Antrim Football Thread

[Lucifer]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

What do you actually want?  As soon as any other player outside of the captain opens their mouth just call it for dissent?  That will take out any judgement ... but it's an entirely preposterous scenario for anyone with common sense.  "Ah ref" or "WTF did you give that for" will become one and the same.  But if the fouling player loudly declares to his own teammate "Hey Paul, I didn't foul him but the ref doesn't have a clue" then this isn't dissent as it isn't a strict application of the definition of the rule as you seem to want.

How about we just use common sense, eh?

[SaffronSports]

'it's my judgement call to decide on people talking back'


You don't need 'the help' when you are bringing 'my judgement call' into players talking back. You have already made 1 rule for 1 and another rule for another with that shout 

What do you actually want?  As soon as any other player outside of the captain opens their mouth just call it for dissent?  That will take out any judgement ... but it's an entirely preposterous scenario for anyone with common sense.  "Ah ref" or "WTF did you give that for" will become one and the same.  But if the fouling player loudly declares to his own teammate "Hey Paul, I didn't foul him but the ref doesn't have a clue" then this isn't dissent as it isn't a strict application of the definition of the rule as you seem to want.

How about we just use common sense, eh?

Is there consistency in common sense? If not, then apply the rule as it's written. This is the very thing that will have refs getting abuse. The ref last week applied "common sense", this week he's not letting me away with what the last one did. Consistency is what is needed from referees not a group of lads with different tolerance levels deciding what is and isn't appropriate.

[Take the Mark]

Consistency - 1 million percent. And this is not possible if every man is making up their own rules on what can and what can't be said. There is consistency in this county though, unfortunately of the negative variety. 'group of lads' - couldnt have said it better myself. Good post.

[Milltown Row2]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

[Take the Mark]

I watched a competitive game last night reffed to the rule, not a firework in sight. But then there were no rockets present.

[InnocentByStander]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

[Milltown Row2]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

You could always stop play give a yellow card and depending on who had the ball either give it a hop ball or non direct free. But think I heard one's saying frees can be overturned? Again from games I've done or watched it's changed from one ref to the next, and that's on the national stage

[Milltown Row2]

From the Irish Examiner

Central Council are expected to be charged with endorsing an amendment or two to the new football rules, following Football Review Committee (FRC) meetings over the coming days.
The question is when they will come into force – for the final two rounds of the league on March 15/16 and 22/23 or the start of the provincial championships.
And the other question - what may they be?



Black and red cards.

In Pomeroy, Tyrone managed with the help of a couple of Michael McKernan two-pointers to outscore Kerry 0-4 to 0-1 for the first-half period while Eoin McElholm was in the sin bin for a black card.
In the second half, Tyrone failed to score for the combined 13 minutes Joe O'Connor and David Clifford were off the field while Dylan Casey scored a point for Kerry. With Clifford yet to return to the fray, Paul Geaney converted a free.
In other instances like Galway v Donegal later that afternoon aswell as Mayo v Armagh and Cavan v Westmeath, teams that were supposed to be numerically disadvantaged were compensated by not having to keep as many players in the opposition's half.

A day after Jim McGuinness described the circumstances that led to that anomaly in Salthill as "farcical", FRC member Éamonn Fitzmaurice admitted it's an area they have to address.
The body might simply insist teams have to abide by the three-up rule at all times. That would re-enforce the need for discipline but it may lend to more lopsided results, which is the very reason why they jettisoned the increase of a goal to four points.
Allowing the team with more players to simply mirror what the opposition is doing and drop back a player into their own half could solve the issue.
Whatever about a red card, there's the alternative of returning the black card to an automatic replacement thereby ensuring there is numerical parity. That could also allow them to increase the number of substitutes to six as was the case before the sin bin was introduced in 2020.

Although data has yet to show that the game is more demanding, managers have been calling for more interchanges.
Expectation: Change on the way.

12 v 11.

The overload being created by advanced goalkeepers is the bane of managers. We can count five who have at some stage or another complained about them – Ger Brennan, John Cleary, Dessie Farrell, Dermot McCabe and Paddy Tally.
The advantage given to those teams with keepers who are comfortable heading up the field is obvious but the risks are clear too. Shane Ryan was almost caught in no man's land last weekend and in better weather we could see more goals scored on the break as netminders scurry back to the literal and metaphorical posts.

At the same time, the extra player sure comes in handy in retaining the football and killing the clock.
It may just be that the FRC either restricts goalkeepers to kick-passing beyond the halfway line or prohibits them from crossing it in open play but compensating for that by allowing them to take and make passes from anywhere inside their own half to see if that helps but that could have drawbacks too.

Expectation: An amendment is likely.


Kick-outs.

Seeing as the longer restarts have added to the amount of contests and there is genuine excitement and expectation about their outcome, the FRC may be reluctant to take their former member Malachy O'Rourke's advice and relax the kick-out length from clearing the 40-metre arc to the "D".

O'Rourke might be drowned out on this one but the FRC will want to see the amount of kick-out marks claimed and breaking ball compared with last season.

Expectation: Too early to call.


Clock/hooter.
It appears the FRC are going to persevere with the technology for the moment even though it counts up rather than down as was envisaged and it doesn't have the full support of the Central Competitions Control Committee.
There has been plenty of dramatic finishes where clock/hooters have been involved but the "negative possession" argument against it has also been underlined by teams playing keep-ball knowing what remains on the clock.

Expectation: Nothing just yet.


50-metre penalty.
Referees at inter-county level at least are feeling more empowered because of the new disciplinary rules but some match officials' interpretations of players not handing the ball back to opponents or delaying the play could be questioned.
It was they who wanted the 50m advancement, the FRC suggested 30m. The severity of the punishment could become more of a deterrent than a reality but infringing players in future might be allowed to drop, roll or throw the ball instead of having to hand it to their opponent.

Expectation: A tweak but maybe before championship.

[paddyjohn]

Any updated management teams from across the county?

[Milltown Row2]

Any updated management teams from across the county?

John mighty Raff looking after Aldergrove

[paddyjohn]

Any updated management teams from across the county?

John mighty Raff looking after Aldergrove

Great fella.

[marty34]

Any updated management teams from across the county?

John mighty Raff looking after Aldergrove

Great fella.

Any updated management teams from across the county?

John mighty Raff looking after Aldergrove

More clubs than Tiger Woods.

[Milltown Row2]

Honestly for me, as biased as I am, I never seen a man put in as much effort for us as a player and as a manager. Good all round man

[FactCheck]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

You could always stop play give a yellow card and depending on who had the ball either give it a hop ball or non direct free. But think I heard one's saying frees can be overturned? Again from games I've done or watched it's changed from one ref to the next, and that's on the national stage

dissent is a foul and a 50m mark

no ifs or buts of maybes

when a player gives off to a ref, even if he's right in what he might be screaming, then it's dissent and it's a free

i can't see why any ref would not be in favour of this rule and look for reasons as to not enforce the rules as stated

it's shows the bias that goes on and the lack of consistency in truth and that's not a dig MR2

everyone has their own bias

[Milltown Row2]

There is no consistency because the rules have changed so much since this has started

But hey ho lets just stick to zero tolerance, any vocal dissent of any kind from the pitch to the sideline will be met with a 50m free

2 weeks away from the fireworks

Can a free be given for dissent if no foul is given?

if someone see's a challenge as a foul that the ref doesn't give and that person gives verbal abuse to the ref can the ref give a free?

Or is it only dissent after fouls?

You could always stop play give a yellow card and depending on who had the ball either give it a hop ball or non direct free. But think I heard one's saying frees can be overturned? Again from games I've done or watched it's changed from one ref to the next, and that's on the national stage

dissent is a foul and a 50m mark

no ifs or buts of maybes

when a player gives off to a ref, even if he's right in what he might be screaming, then it's dissent and it's a free

i can't see why any ref would not be in favour of this rule and look for reasons as to not enforce the rules as stated

it's shows the bias that goes on and the lack of consistency in truth and that's not a dig MR2

everyone has their own bias

How's it bias if you are consistently doing it to everyone?