The Mark - good or bad?

[Jinxy]

Doesn't slow the game at all.
Keep it.

[Zapatista]

Darragh Ó Sé retiring makes the mark more acceptable

[glens abu]

It has seriously increased the number of frees in games and IMO it is impossible for the referee to see all handpasses to make sure they are made with the closed fist.   Some wrong passes will be seen, but others will be missed and it will lead to controversies in every game.  That is my take after seeing 2 matches at the weekend and it is a view that was shared by anyone that I spoke to at either game.

That's interesting. I would have been in favour of banning the handpass because I think it militates against good FOOTball - i.e. devalues kicking. But there's always the law of unintended effects and if the change leads to more frees and stoppages an bad decisions, that's not great.

I wonder if that would only be a temporary phenomenon, though. I can remember when the handpass wasn't allowed. That rule was introduced sometime in the fifties, I think, because people felt there was too much handpassing to the detriment of kicking skills. Under the new rule, the only playing of the ball with the hand allowed was with a closed fist. That's the football I remember from my early days, before the handpass was re-introduced in the seventies.

The thing is, I don't ever remember a problem of interpretation when it was fist-passing only, because people simply didn't try to use the open hand. I wonder if we'd get to that stage pretty quickly if this new rule were kept?

Hardy would you know the year in the 70's that the hand pass rule was changed.Thanks

[Hardy]

It has seriously increased the number of frees in games and IMO it is impossible for the referee to see all handpasses to make sure they are made with the closed fist.   Some wrong passes will be seen, but others will be missed and it will lead to controversies in every game.  That is my take after seeing 2 matches at the weekend and it is a view that was shared by anyone that I spoke to at either game.

That's interesting. I would have been in favour of banning the handpass because I think it militates against good FOOTball - i.e. devalues kicking. But there's always the law of unintended effects and if the change leads to more frees and stoppages an bad decisions, that's not great.

I wonder if that would only be a temporary phenomenon, though. I can remember when the handpass wasn't allowed. That rule was introduced sometime in the fifties, I think, because people felt there was too much handpassing to the detriment of kicking skills. Under the new rule, the only playing of the ball with the hand allowed was with a closed fist. That's the football I remember from my early days, before the handpass was re-introduced in the seventies.

The thing is, I don't ever remember a problem of interpretation when it was fist-passing only, because people simply didn't try to use the open hand. I wonder if we'd get to that stage pretty quickly if this new rule were kept?

Hardy would you know the year in the 70's that the hand pass rule was changed.Thanks

I don't remember exactly and I can't find any references to it. I suppose you've tried that yourself. The best I can suggest is to check video archives. I'd be fairy certain the old fist-pass-only rule was still in place in 1970. I have the video of that year's AIF somewhere and I'll check it when I can. I'm also fairly sure the Kerry team of 1975 were hand passing at a great rate, so I'd guess it was sometime between those two years.

Or can any of our other long-in-the-tooth members remember?

[glens abu]

It has seriously increased the number of frees in games and IMO it is impossible for the referee to see all handpasses to make sure they are made with the closed fist.   Some wrong passes will be seen, but others will be missed and it will lead to controversies in every game.  That is my take after seeing 2 matches at the weekend and it is a view that was shared by anyone that I spoke to at either game.

That's interesting. I would have been in favour of banning the handpass because I think it militates against good FOOTball - i.e. devalues kicking. But there's always the law of unintended effects and if the change leads to more frees and stoppages an bad decisions, that's not great.

I wonder if that would only be a temporary phenomenon, though. I can remember when the handpass wasn't allowed. That rule was introduced sometime in the fifties, I think, because people felt there was too much handpassing to the detriment of kicking skills. Under the new rule, the only playing of the ball with the hand allowed was with a closed fist. That's the football I remember from my early days, before the handpass was re-introduced in the seventies.

The thing is, I don't ever remember a problem of interpretation when it was fist-passing only, because people simply didn't try to use the open hand. I wonder if we'd get to that stage pretty quickly if this new rule were kept?

Hardy would you know the year in the 70's that the hand pass rule was changed.Thanks

I don't remember exactly and I can't find any references to it. I suppose you've tried that yourself. The best I can suggest is to check video archives. I'd be fairy certain the old fist-pass-only rule was still in place in 1970. I have the video of that year's AIF somewhere and I'll check it when I can. I'm also fairly sure the Kerry team of 1975 were hand passing at a great rate, so I'd guess it was sometime between those two years.

Or can any of our other long-in-the-tooth members remember?

thanks I cant find a ref to it anywhere but rem playing in 75/76 and nearly sure it was the fist pass then,but I am sure your right about the Kerry team so that is why I am confused.Thanks anyway.

[Jinxy]

The rules have changed loads of times over the years so I really don't understand why people get so hot under the collar when they try to change them again.

[EagleLord]

This isn't to do with the mark rule, but i didnt know what other thead to put it on.

Im watching a basketball game here. When a player is fouled, he goes to the free-throw line himself. Wonder what you lot would think of that idea? Its basically the old 'if you make it, take it' or 'makers takers' rule as I see it. Made me think if such a rule could be a good thing for gaelic football. And even hurling aswell I suppose.

I think it's an interesting one, and wuld be positive for football, because it'd mean everyone had to improve their kicking abilities. Perfect example, a corner-back makes a real lung-busting run up the feild with one-two's the wholeway etc, only to be fouled on the 14yrd line. Then the corner forward taps it over and gets all the credit and applause from the crowd. In reference to the basketball again, it means that you arent just a donkey on the team you know, you must have all the skills to play. This, in my opinion, can surely only lead to better all-round ability in players in the future. Just wondering what fellow posters thought..

[tyssam5]

This isn't to do with the mark rule, but i didnt know what other thead to put it on.

Im watching a basketball game here. When a player is fouled, he goes to the free-throw line himself. Wonder what you lot would think of that idea? Its basically the old 'if you make it, take it' or 'makers takers' rule as I see it. Made me think if such a rule could be a good thing for gaelic football. And even hurling aswell I suppose.

I think it's an interesting one, and wuld be positive for football, because it'd mean everyone had to improve their kicking abilities. Perfect example, a corner-back makes a real lung-busting run up the feild with one-two's the wholeway etc, only to be fouled on the 14yrd line. Then the corner forward taps it over and gets all the credit and applause from the crowd. In reference to the basketball again, it means that you arent just a donkey on the team you know, you must have all the skills to play. This, in my opinion, can surely only lead to better all-round ability in players in the future. Just wondering what fellow posters thought..

Interesting idea I kind of like it. But it would mean giving license to rugby tackle certain players even 20 yards in front of goals. i.e. 'Hack a Shaq' to expand on your basketball reference. Could lead to frustration that a team gets punished less for fouling cleverly.

[EagleLord]

This isn't to do with the mark rule, but i didnt know what other thead to put it on.

Im watching a basketball game here. When a player is fouled, he goes to the free-throw line himself. Wonder what you lot would think of that idea? Its basically the old 'if you make it, take it' or 'makers takers' rule as I see it. Made me think if such a rule could be a good thing for gaelic football. And even hurling aswell I suppose.

I think it's an interesting one, and wuld be positive for football, because it'd mean everyone had to improve their kicking abilities. Perfect example, a corner-back makes a real lung-busting run up the feild with one-two's the wholeway etc, only to be fouled on the 14yrd line. Then the corner forward taps it over and gets all the credit and applause from the crowd. In reference to the basketball again, it means that you arent just a donkey on the team you know, you must have all the skills to play. This, in my opinion, can surely only lead to better all-round ability in players in the future. Just wondering what fellow posters thought..

Interesting idea I kind of like it. But it would mean giving license to rugby tackle certain players even 20 yards in front of goals. i.e. 'Hack a Shaq' to expand on your basketball reference. Could lead to frustration that a team gets punished less for fouling cleverly.

I do see your point there and it is a valid one of course. It may lead to more fouling, because a defence would rather concede a free to a lanky midfeilder or half back, and take the chance of him missing the free, before he has the chance to offload it to a sharpshootr corner forward. You could just agrue then the foul system that the GAA tried a few years ago, Im not sure whether it is still enforced, whee a player can be yellow carded or even sinbinned for persistant fouling. I just think it would improve the all roun ability of every player. Gone would be te days of a terrier corner back who's a wee hard nut that isn't allowed to kick the ball. The same rule would obviously apply to everywhere on the pitch, not just th scoring zone.

[Throw ball]

Not sure if this is the best place to post this. Anyway.
This weekend the powers that be will debate and decide on if the new rules will be brought in or not. This led me to think. Of all the people voting how many have watched more than 1 or 2 matches with these rules? Do they all take soundings from their club and county members and players? I specifically ask because at the start of the league I would have been against most, as I even commented earlier on this thread. However, after watching 7 league games and 2 McKenna cup games my thoughts are changing.
Initially I thought the mark was stupid. In recent matches I have seen teams working ways to gain a mark and there has been less bunching than before. Admittedly this may be because Division 2 football has not been of a very high standard this year. I now think the mark may be a good idea but would like the catcher to have the option of calling it.
The penalty move seems a good idea and the taking of kickouts from the 13m line irrelevant. I am still not sure of what is the bes way to deal with the square ball.
Finally, the fist pass. Something had to be done because the ball was being thrown too often. The rule introduced may be to strict but I feel that if it is not introduced referees will still be strict on the handpass throughout the summer. Has anyone managed to come to any conclusions?

[ONeill]

The mark has made no discernable difference.

[johnpower]

I agree ,but I always wonder about the interpretation of what is travelling/over carrying ? I coach young lads and tell them that the dispossessing the man is the main thing not primary possession . I remember trying to get some of the Rugby boys I went to college to play real football .It was a disaster as they though they could push /hand off the tackler .

The hard thing to decide about is the hand pass . It is a skill ,but can you imagine a total ban then I think we would have a really different game .

[Main Street]

The mark is the most interesting of the experiments, it deserves a longer trial. The obvious effect is gaining clean possession when executed, eliminating the effect of the swarm culture. I don't know if it has translated into any scores.
I like the fist pass but looks almost impossible to be regulated with any consistency.
Maybe it is time to experiment with 2 refs, one in each half.

[blewuporstuffed]

The mark is the most interesting of the experiments, it deserves a longer trial. The obvious effect is gaining clean possession when executed, eliminating the effect of the swarm culture. I don't know if it has translated into any scores.
I like the fist pass but looks almost impossible to be regulated with any consistency.
Maybe it is time to experiment with 2 refs, one in each half.

i cant believe people that have actually watch the national league think the fist pass rule is a good idea,there is absolutly no need for it if the existing rule  is implimented properly.
if a player 'throws' the ball as alot of people seem to be suggesting happens regularly, then blow him up for it, dont bring in a new rule which is even harder to enforce consistantly!
The things that are worth keeping are the square ball rule and the ball having to out of play to end the game. The mark, i am sort of indifferent about.I think it could maybe work ok, but i wouldnt be that bothered if they didnt go with it either

[EagleLord]

Europea League style you mean..next there will be video refereeing..

For me the biggest issue still remains to be time keeping. The clock should stop when the balls not in play, and a hooter/buzzer at the end. That would eliminate the controversy of the ref 'playing for a draw' or people being outrages at the amount of injury time being played etc. I'll give an example. 70mins gone on the clock, ref has said there is 2 mins of stoppage time, the loosing side are on the in their opponents half, ref cant blow the game up becasue they are on the attack, they end up getting a goal in the 3rd minute! Cue the onslaught of the other manager, saying he played over the time he said he would!

Im bringing in a lot of American style officiating here arent I..damm..as much as I hate the yanks..they have got clear rules on their games..time keeping/refereeing/fouling/makers-takers...there arent many controversies in their sports..