following consultation with both Umpires.
Bollocks-----Donegals goal was not a square ball as the Donegal player who may or may not have been in the square, made no contact with ball or goalkeeper
My dad was talking to a Donegal man in at work last Tuesday and he said there wasn't the same complaining when McGrane took ten steps before scoring the goal in last years Ulster Final.
Quote from: DWAL on June 01, 2007, 12:24:33 AM
My dad was talking to a Donegal man in at work last Tuesday and he said there wasn't the same complaining when McGrane took ten steps before scoring the goal in last years Ulster Final.
True, but to be fair most of the Armagh lads here (and Joe Kernan and the team) took their beating with dignity. I guess they figured we got the rub of the green this time when they might have in other matches, such as last year's. They also seem to be relieved and filled with optimism too after their team's performance, forwards notwithstanding. Maybe that's all put them in a generous mood!
I've actually seen much worse bitching about referees from them in other years when Armagh beat us!
The steps thing seems to be similar to the square ball though in that it is very patchily enforced. How many did that Galway lad take against Mayo the other week before scoring the second goal?
The where the ball lands rule is where the ball first hits the ground or is interfered with by another player after the ball has been kicked.