Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[EoinW]

I'm split on the rules. Love the solo & go, and the new rules were worth it, if only to bring it in. Other than that, I'd be fairly Meh with the rest. Don't like the 2 pointer personally nor the hooter.
But have to laugh at some of the posters who were all in for the changes due to the problems that were evident. But went so all in on the new rules, they are now trying to prevent any talk of changes or amendments that could be made to improve them. They've gone full circle now, and taken the position the traditionalists had.

the 3 up, no passbook to the keeper and the solo and go would have been the perfect middle ground. The 2pter is really boring me now. the throw in was never an issue and the hooter is terrible. Also with the ball not being able to be played back to the keeper, the kickout rule was fine as was.

I agree, why change the throw in rule.  Seemed like change for the sake of change.

I would have preferred a 2 up rule.  3 up appears to distort the balance too much in favour of the offence.  Hopefully teams adapt defensively and that distortion is reduced.

The 3 up rule was created to end the packed defence, with the team in possession endlessly recycling the ball outside the defence.  I guess the idea of the 2 pointer was also to draw the defence out.  However with 3 less defenders there's no unbreachable packed defence and one less reason for the 2 pointer.

What puzzles me is what they settled on in the new rules.  You still have just as much possession outside the arc as you had before.  Plus you have players, like David Clifford, spending as much time outside the arc as he does near the goal.  I don't believe the objective was to draw the top scorers away from goal, was it?

[Saffron_sam20]

I'm split on the rules. Love the solo & go, and the new rules were worth it, if only to bring it in. Other than that, I'd be fairly Meh with the rest. Don't like the 2 pointer personally nor the hooter.
But have to laugh at some of the posters who were all in for the changes due to the problems that were evident. But went so all in on the new rules, they are now trying to prevent any talk of changes or amendments that could be made to improve them. They've gone full circle now, and taken the position the traditionalists had.

the 3 up, no passbook to the keeper and the solo and go would have been the perfect middle ground. The 2pter is really boring me now. the throw in was never an issue and the hooter is terrible. Also with the ball not being able to be played back to the keeper, the kickout rule was fine as was.

I agree, why change the throw in rule.  Seemed like change for the sake of change.

I would have preferred a 2 up rule.  3 up appears to distort the balance too much in favour of the offence.  Hopefully teams adapt defensively and that distortion is reduced.

The 3 up rule was created to end the packed defence, with the team in possession endlessly recycling the ball outside the defence. I guess the idea of the 2 pointer was also to draw the defence out.  However with 3 less defenders there's no unbreachable packed defence and one less reason for the 2 pointer.

What puzzles me is what they settled on in the new rules.  You still have just as much possession outside the arc as you had before.  Plus you have players, like David Clifford, spending as much time outside the arc as he does near the goal.  I don't believe the objective was to draw the top scorers away from goal, was it?

That's it actually, they brought in 2 rules when 1 was enough, with the 3 up rule and no 2 pter it would have given us more goals and teams being more direct rather than messing about round the arc.

Same as the kickout, brought 2 rules in when 1 fixed the issue, ie if ya can't play the ball back to the keeper it stops the slow possession based play at the back with a spare man as teams can easily press up. We didn't need the wholesale changes

[Rossfan]

There must have been an average of 3 fouls* per throw in the pre FRC days.
Now it's 2 lads man on man for the ball.

*Probably 2 black card ones and a yellow one.

[thewobbler]

I've only one issue with the two pointer:

Those who object to it seem to focus all their angst on how teams can build up unusually big leads when playing with the breeze, but tend to neglect the fact that teams can decimate a big deficit just as quickly.

[AustinPowers]

More and more  people obviously seeing through these  stupid and needless new rules.

As EoinW says , was it the intention of the rules to drag Clifford out 60 yards from goal? Probably not , but that's  what teams have found to be  more advantageous . I'm sure Kerry fans are lapping it up, all these 2 pointers from Clifford.  I don't blame them I  suppose , as that's what will win Kerry games and that's all they're concerned with

I'm sure if a player  got 5 points for capturing the corner flag , their fans would lap that up too.

[J70]

Well, they trialed a four point goal along with the two point score at the start, but it was dropped almost immediately.

Personally, I love watching Clifford hit a spectacular long range shot over the bar, often dispatched immediately after receiving the ball. It's a thing of beauty in our game.

[thewobbler]

More and more  people obviously seeing through these  stupid and needless new rules.

As EoinW says , was it the intention of the rules to drag Clifford out 60 yards from goal? Probably not , but that's  what teams have found to be  more advantageous . I'm sure Kerry fans are lapping it up, all these 2 pointers from Clifford.  I don't blame them I  suppose , as that's what will win Kerry games and that's all they're concerned with

I'm sure if a player  got 5 points for capturing the corner flag , their fans would lap that up too.

I've yet to meet a person in the real world who speaks ill of the new rules.

There's obviously a few disenchanted on here, plus there's the blue ticks wums on Twitter who will say anything to get a rise.

But in the real world, no.

Is there still confusion in the real world about the breach / 3 up rule? Yes. But they all know why we need it. Mostly people are just enjoying football. 

[JoG2]

More and more  people obviously seeing through these  stupid and needless new rules.

As EoinW says , was it the intention of the rules to drag Clifford out 60 yards from goal? Probably not , but that's  what teams have found to be  more advantageous . I'm sure Kerry fans are lapping it up, all these 2 pointers from Clifford.  I don't blame them I  suppose , as that's what will win Kerry games and that's all they're concerned with

I'm sure if a player  got 5 points for capturing the corner flag , their fans would lap that up too.

I've yet to meet a person in the real world who speaks ill of the new rules.

There's obviously a few disenchanted on here, plus there's the blue ticks wums on Twitter who will say anything to get a rise.

But in the real world, no.

Is there still confusion in the real world about the breach / 3 up rule? Yes. But they all know why we need it. Mostly people are just enjoying football. 

The Donegal u20 had me questioning the rules at a stage last night , then I remembered what it used to be like
You'll always get the odd team who'll rip the hole out of possession between the 45 and 65 constantly recycling the ball between 3 or 4 men hoping the opposition go to sleep watching them and then pounce

[statto]

See Colm Parkinson is campaigning for a handpass limit followed by a kick that has to go forward.  Would be difficult to police what is considered backward/lateral.  Also if the ball is fisted into the endline what does the forward do in that scenario. 

Would not be adverse to having a hand pass limit based on if you receive a handpass the next players play can't be a handpass they have to kick or solo the ball. 

Not being able to go back into own half after cross halfway would also be a way of potentially preventing the keep ball that was seen at stages in league final. 

[JoG2]

We tried the handpass limit rule before, it was brutal tbh

[trueblue1234]

Starting point for any new rules should be, Does it make it easier for the ref to referee? If not, then do not proceed. Can't keep throwing shite at them and expecting them to sort out the problems.

[Rossfan]

Instead of the 7 ( or 8?) bleating here about the new enhanced rules and the new more attractive game - why don't ye write to the unit in Croke Park headed by one Kevin McStay (Games intelligence unit?).
Seems they're will be ongoing assessment of football and its rules.

I'll be asking to get rid of throwing the ball over the bar.

[Armagh18]

Instead of the 7 ( or 8?) bleating here about the new enhanced rules and the new more attractive game - why don't ye write to the unit in Croke Park headed by one Kevin McStay (Games intelligence unit?).
Seems they're will be ongoing assessment of football and its rules.

I'll be asking to get rid of throwing the ball over the bar.

love to see the rule that allows throwing the ball...

[The Boy Wonder]

Instead of the 7 ( or 8?) bleating here

You deserve what the late Paudi O'Shea dished out to Joe McNally at the start of 1984 AI Final - a kick up rear end.

[GTP]

"The remit was that Gaelic football, one of the four codes within the association will be the most exciting amateur game in the world to play and watch"
1 v1 throw ins does nothing to achieve this and has the possibly unique aspect to any field sport of making a player start off the playing field. If it was a 1v1 they wished to achieve then the two other midfielders could be on the field together behind the throw at a distance and be unable to compete for the ball prior to it being touched.
2 pointer – creates an unnatural scoring zone which to my viewing affects the tactical approach of a lot of teams – they don't or won't push out for fear of conceding a 2 point free. Teams can then handpass aimlessly around the arc. Also punishes fouls occurring further from goals disproportionately e.g. 2 two point frees scored by Donegal U20s last night – one for over carrying the other maybe a high tackle on edge of arc. Neither foul was twice as bad for having been committed one foot the other side of a line.
Forward mark – remains in place but modified to make it harder to obtain therefore discouraging its use – As the original objective was, I believe, to encourage the high catch, one of the aims of the FRC, the change is contradictory to the objective. Also, with an advantage rule no one really has a grasp of making it more confusing for spectators.
Kick out rule – No pass back to goalkeeper allows for a fair contest from short kickouts and could provide for a better spectacle given the risk / reward of a variety of long and short kicking.
"𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗽 𝟱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗲𝗲, 𝗸𝗶𝗰𝗸-𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀, 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵 𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆" Jim Gavin
Gaelic Football is better, but the rule changes were not properly tested, and too many came in at once for anyone to know what affect they have individually and collectively. I haven't noticed a considerable increase in kick passing but maybe the stats sow different. Long range scores, we have had an increase, from my viewing, but is it at expense of actual scores, bigger totals doesn't mean more entertainment, again maybe there are stats to show the number of times the ball goes in the net and over the bar have increased. Goal scoring may have increased are the stats being published to prove the point and if it has, do they know which rule change has had the desired effect? Breaking ball at kickouts seems more frequent than high fielding. Creativity probably can't be measure but I can't think of any teams that pundits are saying are more creative as a result of the rule changes.
So I remain unconvinced the objectives have been achieved or that the FRC ended up with the best rules possible.