FRC Feedback - poll on new rules - which do you like least?

[cjx]

This 4 x3 is adding more daft complexity. Just bar the keeper from leaving thier own half ( except for taking a free when they cant take part in play in other sides half just a [free]kick and drop the pass restrictions.
I wish they would move the kickouts back to 13m ( as per before 1980s) and reinstitute previous 20m restrictions ( ball has to go 20-22m now v 13m previously).

God help junior Bs and their refs.
(there will be lynchings after this).

[Smokin Joe]

This 4 x3 is adding more daft complexity. Just bar the keeper from leaving thier own half ( except for taking a free when they cant take part in play in other sides half just a [free]kick and drop the pass restrictions.
I wish they would move the kickouts back to 13m ( as per before 1980s) and reinstitute previous 20m restrictions ( ball has to go 20-22m now v 13m previously).

God help junior Bs and their refs.
(there will be lynchings after this).

But clearly they don't want to ban the keepers from attacking.
As that is what is in their mind the solution is quite good.  Keepers are still free to attack, but if they do then a teammate has to drop back. This leaves it entirely in the hands of the teams to decide whether it's worth them bringing their keeper up.  I imagine maybe just a few teams will now do this with the vast majority of their teams deciding that they would prefer an outfield player to be the "last" attacker.

[armaghniac]

This 4 x3 is adding more daft complexity. Just bar the keeper from leaving thier own half ( except for taking a free when they cant take part in play in other sides half just a [free]kick and drop the pass restrictions.
I wish they would move the kickouts back to 13m ( as per before 1980s) and reinstitute previous 20m restrictions ( ball has to go 20-22m now v 13m previously).

God help junior Bs and their refs.
(there will be lynchings after this).

But clearly they don't want to ban the keepers from attacking.
As that is what is in their mind the solution is quite good.  Keepers are still free to attack, but if they do then a teammate has to drop back. This leaves it entirely in the hands of the teams to decide whether it's worth them bringing their keeper up.  I imagine maybe just a few teams will now do this with the vast majority of their teams deciding that they would prefer an outfield player to be the "last" attacker.

It might also allow a role for a good man marker back who does not join the attack, even though the goalie sometimes did.

[marty34]

I decided now that I'm not even going to look at the rules now until they're finally sorted.

Would do your head in...drip drip drip with the changes.

[bennydorano]

I decided now that I'm not even going to look at the rules now until they're finally sorted.

Would do your head in...drip drip drip with the changes.

Came to that conclusion a long time ago & zoned out. I was still holding out hope the club season would be spared the chaos but not looking likely.  This will feel like a wasted year by the end of it and we might be ready for it by next January.

[maldini]

They've made it even more difficult for the referees in my opinion with these amendments

[on the sideline]

They've made it even more difficult for the referees in my opinion with these amendments

100% agree

[onefineday]

I am starting to lose faith, I'm really trying to support the changes as the game truly needed change, but it seems that at every opportunity they are ignoring simplicity and choosing complexity.

Case in point is this variation of the 3 up rule 'we are not going to restrict keepers from going up the field', but we'll just add more complexity to make it unlikely.

There are a load of simple tweaks that could be made, the 2 pointer appears popular with the media and committee members, it's the most disliked change on here and it's seen as too cheap by many others I talk to. Simple change would be to make it from play only.

This new midfield mark rule seems unpoliceable, retention of the incredibly generous forward mark again seems like a mistake.

Unfortunately, this season is a write-off and really unfortunately, that may well undermine the retention of these rules when Congress decides next October. Not that I'm even sure I want any of them at this point!

[Ciarrai_thuaidh]

I am starting to lose faith, I'm really trying to support the changes as the game truly needed change, but it seems that at every opportunity they are ignoring simplicity and choosing complexity.

Case in point is this variation of the 3 up rule 'we are not going to restrict keepers from going up the field', but we'll just add more complexity to make it unlikely.

There are a load of simple tweaks that could be made, the 2 pointer appears popular with the media and committee members, it's the most disliked change on here and it's seen as too cheap by many others I talk to. Simple change would be to make it from play only.

This new midfield mark rule seems unpoliceable, retention of the incredibly generous forward mark again seems like a mistake.

Unfortunately, this season is a write-off and really unfortunately, that may well undermine the retention of these rules when Congress decides next October. Not that I'm even sure I want any of them at this point!

To put just 1 possible counterpoint to you - no, it isn't that simple. If you just wipeout all frees in on or outside arc then teams will foul as a matter of course in that area. Makes sense in that case to just foul the likes of a Shane Walsh say, rather than let him shoot for 2.

[Armagh18]

Wish Gavin, his ego and the rest of the arseholes would go away and make a new sport, they're going to f**k Gaelic football.

[Rossfan]

And "Gaelic football" wasn't fkd the last few years??

[EoinW]

The FRC Wrecking Crew strikes again?

Excellent point about how difficult they are making it for referees.  Do they not understand that every judgement call will please one team and anger the other?  It's a can't win situation for officials.  Therefore you eliminate judgement calls, not increase them!  The best games are the ones where the referee is invisible.

The goalkeeper as an extra attacker would become a problem once some manager decided to run a Dean Smith North Carolina 4 Corner offence.  In other words, to hold the ball and kill time.  Of course it hasn't been used that way yet.  In fact, the impact has been a positive for fans looking for more chaotic football.  So I'm not sure why the FRC has changed this.  Could it be as simple as: they hate Ulster?  What they have changed will effectively end the attacking goalkeeper.  It isn't worth the risk, not even for Armagh.

My complaint with these massive rule changes is that you create a "slippery slope" once you begin such actions.  The end result will be that the traditions of the game will end up totally violated.  Because this isn't just a one time thing.  2025 is a precedent which will empower future FRCs to reshape the game in their own imagine.  Simply a case of progressives leaving their mark on the game.

There's one obvious example.  The Backdoor format to give counties a second chance was a radical departure from tradition, yet it was a unique system which seemed to work well and was popular.  How long did it last?  A generation.

That's the thing about all these changes.  They are generational because each new generation believes they have the right to remake the game.  You never hear: we'll try this new idea(like Backdoor format) and if it doesn't work we'll return to the traditional format and admit we were wrong.

Progressives never admit they are wrong(except for minor things to serve as a smokescreen to cover their major changes).  They can be counted on to always double down.

[RedHand88]

Please make it stop.

[tonto1888]

And "Gaelic football" wasn't fkd the last few years??

2024 and 2002 were pretty good....

[gallsman]

That's essentially your same joke from last week. Can't be hunting the same laughs twice!