Author Topic: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football  (Read 10434 times)

tonto1888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #30 on: October 03, 2018, 11:27:22 AM »
Sideline rule is rand.
Handoass rule is daft
Sin bin might work as might the mark
Not really sure what to say about number 5. I can’t picture it in my head at the momen

BennyHarp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5446
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #31 on: October 03, 2018, 11:31:20 AM »
Sideline rule is rand.
Handoass rule is daft
Sin bin might work as might the mark
Not really sure what to say about number 5. I can’t picture it in my head at the momen

Number 5 could be the old management technique of offering something ridiculous which they know people will object too, so they can push through the changes they want. Number 5 won't see the light of day so the others find their way into the rulebook.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 11:35:25 AM by BennyHarp »
That was never a square ball!!

NotOurYear

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #32 on: October 03, 2018, 12:16:55 PM »

I like the proposed rule changes and believe they should be given a chance to operate on a trial basis.
The first question i ask is if the game is in a good place currently and the answer for me is a resounding no. To do nothing would be to accept the way the game is being played now. I don’t ever want to a repeat of some of the games we saw in the summer; Kerry / Galway anyone???? Combating defensive systems and limiting ball retention lie at the heart of the rule changes and this is to be welcomed.

Rule 1: The limit on the hand-pass i can only presume is to promote kick passing. For me kick-passing is the primary skill in the game. Anything that positivity promotes it is to be encouraged. I am in favour of making it harder to engage in that horrible practice of ‘keep ball’ and would favour more contested possessions so this one gets the thumps up from me. A long accurate kick-pass to an inside forward followed by three hand-passes is enough to open a defense when done at pace. I also don’t buy the argument that it will be difficult to referee, it happens in the international rules with no issue and Pat McEneany (former referee chief) believes it would not be difficult to enforce.

Rule 2: Forward Sideline kick. I don’t believe this goes far enough. I would bring this in for all dead ball kicks, they all should have to go forward. I don’t see ball retention as a skill, rather i see it as a blight on the game. I want to see more contests for possession and ensuring a forward kick from restarts will encourage that. I would also limit teams from going back over the attacking 65 if they bring the ball into the attacking zone. Having teams move the ball backwards from the opposition 13m line back to the goalkeeper is depressing-to watch.

Rule 3: The Offensive Mark. What I believe this is trying to combat is the the dreaded blanket defense. Where team place up-to 10 players between the 45 & the 21 in the so called ‘scoring zone’. Attacking teams can’t get through and we have the wonderful vista of keep-ball around mid-field as witnessed in the Derry club game or Kerry / Galway league game in Tralee. With this rule teams can go over the blanket and be rewarded for accurate long kicks (as mentioned the primary skill in the game). So as a defensive team team do you still engage the blanket or do you move it back to cover the mark zone?Imagine the excitement of a long ball kicked into the square with a team down a point? This rule challenges defensive set-ups and will encourage kicking and high fielding so I am for this one as well.

Rule 4: The sin bin. Today yellow cards are handed out too easily. Football is just refereed differently to hurling. Games are no being negatively influenced by referees sending players off for two small yellow card infractions. I see the sin bin as an effort to redress this. However we will have a tick, first yellow card, second yellow card, black card & red card. Too much in my opinion. Keep the tick, yellow card = sin bin, black card = sin bin but must be replaced. Yellow + black or two yellows = red. The black card had no real effect in the closing stages of a game as players were happy to take the card. Now their team is down a man for the remainder of a game. This may lead to 15 vs 13 should two blacks be shown. More difficult for a team to just hang on and when taken in conjunction with the other rules changes should lead to more football being played at the end of games rather than the mess we see now. I believe this is worth a trial.

Rule 5: The kick-out. The most radical proposal and the one that appears designed to eradicate the defensive set-up of teams. So that reason I am in favour of trialing it. Take Tyrone as an example. When the ball is throw-in their two sweepers head to the D. Their forwards drop back to their 65 / 45 bar leaving 1 or 2 inside the opposition half. So in their structure you have 13 players inside their own half. They invite pressure and break at pace to exploit the space at the other side of the pitch. Except nowadays team realise this and play more defensive to mirror the Tyrone set-up leading to crap games (ala Kerry / Donegal 2014). This proposed rule change will make that structure impossible to maintain as it must be reset at every kick-out. The defending Tyrone forward players would need to sprint back to the opposition 45 prior to the kick-out and then back into position again. That is a lot of running for every kick-out. The rule wants players to adopt orthodox positions which may never fully happen again but I believe it could limit the ‘total blanket’ defensive systems that commit 13 to defense. Doing it from kickouts allows the ref to ensure all players are in the correct position. Its will be easy to see if players are in the correct positions as the ball is kicked. Additionally it will finally remove the great scourge of the modern game - the quick kick-out to the corner back....a welcome side effect. The one addendum i would make is for really bad weather, if the ref believes the goalkeeper made a genuine effort to get the ball out then i wouldn’t penalize him.

Overall: I feel the game is broken as it stands, change is needed. We in the GAA are always too quick to say ‘No’ to change. Lets embrace the rules on a trial basis, learn the lessons (good or bad) and then decide if the change should be made permanent. Rugby is a good example, in the mid naughties it was not great viewing; Indeed Argentina got to a world-cup Semi final with the one tactic of Garryowens. World rugby realised that the game needed changing and the altered the laws of the game, particularly around the tackle, to encourage running rugby. Game far more entertaining now as a result. As an association we need to be confident enough to take the positive elements from other field based, invasion games, and incorporate them into our games, it what happened with defensive systems but has just gone a little too far to the dark side. These proposed rule changes redress the balance I feel.

five points

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #33 on: October 03, 2018, 12:51:53 PM »

We in the GAA are always too quick to say ‘No’ to change.

If only.  ::)

We have only recently dumped

the All Ireland Under-21 Championship
the All Ireland Minor Championship
the All Ireland Quarter Finals
September All Irelands
Minors playing adult club football and hurling.
 :-[


thebackbar1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #34 on: October 03, 2018, 01:12:52 PM »
Could some one post the list of names of the people on the committee that came up with these suggestions? I understand that some of the committee have never played gaelic football yet are on the committee.

The Trap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 670
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #35 on: October 03, 2018, 03:04:55 PM »
1. Bad idea and the reasons have already been stated by lots on here. If they really want more kick passing just follow the mark rule out of Aussie Rules. Only thing that would work, not saying I want this by the way!
2. Don't think the sideline kick is a problem, it is after all a kick! What if it was a 'flat' pass? There would be some rows at times and needlessly so.
3. Just go to the Aussie mark again if that's what they want. Would also be hard to ref. Was he inside or outside the 45 when kicked? Was he inside or outside the 20 when caught?
4. Agree with someone else, just go with yellow and red and stick with it. Simple for refs and give them proper instruction on way to use them e.g. would we want the Sean Cavanagh to be a red card? My view yes as in the soccer phrase "stopping a goal opportunity by cynical play"
5. too messy. The last tweak to kick out rule was an improvement and kick outs are now one of the most enjoyable part of the game!

GalwayBayBoy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
  • No show like a Joe show!
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2018, 03:29:10 PM »
Carlow manager Turlough O'Brien has told Sky Sports how he is "gobsmacked" by the proposed rule changes to Gaelic football.

The GAA confirmed on Tuesday that there are five rule changes on the table for Gaelic football, with a view for them to be trialed in the 2019 National League.

The confirmation was met with a mixed reaction and O'Brien told Sky Sports of his displeasure at the moves.

"I am gobsmacked by the new rules," he said. "I'm stunned at the number of rules they're putting forward for a start, and that some of them are so unrealistic, I can't understand why they've done it. They're saying, 'you've got to play a certain way, and the way is simple; 1940s, catch and kick, and wear your flat cap'.

"I think the game today, there are issues but none of these are dealing with it. I mean the biggest issue in the game for me is the tackle, and there's no mention of it anywhere. They haven't addressed it. As a result, we end up with all of these controversial black cards."

"We're going to go to sin bins, which I've no problem with. But the sin bin for two yellows now is extraordinary, considering it was a red card offence previous to this, and now you're going to reward these people by letting them back into the game. That seems like an anomaly straight away.

"I think it's restrictive, they want [us] to play a certain way. It's restricting the hand pass, sideline kicks, and this unbelievably bizarre idea to restrict the kick-outs to two vs two in the middle third of the field is just, I just don't know where they're coming from with that. I just don't know."

The Barrowsiders manager suggested that these rule changes are being brought in due to calls from a few vocal figures.

"I think they're responding to the very vocal criticism of a number of analysts, really. That's driving a lot of this in my opinion.

"I just think these are regressive. I think these people (making the rules), they're not involved in coaching the game, they're not involved in playing the game at the moment. And I think they're being influenced by two or three analysts. Every time you pick up a newspaper, there are two or three analysts who are criticising the game of football."

O'Brien went on to argue that the League is not an appropriate platform to trial these rules, given how important it can be to the likes of Carlow.

"I think the fact that they want to trial it in the National Football League is outrageous. We're working very hard to get to Division 3, and now we're going to be subjected to trial rules where players aren't familiar with it, and it could cost you relegation and promotion in the National Football League, the second major competition they have. I think it's mad.

"To treat it like this is going to disrespect the competition. It's going to infuriate. Some teams are going to suffer because these rules are being trialed in this major competition."

"They emailed a survey to be completed by managers and players. So it's important everyone does respond to that and let them know what they think of it."

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13985
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2018, 03:44:07 PM »
Does that lad ever stop giving out?
Newspaper reports lists the names of the Committee. I suspect "notouryear " is one of them ;)
2018- 2 Cupeens won, 2 to go.

Dubhaltach

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2018, 05:50:47 PM »

Take last years AIF, when David Clarke was kicking out the ball and players were being fouled left right and centre.  Black cards should have been issued. Think about the same scenario now with a Sin Bin and team down to 14 men and a spare man knocking about for the kickout.  Same with someone taking one for the team in the last 5 minutes.  Playing out the last 5 minutes of a tight game with a man down is a major deterrent.

Wow! It's amazing how so many people (who presumably watched the game?) completely forgot what their own eyes saw and instead, like sheep, have their opinions changed to agree with some loudmouth in the media who hasn't a clue what they're talking about.

The incident you refer to happened deep into injury time. There were 6 minutes of injury time indicated by the ref and Rock took the previous free kick to put Dublin ahead at 76:02. The initial kickout went beyond the 45m where there were 2 Mayo men and 3 Dublin men waiting. The ball broke and one of the 3 Dubs, Cian O'Sullivan, was just about to pick it up when everyone realised the whistle had sounded. Before the whistle went the only two players on the ground were Kilkenny and Keegan. After the whistle went a number of other wrestling matches broke out.

Imagine if the ref had black-carded Ciaran Kilkenny and that Dublin had used all their subs so they were down to 14 men and if Mayo had an extra man knocking about for the kickout. Imagine if the ref ordered a re-take of the kickout. Imagine if the ref had added an additional minute and a half to injury time to deal with the time wasted in showing the card and having the kick re-taken. Imagine what Mayo would do with the extra man and extra minute
and a half to get an equalizer.

Maybe you should re-watch it to see exactly what happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxVkVzXci6M
(Rock's freekick at 2:34:30)

The rules were there and implemented, and if Clarke had found a man the narrative would have been how cynicism was duly punished. There was no fouling for the actual final kickout.

You must be ripping the piss there lad. Why on earth would Mayo players go and start a 'wrestling match' when they're a point down with a minute to go in an All-Ireland final? Even the video you posted (which doesn't show all the players) shows Costello and McManamon running straight to there opponents and grabbing them before the kick-out was taken.

I agree with the second bit in bold, the rules were implemented (except for not issuing a couple of more yellows to Dublin forwards which would have been pointless anyway) and they had little negative consequence for Dublin's systematic fouling. Hence, the reason the rules need to be examined, although i'm not sure the current proposal is the answer.

If you seriously believe that Kilkenny's foul on Keegan was the only Dublin foul for that kick-out, you either

A) Weren't at the match
or
B) have fallen seriously hard for the Jim Gavin 'honest team' narrative/ Dubs persecution complex.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 06:05:44 PM by Dubhaltach »

Esmarelda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1325
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2018, 05:57:57 PM »
Carlow manager Turlough O'Brien has told Sky Sports how he is "gobsmacked" by the proposed rule changes to Gaelic football.

The GAA confirmed on Tuesday that there are five rule changes on the table for Gaelic football, with a view for them to be trialed in the 2019 National League.

The confirmation was met with a mixed reaction and O'Brien told Sky Sports of his displeasure at the moves.

"I am gobsmacked by the new rules," he said. "I'm stunned at the number of rules they're putting forward for a start, and that some of them are so unrealistic, I can't understand why they've done it. They're saying, 'you've got to play a certain way, and the way is simple; 1940s, catch and kick, and wear your flat cap'.

"I think the game today, there are issues but none of these are dealing with it. I mean the biggest issue in the game for me is the tackle, and there's no mention of it anywhere. They haven't addressed it. As a result, we end up with all of these controversial black cards."

"We're going to go to sin bins, which I've no problem with. But the sin bin for two yellows now is extraordinary, considering it was a red card offence previous to this, and now you're going to reward these people by letting them back into the game. That seems like an anomaly straight away.

"I think it's restrictive, they want [us] to play a certain way. It's restricting the hand pass, sideline kicks, and this unbelievably bizarre idea to restrict the kick-outs to two vs two in the middle third of the field is just, I just don't know where they're coming from with that. I just don't know."

The Barrowsiders manager suggested that these rule changes are being brought in due to calls from a few vocal figures.

"I think they're responding to the very vocal criticism of a number of analysts, really. That's driving a lot of this in my opinion.

"I just think these are regressive. I think these people (making the rules), they're not involved in coaching the game, they're not involved in playing the game at the moment. And I think they're being influenced by two or three analysts. Every time you pick up a newspaper, there are two or three analysts who are criticising the game of football."

O'Brien went on to argue that the League is not an appropriate platform to trial these rules, given how important it can be to the likes of Carlow.

"I think the fact that they want to trial it in the National Football League is outrageous. We're working very hard to get to Division 3, and now we're going to be subjected to trial rules where players aren't familiar with it, and it could cost you relegation and promotion in the National Football League, the second major competition they have. I think it's mad.

"To treat it like this is going to disrespect the competition. It's going to infuriate. Some teams are going to suffer because these rules are being trialed in this major competition."

"They emailed a survey to be completed by managers and players. So it's important everyone does respond to that and let them know what they think of it."
Couldn't have put it any better. Agree 100% with him.

thewobbler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
    • Balllyholland Harps GAC
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #40 on: October 03, 2018, 06:18:34 PM »
I’m not sure where any of these rules are going.

Based on our black card experiences, the majority of referees will do what they can to avoid issuing this penalty, and those that do, will feel compelled (whether they mean to or not) to balance the score as quickly as possible.

But that’s the easy one.

——

People who equate handpassing with negative play, in my opinion, don’t understand game management. The blight on our game is not that players handpass, it’s that they will recycle the ball endlessly away from contact. Every team that has applied this strategy with any degree of success repeatedly has used lateral and backward kick passes to change the potential point of contact, therefore elongating the cycle.

——

As for trying to force teams away from possession restarts.

These only became popular when (scoring) kickouts were moved away from the 20m line.

Think about this.

Possession restarts are extraordinary easier to fulfil in your own half; as shorter distances to kick maximises their likelihood of success, plus it’s much more tiring for opponents to close down space when there’s a further 20x90m area to cover.

Before that rule change, every other kickout took place on the 20m line. It took even the most attuned keeper 10-15 seconds to get a ball, move through bodies to the 20m line, place the ball stationary, then strike.

So by the time they arrived, the short kickout was infinitely less likely - players had retreated back to fill gaps - and a mistake was punishable by a clear shot on goal from 25m, with the keeper marooned, and nobody behind him. Which by nature makes a territorial play much more appealing than a possession play.


Keeper distribution has improved tenfold in the intervening years, so a return to the full norm of before is unlikely.

But as a simple to understand, easy to implement rule change that can only help coerce the type of game we all wish to see, to me it’s a no-brainer.

Yet nobody apart from me seems to believe this. Why?





twohands!!!

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2270
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #41 on: October 03, 2018, 06:33:07 PM »
Could some one post the list of names of the people on the committee that came up with these suggestions? I understand that some of the committee have never played gaelic football yet are on the committee.

Quote
The Standing Committee on Playing Rules is comprised of:

David Hassan (Chair), Tracy Bunyan (Sec), Pat Daly, Seamus Kenny, Brian Cuthbert, Michael Delaney, David Collins, Alex McQuillen, Frank Murphy.

A veritable who's that of football coaching knowledge.




mrdeeds

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #42 on: October 03, 2018, 06:44:00 PM »
Could some one post the list of names of the people on the committee that came up with these suggestions? I understand that some of the committee have never played gaelic football yet are on the committee.

Quote
The Standing Committee on Playing Rules is comprised of:

David Hassan (Chair), Tracy Bunyan (Sec), Pat Daly, Seamus Kenny, Brian Cuthbert, Michael Delaney, David Collins, Alex McQuillen, Frank Murphy.

A veritable who's that of football coaching knowledge.

Not the Frank Murphy?

Walter White

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #43 on: October 03, 2018, 07:11:36 PM »
As with any rule change, I'll have to see these in practice before making a call. I do feel for referees because a few of these just add to their complicated job, but my initial thoughts are:

I like the forward mark. I always thought a high catch should be followed by an advantage so I was supportive of the mark in midfield and now this will hopefully work as well.

I am not a fan of the side line ball rule, as a few have pointed out before, it's not a major issue and can now hinder teams who win a sideline inside their own 21 but outside their own 13.

Agree that the cards system is over complicated. I'm assuming the tick is replaced by the first yellow now i.e. yellows become even more common.

The kickout will not have a major effect imo (at adult level), other than to force a team playing 13 men behind the ball to 'reset'. A good keeper with good wing half backs will still be able to utilise the space for NFL-like kickouts, which I think could be a good skill. A good quick number 5 or 7 could eat up that spare space and make it a spectacle, so I'm remaining positive about that one. I would suggest that any kickouts below Senior/Reserve should be hit from the 21.

Finally, I am not a fan of the hand pass rule. Yes, we see too many hand passes, but I don't like the idea of punishing a team for keeping the ball when it is the obvious thing to do (i.e. up by 2pts and facing a 15man blanket). I also agree that some of the best scores in recent times have come from powerful running and quick hands ripping open defences.

I would prefer to see attacking incentivised instead of punishing teams who don't stupidly go into a packed defence. This is why a "shot clock" wouldn't work. I would prefer to see something that really rewards teams for going forward. One idea I had (and was laughed at before of course) was to give a team who scores the kickout i.e. maintaining possession. Teams don't want to squander possession these days so if we take the negative out of scoring (losing possession), teams can get on a role and keep going and it is for the other team to get a turn over and get their wave of attacks. This change would also force teams to go and get possession instead of waiting for their next kick out.Probably a radical change, but I'd rather see that than punishing smarter teams.

Fionntamhnach

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2416
  • "If I won the award for laziness, I'd send somebody to pick it up for me."
    • View Profile
Re: Positive proposals at last to address the spectacle of Gaelic Football
« Reply #44 on: October 03, 2018, 07:32:31 PM »
My €0.02...

Quote
Handpass

To introduce a restriction of three consecutive passes of the ball with the fist or open hand by players of the team in possession.

The only way this might work is if after the third consecutive handpass, the player in possession wishing to make a further pass could only do so by kicking it in a forward direction travelling at least 20 metres (arbitrary distance). This would likely still give rise to problems to an attacking team that has reclaimed possession deep in their opponents defence that is working the ball out into a scoring position with several quick fist passes, as defenders will know if the third handpass recipient has more limited opportunities to play the ball. Otherwise as already mentioned by a couple of others here, players will simply use short kicks to reset the handpass count - the type of kicks most players should have left behind once they were too old to play at under 12.

Quote
Sideline Kick

That the ball shall be played in a forward direction from the kick.

Exception:

In the case of a side-line kick being taken by an attacking player on or inside the opponents’ 13m line, the ball may be kicked in any direction.

Not really sure what this is being put up for, but I see not much harm giving it a trial with one amendment. Namely in the exception it should be the opponents 20 metre line instead of 13 metre.

Quote
The Mark

To extend the application of the Mark to the clean catching of the ball on or inside the 20m line from a kick delivered on or beyond the 45m line without it touching the ground.

In the case of a Mark being awarded to an attacking player on or inside the 20m line, the free, if availed of, shall be taken from the point on the 20m line directly in line where the Mark is awarded.

In the case of a Mark being awarded to a defending player on or inside the 20m line, the free kick, if availed of, shall be taken from the point where the Mark is awarded.

The application of the Mark in the two areas of it arising (i.e. as in current Rule and in new Proposal) shall be standardised as follows:

* Up to 15 seconds shall be allowed for a free to be taken from a Mark.
* If the Referee determines that the player who makes the Mark has been injured in the process and unable to take the kick, the Referee shall direct the player’s nearest team mate to take the kick.
* A score may be made from a free awarded for a Mark.
* The normal Rules governing free-kicks shall apply (e.g. players being 13m from the ball before it is kicked).

Exception:

A free-kick from a Mark shall be taken from the hand(s) only.

If a player opts to ‘play on’ when awarded a Mark, he may be challenged i.e. provisions (b) (i) and (ii) of the current Mark Rule shall not apply during the experimentation.

I can see what they're trying to achieve here and the idea behind it is a positive one. Definitely worth trialling. The issues surrounding players being double or triple marked can be rebuffed by pointing out the spare player(s) that can mop up potential breaking balls. Two possible side effects are (a) teams having a player in a permanent "moocher" role that spends most of their time between his opponents end line and 20 metre line whose main role is to make marks, and (b) an increase in the number of balls hit in towards the corners away from a more crowded centre for the purpose of making clean marks which are then brought out to the 20 metre line for a clean strike - this would seem to be opposite to the spirit of the idea of rewarding fielding within the area around the goalmouth. There could also be wider issues of an attacker and wherever they should be awarded a mark having caught a ball within the boundary stated (including if the player jumps behind the 20 metre line with his back to goal, but lands in front of it. Nevertheless, worth giving it a go.

Quote
Sin-Bin

The Penalty on the day for a Black Card Infraction or two Yellow Card Infractions - an ordering off for ten minutes in a Sin Bin.

A subsequent Black Card Infraction shall be penalised by the showing of a Black Card followed by a Red Card.

A subsequent Yellow Card Infraction shall be penalised by the showing of a Yellow Card followed by a Red Card.

In either case there shall be no substitution allowed.

The maximum number of substitutions in normal time to return to five.

The Duties of a Referee and Sideline Official to be amended in accordance with this Proposal.

What kind of shite is this? This is a potential proposal that'll make the teams hatchet man have their eyes light up. The only bit in this that makes sense if reducing the amount of subs down to five. If they want to go for a sin-bin, approach it the same way it's done in womens football - yellow card, hello 10 minutes. Second yellow card? Goodbye! I can't think of any particular reason this can't work in the mens game, and if a referee for an under 14 girls club league game on a Monday evening travelling on their own can cope with the sin-bin timings, I'm sure the refs in the mens game can cope too. At the same time, scrap the black card and integrate the offences for getting one into being yellow carded.

Quote
Kick-Out/Zoning

For a kick-out, two players only from each team shall be positioned between the two 45m lines.

The goalkeeper and a maximum of six players from each team shall be behind the respective 45m lines, until the ball is kicked.

The ball from the kick-out shall travel beyond the 45m line before being played by a player of the defending team.

Other Rules relating to the kick-out to remain unchanged.

Penalties:

(1)  For another player on the team taking a kick-out to play the ball before it has travelled outside the 45m line or has been played by an opposing player.

Penalty:

(i)  Cancel kick-out

(ii)  Throw in the ball on defenders’ 20m line in front of the scoring space.

(2)  For a player to cross a 45m line before the ball is kicked for the kick-out.

(3)  For a player(s) to, in the opinion of the referee, deliberately seek to delay the kick-out by not retreating behind the 45m lines in a timely manner.

Penalty for the above Fouls:

A 45m free off the ground and in front of the scoring space shall be awarded to the opposing team.

(4)  For a player(s) of each team to simultaneously cross the 45m line(s) before the ball is kicked from the kick-out:

Penalty:

A throw-in ball shall be awarded on the centre of the 45m line involved or at the centre of the field (if infringements are made on both 45m lines).

This idea seems to have come up by someone or some group whom have been thinking too hard of issues concerning one level of the game to the neglect of others. Plenty has already been mentioned here from others of the flaws behind this idea from players waiting on the edge of the 45 'till the ball is kicked, that those behind the idea (Tyrone examples here) have never tried to kick a ball out against the wind when any breeze starts picking up in Greencastle, Brocagh, Derrylaughan or even Garvaghy (those wind turbines next door aren't for decoration), not to mention that many under 14 goalkeepers or defenders (and a few even older) might struggle to get their kick out to clear the 45 even on a calm day. Did someone say that Joe B**lly has put this forward in the past? If so then that explains a fúcking lot.

Extra...

When new rule changes are being proposed and then brought on to trial, using the NFL alone is simply not enough. As the trial rules if deemed successful will be likely introduced across the board then they should be trialled at club and underage levels too - for this, give counties and provinces an incentive to be a guinea pig at two adult club level competitions and two youth level competitions per province, e.g. within Ulster have the rules trialled at one club cup competition in a county, one reserve league or championship in another county, one underage competition at under 14 or under 16 in a third county, with the final trial being the Ulster MFL. Get feedback from all levels.

Would have like to have seen a proposal to give a bigger punishment for dissent beyond the 13 metres moved forward, I know the 30 metre proposal was defeated. Personally would have gone for 25/30 metres forward or up to the 45 metre line of the team making the infraction, whatever was closer to the goal.

Also whatever happened to the countdown clock trial? I remember it being passed at congress for trial a few years ago but it was never to my knowledge given an actual go.

Putting internet gobsh*tes in their place since 1999.