Enhanced Rules

[trileacman]

Imo the only ones I have an issue with is the 50m advancement and no time limit to advantage/forward mark advantage. 50m is too harsh and forward mark shouldn't allow a forward who decides to play on have two bites of the cherry.

One rule I would like to add is keeper should be allowed to take a quick kickout even if players are still inside 21. Obviously they can't touch it until the ball has gone out of the arc. Would speed up play even more

You'll see the media gang outlaw this immediately as it eats into their precious action replay time.

[Milltown Row2]

Imo the only ones I have an issue with is the 50m advancement and no time limit to advantage/forward mark advantage. 50m is too harsh and forward mark shouldn't allow a forward who decides to play on have two bites of the cherry.

One rule I would like to add is keeper should be allowed to take a quick kickout even if players are still inside 21. Obviously they can't touch it until the ball has gone out of the arc. Would speed up play even more

You'll see the media gang outlaw this immediately as it eats into their precious action replay time.

Keeper can kick it quick as long as the his players are 13 meters away from the kickout

[trileacman]

We complained about the ref and his timing and looked at a variation of the ladies game with the hooter, now its not good enough for some

I don't remember any massive clamour for changes to additional time. A few gobshites maybe who have a weekly column to fill but certainly the average player, manager or supporter wasn't in uproar about the timekeeping. Surely the example of Hurling refusing to introduce it speaks volume. I certainly think there's been more issues with the hooter than I ever remember about the additional time rule.

We wanted to introduce shooting from distance to beat the blanket defensive teams rather than working the ball to the 'scoring zone' i.e 14 meters out, to do that it was looked at with incentives of 2 points.. now its not liked either for some..

Again I don't remember any sizeable amount of fans clamouring for more long-range points. In the whole people wanted to see a faster game, more turnovers, more contests and less lateral play, time-wasting, avoidance of contact. There wasn't any clamour for a 2 point arc until it was introduced. You've constructed two fallacies to support keeping all the new rules, neither is true.

[Milltown Row2]

That's your opinion though.. my opinion was that were calls for the above to be looked at and changed.

Otherwise why was it brought about?

[Milltown Row2]

And I've called for no changes when this came about.. I've plenty posts to show it too.

[BigGreenField]

Frc has clearly drawn from basketball (for good or bad).

They've missed a trick in not leaning on Kabaddi and require the attackers to chant Kabaddi (which means hand catch)/only be attacking for a single breath , would balance up the challenge for defenders and would speed attacks up.

[AustinPowers]

The seven rules was always going to have further implications when applied in a game. the extent of which is where we are now with some liking them all, some no so much and others liking none of them.

Not sure how far back we go to be 'traditionalist' mid 70's through the 80's or 90's as each of those times brought about change, though not wholesale changes.

We complained about the ref and his timing and looked at a variation of the ladies game with the hooter, now its not good enough for some

We complained about the blanket defence and and having 15 player behind the ball, trying to fix that has brough about that the forwards have too much of the ball and the poor 15 defenders that were able to snuff out attacks can't do that anymore and have to rely on man marking (a traditional trait )

We wanted to introduce shooting from distance to beat the blanket defensive teams rather than working the ball to the 'scoring zone' i.e 14 meters out, to do that it was looked at with incentives of 2 points.. now its not liked either for some..

Jezzzzz its a tough crowd to keep happy

Feck it, lets change it again

Yeah you are right in a way.

Football evolved  into a possession based, no risk strategy , working the ball to get into  that scoring zone 15-20 yards out. Constant recycling  until  the score is guaranteed.  Dublin probably  the best at it.

I dont think we'll ever move away from that now , regardless of  what rules are  introduced.

It's just now, 2 pointers  are very rewarding, so it's just about doing the same recycling thing  (but even more so) to get your kickers in position for a  2 pointer.  Even if a 4 point goal was brought in , I don't think that constant  recycling around the arc will  disappear, nor will we see many more goals.  As 2x2 pointers  is the same as  a goal.

These  tactics  were an ugly stain on the game . They still  are.  And the arc in particular has  made it worse imo.  I don't think you'll ever address  these tactics (unless for eg, you  bring in a shot clock) , so the vast majority of these  rules are just  like  putting lipstick on a pig.

[trileacman]

I don't really like any of the new rules except the tap and go. To me they all represent using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and it's no coincidence that as the season progressed they were either ditched (20 second kickouts, 50m forward for a midfield mark, 21m free for breaching 3 up) or the refs began applying them much more judiciously.

The real issue with the game since 2012 was the movement of 12 players behind the ball and later all 15 players into the defensive arc. The keep-ball, lack of pressing up the pitch, short kick-outs all stemmed afterwards from the basketball-isaiton of Gaelic Football defence strategy.

For me that period from about 1990 to 2012 when teams more or less played with a 6-2-6 structure or variation thereof was when Gaelic football was in a good place. I'd have preferred if we made rules changes that encourage, not force, teams to adopt a similar structure again. One of the main reasons for teams retreating back their half-forward, midfield and wing backs into their own 45 is that it's too difficult to win the ball back high up the pitch and exposes your defence to too much risk for the very slim reward on offer. So I'd rather we'd slightly tip the odds back in favour of wing-forwards and MFs fighting for the ball to encourage them to stay higher up the pitch, leaving more room behind them and also better able to score quick attacks.

I've said it before but the only rule change (along with tap and go) would be to ban defensive teams from hand-passing in their own 45 or half of the pitch. It would achieve several of the aims of the new rules without the need for lots of rules changes and bastardisation of the scoring system.

- Teams would be encouraged to keep forwards higher up the pitch.
- teams would be discouraged from recycling the ball backwards deeper into their own playing area.
- teams would find it harder to waste time by playing keep ball.
-teams would be discouraged from taking short guaranteed possession kick outs and rewarded for kicking long contestable kickouts.

I think the rule would force the game to be played less like basketball and more like hurling, where teams are encouraged to play the ball quickly out of their own half.

We'd had several rule changes that constrain how teams can play and now it looks like because the outcome isn't desirable the FRC feel the need to add more rule changes. People need to understand that rules are constraints that remove adaptability and diversity to teams tactics. The more of them we apply the more teams are encouraged to all play the same way as there is so little room left by the rules to play the game in a way that is unique or different. Essentially the game turns into a 15 man basketball where you kick the scores.

[Rossfan]

Imo the only ones I have an issue with is the 50m advancement and no time limit to advantage/forward mark advantage. 50m is too harsh and forward mark shouldn't allow a forward who decides to play on have two bites of the cherry.

One rule I would like to add is keeper should be allowed to take a quick kickout even if players are still inside 21. Obviously they can't touch it until the ball has gone out of the arc. Would speed up play even more

You'll see the media gang outlaw this immediately as it eats into their precious action replay time.

That rule was introduced last year by the Special Congress😉

[EoinW]

Nice assessment trileacman.  My first game was the notorious 2011 Dublin-Donegal SF.  Maybe that's why everything from 2012-24 looked good to me.

It's a shame the FRC had to make things so complicated.  Many of the rule changes have nothing to do with the core problem.  Who cares where the four midfielders stand at the start of the half?  50m dissent rule?  The referees already have yellow cards.  Use them!

I wish the RFC had only made two changes - tap and go plus a 1v1 rule.  If they'd done that we'd all be in agreement now that the tap and go improved the pace of the game.  As for only allowing 13 defenders and goalkeeper, we would have just had an entire season to see if it gave the offences a "leg up" to better break down the dominant defensive systems.  If it hadn't then they could try 2v2 for 2026.  We know that 3v3 basically abolishes defensive football so 1v1 or 2v2 would been better for balance.

Regarding the "keep ball" problem.  I'm still suggesting a limit of 12 hand passes per possession.  That would also force teams to move the ball up pitch more quickly.

Your final paragraph highlights a danger conformist don't care about.  We've heard it lots since Sunday: Everyone else has to start playing Kerry's way to catch up!  Many here seem to resent Jim McGuinness, however everything he and the other defensive gurus created was WITHIN the rules of football.  No one was cheating.  McGuinness didn't go to GAA HQ with a bag full of money to get them to change the rules to suit his system.  Yet now we appear to have the FRC trying to force every county to play Kerry's style.  So much for diversity.

The basketball analogy is one I've used often.  I've seen what the 3 point shot did to college basketball.  It took over a decade but, eventually every team ended up playing an offence revolving around the 3 pointer.  Consequently every defence had to be structured to stop that offence.  I stand by my prediction that, if kept, the 2 pointer will have the same negative effect on football.

Two unfortunate facts: 1) people are more comfortable conforming.  They see innovators, like McGuinness, as a threat. 2) all sports - beginning with soccer in the 1970s - have seen this possession oriented evolution take over the game.  GAA is lucky that it came to football so late.  Hurling even luckier as it might be the only sport spared this evolution.  Most sports have never been able to fix this problem.

Maybe the FRC understood that you can't save Gaelic football from it without taking the risk of killing the traditional game.  I wish this committee had joined the WEF, focused on building society back better and left football alone.

[The Trap]

It's great to see a proper debate about the rules on here. This game means so much to a lot of us and these are massive changes to it.

The debate here reflects the discussions I have had around the pitches of my locality and I have been involved in some robust conversations over the last few months.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion and all feedback should be welcomed.

Surely there is someone in the media who thinks like half the people on here who feel that at best only some of the rules should be kept?

Why do all of the media feel the same way? What has happened to make them all back everything the FRC, Jim and Jarlath say?

There will be an even more concerted effort over the next couple of months as the vote approaches.

Keep posting your views on here people, as you never know, some of them may read this forum.

If all of the rules are retained those in opposition should vote with their feet next year.

[Rossfan]

People voted with their feet in 2024.

[Armagh18]

I'm sick hearing every journalist/podcaster claim that this was the best championship in the last 20 years.

Off the top of my head, there were very few good games after the provincials. Armagh Galway was a good game but ultimately Armagh had nothing to play for. There were a few more in the group stages and the Down/Galway prelim but the only game with any from the quarter finals onwards with any excitement was Meath Galway.

Someone tell me I'm wrong?

[The Trap]

There was a big crowd at the Leinster final because it was 2 new teams and a big crowd at meath semi final because meath were there for the first time in so long. Other than that the crowds weren't any different.

[Rossfan]

Connacht Final 2024 19,000
Connacht Final 2025 27,000