|
I love the 50 yard rules for dissent. Our game was being destroyed by a total lack of respect for referees. The punishment needed to be severe.
Re the 3v3 punishment. I would love if the ref/linesman come up with a signal. Not sure why the ref has to jog across to the linesman every time. Slows things a bit. But I like the rule.
Solo and go is excellent.
Two point arc is good. In Salthill you noticed when the teams were against the wind the arc was redundant because 2 pointers were not really an option hence the defending team did not have to push out.
Noticed in Salthill the ref did not use the disappearing foam for frees. Did they at other venues? This is definitely needed because players have been going to town on narrowing angles for the last few years.
Handing the ball back - I would be happy enough if this was changed to leaving it down immediately. But not a major gripe.
All in all, didn't solve everything but definitely better.
Mayonman (Galway) - Posts: 1914 - 27/01/2025 11:50:40
2587861
Link
0
|
|
Replying To mhunicean_abu: "Was wondering why the 2pt arc does not extend right to the end line, parallel with the sideline from the 20 metre line, surely scoring from out on the sidelines deserves 2 points as much as much as straight in front" Likely because it's a 40m arc, and therefore standard on all pitches.
If it were to extend to the sidelines, it would have a different shape on pitches of different widths.
Not saying that would be a bad thing, necessarily, but would it be an issue for players if distances from goal were different at each grounds? (The distance would increase the further you went towards the sidelines on wider pitches).
Amusing to see the few goes the Tyrone lads had at marking it out. Must have been using a bungee cord :-)
TearsIn85 (Monaghan) - Posts: 208 - 27/01/2025 12:27:33
2587870
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Yvrjd: "Should there be a restriction on the goal keeper coming out past the large rectangle unless it's to compete for a ball?" Just musing should goalkeepers only be allowed receive the ball in the attacking 45m? Less likely to result in 11 v 12 keep ball in the defensive 45m. Between the 45m and halfway is more appealing for the keep ball plays.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8566 - 28/01/2025 09:12:06
2588098
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "Just musing should goalkeepers only be allowed receive the ball in the attacking 45m? Less likely to result in 11 v 12 keep ball in the defensive 45m. Between the 45m and halfway is more appealing for the keep ball plays." From watching the games at the weekend, I think I'd only let the keeper get the ball inside his own 45.
I know they stopped the back-pass to try to eliminate teams playing keep-ball, but they're now just doing it between half way and the opposition 45 since it's 12 vs 11.
If the keeper can't come out past his own 45 and they still want to play keep-ball with him, they're playing with fire as it's much more risky to pass the ball around inside your own half.
Teams will be less likely to drop off, as they have to keep 3 up anyways, and have the chance to overturn the keeper if he does try to get on the ball.
Ciaran359 (Galway) - Posts: 21 - 28/01/2025 12:24:10
2588152
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Ciaran359: "From watching the games at the weekend, I think I'd only let the keeper get the ball inside his own 45.
I know they stopped the back-pass to try to eliminate teams playing keep-ball, but they're now just doing it between half way and the opposition 45 since it's 12 vs 11.
If the keeper can't come out past his own 45 and they still want to play keep-ball with him, they're playing with fire as it's much more risky to pass the ball around inside your own half.
Teams will be less likely to drop off, as they have to keep 3 up anyways, and have the chance to overturn the keeper if he does try to get on the ball." Not sure about that. Inside the defensive 45m seems the more likely zone for the defensive team to turn over a 12 v 11 attack.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8566 - 28/01/2025 13:44:30
2588167
Link
0
|
|
What rule tweaks would you like to see?
Here are four of mine:
A) 11v11 - Defence must keep 4 back at all times, either 3 + goalkeeper, or 4 outfielders if the goalkeeper crosses the halfway line.
B) Limit Keep Ball via 'Timely Forward Progress' - With the pitch divided into three approx 'thirds' at the 45s, the team in possession has only 25 seconds (liberal?) to move the ball to the 'next third', or register a score or wide beyond 'other 45', the final third.
Ref could provide a rugby-style "use it" warning call, using judgement at an 'unscientific' 20 seconds or so, with a violation occuring if the ball is not out of the zone (or turned over) within 5 additional seconds.
Free kick from near the middle of each zone, i.e. midfield or the relevant 20m line.
I wonder if there'd be positive unintended consequences, like more kicking/ less handpassing with little "use it" calls required ?
C) GAT (goals, arcs, total) - Present scoring in this way, with one-pointers just part of the total, not broken out to simplify presentation and eliminate all the 'mental maths calculations'.
D) Revert to tradition 3/1 scoring instead - 'Over the bar' from the arc or outside is simply one point. The close range score, inside the arc or 20m line, is also worth one point, ONLY IF proceeded by a 45-20 kick (from outside the 45, to inside the 20, not necessarily a mark as the ball can hit the ground).
Do you like any of them?
omahant (USA) - Posts: 3105 - 28/01/2025 15:10:36
2588197
Link
0
|
|
Replying To legendzxix: "Just musing should goalkeepers only be allowed receive the ball in the attacking 45m? Less likely to result in 11 v 12 keep ball in the defensive 45m. Between the 45m and halfway is more appealing for the keep ball plays." I think that would just rearrange the numbers - yes it would make the keeper push 20m further up but another player could drop back to play the same keep ball role.
I'd rewrite the rule that 4 defending players need to stay back including the goalkeeper with 3 attacking players staying forward. That way you'd prevent the 11 v 12 and allow teams to opt for one on one match ups. The keeper could go forward if desired but another player would need to stay back.
brianb (Kildare) - Posts: 404 - 28/01/2025 15:20:09
2588201
Link
1
|
|
Replying To brianb: "I think that would just rearrange the numbers - yes it would make the keeper push 20m further up but another player could drop back to play the same keep ball role.
I'd rewrite the rule that 4 defending players need to stay back including the goalkeeper with 3 attacking players staying forward. That way you'd prevent the 11 v 12 and allow teams to opt for one on one match ups. The keeper could go forward if desired but another player would need to stay back." That seems to be the most logical option and would be no tougher to police than current rules.
I just have a bee in my bonnet after the weekend about how often I saw the keeper coming up to take a pot shot.
I won't speak for everyone but that's not the result I would have wanted from the rules changes that were supposed to make football a more enjoyable sport to watch.
Ciaran359 (Galway) - Posts: 21 - 28/01/2025 17:17:28
2588227
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "What rule tweaks would you like to see?
Here are four of mine:
A) 11v11 - Defence must keep 4 back at all times, either 3 + goalkeeper, or 4 outfielders if the goalkeeper crosses the halfway line.
B) Limit Keep Ball via 'Timely Forward Progress' - With the pitch divided into three approx 'thirds' at the 45s, the team in possession has only 25 seconds (liberal?) to move the ball to the 'next third', or register a score or wide beyond 'other 45', the final third.
Ref could provide a rugby-style "use it" warning call, using judgement at an 'unscientific' 20 seconds or so, with a violation occuring if the ball is not out of the zone (or turned over) within 5 additional seconds.
Free kick from near the middle of each zone, i.e. midfield or the relevant 20m line.
I wonder if there'd be positive unintended consequences, like more kicking/ less handpassing with little "use it" calls required ?
C) GAT (goals, arcs, total) - Present scoring in this way, with one-pointers just part of the total, not broken out to simplify presentation and eliminate all the 'mental maths calculations'.
D) Revert to tradition 3/1 scoring instead - 'Over the bar' from the arc or outside is simply one point. The close range score, inside the arc or 20m line, is also worth one point, ONLY IF proceeded by a 45-20 kick (from outside the 45, to inside the 20, not necessarily a mark as the ball can hit the ground).
Do you like any of them?" Is the whole thing not confusing enough for players, referees and supporters without you adding to the problems…?
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3544 - 28/01/2025 18:45:39
2588243
Link
1
|
|
Replying To omahant: "What rule tweaks would you like to see?
Here are four of mine:
A) 11v11 - Defence must keep 4 back at all times, either 3 + goalkeeper, or 4 outfielders if the goalkeeper crosses the halfway line.
B) Limit Keep Ball via 'Timely Forward Progress' - With the pitch divided into three approx 'thirds' at the 45s, the team in possession has only 25 seconds (liberal?) to move the ball to the 'next third', or register a score or wide beyond 'other 45', the final third.
Ref could provide a rugby-style "use it" warning call, using judgement at an 'unscientific' 20 seconds or so, with a violation occuring if the ball is not out of the zone (or turned over) within 5 additional seconds.
Free kick from near the middle of each zone, i.e. midfield or the relevant 20m line.
I wonder if there'd be positive unintended consequences, like more kicking/ less handpassing with little "use it" calls required ?
C) GAT (goals, arcs, total) - Present scoring in this way, with one-pointers just part of the total, not broken out to simplify presentation and eliminate all the 'mental maths calculations'.
D) Revert to tradition 3/1 scoring instead - 'Over the bar' from the arc or outside is simply one point. The close range score, inside the arc or 20m line, is also worth one point, ONLY IF proceeded by a 45-20 kick (from outside the 45, to inside the 20, not necessarily a mark as the ball can hit the ground).
Do you like any of them?" I do think the scoring needs to be reported differently. You need to read the full match report to know how many 2 points are scored. I'd say we should add a place for the 2 pointers. Show it as 1-3-12 (21) - on TV and in match reports .
brianb (Kildare) - Posts: 404 - 28/01/2025 21:45:27
2588269
Link
1
|
|
Replying To brianb: "I do think the scoring needs to be reported differently. You need to read the full match report to know how many 2 points are scored. I'd say we should add a place for the 2 pointers. Show it as 1-3-12 (21) - on TV and in match reports ." Our once great game is being dismantled piece by piece… tap and go ( from rugby ) , mark and 3 types of scores ( Aussie rules ) yellow cards and shaving foam (Soccer) and pitches with more lines than American football….. Gaelic Football is now a distant relative to what it once was….
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3544 - 28/01/2025 22:02:22
2588273
Link
0
|
|
Replying To brianb: "I do think the scoring needs to be reported differently. You need to read the full match report to know how many 2 points are scored. I'd say we should add a place for the 2 pointers. Show it as 1-3-12 (21) - on TV and in match reports ." Even then we'd be getting the calculators out :)
Yvrjd (Galway) - Posts: 8 - 28/01/2025 22:56:25
2588281
Link
0
|
|
Replying To brianb: "I do think the scoring needs to be reported differently. You need to read the full match report to know how many 2 points are scored. I'd say we should add a place for the 2 pointers. Show it as 1-3-12 (21) - on TV and in match reports ." I know what you are saying but I think four numbers is a lot (or too much).
I would just say 1-3-21 (shorter) - it tells the story too - one can derive the 12, if so inclined.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 3105 - 29/01/2025 03:09:12
2588288
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Seanfanbocht: "Absolutely." No explanation has emerged for this. Maybe it's because extending the arc would show up narrow pitches.
Aibrean (Kerry) - Posts: 322 - 29/01/2025 11:26:33
2588319
Link
0
|
|
The game is still "Handball". The Elephant is as large as ever. Over 400 handpasses in the Galway/Armagh game, according to Martin Breheny in today's Indo. And, of course, many of the handpasses are illegal.
The new rules are a big improvement, but, why, oh why, did the FRC not tackle the handpass problem?
Aibrean (Kerry) - Posts: 322 - 29/01/2025 11:39:10
2588323
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Aibrean: "The game is still "Handball". The Elephant is as large as ever. Over 400 handpasses in the Galway/Armagh game, according to Martin Breheny in today's Indo. And, of course, many of the handpasses are illegal.
The new rules are a big improvement, but, why, oh why, did the FRC not tackle the handpass problem?" I haven't read anything that could be remotely described as positive or optimistic from Martin for years.
Not sure why the FRC didn't make some amendment regarding the handpass, maybe the difficulty for officials? In any case I'm not going to obsess about what's in or what's out.
I watched two full games at the weekend. I really enjoyed the open game between Dublin and Mayo. But was it better than the same two counties in Castlebar last year under old rules, probably not.
Last year's All Ireland final between Armagh and Galway was a turgid affair, was Saturday's encounter any better? Maybe yes but marginal.
sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 851 - 29/01/2025 12:36:58
2588336
Link
0
|
|
Replying To ForeverBlue2: "Our once great game is being dismantled piece by piece… tap and go ( from rugby ) , mark and 3 types of scores ( Aussie rules ) yellow cards and shaving foam (Soccer) and pitches with more lines than American football….. Gaelic Football is now a distant relative to what it once was…." Are you Martin Breheny? Or Pat Spillane? Definitely forever blue whoever you are ;-D
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 15047 - 29/01/2025 13:01:40
2588343
Link
0
|
|
Replying To brianb: "I do think the scoring needs to be reported differently. You need to read the full match report to know how many 2 points are scored. I'd say we should add a place for the 2 pointers. Show it as 1-3-12 (21) - on TV and in match reports ." I agree. I watched the Roscommon v Down game at the weekend on TG4. At half time the score made it look like Down were the stronger side, but it was those 2 pointers that really made the difference for them, Roscommon actually looked stronger for the majority of the match I thought.
If you miss part of the game, like last weekend I had no electricity for over 2 days and missed part of that game, its only when you see the breakdown that you can gauge who was the stronger side in any given half. TV and match reports need to adapt and include the 2 pointers.
Commodore (Donegal) - Posts: 1300 - 29/01/2025 13:18:55
2588348
Link
0
|
|
McGeeney making the point that the elements could see a team benefit from two pointers but then the wind could be calm in the second half!
That would nearly suggest offer 4 points for a goal and leave points as they are. The new attacking mark is supposed to be encouraging more goal opportunities anyway.
legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8566 - 02/02/2025 01:51:27
2588827
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Viking66: "Are you Martin Breheny? Or Pat Spillane? Definitely forever blue whoever you are ;-D" Just telling you something you don't want to hear… Head out of the sand now that's a good lad…!!
ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3544 - 02/02/2025 10:26:51
2588849
Link
0
|