FRC proposals...black cards, marks etc

[Milltown Row2]

I think that would be incorrect. Grabbing a lad in a bear hug is not the body check foul.

Given that the description of this specific type of foul uses the word 'collide' then I think it's open to interpretation by the ref.
One could easily argue that a bear hug comfortably fits the definition of the word 'collision' and if it is executed in such a way as to impede a man when he doesn't have the ball (but is moving forward in anticipation of receiving a pass), then I don't really see where the conflict is.

Hardy would prefer to have teams bear hugging people now rather use a bit of common sense ffs, I seriously wonder about people

You do seem have your problems interpreting the English language, MR2. First a bear hug is a deliberate collision. Then a statement that it's not is the expression of a wish "to have teams bear hugging people". It's not really fair to make things up that I didn't say so that you can ridicule them.

When I see "common sense" invoked as a substitute for application of the rules I despair. Why do we bother framing rules using precise language when referees claim the right to overrule them with the application of their own rules, in the guise of "common sense"? Who writes the rules of common sense? And are they further overruled by some other version of sense?

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?



The rules where brought in to stop cynicism in the game and to stop referees being abused. The black card will take a bit of time to settle down and the players will have to adapt, it's in the rules now so we, supporters/players/managers and referees.

[BennyHarp]

I think that would be incorrect. Grabbing a lad in a bear hug is not the body check foul.

Given that the description of this specific type of foul uses the word 'collide' then I think it's open to interpretation by the ref.
One could easily argue that a bear hug comfortably fits the definition of the word 'collision' and if it is executed in such a way as to impede a man when he doesn't have the ball (but is moving forward in anticipation of receiving a pass), then I don't really see where the conflict is.

Hardy would prefer to have teams bear hugging people now rather use a bit of common sense ffs, I seriously wonder about people

You do seem have your problems interpreting the English language, MR2. First a bear hug is a deliberate collision. Then a statement that it's not is the expression of a wish "to have teams bear hugging people". It's not really fair to make things up that I didn't say so that you can ridicule them.

When I see "common sense" invoked as a substitute for application of the rules I despair. Why do we bother framing rules using precise language when referees claim the right to overrule them with the application of their own rules, in the guise of "common sense"? Who writes the rules of common sense? And are they further overruled by some other version of sense?

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?



The rules where brought in to stop cynicism in the game and to stop referees being abused. The black card will take a bit of time to settle down and the players will have to adapt, it's in the rules now so we, supporters/players/managers and referees.

Just because it's now in the rules doesn't mean every person in the GAA has to agree that they are the correct way forward and just because you have reffed a few games doesn't make you the fountain of all knowledge on how this will pan out. The "bear hug" was plainly not dealt with during the game in question, now the rules may be adapted to incorporate this but surely you can see how certain scenarios may arise that may need a lot of thought and inconsistencies will arise which will annoy supporters/players/managers and refs. (eg. You would have shown a black card but the ref in that game didn't). One mans common sense is not necessarily that of another's and I too cringe when I hear that common sense will be applied to the rules.

[Hardy]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

[Milltown Row2]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

[BennyHarp]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

[Hardy]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

There you go again.

[Milltown Row2]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

Did the Bear hug in your view obstructed the player from moving?

[Milltown Row2]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

There you go again.

What's your stereotype referee ?

[Milltown Row2]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

Cynical Behaviour Fouls


1. Deliberately pull down an opponent.
2. Deliberately trip an opponent with the hand(s), arm, leg or foot.
3. Deliberately body collide with an opponent after he has played the ball away or for the purpose of taking him out of a movement of play.

This bit in bold would cover the bear hug in my opinion

[BennyHarp]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

Did the Bear hug in your view obstructed the player from moving?

You don't seem to get the point - it wasn't the body check / deliberate collide rule that was in question. Paddy Keenan was in possession of the ball and was cynically being bear hugged, (I.e, held but not deliberately pulled down to the ground) when he won possession, therefore it was not deemed to be a black card offence. The level of confusion over one incident shows that you can't just call out 4 fouls and call them the only cynical fouls. Blindly following the FRC proposals without at least a National League trial was folly in my opinion. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, and I hope I am, but I am concerned that cynical play will just take another form and we will be back to square one only with a game that may have evolved even further into a short passing and packed defence running game.

[Milltown Row2]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

Did the Bear hug in your view obstructed the player from moving?

You don't seem to get the point - it wasn't the body check / deliberate collide rule that was in question. Paddy Keenan was in possession of the ball and was cynically being bear hugged, (I.e, held but not deliberately pulled down to the ground) when he won possession, therefore it was not deemed to be a black card offence. The level of confusion over one incident shows that you can't just call out 4 fouls and call them the only cynical fouls. Blindly following the FRC proposals without at least a National League trial was folly in my opinion. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, and I hope I am, but I am concerned that cynical play will just take another form and we will be back to square one only with a game that may have evolved even further into a short passing and packed defence running game.

Well if he were in possesion and was bear hugged then it's a foul, will all referees show a black card for it? maybe not. I can't see the bear hugging taking off if truth be told, players will drop to the floor and the player who made the bear hug will be carded


For every rule out there, there will be managers/players looking to get around them

[BennyHarp]

You are a moan and whinge bag, is that plain enough to understand?

Good man. That's helpful.

It does tend to reinforce my stereotype of referees but I'll try to overcome that.

Is it referees you don't like or the GAA?

Benny I've refereed 5 odd years so I've a good insight with refereeing thanks. I've managed all grades to so I can see it from all sides.

Why are there so many against the new rules?

And even with all that experience you still would call the bear hug differently from the ref in the Louth v Dublin game. I think the level of  inconsistency is one of the big concerns.

Did the Bear hug in your view obstructed the player from moving?

You don't seem to get the point - it wasn't the body check / deliberate collide rule that was in question. Paddy Keenan was in possession of the ball and was cynically being bear hugged, (I.e, held but not deliberately pulled down to the ground) when he won possession, therefore it was not deemed to be a black card offence. The level of confusion over one incident shows that you can't just call out 4 fouls and call them the only cynical fouls. Blindly following the FRC proposals without at least a National League trial was folly in my opinion. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, and I hope I am, but I am concerned that cynical play will just take another form and we will be back to square one only with a game that may have evolved even further into a short passing and packed defence running game.

Well if he were in possesion and was bear hugged then it's a foul, will all referees show a black card for it? maybe not. I can't see the bear hugging taking off if truth be told, players will drop to the floor and the player who made the bear hug will be carded


For every rule out there, there will be managers/players looking to get around them

I agree, it probably won't take off but it's concerning that so early on we are talking about teams actively working out ways to push the rules. Anyway - hopefully it's just early arse boxing and we will be treated to a season of open, attacking football.

[orangeman]

Eugene's thoughts - more changes needed ?

Eugene McGee: Youngsters quitting GAA in droves -- who'd blame them?



Eugene McGee– 13 January 2014

Is there any fun left in Gaelic football for players any more? It may seem a silly question, bearing in mind the hundreds of thousands of young people who play and love the sport but, unfortunately, it is a question that does need to be addressed.




In recent months we have had a whole series of reports involving how football is organised, played, promoted and coached which certainly reflects a major culture change.

The abuse of players through over-training, inadequate rest periods , ridiculous match scheduling and lack of consideration for the needs of players' everyday lives are the main problems.

Why are there more serious injuries in football nowadays than ever before?

At this time of year we get horrific fixture making that would not be tolerated in any other major sport anywhere -- we have players being asked to play three times in eight days.

But even more serious is the irresponsible action of people in charge of teams who behave in a totally selfish manner regarding training and matches -- at the expense of players.

There are players who are asked to train for third-level teams because this is the lead-up time for the Sigerson and Fitzgibbon Cups. At the same time, county managers are insisting they have full use of their players. This is bad enough when the county players are senior grade only, but a huge number of players are also involved with their U-21s.

So we have plenty of examples of students taking part in training at one time of the day and senior or U-21 training later on. This of course involves travelling, often 100km-plus round trips and returning to base after midnight.

A more serious development in recent years has been the exploitation of secondary school students.

Firstly we began to see examples of star teenage players being actively recruited by some leading schools to 'transfer', in a bid to win trophies. Repeating the Leaving Certificate to enable this to take place is common these days.

On top of that, we have examples of school teams being brought in for training at 7.0 in the morning, which seems grossly unfair on young men who should be devoting their main activity to preparing for the Leaving Cert exams.

Which brings us to county minor teams and their managers/coaches, who in many cases are a law unto themselves.


Minor panels are being brought together as early as November, and training has started to include strength and conditioning work in gyms.

The GAA has a rule forbidding minor training until after March 1 but, as usual, this is totally ignored.

There was a useful example recently when we learned of a clash between a county minor manager and college trainers, and we can see examples of this all over the country.

I'm amazed at this bitter wrangling in the name of sport -- something that could affect the enjoyment of what should be the happiest sporting days of a player.

PROTEST

At long last, parents of teenage players seem to be waking up to the reality of what is taking place, and some voices are being raised in protest.

I heard of a minor manager last year who issued ultimatums to four young men five days before the start of their Leaving Cert -- either turn up for training tonight or you are off the county minor panel.

It is not nice to describe any GAA person as a lunatic, but is there any other description suitable for this manager?

Parents need to take a stand in these situations, but they need more support from strong GAA leaders around the country as well.

There is a proposal going forward this year to change the minor grade from U-18 to U-17, which would hugely reduce the numbers having to juggle inter-county football with their Leaving Cert.

It will be interesting to see if GAA delegates opt for this. Player welfare is at stake in this, so let's see what officials really think about welfare.

Playing the inter-county U-21 competition in the spring is heaping huge additional pressure on young players and, again, some U-21 managers started training last October or November, against GAA rules also.

Should U-21 players be asked to play on Wednesday nights and then play a National League the following Sunday, while at the same time being court-martialled by at least three different managers -- senior, U-21 and third-level -- if they do not turn up for all training sessions?

That's what I mean about the fun going out of the game. All players love to play matches above all, but there are ridiculous demands being made nowadays.

Dr Niall Moyna, an expert in fitness and sports medicine, regularly produces scary facts about the damage all of this madness is causing to footballers' bodies -- short-term and long-term -- but it seems those responsible -- managers, coaches etc -- mainly only pay lip-service in their thirst for more and more training.

There are of course notable exceptions from managers who study these things and take the necessary action, but they are rare enough.

County boards should have a duty of care in these matters to prevent this exploitation of young men who initially love Gaelic football.

No wonder there is a huge drop-out level among footballers in their late teens.

Would you blame them?

[Premier Emperor]

Moaners like Eugene McGee would drive people away from the GAA.

[Rossfan]

Aye - much better to have lads gettin' hip operations in their 20s - something which usually isn't required by anyone under 60.