Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Zulu

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 483
And we know the county managers who are complaining now aren't among the 12 original respondents?

Without exception, everyone I know involved with the game in any practical way acknowledge the game needs help as a spectacle. However, any of those whose opinion i'd give any credence were able to discern the effect of the handpass limit on the game and recognised immediately that it was a mistake. The games to date bear that out but anyone who supported it immediately - not least the Rules crew - won't admit they were wrong and seem intent on hanging in and damaging possible future attempts to make a credible impact through rule changes.

In fairness, we can all have opinions but until we give things a chance none of us can be sure and I certainly wouldn't agree that the experimental rules have been given enough time to see if they will have a positive impact or not. With the exception of the sin bin, I wouldn't have proposed any of the experimental rules but I haven't heard a single suggestion that I think wold definitely impact the game positively from the get go.

I'm be willing to give the rules time to have an impact. The 3 hand pass rule for example, won't have an discernible impact until coaches and teams start to prepare and develop tactically using the rule. It might turn out to have n o positive effect but with nothing else on the table and a game which is in a bad place I think we need to give it a go. My only issue is why the GAA don't trial things at lower levels, even run special competitions under experimental rules before throwing them under the spotlight.

Well I'd listen to the 12 that replied. Should we listen to those who didn't bother replying but will rubbish other people's suggestions on the national airwaves?

The game needs help, very few people disagree with that. I coach teams and when you're on the line you tend not to notice if the game is good or bad so it's fair to say most IC set ups are not focused on whether the game is good to watch. However, I think every sport should be concerned whether it's entertaining to the general sporting public.

I'll coach a team to play around outside a massed defence and probe for chances but not force score attempts. I won't pay €10 - €50 to watch other teams do it too often though. It should concern any genuine football fan when many genuine football people aren't bothered about watching the game anymore.

Don't really see how going to 13 a side would make much of a difference. If you want to drop players back then the two players you lose would probably come from your forwards or one forward and one 'defender' that defends the 45m area.

The problem is we have seen how getting players back makes it more difficult to score. We have also now figured out how we can get them back and still transition pretty quickly when we turnover the opposition. We have now figured out that playing in front of the massed defence and probing is the most effective way of countering the massed defence. So unless we can figure out a way of preventing teams dropping players back and forcing opponents to play a probing kind of attack we are stuck with the pretty shit fare we get in many games.

But would you be open to trialing it and seeing how it panned out. Youve stated your reasons why you think it mightnt work i feel it would be very much worth looking at because.......

1. Less players means more space, I fully believe there should be allowance for a defensive set up, carlow and fermanagh for instance I don't think would have had the success of last year without it and with 13 a side you could still implement this but there should be more room to operate and space to find for attacking players. Even in this years all ireland at times dublin had 15 players in their own half, so taking 2 out can only free up space that is being occupied

2. Players are fitter than they have ever been, should be no issue in this regards with less players.

3. It should help counties with a smaller/less talented pick than the bigger counties....I know in tipp starting team would be stronger starting 13 and much better quality of player to be able call off the bench. The last few years we had a strong starting 15 with 3/4 players who you would be happy to come on and do a good job and be effective....dublin bring on 6 all stars off the bench so with 13 a side it should only strengthen the full compliment of players every team uses in a game

4. It would make a huge difference to rural clubs who struggle for numbers.

I'd certainly have no issue with trialling it. I don't think the three hand pass rule is the right answer either but I'm in favour of it getting a longer trial than many here are willing to give it. The bottom line is nobody knows what will change the game for the better and I think any rule change needs to be trialled in at least 100 games to see how it changes the game. The game isn't a good spectacle at the moment so we need to get serious about how to address that. Trialling changes at senior IC level is not the way to go.

Don't really see how going to 13 a side would make much of a difference. If you want to drop players back then the two players you lose would probably come from your forwards or one forward and one 'defender' that defends the 45m area.

The problem is we have seen how getting players back makes it more difficult to score. We have also now figured out how we can get them back and still transition pretty quickly when we turnover the opposition. We have now figured out that playing in front of the massed defence and probing is the most effective way of countering the massed defence. So unless we can figure out a way of preventing teams dropping players back and forcing opponents to play a probing kind of attack we are stuck with the pretty shit fare we get in many games.


Okay, one step at a time I guess... explain how the handpass rule discourages Donegal from "sitting deep"?

It does not discourage teams from sitting back but it should encourage teams to push up on the opposition which i suppose is the same thing. This is only my opinion and coincidentally, in the Cavan McKenna cup game yesterday it came to pass. Cavan decided to aggressively push up on Queens when they came out, when you throw a kick into the mix it forced queens to kick the ball under pressure and with a kick over say 20 meters being inherently less accurate than a 2 yard handpass, Cavan were able to turn over possession higher up he field and get a number of easier scores. Cavan did try the same against Down but had less success but I put that down to the team developing this style of play and not being particularly efficient in it. In short Cavans new manager is innovating while Down manager in particular is stuck in a rut trying to mimic Jim McGuinness's winning formula from a decade ago.

Now I have stated that I have seen a lot of teams foul the ball when in an attacking position which i think is wrong, so I would tweak the rule to say once you enter the opposition half or 45 (whichever makes more sense) there is no counting of handpasses.

2nd example. If a player gets a mark for catching the ball clean in the oppositions 45, surely it makes sense to push up and put pressure on the kicker as well as to mark tight and put pressure on the receiver?

I'd really love to see that tweak to the hand pass rule implemented before the league, especially to stop eejits showing videos of "great" goals that would be disallowed in todays game.

What is it about the experimental rules that you think make it advantageous to "push up" (Pep style)? If your answer is that a 4th handpass in a row being a foul will put players under pressure* you are even further discredited in this discussion (if that's possible).
If teams press up into their forward line to win the ball back (which is not a new concept) they are leaving man on man scenarios in their own half of the field and crowding their own attacking space.
* If you think teams will be under pressure because of the handpass restriction you obviously haven't been to any games yet - they just turn and kick it back to the keeper then start again.

1st bold - I've already answered this question
2nd bold - Exactly.

Glad to have helped you understand.

So you think teams will push up to leave their own defence vulnerable?

Although I'm not in favour of restricting the hand pass as I don't think it's the best way to address the ills of the game I'm with Itchy in giving it time to evolve. As he said, you won't see massive changes in the first 2 or 3 pre-season games teams play, especially when they don't know if they'll ever play under those rules again. However, I do see how the three hand pass restriction can encourage less packed defences which is the real problem.

If you drop everyone back inside your 45 and turnover the opposition on the top of the D but have only three hand passes before needing to kick teams may decide it's not worth getting everyone back. If my team got turned over on the oppositions D I could well see how we would look to push up on the opposition knowing that they can't run the ball out as easily as they could now.

I see no reason why pushing up would expose your own defence. If your opponents just left one or two players up you can easily mark them from in front as long as the defenders are fairly quick, which all counties and most clubs would have.

The current experimental rules may not be the best way forward but I haven't heard any suggestion that doesn't have flaws so why not give these time? Mind you, I think experimental rules should never be used in league or championship until they've been trialled for at least two years at other levels. Rule changes will not be given time at senior IC level to full demonstrate whether they work or not.

GAA Discussion / Re: GAA clubs named after Republican figures
« on: November 01, 2018, 12:08:52 PM »
This seems fairly inaccurate from what I have read. The GAA were intrinsically linked to revolutionary activity from it's set up to the Easter rising and beyond. It may have over stated it's official role over time but there were many IRA men playing county GAA and a number of Collins squad (in Dublin) were GAA men.

GAA Discussion / Re: PAY-FOR-PLAY
« on: October 06, 2018, 12:20:32 AM »

Why would the GPA be balloting members to dissolve County squads?

The GPA don't ballot members on dissolving county squads.


What they do do however is have their members complete a survey every year where they are asked if professionalism means that there will no longer be an intercounty structure are they in favour of professionalism (GPA are savvy, the realise a 32 team structure for professionalism is an impossibility).


For now the answer has always been no but one day that no will turn into a yes and then we will likely see a ballot on strike if the GAA don't immediately agree to discussions on a professionlism.

Caprea, this seems to be your hobby horse but you've never once made a cogent argument as how or why it would happen.

I see no reason why a majority of IC players would vote in favour of professionalism. I've no doubt a majority would like to be professional GAA players but why would a majority vote for it?

If the county system had to be scrapped in favour of, lets say, 10 regional professional teams then why would the majority of division 3 and 4 players or division 1 and 2 squad players vote for it when the vast majority wouldn't make a professional franchise squad? They'd basically be voting themselves out of the dance.

Why would any IC player 25 years or older vote for it? By the time the fine details were ironed out (3 years minimum) most would be at or near the end of their playing career. So they'd be striking for something they'd not get any benefit from. Can't see many lads risk their career, not to mention the unholy shit storm they'd face day to day just so some of the current minor team might make a living out of GAA.

In the event the GAA did go pro would a 27 year old doctor/accountant/engineer/business owner etc. decide to put their career on hold to go pro in the GAA? Some probably would but many wouldn't.

And even if they did go on strike, what cards would they hold?

Players: pay us or we don't play.

GAA: Right lads, don't play. Others will and if not we'll focus on clubs.

Players: We'll form our own breakaway professional GAA.

GAA: No bother lads, but you'll not have access to any pitches or GAA facilities anywhere in Ireland.

Players: Errr.....right......ahhh

There's just no leverage for the players, support from the wider GAA or the ability to sustain a professional sport here longterm.

GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 14, 2018, 12:38:38 PM »
I know this was nothing new, but the stuff on Mass and the Rosary for me is something that the Tyrone CB should be looking very strongly at.  Totally inappropriate given the message it sends out to those with other faiths and none, that have an interest in playing Gaelic Football.
Noticed an reference to this elsewhere, so took a quick look to see what the reaction was on this forum.

Frankly, I'm shocked - though not surprised - that this particular aspect of Cavanagh's book doesn't merit a thread of its own (or at least some comment from more than one or two individuals).

I mean, is no-one else astonished, even outraged, that a team manager could get away with imposing his personal religious leanings on an entire team, to the exclusion of those who may feel differently?

i read a lot of stuff about sledging and foul play etc, but there is at least some possible redress (referee) or comeback (retaliation) to those things, but what can someone on the Tyrone panel who doesn't agree say or do to this? Speak out and never play for the county again?

And all that's BEFORE you get to the context of sport and society in  NI.

Could you imagine the shitstorm if eg the Linfield manager required his players eg to take part in some sort of Orange Order parade, or British armed forces commemoration, or attend a Free Presbyterian service?

It would be roundly and publicly condemned, with the governing body clamping down immediately, and QUITE RIGHTLY too, imo. In fact, it's unthinkable. (And I say that as someone who pretty much despises Linfield, btw).

"GAA For All (Protestants need not apply)"

Those aren't accurate comparisons - I'd say an accurate comparison would be attending a church service, and the comparisons you've chosen are telling about you, but your general point is valid. (On a slight tangent though, weren't Irish league players forced to take part in a ceremony and have an anthem they don't recognise as theirs played as though it were recently??)

I don't see it as a big imposition at all, but nonetheless everyone should have their own free choice - I haven't seen any evidence yet that they didn't. If anyone went to MH and said, I'm not comfortable, do you really think they would have suffered repercussions re selection? I doubt it very much. It would seem noone involved had an issue (Unlike the Irish league example I mentioned earlier actually).

The majority of Irish catholics are brought up with the ritual of mass, when they have their own free choice they'll all attend weddings, funerals, mass at easter/christmas, for whatever reason. A mass before games in this context isn't a big deal. Irish catholicism isn't taken that seriously, its just a routine for many, and I think thats the context it needs to be taken in. its not forcing your religious views onto others, as it is being portrayed.

I think you missed the point there.
Most Irish catholics wouldn't have a major problem with it. But What about somebody who isn't catholic? It's a pretty big deal to anyone of any other religion (or no religion).  It could certainly be viewed as 'forcing' your catholic views onto non catholics.
Obviously, we don't know how much 'forcing' was done, but all managers want players to do things as a team. Therefore it's likely that everyone was strongly encouraged to go as a team!

I'm not missing the point. The players were all from a catholic background. The hypothetical situation you describe didn't occur. If it had, I'm sure it would have been dealt with in the proper manner. MH would of course have been aware of the situation and adjusted accordingly. He is there to build bonds and win matches, not convert people to catholicism.

At the end of the day, this was something willingly partaken in by a group of people comfortable with the environment they were in. What we now have is people outside that environment theorising about what took place, or could have took place, or how players probably weren't comfortable but weren't able to say anything....none of which I believe for a second.

And of course, it could be noted that if there was an issue the captain should surely be the person to bring that up with the management team at the time. Instead he sniped about it later, and hasn't chosen to point out that everyone seemed satisfied with the arrangement (if there'd been any murmurings you can bet he'd have written about them!)

You don't know that to be the case yet your saying others are theorising, surely you're just doing the same. I doubt very much that 30 odd twentysomethings in any Gaelic football squad are practicing Catholics and believe in God. Personally I'd be very annoyed in that was asked of me in a team setting and I think many younger players/fringe players etc. would feel they may not be able to raise their concerns. Harte is in a position of Tyrone GAA authority and a religious man himself, he shouldn't have mixed them together. It was totally out of order IMO.

GAA Discussion / Re: AI minor football championship
« on: September 02, 2018, 02:15:20 PM »
Very good game between two high quality teams.

GAA Discussion / Re: Hurling puts football in the shade
« on: August 19, 2018, 05:22:54 PM »

Thought it was very poor bar the last 10 minutes or so.

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling championship 2018
« on: August 19, 2018, 05:16:03 PM »
Congratulations Limerick.

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling championship 2018
« on: August 19, 2018, 05:11:15 PM »
Well limerick have done their best to throw it away but might have enough to see it out now.

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling championship 2018
« on: August 19, 2018, 05:01:20 PM »
That’s it now.

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling championship 2018
« on: August 19, 2018, 04:34:13 PM »
Galway showing nothing to suggest they’ll put up a fight. This could be a cakewalk for limerick as Galway are incredibly poor today.

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling championship 2018
« on: August 19, 2018, 04:13:33 PM »
Though limerick should be further ahead I thought when Galway played a bit they looked better and if they can find a bit of form in the second half they’ll go on and win it. Need a good few lads to step up though.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 483