Congress 2016

[DuffleKing]

Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.

But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)

This is nonsense.

Donegal defended the exact same way in every year Mcguinness managed them - they ill informed call it a blanket defence.

What evolved each year was their counter attacking style as they began to understand how best to exploit the space opponents left behind them by innocently committing numbers to break them down.

In short, if teams require time to set up a smother defence then the mark will have no inhibiting effect.

[PAULD123]

This is nonsense.

Donegal defended the exact same way in every year Mcguinness managed them - they ill informed call it a blanket defence.

What evolved each year was their counter attacking style as they began to understand how best to exploit the space opponents left behind them by innocently committing numbers to break them down.

In short, if teams require time to set up a smother defence then the mark will have no inhibiting effect.

How can my statement that Donegal modified their style be nonsense when you immediately afterwards state that they evolved?

Also to say they played exactly the same but then say they evolved a counterattcking plan is in itself contrdictory.

In 2011 Donegal defended with 12-13 players behind the ball even when they had possession. In 2012 they allowed players to transition quickly and vacate defensive positions. They did not play the same every year under McGuinness. That is naive, and shows a lack of awareness of what McGuinness achieved in building a successful all-Ireland strategy.

[DuffleKing]

But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better.

Donegal patently won the all Ireland defending as they always had.

[westbound]

Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.

But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)

I agree with most of that, but my concern is that certain managers will look at the risk/reward of the mark and will pull back 10-12 players. I think attack minded teams like the Dubs will ignore it, but with the possible exception of someone like Kerry or Mayo who might fancy winning a mark at midfield, I think the main outcome will be it encouraging more blankets.

I can see the point you are making but think of the opportunities that the mark will also present.

If you take a quick kick out after the opposition have had an attack with 5-6 men forward, win the mark at midfield and then you have a free kick into your own attack while the opposition haven't had time to get all the blanket back.
It might present opportunities for some teams to counter-attack the counter attacking teams

I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)

[blewuporstuffed]

Muppet, I agree that this will not do much to counter the defensive blanket that teams often use. What it will do is counter the swarming of midfielders, the melee that ensues and the slowing down of the play. It will speed up the midfield, and allow runners to attack. which is a positive in its own right.

But yes if teams put up a blanket defense then that will still be a problem. But the biggest factor to speak against blanket defense is that Donegal failed to win an All-Ireland with it and no one has done better. When Donegal won the Sam Maguire they had already modified their style to transition quickly to attack. I see far too many teams simply holding 12-13 players in their own half at all times. All this means is that you lose by a narrow margin. So you don't get stuffed. But also you have almost no chance of winning the game. Unless a team has very quick transition and fast runners, the space in the opponents half is never exploited (certainly not by 5 guys bring the ball slowly up teh pitch by lateral hand-passing)

I agree with most of that, but my concern is that certain managers will look at the risk/reward of the mark and will pull back 10-12 players. I think attack minded teams like the Dubs will ignore it, but with the possible exception of someone like Kerry or Mayo who might fancy winning a mark at midfield, I think the main outcome will be it encouraging more blankets.

I can see the point you are making but think of the opportunities that the mark will also present.

If you take a quick kick out after the opposition have had an attack with 5-6 men forward, win the mark at midfield and then you have a free kick into your own attack while the opposition haven't had time to get all the blanket back.
It might present opportunities for some teams to counter-attack the counter attacking teams

I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)

100% agree with this.
The mark could turn out to have a  positive effect on the game (although i have my doubts), but the trouble is we are guessing, and we shouldn't be making fundamental rule changes on the basis of guesswork.

[PAULD123]

...I think the main point is that it's very hard to predict with any certainty how the mark will impact on the game and it only reinforces the craziness of not trialling this properly (trialling it 6 years ago is not an appropriate trial!)

I certainly agree that a trial 6 years ago does not hold strong enough evidence for a permanent rule change. But it is good evidence and should be considered significant at least.

The main thing I would say is how long should the trial be? In 2010 it was trialed only in the league and dumped for the championship. I do not consider that a true test of the rule. A major rule change will have a bit of settling in time before players and managers get used to it. You will see some silly things happening, like lots of frees being given away and people saying "it's ruining the game as a spectacle!!!" then after time people will learn to deal with it and make use of it. So seven league matches is not enough.

I would believe that a trail for two full season (league & championship) would have been fair to decide on a permanent decision. Otherwise we are looking at the effect of the change in immaturity.

[Rossfan]

The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.

[blewuporstuffed]

The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.

[TF15]

A kick after 3 consecutive hand passes would be some balls. Be loads of tippy 5 meter kicks and teams could play the blanket defence knowing that they stand the opposition up outside the shooting zones and press hard on the mandatory kick pass, making it even harder to probe through the defensive lines.


JUST LEAVE THE GAME ALONE!!!!!!! The GAA must be the most self critical sporting organisation in the world. Our games already are really good and much more viewer friendly than the supposed opposition sports of soccer and rugby.

[muppet]

The mark us being used in the forthcoming Connacht N
MFL.
If taking the mark must be kicked forward else a free to opposition.
Also
Only 3 consecutive hand passes
No passing back to goalie.

I have serious pity for the ref who already gets lambasted for missing the 9 steps of the Ballyboden equaliser, or Kevin Mc's two hops and now has to content with all of that!

[Rossfan]

Be no trouble to the Connacht MFL refs....
Only 1 rule -  it's a free to the rhubarbs

[longballin]

A kick after 3 consecutive hand passes would be some balls. Be loads of tippy 5 meter kicks and teams could play the blanket defence knowing that they stand the opposition up outside the shooting zones and press hard on the mandatory kick pass, making it even harder to probe through the defensive lines.


JUST LEAVE THE GAME ALONE!!!!!!! The GAA must be the most self critical sporting organisation in the world. Our games already are really good and much more viewer friendly than the supposed opposition sports of soccer and rugby.

you are kidding? last few years have been dire viewing, thankfully club football not so bad as that but coaches are apeing them..