FRC proposals...black cards, marks etc

[DennistheMenace]

The black card sure is going to add a good few more minutes to every game. Players walking off slowly, new players coming on etc..

[sheamy]

I'm noticing high profile managers incl Harte and Canavan coming out against the black card. Critics do what most critics do, criticise but offer no alternative. Give the black card a chance, it offers something that didnt exist before and it will at least make players think twice before they 'stop' their opponent.

I'm sorry but that's rubbish. Most people who are against the black card do offer an alternative - apply the existing rules properly. As has been pointed out the FRC's own video highlights the problem. Someone said that only one yellow card was applied for all those instances. I cannot verify this but no-one disputes it either and I find it strange that the FRC wouldn't mention what the ref gave or didn't give.

If the existing rules were applied properly one of these fouls would have you on a razors edge of leaving your team at a numerical disadvantage. Refereeing, or what passes for it, is nothing short of scandalous. True they get an unacceptable level of abuse but that could be easily dealt with and again, should be if the current rules were adhered to.

only one yellow card was NOT applied for all those instances

Fair enough if that's the case. Don't understand how a ref could miss a yellow card out of that selection and there should be a couple of possible reds in there too (the Armagh & Kildare rugby tackles - "behave in a way which is dangerous to an opponent", Mark McHugh's - "to kick or attempt to kick an opponent"). The point remains. The rules as they are are strong enough if implemented correctly. This will cause mayhem.

but they were implemented correctly(?). Or at least McEnaney claimed that. That was the point of the video I thought i.e. that the present sanctions were no deterrent. However, as O'Neill pointed out, the fouls which are having the biggest effect on the entire tactical implementation of the game are the ones done around or behind midfield to stall the counter attack for a vital 4-5 seconds once possession is lost. If these are punished then we will see change in the game. The more dramatic ones where goals are on such as shown in the video will still happen as Peter Canavan pointed out. If the minor arm and shirt pulls on a breaking player aren't punished with black, then it's a waste of time. If they are punished, then it's not. Imagine Peter Harte or Sean Cavanagh not subject to tactical fouling.

[Milltown Row2]

I'm noticing high profile managers incl Harte and Canavan coming out against the black card. Critics do what most critics do, criticise but offer no alternative. Give the black card a chance, it offers something that didnt exist before and it will at least make players think twice before they 'stop' their opponent.

I'm sorry but that's rubbish. Most people who are against the black card do offer an alternative - apply the existing rules properly. As has been pointed out the FRC's own video highlights the problem. Someone said that only one yellow card was applied for all those instances. I cannot verify this but no-one disputes it either and I find it strange that the FRC wouldn't mention what the ref gave or didn't give.

If the existing rules were applied properly one of these fouls would have you on a razors edge of leaving your team at a numerical disadvantage. Refereeing, or what passes for it, is nothing short of scandalous. True they get an unacceptable level of abuse but that could be easily dealt with and again, should be if the current rules were adhered to.

only one yellow card was NOT applied for all those instances

Fair enough if that's the case. Don't understand how a ref could miss a yellow card out of that selection and there should be a couple of possible reds in there too (the Armagh & Kildare rugby tackles - "behave in a way which is dangerous to an opponent", Mark McHugh's - "to kick or attempt to kick an opponent"). The point remains. The rules as they are are strong enough if implemented correctly. This will cause mayhem.

but they were implemented correctly(?). Or at least McEnaney claimed that. That was the point of the video I thought i.e. that the present sanctions were no deterrent. However, as O'Neill pointed out, the fouls which are having the biggest effect on the entire tactical implementation of the game are the ones done around or behind midfield to stall the counter attack for a vital 4-5 seconds once possession is lost. If these are punished then we will see change in the game. The more dramatic ones where goals are on such as shown in the video will still happen as Peter Canavan pointed out. If the minor arm and shirt pulls on a breaking player aren't punished with black, then it's a waste of time. If they are punished, then it's not. Imagine Peter Harte or Sean Cavanagh not subject to tactical fouling.

If in the view of the referee that (in bold) has 'pulled him down' then it will be a free and a black card, if the player throws himself down to gain a player a black card he should be punished also, is there a rule for diving? I'd gladly show a card for that

[orangeman]

I'm noticing high profile managers incl Harte and Canavan coming out against the black card. Critics do what most critics do, criticise but offer no alternative. Give the black card a chance, it offers something that didnt exist before and it will at least make players think twice before they 'stop' their opponent.

I'm sorry but that's rubbish. Most people who are against the black card do offer an alternative - apply the existing rules properly. As has been pointed out the FRC's own video highlights the problem. Someone said that only one yellow card was applied for all those instances. I cannot verify this but no-one disputes it either and I find it strange that the FRC wouldn't mention what the ref gave or didn't give.

If the existing rules were applied properly one of these fouls would have you on a razors edge of leaving your team at a numerical disadvantage. Refereeing, or what passes for it, is nothing short of scandalous. True they get an unacceptable level of abuse but that could be easily dealt with and again, should be if the current rules were adhered to.

only one yellow card was NOT applied for all those instances

Fair enough if that's the case. Don't understand how a ref could miss a yellow card out of that selection and there should be a couple of possible reds in there too (the Armagh & Kildare rugby tackles - "behave in a way which is dangerous to an opponent", Mark McHugh's - "to kick or attempt to kick an opponent"). The point remains. The rules as they are are strong enough if implemented correctly. This will cause mayhem.

but they were implemented correctly(?). Or at least McEnaney claimed that. That was the point of the video I thought i.e. that the present sanctions were no deterrent. However, as O'Neill pointed out, the fouls which are having the biggest effect on the entire tactical implementation of the game are the ones done around or behind midfield to stall the counter attack for a vital 4-5 seconds once possession is lost. If these are punished then we will see change in the game. The more dramatic ones where goals are on such as shown in the video will still happen as Peter Canavan pointed out. If the minor arm and shirt pulls on a breaking player aren't punished with black, then it's a waste of time. If they are punished, then it's not. Imagine Peter Harte or Sean Cavanagh not subject to tactical fouling.

If in the view of the referee that (in bold) has 'pulled him down' then it will be a free and a black card, if the player throws himself down to gain a player a black card he should be punished also, is there a rule for diving? I'd gladly show a card for that

It would take some balls to show a black card for diving or even a yellow. When did you last see a ref showing a yellow for diving ?



Why do we try and imitate soccer, rugby etc all the time ?. It's not soccer we're playing - It's gaelic football.

[J70]

Maybe because, in the case of diving, soccer has it right and are worth imitating?

[Hound]

If in the view of the referee that (in bold) has 'pulled him down' then it will be a free and a black card, if the player throws himself down to gain a player a black card he should be punished also, is there a rule for diving? I'd gladly show a card for that

Yes, yellow card for diving is part of the rules.

Diving is another hard one to define. In soccer 90%+ of the bookings handed out for diving are for when there is no contact made, its not often they are given for going down too easily when contact is made.

Its rare in GAA for someone to take a blatant dive when no contact has been made. There's plenty of going down easy when physcial contact is made.

[Milltown Row2]

If in the view of the referee that (in bold) has 'pulled him down' then it will be a free and a black card, if the player throws himself down to gain a player a black card he should be punished also, is there a rule for diving? I'd gladly show a card for that

Yes, yellow card for diving is part of the rules.

Diving is another hard one to define. In soccer 90%+ of the bookings handed out for diving are for when there is no contact made, its not often they are given for going down too easily when contact is made.

Its rare in GAA for someone to take a blatant dive when no contact has been made. There's plenty of going down easy when physcial contact is made.

So just wave play on and get the abuse of the supporters/manager that that was a pull down/collision?  Minefield for referees

[DuffleKing]

The black card sure is going to add a good few more minutes to every game. Players walking off slowly, new players coming on etc..

Much to my astonishment I recently learned that bookings, sendinf offs, etc and the time they take are not taken into account within the added time at the end of a half

[DuffleKing]

There is a smugness and a high brow attitude about those backing the new proposals that is quite irritating!

http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=188721

Surely not

http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=188772

[Zulu]

The black card sure is going to add a good few more minutes to every game. Players walking off slowly, new players coming on etc..

Much to my astonishment I recently learned that bookings, sendinf offs, etc and the time they take are not taken into account within the added time at the end of a half

That's correct and I'm surprised so few are aware of this. It is an area that needs to be looked at again though as it is common place now to use these as time wasting tactics.

[highorlow]

People are forgetting that the advantage rule is also implemented.

What then happens if say in the last 5 minutes of a match Player X pulls down opposition Player Y rugby style and Y is the 4th potential black card and the ref waves play on (the ref must hold his hand in the air to indicate advantage), the advantage team in the same move then go down the field and kick the ball wide? The fouling team go on to win the match by a point which is scored by Player Y in the last minute.

I wouldn't fancy been a ref this time next year that's for sure or can one of Pat's people go back and subsequently send off Player Y, i.e. how long does advantage accrue?

[Zulu]

There is a smugness and a high brow attitude about those backing the new proposals that is quite irritating!

http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=188721

Surely not

http://www.hoganstand.com/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=188772

Fair enough comment to my mind. The decision has been made now and the effect on the game is all speculation so there is little point in giving out about it until we've seen it in action over a period of time and different levels. Once there is something to judge the debate can start up agin but to give out about it now is simply to blow hot air as nobody has evidence either way.

[Zulu]

People are forgetting that the advantage rule is also implemented.

What then happens if say in the last 5 minutes of a match Player X pulls down opposition Player Y rugby style and Y is the 4th potential black card and the ref waves play on (the ref must hold his hand in the air to indicate advantage), the advantage team in the same move then go down the field and kick the ball wide? The fouling team go on to win the match by a point which is scored by Player Y in the last minute.

I wouldn't fancy been a ref this time next year that's for sure or can one of Pat's people go back and subsequently send off Player Y, i.e. how long does advantage accrue?

Why can't the ref go back and send him off? Sure he can do that now.

[trasna man]

I'm noticing high profile managers incl Harte and Canavan coming out against the black card. Critics do what most critics do, criticise but offer no alternative. Give the black card a chance, it offers something that didnt exist before and it will at least make players think twice before they 'stop' their opponent.

I'm sorry but that's rubbish. Most people who are against the black card do offer an alternative - apply the existing rules properly. As has been pointed out the FRC's own video highlights the problem. Someone said that only one yellow card was applied for all those instances. I cannot verify this but no-one disputes it either and I find it strange that the FRC wouldn't mention what the ref gave or didn't give.

If the existing rules were applied properly one of these fouls would have you on a razors edge of leaving your team at a numerical disadvantage. Refereeing, or what passes for it, is nothing short of scandalous. True they get an unacceptable level of abuse but that could be easily dealt with and again, should be if the current rules were adhered to.

only one yellow card was NOT applied for all those instances

Fair enough if that's the case. Don't understand how a ref could miss a yellow card out of that selection and there should be a couple of possible reds in there too (the Armagh & Kildare rugby tackles - "behave in a way which is dangerous to an opponent", Mark McHugh's - "to kick or attempt to kick an opponent"). The point remains. The rules as they are are strong enough if implemented correctly. This will cause mayhem.

but they were implemented correctly(?). Or at least McEnaney claimed that. That was the point of the video I thought i.e. that the present sanctions were no deterrent. However, as O'Neill pointed out, the fouls which are having the biggest effect on the entire tactical implementation of the game are the ones done around or behind midfield to stall the counter attack for a vital 4-5 seconds once possession is lost. If these are punished then we will see change in the game. The more dramatic ones where goals are on such as shown in the video will still happen as Peter Canavan pointed out. If the minor arm and shirt pulls on a breaking player aren't punished with black, then it's a waste of time. If they are punished, then it's not. Imagine Peter Harte or Sean Cavanagh not subject to tactical fouling.

If in the view of the referee that (in bold) has 'pulled him down' then it will be a free and a black card, if the player throws himself down to gain a player a black card he should be punished also, is there a rule for diving? I'd gladly show a card for that

It would take some balls to show a black card for diving or even a yellow. When did you last see a ref showing a yellow for diving ?



Why do we try and imitate soccer, rugby etc all the time ?. It's not soccer we're playing - It's gaelic football.

rule 5.25
To attempt to achieve an advantage by feigning a foul or injury
Penalty for above
Caution offender, order off for second cautionable foul

[Hardy]

I can only remember seeing that rule applied on one occasion ever in inter-county football and never in club football. This would seem to indicate something wrong with the state of refereeing - here is a rule that is not being applied while football people everywhere decry the cheating and diving that have infested the game. Likewise, about 80% of members and players point to the standard of refereeing as the biggest problem in the game.

Yet the FRC, supposedly set up to analyse and resolve the problems of football managed to ignore both of these glaring issues. How can that be? Surely there's not some other agenda at work?