Gaelic Handball - what's all the fuss about?

[Zulu]

From today's Irish Independent

By Martin Breheny


Wednesday April 14 2010

IT was, they claimed, impossible to differentiate between legal and illicit. It had turned Gaelic football into Gaelic basketball, removed the primacy of boot from the sport and promoted running more than kicking.

Having vilified the hand pass for 30 minutes, they voted to retain it anyway.

Sounds like an account of the debate on the hand pass v the fist pass at next weekend's GAA Congress. Not so. Actually, it's a report from the 1980 Congress!

The irony is completed by the venue for that Congress which, same as this year, was the Slieve Donard Hotel in Newcastle, Down. I haven't been back in the hotel since then but I certainly never thought at the end of the 1980 session that if it returned to the Slieve Donard 30 years later the hand pass would still be problematical for Gaelic football.

Actually, it's far worse now, having corrupted the game to a degree where calling it Gaelic football violates the Trades Description Act. Tinkering with the pass in the experimental rules so that a player has to use a closed fist as opposed to an open hand has done nothing to reduce the number of dodgy transfers or make life easier for referees.

And it most certainly hasn't led to an increase in foot passes. Former All-Ireland referee PJ McGrath (Mayo) has carried out detailed studies of NFL games this season and reports that the fist-to-kick pass ratio is four to one in favour of the fist. And they call it Gaelic football!

Delegates at Congress will vote on whether to retain the fist pass on a permanent basis or return to the open hand pass, either of which will do nothing to promote kicking. In fact, this debate will be about as relevant as arguing over whether to apply a sticking plaster or a bandage to a wound when the patient's main problem is a heart condition.

Imbalance

The real challenge is how to correct the imbalance between hand and boot but since it's not on the agenda it won't be discussed. Never mind, sure it can be addressed in 30 years' time!

The hand pass isn't the only issue to remain unresolved since 1980. There was unease over championship formats back then too -- indeed a few motions appeared on the Congress agenda calling for the replacement of the provincial championships with an open draw All-Ireland series.

Down and Dublin drove the open draw idea but it met with road rage from many counties and was supported by less than 20 delegates. The main opposition was led by Peter Quinn (Fermanagh), who would later become GAA President and Frank Murphy (Cork) who spoke trenchantly against "gambling with something we know nothing of".

Quinn opposed it on the basis that since Fermanagh had never won the Ulster senior title, or even qualified for the final since 1945, they wanted to continue with their pursuit of the great dream. Thirty years on, Fermanagh are still waiting for a first Ulster crown.

Still, some things have changed since 1980. Rather remarkably for a county with a reputation as free spirits, Wexford wanted any GAA member who criticised Congress decisions or the Association's leadership to be expelled.

Steady on, folks, wasn't that a bit drastic? No, argued Wexford, claiming it would control those "who liked the sound of their own voices".

Roscommon and Mayo led the opposition and Wexford eventually withdrew the proposal but demanded that the authorities take stern action against its critics. Having championed free speech, Mayo then wanted players who didn't give their first allegiance to the GAA to be penalised.

It seemed remarkably like a call for a limited reintroduction of the famous 'Ban', which had been removed nine years earlier but GAA President, Down man Paddy McFlynn -- who is still in fine fettle and will be present next weekend -- skilfully manoeuvred the debate in a less contentious direction.

Sligo proposed the deletion of the rule preventing British Army and RUC personnel from joining the GAA but it had no chance of being passed in those far more troubled times.

Mind you, there was no great mood for change in any sphere with only 31 of the 145 motions being passed. Thirty years on, will the strike rate from the 123 motions be much higher next Saturday? Probably, but Congress still won't have addressed the curse of the hand/fist pass.




While I don't get as annoyed with Martin as much as some on this board I think his obsession with the handpass is ridiculous. Why are people so hung up on handpassing, when done badly, aimlessly or too slowly it can frustrating to watch and is certainly ineffective but when done well it can be brilliant. Most of the passing in the football codes is short in nature, for Gaelic football that means a handpass, so what is the problem. I've also seen plenty of good kick passing in games over the past few years so it isn't like it has gone from the game.

This is a perfect example of an issue that needs to be addressed properly and not be fuelled by spurious 'facts and figures'. We need to decide what type of game we want and for my money it is largely fine as it is but let there be a proper debate rather than have motions or rules that try to force something that we don't need to change.

[maximus]

Is there much chance of them changing the rule regarding the hand pass? Would prefer to see it stay as it is as the pass with the open hand is quicker and more accurate in tight situations. It was evident from dublin tyrone at the weekend that players are still finding it difficult to adapt and it only serves to cause further breaks in play. 

[Zulu]

No chance I'd say.

[Celt_Man]

At the Cavan Fermanagh game at the weekend to my viewing the Ref never once called a free for a handpass despite plenty of them happening.  It's a ridciulous experimental rule and shouldn't be brought in in any shape or form

[Zulu]

I agree but what i can't understand is where the demand to address the handpass is coming from? In fairness it isn't only Breheny who is talking about the 'curse' of the handpass. What I can't understand is why, there have been planety of very good games over the past few years and of the bad ones I don't see how handpassing was to blame.

[maximus]

As far as I can gather it was to allow referees to differentiate between a proper striking action and the perceived problem with players throwing the ball although I don't think this was much of an issue. With regards the comments in the article about handpass to kicks ratio surely the writer would recognise that retention of the ball is very important and if the kick is not on the players should keep possession using the handpass. If anything the use of a sweeper in front of the full back line is preventing long kicking of the ball maybe we should ban that and make everyone stay in a designated area!!

[Celt_Man]

Well my point is if referees can't distingush between a throw ball and a hand pass what makes the GAA think that they can distingush between a fistpass and a handpass with a greater degree of accuracy?

It would be a disaster if it came in at club level and overall you would have to ask yourself what was so wrong with Gaelic Football last year that we needed new rules tried?  That's the fundamental question

[maximus]

Would totally agree if it's not broke don't fix it!

[Zulu]

That is the point maximus, I remember watching the Offaly/Kerry game from 1981 there recently and the amount of times both teams, but especially Offaly, won possession and just put the boot to the ball ansd invariably turned it back over wasn't funny. You'd be hauled off with in two minutes if you did what some of the Offaly players did in today's game. A far more relevant statistic would be to measure the number of times kicked passes in the 70's and 80's resulted in a turnover compared to today's game.

I'm a big fan of the kicking style of football and I do think it is the most effective way of playing but I wouldn't like to see players kick for the sake of kicking. Besides isn't good to have a game that can produce different styles of football and forces us to constantly evaluate the best way of overcoming the latest tactics employed by successful teams? My only major gripe with the way the game has developed is the fact that we probably concentrate too much on how to stop opponents playing rather than on coming up with ways of out playing them.

[Lar Naparka]

That is the point maximus, I remember watching the Offaly/Kerry game from 1981 there recently and the amount of times both teams, but especially Offaly, won possession and just put the boot to the ball ansd invariably turned it back over wasn't funny. You'd be hauled off with in two minutes if you did what some of the Offaly players did in today's game. A far more relevant statistic would be to measure the number of times kicked passes in the 70's and 80's resulted in a turnover compared to today's game.

I'm a big fan of the kicking style of football and I do think it is the most effective way of playing but I wouldn't like to see players kick for the sake of kicking. Besides isn't good to have a game that can produce different styles of football and forces us to constantly evaluate the best way of overcoming the latest tactics employed by successful teams? My only major gripe with the way the game has developed is the fact that we probably concentrate too much on how to stop opponents playing rather than on coming up with ways of out playing them.

That's the way it seems to be going alright but then ways will be found to stop the stoppers and the game will continue to evolve. It's just a natural process of evolution. Handpassing can be a brutal spectacle when carried out by brutal teams. IMO, there is little or no likelihood that the quality or attractiveness of their play would improve if they were to revert to 'catch and kick.'
The opposite would probably be the case. In the heyday of catch and kick, the balls were much heavier than those of today. When they got wet, their weight increased and their surfaces became very slippery.  Trying to hand pass or fist pass one of them could result in sprains or broken bones. The boots were equally primitive by today's standards and were never designed for the endless running we see today. On top of all that, the fitness levels of the players back then were no way as high as those of their modern counterparts. Players hoofed and rooted because that was the only option. There was more high fielding than we have today but clean catching is one thing; making good  use of this possession is quite another. Nine times out of ten, a dogfight began as soon as the fielder brought the ball down.
I saw many games from the mid 60s onwards that were classics and a joy to watch but with the help of the likes of Laochra Gael and GAABeo I have had the chance to take a look at some of those again. Honest to God, I have been let down by all I have seen to date. Even the great Dublin v Kerry clashes in the 70s didn't live up to what I was expecting to see. Those games were filthy. The amount of pulling and dragging and straight arm tackling was shocking. In the game where Mickey Ned O'Sullivan was hospitalised, a modern ref would have red carded at least a half dozen from each side before poor Mickey got flattened.
There are many problems that need fixing in the modern game but I'd honestly hate to see the clock turned back in any way.