Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[Milltown Row2]

The vanishing foam to mark where the free kick should be taken should be a no brainer to introduce. The yards being stole by free kick takers is getting worse. I am not sure why referees aren't penalising this as it is.

Taking a few yards is done by both teams and not punished, so its only a problem for the team that hasn't got a free, as they don't complain when their own free taker does the same thing, unpunished.

But I've said the foam is a good option as its a physical line they see, also the referee's watch could be blue-toothed to the clock at pitch side, so when he stops his watch for subs/injuries then the supporters can see, exactly what time is left, rather than 'injury time' once the clock hits 30 (per half) whistle blown.

Cuts out that crying from supporters and management about added time and so on

[lenny]

I honestly don't think a point from 41 metres should be double the value of a point from 38 or 39 metres. I can see this leading to a lot of teams boringly trying to work the ball to their 2 or 3 long kickers who will be sitting around the 50 metre mark waiting for the opening for a shot.

[tiempo]

Surely a goal from that distance should be worth 6?

[The Boy Wonder]

Must say I like the bit of argybargy for the 4 man throw in, about the only time a bit of physicality is still allowed.

Maybe get the Bishop to throw in the ball like the good old days 

[RedHand88]

Surely a goal from that distance should be worth 6?

Think it's all goals are worth 4.

[full moon]

From a defensive point of view surely  work could have been done to define the tackling and one on one tackles, shoulders etc for these rules changes

One of the main reasons teams pack the defense is because players can no longer win the ball one on one without fouls being given and so the only method we get now is swarming of 4 or 5 players on one and a free given. Which really is quite new and nonsensical based on the rules.

[gallsman]

I honestly don't think a point from 41 metres should be double the value of a point from 38 or 39 metres. I can see this leading to a lot of teams boringly trying to work the ball to their 2 or 3 long kickers who will be sitting around the 50 metre mark waiting for the opening for a shot.

Can't remember whether it was Fitzmaurice or Gavin, but one of them mentioned that in some of the sandbox games they've had to date, some players were actively working the ball out behind the 40m line when you might otherwise not expect them to.

Can't wait for that at junior level when every club's dickhead up front thinks he's Ciaran MacDonald.

I'd be happy enough to give the 2pt score from distance a go, but don't like the idea of 4 points for a goal.

[J70]

It will be some advantage for club teams with (thinking of home) county-level long range shooters like Michael Langan, Ciaran Thompson, Michael Murphy and Paddy McBrearty. They'll be racking up the scores against blanket defenses.

[BigGreenField]

From a defensive point of view surely  work could have been done to define the tackling and one on one tackles, shoulders etc for these rules changes

One of the main reasons teams pack the defense is because players can no longer win the ball one on one without fouls being given and so the only method we get now is swarming of 4 or 5 players on one and a free given. Which really is quite new and nonsensical based on the rules.

Most of the fouls and following on nonsense on a pitch comes from every man and his dog having their own interpretation of the tackle,  particularly swarm tackles and striking at the body. If the aim is to speed up/have more free flowing games, have players take other players on etc this is the giant pink elephant in the room.

[AustinPowers]

This 3 players up  top is nonsense.

Let's say the ball is hoofed out of defence , and a forward  runs towards the ball , but stops  at the 50 yard line like he's   reached the edge of a cliff, and can't go any further because that would mean only two players are  within the  50

How are officials supposed to police that? And how are players supposed to suppress their natural  instincts  to go for a ball, then stop  going for the  ball?

Same way they stop for the sideline, end line etc etc??

Aye but you're only looking after yourself  in those situations.

You don't have to look  down the  sideline and count how many of your players  are  behind  it

With this new rule , if one forward  runs over the 50 at the  same time another runs into it. Jaysus you'd need  super slow motion to  determine that. How are officials to see the likes of  that in  real time?

[lfdown2]

It will be some advantage for club teams with (thinking of home) county-level long range shooters like Michael Langan, Ciaran Thompson, Michael Murphy and Paddy McBrearty. They'll be racking up the scores against blanket defenses.

Will this force teams to 'mark' them?

[tiempo]

Why did this game need no such rules?

[DuffleKing]

It will be some advantage for club teams with (thinking of home) county-level long range shooters like Michael Langan, Ciaran Thompson, Michael Murphy and Paddy McBrearty. They'll be racking up the scores against blanket defenses.

Will this force teams to 'mark' them?

Why would it require more attention than it does now - those type of shooters already get additional coverage in those areas for one pointers. I don't think it changes much, if anything. The two point arc will make no difference to the pattern of games.

The only rule proposed that addresses blanket defenses is the 3 up & back rule so that scoring areas can only be covered by 11 outfield players instead of 14.

There seems to be a misconception that this will create a 3v3 game at times but there is virtually no chance of that given that teams can keep as many back as you like.

[JoG2]

It will be some advantage for club teams with (thinking of home) county-level long range shooters like Michael Langan, Ciaran Thompson, Michael Murphy and Paddy McBrearty. They'll be racking up the scores against blanket defenses.

Will this force teams to 'mark' them?

Why would it require more attention than it does now - those type of shooters already get additional coverage in those areas for one pointers. I don't think it changes much, if anything. The two point arc will make no difference to the pattern of games.

The only rule proposed that addresses blanket defenses is the 3 up & back rule so that scoring areas can only be covered by 11 outfield players instead of 14.

There seems to be a misconception that this will create a 3v3 game at times but there is virtually no chance of that given that teams can keep as many back as you like.

Why would any team risk leaving 3 unmarked (1 or 2 even) men considering 1 or 2 kicks after a turn over, about a few seconds, and they're in on goal?

[DuffleKing]

Not following what you're saying here. There must also be a minimum of three defenders in your own half also - but more likely 4 or 5 when you're attacking.