Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[johnnycool]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

[Milltown Row2]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

[tbrick18]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

Class.

[johnnycool]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

How is that downward chop any different to someone doing the same when someone is rising the ball though?

And if you get the hand and ball, is it much different to the yellow card the Tipp lad got when blocking a high ball and catching the Clare lads hand?

Duty of care and all that shíte.

[Milltown Row2]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

How is that downward chop any different to someone doing the same when someone is rising the ball though?

And if you get the hand and ball, is it much different to the yellow card the Tipp lad got when blocking a high ball and catching the Clare lads hand?

Duty of care and all that shíte.

Very valid point and same goes for the eejit that sticks his foot in a ruck and the player gets ball and foot.

But in the rules, chop down on hurl is a foul so we can't just change that. Connecting with the head with hurl is in the rules  also.

As David has rightly said on many occasions the rules need a overhaul

[johnnycool]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

How is that downward chop any different to someone doing the same when someone is rising the ball though?

And if you get the hand and ball, is it much different to the yellow card the Tipp lad got when blocking a high ball and catching the Clare lads hand?

Duty of care and all that shíte.

Very valid point and same goes for the eejit that sticks his foot in a ruck and the player gets ball and foot.

But in the rules, chop down on hurl is a foul so we can't just change that. Connecting with the head with hurl is in the rules  also.

As David has rightly said on many occasions the rules need a overhaul

God, I'd love to see someone fly into a ruck and let fly and be allowed to. That would soon put an end to those rucks which are a blight on the game.
like a bunch of old hens picking at spilled barley a local lad from farming stock called it one day.

[Milltown Row2]

I don't think it's mockery to be honest.

It's more frustration.

A sizeable group of GAA followers - perhaps even the majority - have limited interest in rules being applied correctly, fairly or consistently. Instead they have an inner expectation that every coin toss should land in their favour.

Social media then provides an echo chamber for this approach, which allows them to feel vindicated, indeed unbiased, to have these thoughts.

It's not a GAA unique issue by the way. Soccer is drowning in "attack referee first, analyse performance second" followers. The NFL is falling down with it. Even in rugby where the players and management are almost entirely courteous to referees, suffers from it.

People are people.

Makes refereeing very difficult all the same.

I will be the first one i admit I don't know all the rules these days. However, I know what I see and that things being done inconsistently within games. A ref will blow player up for over carrying but not player B. Or charging or whatever. I've no issue with them doing that against an Armagh man but only if they apply it the same against the other team. And it's not just Armagh games I'm referring to. I've seen it in other games also. I get it can come down to the refs interpretation of a charge for example, but surely his interpretation can't change in the same game?

I'd two incidents in a game the other day... Hurling game

First was a free, over the shoulder tackle no interest in playing the ball.

Second incident, opposing team, lad reaches in over the shoulder with hurl to try and flick ball away, intentionally trying to play ball rather than trying to stop player!

Cries come for a free, followed by "what's the difference?" And "we want consistency"

Two different views, one whistle

The over the shoulder "flick" is getting pretty common in hurling, but is that not a chop down which should be a foul, no?

Not if he plays the ball, if he attempts to play ball misses, chops down or plays hurl it's a foul, but the body check style, arms out, followed by a plea of "he's dipped into it" that means nowt, players have a duty of care also.

Had to laugh, called a foul, knee high strike, absolutely nowhere near the ball. Lad says you were at that when you were playing  . Probably got away with it too

How is that downward chop any different to someone doing the same when someone is rising the ball though?

And if you get the hand and ball, is it much different to the yellow card the Tipp lad got when blocking a high ball and catching the Clare lads hand?

Duty of care and all that shíte.

Very valid point and same goes for the eejit that sticks his foot in a ruck and the player gets ball and foot.

But in the rules, chop down on hurl is a foul so we can't just change that. Connecting with the head with hurl is in the rules  also.

As David has rightly said on many occasions the rules need a overhaul

God, I'd love to see someone fly into a ruck and let fly and be allowed to. That would soon put an end to those rucks which are a blight on the game.
like a bunch of old hens picking at spilled barley a local lad from farming stock called it one day.

I've no issues with that, providing that contact with the ball is first, as the say goes "ball and all"

If an attacker fails to protect his hand when catching the ball though very rarely will a ref blow, though I remember a club mate went for a ball and ended up dislocating his finger, I said "FFS, did you not keep the hurl up?" He said "aye, I did, he smashed my other hand holding the hurl"
Funnily enough, it was some aul bruiser from Ports lol

[Rossfan]

Too much hurley stuff infecting this thread😳
Back to football I see Smug Jim expects to be trialling a scatter of new football rules in League AND Championship in 2025!

[befair]

The rules advisory committee is top-heavy with county players/managers. The real problem is at club level, esp in the lower divisions, 15 men behind the ball, endless hand passing around the 45, uncontested kick-outs

[DuffleKing]

They're all looking at club football as much as anyone - where do you think counties get coaches and players?