Enhanced Rules

[AustinPowers]

I think some people on here believe the media narrative that this is all brilliant while there are other people who can look beyond that and see that it is not.

I also think those people set up this poll thinking their position would be validated given the 100% support of the media and cannot believe that there are people who have minds of their own.

One person set it up and people have voted.. most people have said they are happy for change.. only 6% want to go back to the 80's

Currently 90.8% for change

You could also look a t it another way , and say only  15% want all rules retained. That's hardly a ringing endorsement

Most people are open to  a new rule or two.  Not everyone is closed off  to  the prospect of  a change that will add  something to the game.  Just as the free from the hands, square ball change etc was welcomed previously.

 I think the tap and go seems  to have been  well received by many , but that might be the only one favoured by some (myself included). But as I said before,  whether you like 1 new rule or 6, you're ticking  the same box , so the results are slightly misleading. Or maybe  that was your intention?

[trileacman]

I think some people on here believe the media narrative that this is all brilliant while there are other people who can look beyond that and see that it is not.

I also think those people set up this poll thinking their position would be validated given the 100% support of the media and cannot believe that there are people who have minds of their own.

One person set it up and people have voted.. most people have said they are happy for change.. only 6% want to go back to the 80's

Currently 90.8% for change

And 85% opposed to keeping the rule changes as they are.

[Milltown Row2]

I think some people on here believe the media narrative that this is all brilliant while there are other people who can look beyond that and see that it is not.

I also think those people set up this poll thinking their position would be validated given the 100% support of the media and cannot believe that there are people who have minds of their own.

One person set it up and people have voted.. most people have said they are happy for change.. only 6% want to go back to the 80's

Currently 90.8% for change

And 85% opposed to keeping the rule changes as they are.

But still looking changes of sort are 90%

Think polls can give skewed views or false opinions

For some they like blanket defence and keeper's playing up field or short unopposed kick outs, they like possession football that really only kicks in on 55 minutes, zonal marking were they actually pass players with the ball so they can get into their position, the enjoyment of getting into the scoring zone (13m) so they can shoot.

And some people like it differently

The rules, all 7 have multiple layers which made life difficult to manage. Certainly as a ref it's ridiculous and flawed.

Keeping people happy is difficult

I'd be more concerned on how a poll is done with actual players rather than the sofa hugging experts

[The Trap]

Feck Rossfan you are absolutely mental.

Over 50% want minimal change......minimal.......you hear that??

Fecking minimal.

One or two changes......minimal.....you get the word?? Fecking minimal

I'm done with narcissists on here and in power.

Over and out...

Ruin the game if yous want.

See yous in 5 years.

[David McKeown]

I think some people on here believe the media narrative that this is all brilliant while there are other people who can look beyond that and see that it is not.

I also think those people set up this poll thinking their position would be validated given the 100% support of the media and cannot believe that there are people who have minds of their own.

One person set it up and people have voted.. most people have said they are happy for change.. only 6% want to go back to the 80's

Currently 90.8% for change

With no consensus what the change should be. I voted to go back to 2024 because the alternatives were not defined but I'm not opposed to change. I just think any change needs to be properly tested to analyse its impact before it's implemented for a minimum 4 year period.

[Rossfan]

Feck Rossfan you are absolutely mental.

Over 50% want minimal change......minimal.......you hear that??

Fecking minimal.

One or two changes......minimal.....you get the word?? Fecking minimal

I'm done with narcissists on here and in power.

Over and out...

Ruin the game if yous want.

See yous in 5 years.

😀😃😄😁😆😅🤣

[Rufus T Firefly]

Im obviously bias but the 2024 final was infinitely superior to the 20025 final.  I think the 2024 final suffers from exaggeration as to how bad it was.  The 2025 final on the other hand is benefitted by a need to portray the current game as vastly superior to the old one.

100% this.

[twohands!!!]

For people who are looking for what the general GAA public thoughts are on the rules the following reports from after the league show the massive public support for the new rules.

https://www.gaa.ie/article/football-review-committee-benefit-realisation-framework-on-new-rules

https://www.gaa.ie/article/frc-publish-post-allianz-football-league-review

Given how thorough the FRC have been to date and how they have actually used data and feedback, I'd imagine there will surely be a post championship report at some stage.

Between how popular the rules changes have been according to these reports and the increased attendances, anyone thinking that any of the new rules have any chance of being abandoned looks to be severely out-of-touch with reality.

[tonto1888]

The thought of going back to packed defences, crab football, the audible chat from the stands gives me the jitters tbh

I totally understand fellow Gaels have hugely differing thoughts and preferences on this from my own opinion, and I accept that they are likely to carry the day in this debate.

The one thing I would say, in reference to the bit I've kept from your post, is that last year, the great and the good came on to lambast the spectacle that was the 2024 All Ireland Final, and many referenced how the players calling to each other was clearly audible, in the context of what they seen as a poor contest on the pitch, which in turn was used to shout for the need for rule changes. And yet, the players were clearly audible talking to each other on Sunday, and there was plenty of lateral passing and holding the ball up, and there was little talk about it, albeit there was plenty of booing from the crowd.

Furthermore, we had the ridiculous spectacle of Kerry players soloing the ball back and forward, unimpeded, in front of the half way line, as three Donegal players watched on helplessly, only yards away, unable to intervene.

Maybe the new game is a much better spectacle, full of more scores and more exciting for many, but for me it's just not Gaelic Football.

I respect your opinions on a lot of thing rufus but I'd like to query the last sentence. What is Gaelic football to you? What we seen in 2024? I'd wager if you dropped someone from 1959 into 2024 they woukdnt recognise the sport. The people who wrote the original rules certainly wouldn't.

https://www.museum.ie/en-IE/Collections-Research/Collection/Documentation-Discoveries/Artefact/Gaelic-Athletic-Association-Football-Rules-Book-18/c6a88203-7819-40ef-b0ae-4d589cb1c3a3

[David McKeown]

For people who are looking for what the general GAA public thoughts are on the rules the following reports from after the league show the massive public support for the new rules.

https://www.gaa.ie/article/football-review-committee-benefit-realisation-framework-on-new-rules

https://www.gaa.ie/article/frc-publish-post-allianz-football-league-review

Given how thorough the FRC have been to date and how they have actually used data and feedback, I'd imagine there will surely be a post championship report at some stage.

Between how popular the rules changes have been according to these reports and the increased attendances, anyone thinking that any of the new rules have any chance of being abandoned looks to be severely out-of-touch with reality.

Do they? I've only been able to skim them there but from what I can see the first report seems to have only taken unsolicited emails as a barometer of public opinion. The second doesn't seem to make any reference to same.

Where exactly is the evidence of massive public support?

[EoinW]

The danger is that all of western society has an Alice in Wonderland quality to it.  What one believes is often more important than facts.  Journalism, as we've seen at the political level, has died.  Instead of being truth seekers revealing reality, journalists are stenographers repeating what governments and bureaucrats tell them to present as "reality".

It's nice to think sport journalists are immune from this - simply because sports are not important enough to require manipulation.

What happens when the sport's authority sets out to create a new mandate for the game?  Suddenly you have a political reason to manipulate how fans feel.  We know from other journalistic fields that sport journalists can not be relied on to hold authority to account.  It's a safe bet they will do what their brother journalists have done and become stenographers, parroting the party line...manufacturing consent.

We've seen the performance of RTE and GAAGo this year.  I was shocked watching one of the Ulster provincials, on BBC, when a comment was made(might have been by Oisin McConville) suggesting their was TOO MUCH offence.  That was the first hint I had that anyone on television was thinking there might be a problem with the new rules.

Sorry but I'll be skeptical of any polls or research done by the GAA or FRC or even the media.  They all have a vested interest in one side of the debate.  If they aren't objective, how can their polling/research be objective?

Regarding the poll on this site, there were 80,000 fans at Croke Park Sunday.  We've got a poll with less than 100 votes.  it's a nice curiosity piece but it doesn't mean anything

[Rossfan]

I think we can have a fair guess at who the 7 are anyway

[thewobbler]

Statisticians work on the basis that for a population of 100,000, a sample of 100 people provides a margin of error of less than 10%.

[EoinW]

I think we can have a fair guess at who the 7 are anyway

LOL! Start another poll!

[Rossfan]

Sandbox game report  the Irish Times

After an incredibly successful first year under the new rules, the Football Review Committee (FRC) headed back to the laboratory for further tests last Wednesday night. A "sandbox" game was hosted between Dublin Senior 2 sides Fingallians and Round Towers Clondalkin in Abbotstown, to trial a few extra rules that hadn't made the cutline for the 2025 season.

Heading out towards Blanchardstown though, there was a feeling that we, the players, were also on trial.

Not only was the place, date and time of the match announced by FRC chairman Jim Gavin during the RTÉ broadcast of the All-Ireland final, but the chat in Towers' dressingroom was mostly around the bits and pieces posted on social media about the game, and whether a cadre of football nerds and journalists would descend upon the National Sports Campus. But the call was coming from inside the house.

I was out there in both a professional and recreational capacity, having played for Towers since before I can remember, and certainly before I became a "journo". In any case, it turned out that there was a smattering of apparent neutrals in the stands, but before we got out on to the pitch, we were visited by Towers' most famous son, Gavin himself.

The rules of the match were set out to us. We were to begin with a 15-minute period, where goals would be worth four points and we would be unable to bring the ball back into our own half once we had crossed the halfway mark. The pitchside hooter would bring an immediate stop to the first quarter (rather than the play being allowed continue), and there would also be some alteration to the current kick out mark – although it wasn't clear to most of us what that was exactly.

In any case, that wasn't much of a concern when we saw the Fingallians team, who appeared mostly to be well over 6ft tall. By the end of the first quarter, we were grateful that the hooter brought the game to an abrupt halt. A couple of four-point goals had hit the back of our net and we had already dug ourselves into a hole in this particular sandbox.

Before the second quarter, Gavin came over to have a few words with us, and told us that it would begin with the scenario that we were six points up. Despite an improvement in the second period, we still conceded a four-pointer, which meant that we had lost the period by five. There were a few wry smiles when Jim came back to us at half-time with a cheery "well done, you won that by a point".

The boosted goals had been very telling in the first half, as Fingallians went direct as often as they could. However, the game had also become unbalanced very quickly because of them.

There was a couple of breaches of the halfway-line rule and both teams were able to press up farther because their opponents couldn't just turn and play it backwards. After the match, there was broad agreement that it was the most viable and positive of the sandboxed rules.

After half-time came two evenly matched five-minute periods, where each side took a turn at playing a scenario where they were two points up to start. Then, for the final 20 minutes, another rule was introduced: a player receiving a hand pass would have to kick pass. In other words a team could not play two hand passes in a row.

This led to more chaos, more verticality and more turnovers, and it was probably the most enjoyable part to play in.

There were a few lapses on the rules throughout the game – lads passing into their own half, or playing one-twos through the hands in the final period. There were also some unusual decisions being made because of the different parameters, with more long balls being played, especially in the last 20.

Having apparently become overwhelmed by the spirit of the game, I latched on to a loose pass and drove out of defence only to absolutely welly an awful pass into the full-forward line. I later managed to somewhat balance the books, cutting across the ball nicely to switch play after receiving a hand pass. It wasn't a defence splitter, but it did give pace to the attack on the far side, and it's exactly the sort of risky pass I would never play under the current rules.

The increase in kicking in the final period had opened the game up, even if the rule itself wasn't perfect. When players did kick, they usually had the skills to execute their pass.

But it was obvious that many of us simply don't get our heads up quickly enough, having been raised in the post-puke-football era. The FRC changes aren't just fixing a rules problem, they have to address the now ingrained safety-first culture in players.

Those attitudes may actually prove harder to change than the rules.