Messages

It hasn't divided fans.

I promise you, it hasn't.

You can't possibly know that.

Not unequivocally, no.

But I do believe that the only way anyone could believe that the rules are dividing fans is if every time they hear a murmur like "2 pointers provide too much advantage for attackers", "50m for dissent is too much of a punishment", "3 back is too hard to police", they ignore the general sentiment from the complainer, which is - almost without fail - along the lines of "but I still prefer the new rules, old football was horrible".

I've yet to meet a person in the real world who thinks differently.

If it's "divided", the weighting I believe is somewhere between 90% and 95% in favour. That's not "divided".

It hasn't divided fans.

I promise you, it hasn't.

A technical/procedural question. If a player commits a black card infraction, ref gives a free, player gets up and takes a quick free. The ref allows the quick free but waits for play to stop again before giving the offender a black card, can a ref do this?

I don't see how this would be an issue. The last thing the rules would want is a "double jeopardy" scenario where cynical fouls can't be punished appropriately because the game too quickly.

The flip side that you're speaking of Eoin, isn't  "Kerry". It was every school, club and county team in Ireland. It wasn't possible to play positive, front-foot football under the old rules until legs got tired. Any attempt to do so, ended in failure. Possession was too hard to regain, and the "all out attack" team always entered the final quarter with nothing left in the tank, and nowhere near the scores on the board to compensate.

I reckon you should desist from trying to make this about Kerry. The new rules aren't and never were about Kerry. They were about positive play and attacking variety. Kerry have always been able to adapt quicker than anyone else to changes in how football is played, and this season they'd the bonus of having the Cliffords. So it's no surprise that they were first out of blocks.

The real outcome of the rules though, we won't know for another season or two. The gap is unlikely to increase. Everyone else just takes a little longer to work things out.

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%.

The broader social issue, which takes place all across the UK, is that professional and semi professional soccer provides an arena for groups of young men to attach themselves as supporters, and engage in violence with other groups of attached supporters.

You can argue the toss about this one all you like. But it's a very real thing. It's very much a soccer thing only. And most of it can be traced to a) a culture that permeates hatred towards rivals, and b) a willingness by clubs to tolerate this culture, and and in some cases promote it as a healthy thing.

BB, Pairc Esler and Newry Showgrounds are 150m apart.

Esler has 5 times the capacity and 7-8 times the attendances. And there's no police presence, and no trouble.

Twice a year when Linfield play in Newry (or well, until recently when they got relegated), the local "recreational rioters" (as you describe them) come out to play. If they have good fun and get the right response from the opposition and the PSNI, they might pop in for Glentoran games too.

These crowds of 1500 odd people then need 20+ policemen to ensure things don't get entirely out of hand.

So tell me, why do the "recreational rioters' of towns as far apart d Newry and Derry, never target Gaelic Games in their area, but regularly target soccer in their area?

You answered your own question for Newry

No I didn't.

The only time a mob has gathered up in Newry the past 15 years, is for soccer matches.

BB, Pairc Esler and Newry Showgrounds are 150m apart.

Esler has 5 times the capacity and 7-8 times the attendances. And there's no police presence, and no trouble.

Twice a year when Linfield play in Newry (or well, until recently when they got relegated), the local "recreational rioters" (as you describe them) come out to play. If they have good fun and get the right response from the opposition and the PSNI, they might pop in for Glentoran games too.

These crowds of 1500 odd people then need 20+ policemen to ensure things don't get entirely out of hand.

So tell me, why do the "recreational rioters' of towns as far apart d Newry and Derry, never target Gaelic Games in their area, but regularly target soccer in their area?

[Hence the use, recently on this thread, of derisory, inflammatory language such as "cult" and "media brainwashed".]

It also has become very polarised. You're either for or against them but nowhere in the middle.

FWIW I like them and I have said for a long time McGuinness doesn't play to them. Games have been clawed back all year but Donegal never went for 2 pointers so couldn't do that. Tbf Kerry didn't let them either. Your man on McBrearty knew what he was trying every time and closed him out. He would probably have went for 2s but couldn't get space (plus missed one).

I don't think it's at all polarised.

Pretty much everyone accepts that the game is better now. Apart from a small minority who are determined to make it into an us vs them. Hence the use, recently on this thread, of derisory, inflammatory language such as "cult" and "media brainwashed".

There's just not enough of them to make noise, to actually create a polarised issue.

You obviously see what you want to see. There's been worse  language  and insults towards those opposed to some rules. "Balloon"  was a recent one

Perhaps Austin. Thing is. Calling an individual a balloon is not the same thing as describing a (majority) thought process as a cult. The former is a reaction. The latter is unhinged.

It also has become very polarised. You're either for or against them but nowhere in the middle.

FWIW I like them and I have said for a long time McGuinness doesn't play to them. Games have been clawed back all year but Donegal never went for 2 pointers so couldn't do that. Tbf Kerry didn't let them either. Your man on McBrearty knew what he was trying every time and closed him out. He would probably have went for 2s but couldn't get space (plus missed one).

I don't think it's at all polarised.

Pretty much everyone accepts that the game is better now. Apart from a small minority who are determined to make it into an us vs them. Hence the use, recently on this thread, of derisory, inflammatory language such as "cult" and "media brainwashed".

There's just not enough of them to make noise, to actually create a polarised issue.

Unpopular opinion (maybe a bit of bias) but i think Frank Burns should be in with a shout of an All-Star.

Brilliant player and not many better in the country in his position.

I agree.

I think Finn McElroy should get one too. Put in a similar shift for Down this year.

Jases now people who enjoy watching football again are "a cult".

Most people enjoyed watching football in 2024.  It wasn't perfect and we were open to rule changes to get more pace into games and a better offence-defence balance.  Instead the FRC completely changed the game.

Yes some of you are behaving like you're in a cult. "I'm bored with football.  Change the rules or I'm going to drink some Kool Aid"!

I've seen little respect here for the football fans who were happy with where the game was a year ago. Actually it's been six months of endless insults.  Like we're to blame because people like you no longer enjoyed Gaelic Football.

Look how divided football fans are now.  I know the FRC will wait for dinosaurs, like me, to go away.  Then the rest of you can be one big Happy Club.

Divided?

Apart from a few on this forum (roughly 5 out of a few hundred), I haven't met anyone who prefers the old rules. I'm yet to meet a person face to face who is "divided".

I'm guessing you haven't either.

Jases now people who enjoy watching football again are "a cult".

Twitter and its "for you" algorithms has done some job on the world.

Even if social media was somehow canned in the morning, it would likely take a generation or two for heavy users to accept that when someone is not 100% with you, it doesn't actually mean they're against you.

SouthPark with one of the smartest, recklessly brave episodes of TV I've seen in a long time.

It was batshit crazy. If wasn't even funny, it was just in the zone. Never seen anything like it.

People espousing the shite that was gaelic basketball this year because they are so brainwashed by the media.

Talk me through "brainwashed" here.

For I'm getting the impression that you're unable to separate a general consensus from state-sponsored mind control.

So here's a few pointers for you:

1. If you're in a minority, it doesn't mean you're wrong.

2. If you're in a tiny minority, it still doesn't mean you're wrong. But it does mean you probably think differently to most people. 

3. If you think differently to most people, it doesn't make you right.

4. If you think differently to most people, and tend to get obsessive about topics, then you'll likely amplify those topics when you encounter them.

5. When you amplify topics in which you hold a small minority view, there's a strong chance you'll become a paranoid mess anytime the topic appears.