Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[Milltown Row2]

He didn't really loose control of the ball there in that clip, he bounced it and straight away bounced it again, he can have no complaints

[tiempo]

He didn't really loose control of the ball there in that clip, he bounced it and straight away bounced it again, he can have no complaints

He looked like he was acting the ballix - foul

He was handy enough not to look guilty - no foul

Similar to interpretation of steps

[Rossfan]

What rule covers "acting the ballix"?

[Milltown Row2]

What rule covers "acting the ballix"?

Quite a few lol

[Armagh18]

What rule covers "acting the ballix"?

One of them ones at discretion of the ref lol

[Milltown Row2]

What rule covers "acting the ballix"?

One of them ones at discretion of the ref lol

Only one whistle, if someone is acting the ballix well, that's on him 

[Gianni]

He didn't really loose control of the ball there in that clip, he bounced it and straight away bounced it again, he can have no complaints

He didn't really loose control of the ball there in that clip, he bounced it and straight away bounced it again, he can have no complaints

He looked like he was acting the ballix - foul

He was handy enough not to look guilty - no foul

Similar to interpretation of steps

But what would the new interpretation, which I posted above, mean?
I mean, I just can't understand when it is legal to dribble like in basketball and when it is not?

Is catching the ball and then starting to dribble like in basketball illegal?
Or would it be illegal when someone catches the ball, starts to dribble, basketball style, and then catches the ball again and starts to dribble again, that is, in short, the double dribble of basketball?

I don't understand the dynamics of the foul? I mean, I just don't understand when this continuous bouncing is a foul or not.

[Milltown Row2]

Control of the ball and double bouncing is a foul. Not in control of ball and bouncing a 100 times is not a foul

[GTP]

It is a foul whenever the referee blows his whistle. Theoretical interpretation of the rules of gaelic football is a pointless pursuit.

[Gianni]

Control of the ball and double bouncing is a foul. Not in control of ball and bouncing a 100 times is not a foul

But with "Control of the ball and double bouncing" do you mean when the player has caught the ball and holds it in his hand(s)?
So a player catches the ball with his hands, hops the ball on the ground and, without catching the ball that bounces, hops the ball again, over and over again, without ever catching it again on the rebound, legal or not?

According to the interpretation I posted it would be legal, right?

I mean I don't understand how the dribble is counted.

What do you mean instead with "Not in control of ball and bouncing a 100 times is not a foul", that is if the player does not catch the ball he can dribble in the basketball style? But how can you not catch the ball and dribble?
I had interpreted, understood the rule as if it were the double dribble rules of basketball. That is, you can catch the ball, bounce the ball as many times as you want, but you cannot interrupt the dribble, catch it again then start bouncing the ball again.


Is there a video tutorial that explains which bouncing is legal and which is not?

It is a foul whenever the referee blows his whistle. Theoretical interpretation of the rules of gaelic football is a pointless pursuit.

Are you serious or are you joking? If the rules are not clear how can you play a sport?

[Milltown Row2]

Other than yourself I'm not sure anyone that plays the game doesn't understand that rule.

[Gianni]

The point is that I come from Italy, where if you ask what Gaelic football is, no one knows.
Now me and some of my friends would like to play it and spread it here but we are having trouble understanding certain dynamics of the rules, you will agree with me that the rules are really poorly written. Like for example the limit to bouncing.

In the video I posted the player catches the ball, then does a hop, on the rebounce, instead of catching the ball again he does another hop and only at the end he catches the ball again. Now, following the official interpretation posted by me, in the men's game a "bounce" is completed once you retake possession of the ball (I want to clarify that the interpretation posted is not mine but the official one of the gaa)
you can hop it as often as you like once you don't catch it, or not?

Another doubt of mine: what is meant by this clarification to the rule?
"For a player to play the ball against the ground with their hand(s) and
back into their hands twice again except the basketball bounce, per se,
is not a foul. A double bounce is not effected until the ball is caught on
completion of the second bounce"
&
"Definition: For a player to play the ball against the ground with their hand(s) and back into
their hands twice again except the basketball bounce, per se, is not a foul. A double bounce is
not effected until the ball is caught on completion of the second bounce"

and this one:
"4. A ball that has not been caught may be bounced more than once in succession with one or both hands."
So how can you bounce it if you don't catch it? Possible examples?

The rule could refer to this, so we interpreted it:

Player catches the ball, bounces it as many times as he wants, this would constitute only one bounce, then catches it, interrupting the dribble, and then tries to bounce it again but the double dribble would only apply when this new series of dribbles ends at the moment the player catches the ball again, this would be the second time. This would essentially be the same as the double dribble rule in basketball.
This is following the new and official interpretation:
"5. Definition of bounce: "For a player who has caught the ball to play the ball against the ground with his hands and to catch it on return to his hands."

Change: This redefinition of the bounce has the effect that the "Basketball Type", bounce, per se, is not a foul.

A "double bounce" is not effected until the ball is "caught" on completion of the second bounce." https://munster.gaa.ie/2010/05/playing-rule-changes-2010/ is this the case or are we wrong? Please try to answer all the questions.

[GTP]

Are you serious or are you joking? If the rules are not clear how can you play a sport?

I'm pretty serious. At a championship game yesterday a player bounced the ball did not take it in his hands, took a second bounce and caught the ball. No foul was given for this "dribble" and no one in the crowd complained or cared. If you are in doubt and want to play GAA then simply do not bounce the ball twice in a row. No player that I have ever seen has gained a tactical advantage from basketball style dribbling of the ball, it is irrelevant  as to playing the game properly if this is a technical foul or not.
All sports have rules that can be picked apart and maybe this one can be interpreted in many ways, in any given match it will be for a referee to decide so any validation you get in here will not make a pile of difference  if you were standing on a pitch when a foul is given or not given.

[Gianni]

I'm pretty serious. At a championship game yesterday a player bounced the ball did not take it in his hands, took a second bounce and caught the ball. No foul was given for this "dribble" and no one in the crowd complained or cared. If you are in doubt and want to play GAA then simply do not bounce the ball twice in a row.

But in fact if you read the new interpretation of bounce the action, described by you, is absolutely legal, or so I believe.
The dribble should be counted like this, but I'm not sure:
First bounce: player catches the ball, he can hop it as often as he likes once he doesn't catch it, and finally he catches the ball again. These actions should constitute only one bounce. Instead if after all this he were to start dribbling again in this case it would be a second bounce (a kind of double dribble of basketball).
This is the sequence:
1 Bounce: catch, hop as often as he likes and catch. 2 Bounce: catch and hop again, but the second hop would be completed only when the player now catches the ball again.
That is, theoretically until he catches the second dribble the player, I believe, could hit the ball to pass, to score or even to pass it to himself.
But I don't know if this is all correct. That's why I asked for help from you who know much more than me.

No player that I have ever seen has gained a tactical advantage from basketball style dribbling of the ball, it is irrelevant  as to playing the game properly if this is a technical foul or not.

Being able to dribble like in basketball in certain situations could be much more advantageous than doing the traditional 4 steps, bounce, solo and so on.
For example, in a counterattack situation, a player catches the ball and would run much faster if he could catch the ball and then bounce it many times like in basketball.

All sports have rules that can be picked apart and maybe this one can be interpreted in many ways, in any given match it will be for a referee to decide so any validation you get in here will not make a pile of difference  if you were standing on a pitch when a foul is given or not given.

A sport that is not well regulated will never be able to spread worldwide. See the well-defined rules of soccer, volleyball or basketball.

[GTP]

Soccer does not have well defined rules - e.g. debate over if a foul is dangerous, reckless or just a foul leading to red card, yellow card or no action. And the interpretation of the handball rule which is also up for debate.

"Being able to dribble like in basketball in certain situations could be much more advantageous."
If it was advantageous players would be coached to do it and you would see this action during matches across the globe. You don't so whatever situation you envisage would be extremely limited.

"But in fact if you read the new interpretation of bounce the action, described by you, is absolutely legal"
In so far as I am aware it is legal to do multiple bounces of the ball without catching it. If that is the answer you seek stop asking the question.