Gaelic Football - Rules & Regulations discussion/clarification

[Milltown Row2]

Still remove the 2pt free,a goal worth just 3, it's hard to even score 2 goals these days, and 3 frees outside the 40 the same as 2 goals.Its too big a reward for a skill that any decent country free taker can convert. And hence earlier people wondering why defenders shadow and not tackle hard. The foul they may give away is too big a risk in that area points wise.

Yeah I'm not with the 2 point crowd to be fair unless the goal was worth 4..

4 defenders in the half at all times good
No kicking back to the keeper good
solo and go good
Not seeing any reason why the throw up at the start and halftime was needed to be changed, as personally haven't noticed any improvements
The kickouts, its a complaint for many but each team has the same opportunity to win the ball, if its your keeper you should still have an advantage
Dissent (regardless of being a ref) a great thing and needs to be brought into hurling also along with the black card for deliberately bringing players down
Breaching the halfway line, should only be a free from the halfway line period!
If keeping the 2 points it should only be from play outside the arc

[The Boy Wonder]

The GAAboard "legion of the rearguard" still digging in. Time to stop digging lads and go to a few games and try to take the scowls off yer faces.

There's a great big happy gaelic football world out there.

Why do you always look to close down any debate around the rules of the GAA? Could you not try and debate some of the points like an intelligent person instead of piling in with insults about "whinging" and "scowls".

You have to just accept that there are those who can't resist pontificating on any and every subject.

We all have our opinions and constructive debate is always welcome.

[Rossfan]

Because it's an Internet forum and I can say what I feel

The 5 or 6 old rules advocates have had their say, a lot of it embarrassing and no need for them to keep on ad nauseum.
Of course they can if they want.....

If you don't want to or can't discuss the issues around the rules maybe you shouldn't bother reading this thread. If you're only here to dish out insults we'll manage without you.

Up to the moderator to make those kind of comments (inaccurate and all as they may be).
As for the enhanced rules all for them with one reservation about the 2 pointer - they should have kept the 4 point goal.

If I think a few posters are spouting sh1te I'll say so. Ive a low bullsh1t threshold and a west of Ireland aversion to long drawn out verbiage.

[EoinW]

The 4-point goal is being discussed as a response to the legitimate criticism that, currently, a 2-pointer is simply too easy to be worth 2/3 of a goal.

To me, that's a daft way of looking at things. Rather they should look to make the 2 pointer a harder, more spectacular feat to accomplish. Keep it, but get rid of the arc and simply say anything outside the '45. That'll reduce the number of "cheap" two pointers massively.

Moving it beyond the 45m is a valid suggestion.

However I must point out the NCAA basketball 3 point shot precedence(because it is the only guide we have to determine what football's 2 pointer will lead to).

The ACC introduced the 3 pointer for their 1982-83 season.  It was ridiculously too short and scoring exploded.  At least the NCAA learned from that mistake and introduced the 3 point shot for all college games in 1986 from a distance further out.  3 1/2 decades later they had to enlarge the arc a further 3 feet.

My point is: when Gaelic football introduced the 2 point shot it had stepped on a slippery slope.  This issue and endless debate is going to be a feature of the game for good.  I can't help but think the FRC went looking for trouble by adopting this new idea.

As much as I hate the 2 pointer, I will concede that it is a rule change option to counter a packed 14 man defence.  In theory the 2 pointer forces the defence to play further out, creating space inside.

However the 3 v 3 rule, reducing defences to 11 players, addressed the packed defence problem.  Actually addressed it too well, which is why I hope they'll compromise and allow 12 defenders next season.

By limiting the number of defenders, the issue was resolved.  That PLUS the 2 pointer is serious overkill.

[The Boy Wonder]

For what it's worth I'm not a fan of the arc and the 2-pointers.

I have not read through the AI-Final thread so some of my issues might already have been raised.

Kerry shot into a 9-point lead early in the game which gave them great impetus with the reverse for Donegal.

Very often the team with the wind in the first half or shooting into the more favourable goal has a marked advantage with the opposition having to play catch-up.

The 2-pointer distorts the scoring in a big way - Kerry's early 9-point lead was not a true reflection of the game at that stage.

The 40m arc disrupts the natural flow of the game with much of the attacking play going back and forth outside the arc.

[tbrick18]

Because it's an Internet forum and I can say what I feel

The 5 or 6 old rules advocates have had their say, a lot of it embarrassing and no need for them to keep on ad nauseum.
Of course they can if they want.....

I haven't actually seen anyone, including myself, say all the new rules should be abolished or that the 2024 version of the game was perfect.
What I've been saying is that I don't think the swathe of rules have improved the game as much as is being touted. I also feel that a small subset of the rules would have had just as much impact in improving the game as the multitude of rules we got.

If the only rules introduced were the dissent rule, the solo and go rule, and the rule where backpassing to the keeper was removed, the game improves without wholesale changes to the what the game looks like.

[tbrick18]

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.

What are you basing this on?
I haven't seen any surveys or stats. If a fair and balanced survey was held and independant (non-FRC) stats showed this to be the case I'd concede the point.
But as far as I can tell this is opinion and not fact.

[twohands!!!]

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.

What are you basing this on?
I haven't seen any surveys or stats. If a fair and balanced survey was held and independant (non-FRC) stats showed this to be the case I'd concede the point.
But as far as I can tell this is opinion and not fact.

Are you really trying to suggest that the FRC were lying about their survey results that showed people thought that pretty much all the rules improved the game significantly?

[tbrick18]

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.

What are you basing this on?
I haven't seen any surveys or stats. If a fair and balanced survey was held and independant (non-FRC) stats showed this to be the case I'd concede the point.
But as far as I can tell this is opinion and not fact.

Are you really trying to suggest that the FRC were lying about their survey results that showed people thought that pretty much all the rules improved the game significantly?

I'm not suggesting anything - I didn't see or hear of any survey they carried out.
But, since when did marking your own homework become good practice?
The GAA should survey players and members for opinion - then gauge if they think the FRC has delivered what they were put in place to deliver.

[Mad Mentor]

I would presume going by the list of people involved in coming up with the rules there would have been some fairly robust discussion about the merits and impacts of the changes. It would be interesting to hear from some of these about the thought process and arguments that would have occurred. It would make a fascinating fly on the wall documentary. All rule changes are theoretical until teams actually have to play under them, and like legislation in any field it has to change over time. I'm sure the GAA founding fathers never envisaged the emergence of the blanket defence back in the 19th century.

I have to say I like the way the game has changed but I'm not a purist. There is also a lot to be learned for hurling from the process - especially around the dissent area.

[AustinPowers]

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.

What are you basing this on?
I haven't seen any surveys or stats. If a fair and balanced survey was held and independant (non-FRC) stats showed this to be the case I'd concede the point.
But as far as I can tell this is opinion and not fact.

Are you really trying to suggest that the FRC were lying about their survey results that showed people thought that pretty much all the rules improved the game significantly?

That's like asking the British labour party members ,  how do you think  we're doing  running the UK? Oh  we're all brilliant!! Everything  is  just fantastic. The place has never been  better

[Rossfan]

Stick up a poll here then.

[upmonaghansayswe]

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.

What are you basing this on?
I haven't seen any surveys or stats. If a fair and balanced survey was held and independant (non-FRC) stats showed this to be the case I'd concede the point.
But as far as I can tell this is opinion and not fact.

Are you really trying to suggest that the FRC were lying about their survey results that showed people thought that pretty much all the rules improved the game significantly?

That's like asking the British labour party members ,  how do you think  we're doing  running the UK? Oh  we're all brilliant!! Everything  is  just fantastic. The place has never been  better

A recent poll of labour party members had 49% saying they are going in the wrong direction.