Thoughts from a football man watching the hurling

[thewobbler]

I've never really got bitten by hurling. While I can appreciate the skill, fitness and power needed to progress in the game, as I've never had an interest in getting chased around a confined space by a man holding a weapon, I've just never got into it.

But I do love a sporting occasion, so I sat down today with an open mind, ready to be entertained.

And I have to say I was thoroughly entertained. It really was an enthralling contest and the combination of ferocity in the tackle and discipline when on the receiving end, was a marvel.

But I'm still not bitten. There are things about this game I just don't understand.

I read this morning about Brian Cody's tactical genius. But It seems to me that Kilkenny have now won 4 All Irelands in a row with tactics that comprise hitting the ball as far as they can on the general direction of the goal, then using pure physical power to ensure they win enough breaks to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Obviously he moves players into different positions depending on who they're playing, but can this really be described as tactics instead of man management?

The much marvelled sideline cut. Is it just me who thinks that striking a ball as far as you can with these is simply a waste of possession? Has anybody actually ever hit a sideline ball 10 metres into a teammates hands? Or is this frowned upon by the hurling fraternity?

Fouls. Is anything actually a foul in this game? Don't get me wrong, the game is a better spectacle for the lack of whistling, but it seemed to me today that the referee used his whistle at timed intervals - to give the lads a break - rather than as a reaction to any events that happened. So every 3 minutes Kilkenny enjoyed a free, then 3 minutes latet Tipp got one, and so on.

Goalkeepers. If their counterparts in games like ice hockey and lacrosse are wise enough to wear headgear (plus countless other pieces of armour), surely their claims that it impedes their vision are just the cries of a madman.

Soloing the ball. It seems that you can a) run as far as you like with the ball in your hand, b) transfer the ball between hand and stick at completely random intervals, or c) run with the ball on the end of your stick if you're a real show-off. As the referee never blows you up, why doesn't everyone just run with ball in hand?



The commentators definitely prefer hurling though, so I might even watch a few more games next year to see if I can decipher any of these things.

[Joxer]

what would a Down man know about Hurling?

[wobbller]

I've never really got bitten by hurling. While I can appreciate the skill, fitness and power needed to progress in the game, as I've never had an interest in getting chased around a confined space by a man holding a weapon, I've just never got into it.

But I do love a sporting occasion, so I sat down today with an open mind, ready to be entertained.

And I have to say I was thoroughly entertained. It really was an enthralling contest and the combination of ferocity in the tackle and discipline when on the receiving end, was a marvel.

But I'm still not bitten. There are things about this game I just don't understand.

I read this morning about Brian Cody's tactical genius. But It seems to me that Kilkenny have now won 4 All Irelands in a row with tactics that comprise hitting the ball as far as they can on the general direction of the goal, then using pure physical power to ensure they win enough breaks to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Obviously he moves players into different positions depending on who they're playing, but can this really be described as tactics instead of man management?

The much marvelled sideline cut. Is it just me who thinks that striking a ball as far as you can with these is simply a waste of possession? Has anybody actually ever hit a sideline ball 10 metres into a teammates hands? Or is this frowned upon by the hurling fraternity?

Fouls. Is anything actually a foul in this game? Don't get me wrong, the game is a better spectacle for the lack of whistling, but it seemed to me today that the referee used his whistle at timed intervals - to give the lads a break - rather than as a reaction to any events that happened. So every 3 minutes Kilkenny enjoyed a free, then 3 minutes latet Tipp got one, and so on.

Goalkeepers. If their counterparts in games like ice hockey and lacrosse are wise enough to wear headgear (plus countless other pieces of armour), surely their claims that it impedes their vision are just the cries of a madman.

Soloing the ball. It seems that you can a) run as far as you like with the ball in your hand, b) transfer the ball between hand and stick at completely random intervals, or c) run with the ball on the end of your stick if you're a real show-off. As the referee never blows you up, why doesn't everyone just run with ball in hand?



The commentators definitely prefer hurling though, so I might even watch a few more games next year to see if I can decipher any of these things.

   No relation of mine.

[thewobbler]

what would a Down man know about Hurling?

Sweet FA. I've only watched a full game half a dozen times in my life.

A number of strange points but the sideline cut one is the strangest. I would like you to expand on this.

In football, a sideline ball is mostly used as an advantage; a method for retaining possession and rebuilding an attack. In hurling - based on the little I've seen - there seems to be macho thing about sideline cuts, where they are used to propel the ball as far as possible, and in effect creating a lottery over who regains possession.

[ONeill]

A number of strange points but the sideline cut one is the strangest. I would like you to expand on this.

I think he means it not usually strategically taken short or quickly towards a free team mate. There seems to be much emphasis in football on percentage balls - don't pass it or lump it forward unless your man has a high percentage chance of winning it. No 50/50s. I might be wrong but I think he's saying it's a much-heralded skill but actually not a productive advantage. But I'm sure he can answer for himself.

[GalwayBayBoy]

what would a Down man know about Hurling?

Sweet FA. I've only watched a full game half a dozen times in my life.

A number of strange points but the sideline cut one is the strangest. I would like you to expand on this.

In football, a sideline ball is mostly used as an advantage; a method for retaining possession and rebuilding an attack. In hurling - based on the little I've seen - there seems to be macho thing about sideline cuts, where they are used to propel the ball as far as possible, and in effect creating a lottery over who regains possession.

Believe it or not when everyone is being marked it is not so easy to land a sliotar from a sideline straight into the paw of a teammate even 10 yards away. There is always a chance his marker will nip in and deflect the ball away and suddenly the opposition are tearing down the field. Only time you generally see short sidelines is when someone manages to get completely free which doesn't happen so much at the highest level.

[Donnellys Hollow]

If you could drive the ball ninety to hundred yards in football then there'd be very little handpassing. Both football and hurling are excellent field games and we are blessed to have them as our native games. They are fundamentally different sports though and it is silly to try and compare them.

[ONeill]

Football and hurling are different games, none better than the other. A criticism of hurling can be that to get from A (puck-out) to B (score) it can take pucks involving 2 men in 5-10 seconds involving little movement whereas in football you'll probably need half a dozen players with much more ball work and physical exertion. A criticism of football is that anyone can play it, even if you haven't trained in a decade - a rusty hurler can't hurl.

[ONeill]

A number of strange points but the sideline cut one is the strangest. I would like you to expand on this.

I think he means it not usually strategically taken short or quickly towards a free team mate. There seems to be much emphasis in football on percentage balls - don't pass it or lump it forward unless your man has a high percentage chance of winning it. No 50/50s. I might be wrong but I think he's saying it's a much-heralded skill but actually not a productive advantage. But I'm sure he can answer for himself.

The same then as a back whacking it out of defence in hurling as opposed to footballers handpassing it out of defence. It's to do with the distance the hurler can get on it. If a football full back was able to land the ball in his full forward line, he'd do it to.

Purists say that possession play is bad for the game so you may be correct. I say next year lump the ball on top of Penrose and let him work it out for himself!

[magickingdom]

I've never really got bitten by hurling. While I can appreciate the skill, fitness and power needed to progress in the game, as I've never had an interest in getting chased around a confined space by a man holding a weapon, I've just never got into it.

But I do love a sporting occasion, so I sat down today with an open mind, ready to be entertained.

And I have to say I was thoroughly entertained. It really was an enthralling contest and the combination of ferocity in the tackle and discipline when on the receiving end, was a marvel.

But I'm still not bitten. There are things about this game I just don't understand.

I read this morning about Brian Cody's tactical genius. But It seems to me that Kilkenny have now won 4 All Irelands in a row with tactics that comprise hitting the ball as far as they can on the general direction of the goal, then using pure physical power to ensure they win enough breaks to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Obviously he moves players into different positions depending on who they're playing, but can this really be described as tactics instead of man management?

The much marvelled sideline cut. Is it just me who thinks that striking a ball as far as you can with these is simply a waste of possession? Has anybody actually ever hit a sideline ball 10 metres into a teammates hands? Or is this frowned upon by the hurling fraternity?

Fouls. Is anything actually a foul in this game? Don't get me wrong, the game is a better spectacle for the lack of whistling, but it seemed to me today that the referee used his whistle at timed intervals - to give the lads a break - rather than as a reaction to any events that happened. So every 3 minutes Kilkenny enjoyed a free, then 3 minutes latet Tipp got one, and so on.

Goalkeepers. If their counterparts in games like ice hockey and lacrosse are wise enough to wear headgear (plus countless other pieces of armour), surely their claims that it impedes their vision are just the cries of a madman.

Soloing the ball. It seems that you can a) run as far as you like with the ball in your hand, b) transfer the ball between hand and stick at completely random intervals, or c) run with the ball on the end of your stick if you're a real show-off. As the referee never blows you up, why doesn't everyone just run with ball in hand?



The commentators definitely prefer hurling though, so I might even watch a few more games next year to see if I can decipher any of these things.

class, this is post of the year for me. as a kerryman what do i know about hurling but i often thought the very same as wobbler. ever wonder about kk and tactics, its simple really like golf they hit the ball as far as they can and go get it do it again. yet they win 4 in a row. some going that. dont start me on the sideline cut, its an ego trip for whoever hits it. if i was a manager i'd scream everytime we got one. how can you do anything with it but hit and hope. its fuckin nuts thought today was a great game tho

[magickingdom]

theres only one joe canning

[The Real Laoislad]

Coming from a dual county  I get both codes to watch,but hurling is my No.1 by far always has always will be, but I don't see why it needs to be highlighted all the time why one is better than the other or vice versa,it's the same when every now and then someone on here feels the need to tell everyone how better football is than soccer....

Who cares which is better, we are all individuals who like different things and different sports,this need for competition against other sports is nonsense,no ones a better man than anyone else because he is a soccer man,or a hurling man or a football man..

Why can't people just be what they are and forget about which sport is better or more skillfull, you like it someone else doesn't so get over it,its the same as everything else in life people are different and its the way it should be

[thewobbler]

Hardstation you are being petty on many levels with that stuff about Canning. For one he is a uniquely gifted individual. For two I would love to see his conversion rate from 70m in. For three, and most importantly, I deliberately didn't bring taking a score into from a sideline into it. If a score is achievable from any dead ball in any sport, of course it makes sense to attempt it. Lumping possession away though from a dead ball appears to be a fascination in hurling.

[thewobbler]

Laois Lad, this thread genuinely isn't an attempt to weigh football up against hurling. It's more an exploration in my mind of how hurling is a strange game, and for an outsider looking in, I just can't buy some of the propoganda that surround the game, its skills and tactics. Which has nothing to do with football.

[The Real Laoislad]

Laois Lad, this thread genuinely isn't an attempt to weigh football up against hurling. It's more an exploration in my mind of how hurling is a strange game, and for an outsider looking in, I just can't buy some of the propoganda that surround the game, its skills and tactics. Which has nothing to do with football.

Sorry I actually meant to post that in the Football me arse thread