|
Replying To tirawleybaron: "Need to alter the two point rule after what Gleeson did in Connacht final.
Can't be having that.
Fair enough if he tipped over a ball that was going into the goal, but flapping at a ball that was going over anyway? No" It's a stupid rule full stop.. and the sleep inducers efforts at clearing it up was laughable… The 2pt scores should be done away with completely as it does nothing for the game… teams trailing are now just taking pot shots and don't even try to create a goal… The tip over aspect of the 2pt scores is a complete joke altogether but wouldn't even be talked about if that nonsense rule didn't exist…!
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3872 - 06/05/2025 17:06:08
2607173
Link
0
|
|
Replying To tirawleybaron: "Need to alter the two point rule after what Gleeson did in Connacht final.
Can't be having that.
Fair enough if he tipped over a ball that was going into the goal, but flapping at a ball that was going over anyway? No" The reason for it was to make it a clean rule that the ball had to go directly over without any touch. It was intended to address any 2-point efforts which were added to or punched over after dropping short.
To take out any confusion about who touched it and whether it was going over anyway, they decided to make it a 1 point if it got any touch on its way over.
WanPintWin (Galway) - Posts: 2321 - 06/05/2025 18:05:04
2607192
Link
0
|
|
Replying To tirawleybaron: "You can do a go-solo- and go
4 steps, solo, then 4 more steps. Really punishes a foul." That seemed to be the rule in Castlebar alright. However in the Meath Dublin game which I was at players who moved forward without soloing first were "blown up" and then told to take the old style free kick.
The rule clearly states that to signal the intention to play on the player must "immediately" solo the ball and then move forward.
sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 893 - 06/05/2025 19:37:30
2607211
Link
0
|
|
Great Ulster Final today - the new rules make the games very enjoyable.
One thing I'd like addressed is that - occasionally as teams slowed things down (which is ok), they drifted back into "old football", backwards and sideways with little opportunity to break "keep ball".
How could this be addressed? As a shot clock would be too difficult to administer - I'd like a subjective rugby-style "use it" call be the ref - say after 10 or so unbroken passes, a "use it" call means the team must register a score, wide or turnover after no more than say, three more passes.
There should be an evident endeavor to move the ball towards a score.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 3244 - 11/05/2025 00:14:53
2608273
Link
0
|
|
Kildare scoring 0-36 in a football match just shows how ridiculous some of these new rules are… Teams are no longer interested in trying to score goals… The 2 point score should be ditched immediately to bring back more action near the small square… Teams will soon not need a goalkeeper at all…
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3872 - 11/05/2025 09:35:02
2608328
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "Great Ulster Final today - the new rules make the games very enjoyable.
One thing I'd like addressed is that - occasionally as teams slowed things down (which is ok), they drifted back into "old football", backwards and sideways with little opportunity to break "keep ball".
How could this be addressed? As a shot clock would be too difficult to administer - I'd like a subjective rugby-style "use it" call be the ref - say after 10 or so unbroken passes, a "use it" call means the team must register a score, wide or turnover after no more than say, three more passes.
There should be an evident endeavor to move the ball towards a score." Maybe let's just take a breather and give players, officials, supporters etc a bit of time to adjust to the current changes. Three excellent provincial finals out of four and a really good semi in Munster from Kerry and Cork.
sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 893 - 11/05/2025 20:56:51
2608575
Link
0
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "Kildare scoring 0-36 in a football match just shows how ridiculous some of these new rules are… Teams are no longer interested in trying to score goals… The 2 point score should be ditched immediately to bring back more action near the small square… Teams will soon not need a goalkeeper at all…" Twelve goals scored in the 4 provincial finals this year, only 4 last year!
sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 893 - 11/05/2025 21:04:45
2608581
Link
1
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "Kildare scoring 0-36 in a football match just shows how ridiculous some of these new rules are… Teams are no longer interested in trying to score goals… The 2 point score should be ditched immediately to bring back more action near the small square… Teams will soon not need a goalkeeper at all…" LOL. Often games where the dominant team are happy enough just scoring points!
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8797 - 11/05/2025 21:35:05
2608594
Link
0
|
|
Replying To sligo joe: "Twelve goals scored in the 4 provincial finals this year, only 4 last year!" The 2 point score still adds nothing only teams taking pot shots
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3872 - 11/05/2025 22:42:48
2608620
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "LOL. Often games where the dominant team are happy enough just scoring points!" Problem is arguably bigger in hurling.
Solution is maybe goals worth 4 pts in football, but 5 pts in hurling.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 3244 - 12/05/2025 03:43:55
2608644
Link
0
|
|
Replying To sligo joe: "Twelve goals scored in the 4 provincial finals this year, only 4 last year!" You can't compare the tripe that was being played last year… I still think 36pts in a football game just doesn't seem right… Keeping 3 players up has really improved the game as a spectacle but these 2 point scores just creates a line of defenders patrolling the large circle and teams passing balls back out for players to have a pot shot… a bit like drop goals in rugby… All the 2 pointers have done is create distorted score lines and reduce goal scoring chances.. For me they add absolutely nothing to the game…! Get rid
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3872 - 12/05/2025 07:17:04
2608650
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "Great Ulster Final today - the new rules make the games very enjoyable.
One thing I'd like addressed is that - occasionally as teams slowed things down (which is ok), they drifted back into "old football", backwards and sideways with little opportunity to break "keep ball".
How could this be addressed? As a shot clock would be too difficult to administer - I'd like a subjective rugby-style "use it" call be the ref - say after 10 or so unbroken passes, a "use it" call means the team must register a score, wide or turnover after no more than say, three more passes.
There should be an evident endeavor to move the ball towards a score." One thing is once you bring the ball over the halfway line you cannot bring it back. The risk of losing the ball in a tighter space is not gone up. Looking at the games the only time it didn't go back was when the team was trying to run down the clock
zinny (Wexford) - Posts: 1974 - 12/05/2025 07:42:44
2608656
Link
1
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "You can't compare the tripe that was being played last year… I still think 36pts in a football game just doesn't seem right… Keeping 3 players up has really improved the game as a spectacle but these 2 point scores just creates a line of defenders patrolling the large circle and teams passing balls back out for players to have a pot shot… a bit like drop goals in rugby… All the 2 pointers have done is create distorted score lines and reduce goal scoring chances.. For me they add absolutely nothing to the game…! Get rid" Well OK let us agree with you and forget about the tripe last year when only 4 goals were scored in the provincial finals.
Without any comparison with any year there has been a healthy number, 12, goals scored in the finals this year, and you say there are no goal scoring chances.
sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 893 - 12/05/2025 13:16:02
2608804
Link
0
|
|
There is some basic logic to the two point score
The last few years we have been watching teams try to work the ball to the D before taking a shot - all other shots were considered to be low percentage
You can miss 50% of your two point attempts to get the equivalent of a 100% success rate from around the D. Therefore it creates an incentive for a pot shot.
The pot shot still carries an element of jeopardy as it will result in 1 of 4 outcomes, (a) giving possession back to the opposition (b) a kick out where you have a 50/50 chance of getting the ball back, (C) an attaching mark/goal chance or (d) 2 points.
If you can develop a consistent 2 point scoring game - Teams will have to come out and defend the 2 point arc - leaving room inside for goals.
I would have preferred to change to 4 points for a goal - but that was seen as too much to soon for most people.
Even yesterday, Meath were defending the 2 point arc before half time and Louth burst through the defensive line and scored a cracking goal.
The 2 points shot is here to stay.
When you look at the NBA for the past 10 years - The GSW and Boston Celtics have played a game based entirely around 3 point shooting - winning 6 of 10 titles between them and losing in another 2 finals.
All other winners have used a combo of 3 point shooting and an inside game.
If the 2 pointer stays and goals remain at 3 points, then GAA could easily become dominated by those with the best outside shooters to the detriment of those with the best inside forwards. For now, its a great change from what we have seen the in last few years (where the balled could be handpassed around all day if the D was clogged up).
If it turns into a game of just long range shooting - then there will have to be a revisit to the 4 point goal. Going back to no reward (for the long range score) isnt a good idea.
tirawleybaron (Mayo) - Posts: 1390 - 12/05/2025 14:27:59
2608857
Link
1
|
|
Replying To tirawleybaron: "There is some basic logic to the two point score
The last few years we have been watching teams try to work the ball to the D before taking a shot - all other shots were considered to be low percentage
You can miss 50% of your two point attempts to get the equivalent of a 100% success rate from around the D. Therefore it creates an incentive for a pot shot.
The pot shot still carries an element of jeopardy as it will result in 1 of 4 outcomes, (a) giving possession back to the opposition (b) a kick out where you have a 50/50 chance of getting the ball back, (C) an attaching mark/goal chance or (d) 2 points.
If you can develop a consistent 2 point scoring game - Teams will have to come out and defend the 2 point arc - leaving room inside for goals.
I would have preferred to change to 4 points for a goal - but that was seen as too much to soon for most people.
Even yesterday, Meath were defending the 2 point arc before half time and Louth burst through the defensive line and scored a cracking goal.
The 2 points shot is here to stay.
When you look at the NBA for the past 10 years - The GSW and Boston Celtics have played a game based entirely around 3 point shooting - winning 6 of 10 titles between them and losing in another 2 finals.
All other winners have used a combo of 3 point shooting and an inside game.
If the 2 pointer stays and goals remain at 3 points, then GAA could easily become dominated by those with the best outside shooters to the detriment of those with the best inside forwards. For now, its a great change from what we have seen the in last few years (where the balled could be handpassed around all day if the D was clogged up).
If it turns into a game of just long range shooting - then there will have to be a revisit to the 4 point goal. Going back to no reward (for the long range score) isnt a good idea." Yes I agree and NBA is a serious caveat. Watched a good video on how viewership is dying in NBA now as people are bored with threes. The game has been ruined by teams and analytics saying go for threes or layups and games turning into three point contests with lack of variety and spice. Its all very santised.
The 2 pointer could have same effect in time as sides develop their core skills and it becomes the focus and if shooting is over 60% scorerate, we will be in big bother as it will just turn into that with lack of mid scoring or my favourite, when a guy curls one in tight from near the sidelines. Statistically thats a poor option now and risk v reward will suggest recycle. Andy Moran and Paddy Andrews have scored a few worldlies in the previous decade that I struggle to see how its worth half of some lad shooting a free from 40 yards.
On Saturday after Donegal scored that epic goal in ET, they were penalised for overcarrying and Armagh GK got a free kick on 45 line and clipped it over no bother. How is that worth 66% of a well worked goal?
The value is wrong but the idea is right and we do want to encourage long kicks and make defences not retreat into zone.
The ideal value would be 1.5 (one and a half) points but I cannot see that ever flying. It is 50% more than inside the 40 and its half as valuable as a goal. However I just don't see them going to half points. The only way to make it implementable would be to make a point worth 2 points, outside 40 3 points and a goal 6 points but that just wouldnt work physiologically as a point has to be worth a point. Its baked into the vocab of the score and I just don;t think people would like it.
shaggykev (Donegal) - Posts: 330 - 12/05/2025 14:47:34
2608874
Link
0
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "You can't compare the tripe that was being played last year… I still think 36pts in a football game just doesn't seem right… Keeping 3 players up has really improved the game as a spectacle but these 2 point scores just creates a line of defenders patrolling the large circle and teams passing balls back out for players to have a pot shot… a bit like drop goals in rugby… All the 2 pointers have done is create distorted score lines and reduce goal scoring chances.. For me they add absolutely nothing to the game…! Get rid" Of Kildare's 36 points - 5 of the scores were 2 point scores ; 2 of Leitrim's were 2-pointers. So under the old scoring system it would have been 0-31 to 0-9 - certainly not a game to base any scoring system complaints off.
brianb (Kildare) - Posts: 439 - 12/05/2025 14:48:51
2608875
Link
0
|
|
Replying To tirawleybaron: "There is some basic logic to the two point score
The last few years we have been watching teams try to work the ball to the D before taking a shot - all other shots were considered to be low percentage
You can miss 50% of your two point attempts to get the equivalent of a 100% success rate from around the D. Therefore it creates an incentive for a pot shot.
The pot shot still carries an element of jeopardy as it will result in 1 of 4 outcomes, (a) giving possession back to the opposition (b) a kick out where you have a 50/50 chance of getting the ball back, (C) an attaching mark/goal chance or (d) 2 points.
If you can develop a consistent 2 point scoring game - Teams will have to come out and defend the 2 point arc - leaving room inside for goals.
I would have preferred to change to 4 points for a goal - but that was seen as too much to soon for most people.
Even yesterday, Meath were defending the 2 point arc before half time and Louth burst through the defensive line and scored a cracking goal.
The 2 points shot is here to stay.
When you look at the NBA for the past 10 years - The GSW and Boston Celtics have played a game based entirely around 3 point shooting - winning 6 of 10 titles between them and losing in another 2 finals.
All other winners have used a combo of 3 point shooting and an inside game.
If the 2 pointer stays and goals remain at 3 points, then GAA could easily become dominated by those with the best outside shooters to the detriment of those with the best inside forwards. For now, its a great change from what we have seen the in last few years (where the balled could be handpassed around all day if the D was clogged up).
If it turns into a game of just long range shooting - then there will have to be a revisit to the 4 point goal. Going back to no reward (for the long range score) isnt a good idea." Good post, just hope we don't get the shot clock too.
You are right about the arc, but i still think there is massive opportunity for goals inside. With players making runs massive space can appear in front of the fullback and i still think teams will develop to use this.
2 pointers are still a bit of hit and hope and it would be interesting to see if we had some stats on 2 point attempts that are missed. O Baoil missed his attempt yesterday and he's one of the best so far. I think it should be left alone for the moment and let the game continue to develop, as its still early days.
ponger (Cavan) - Posts: 555 - 12/05/2025 14:50:15
2608876
Link
1
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "Kildare scoring 0-36 in a football match just shows how ridiculous some of these new rules are… Teams are no longer interested in trying to score goals… The 2 point score should be ditched immediately to bring back more action near the small square… Teams will soon not need a goalkeeper at all…" Over the top reactions like this are of no benefit to anyone lad. You'd swear there were foals flying in left right and center last year. I get your point about the effect on goals. I feel old saying that I rememebr when the 2 point sidelien was trialled in hurling that it devalued a goal and for that reason I think it was done away with. But:
1. There is no argument imo that Fotball is infinitely better to watch now than it was last year.
2. The current changes need to bed in a little before we jump to any conclusions. As above it might be a case that teams become more proficcient at 2 pointers and that may actually lead to more goals. I also think the 4 poitn goal was a good solution and might be revisited, but for now let's just enjoy the improvements and let any necessary tweaks reveal themselves as we go
Overdahill (Galway) - Posts: 47 - 12/05/2025 14:59:25
2608882
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Overdahill: "Over the top reactions like this are of no benefit to anyone lad. You'd swear there were foals flying in left right and center last year. I get your point about the effect on goals. I feel old saying that I rememebr when the 2 point sidelien was trialled in hurling that it devalued a goal and for that reason I think it was done away with. But:
1. There is no argument imo that Fotball is infinitely better to watch now than it was last year.
2. The current changes need to bed in a little before we jump to any conclusions. As above it might be a case that teams become more proficcient at 2 pointers and that may actually lead to more goals. I also think the 4 poitn goal was a good solution and might be revisited, but for now let's just enjoy the improvements and let any necessary tweaks reveal themselves as we go" Yes, football is enjoyable again.
I'd like a mechanism to penalise "keep ball" though.
As I think 'scientific measures' like a shot clock or a pass limit would be impractical, I wonder if an "unscientific" one would work.
Say, if 'it appears' to the ref that a team is only killing time, the ref could make a rugby-style "use it" call warning, after which the team 'needs to get on with it', or concede a free.
How could we better police this?
I'm ok with recycling once, slowing down, stringing half a dozen passes, backwards and sideways - but then, come on - make progress on the goal.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 3244 - 12/05/2025 15:34:36
2608892
Link
1
|
|
Replying To sligo joe: "Well OK let us agree with you and forget about the tripe last year when only 4 goals were scored in the provincial finals.
Without any comparison with any year there has been a healthy number, 12, goals scored in the finals this year, and you say there are no goal scoring chances." You are missing the point… teams are less likely to go for goals with this ridiculous 2pt rule available.. Kerry will always create goals and the 4 in the Leinster Final were the result of woeful defending by 2 seriously average teams… Louth wouldn't have a chance of any of those goals against a top team… A couple of those goals were also seriously soft penalty decisions
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3872 - 12/05/2025 17:27:43
2608952
Link
0
|