National Forum

What Is The Best Of Jim Gavins Ideas

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Not supporting the 3v3 is a funny one. Many saw the benefit over the weekend. The advantages of the 2 pointer then is obvious. A goal should be worth more with 2 pointers on offer but that might be just a change further down the road.
The advanced mark is an improvement. 1v1 throw ins cuts out a lot of unnecessary fouls.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 23/10/2024 20:49:47    2576607

Link

Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game.

realdub (Dublin) - Posts: 8672 - 23/10/2024 21:42:08    2576615

Link

Changing the scoring system is drawing a lot of debate. 1-2-4 is better that 1-2-3. Staying at 1-3 is better that 1-2-3?
3 up is supposed to create more space in the defending 45. The attacking mark is supposed to encourage more goal opportunities, with the insurance of a point option.
The solo and go is also supposed to keep momentum with the attack.
There is a argument for bringing in the other so-called enhancements before looking at changing the scoring system.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 23/10/2024 22:25:26    2576624

Link

Replying To realdub:  "Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game."
Knockout would definitely help attendances per game, but not overall attendances. Knockout would also make the League more relevant again.

Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 13662 - 24/10/2024 06:12:10    2576635

Link

Replying To realdub:  "Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game."
I agree with you 100% realdub… I have said this for years as regards the Championship…!

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2974 - 24/10/2024 06:24:56    2576637

Link

'The law of unintended consequences' it will be interesting to to see how it all plays out with whatever new rules come in next year.
I'm looking forward to it, anything is better than boring lateral backwards safety first rubbish we have endured for years,

Tirchonaill1 (Donegal) - Posts: 3001 - 24/10/2024 14:13:23    2576717

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "I agree with you 100% realdub… I have said this for years as regards the Championship…!"
The championship needs proper jeopardy. The quality of football can't be ignored either. All the lateral passing and safety first football.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 24/10/2024 15:07:44    2576727

Link

Replying To realdub:  "Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game."
But the players deserve a lot m9re and better than straight knockout. Even with qualifiers. 2 games in championship isn't enough for what players put in.
4 point goal shouldn't really have a negative effect on point taking. How many goals are in games as it is.
Rewarding high fielding should be a good thing no?
2 point score shouldn't see lot of wides but will see plenty balls drop short, potential goals etc. Nothing wrong there.

The game needs a better defined tackle/means of dispossessing the opposition and more help and respect for referees

KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 3667 - 24/10/2024 19:57:57    2576762

Link

Replying To realdub:  "Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game."
Absolutely, totally agree. Only option is return to knock-out championship I've been saying it for years as well. As for the tweaks the 2 point score is a no, no.

The 4 point goal has the potential to kill off many a game long before the full time whistle should the stronger team bang in 2 or 3 rapid fire goals along with a couple of points the game could be out of reach possibly at half time.

I agree with your opinion on the other tweak's

supersub15 (Carlow) - Posts: 3027 - 24/10/2024 22:19:10    2576782

Link

Replying To realdub:  "Attendances are a huge worry, I don't see it getting any better. Only option is return to knock-out championship.
You and your enemy/rival, do or die, only that can create real drama.

As for these 'tweaks', I can't give an informed opinion until I see them in a competitive environment.
The 4 point goal will only have a negative effect on the art of point taking.
I'd like to see NO marks.
No backpasses to the keeper.
3 staying up seems fair.
2 point score will only result in a lot of wides in a game."
I forgot to mention in my previous post that the current system of NFL, Provincial championship and the TC are too "Close coupled" it's almost like having a "Triplex championship,"

supersub15 (Carlow) - Posts: 3027 - 24/10/2024 22:34:27    2576783

Link

Football is suffering from a double whammy. Terrible football e.g. the Kerry v Derry quarter-final and meaningless games e.g. the provincial championships followed by a round robin without any jeopardy.
On the scoring. 2 pointers compared to 1 pointers seems unbalanced. The 2 pointers are overly rewarding. If a goal remains at 3 points then, a goal is unrewarding. Will there be enough reward to try and claim an attacking mark goal? Take your 2 pointers and from a ball dropping short, a goal might follow.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 25/10/2024 09:10:15    2576809

Link

Replying To legendzxix:  "Football is suffering from a double whammy. Terrible football e.g. the Kerry v Derry quarter-final and meaningless games e.g. the provincial championships followed by a round robin without any jeopardy.
On the scoring. 2 pointers compared to 1 pointers seems unbalanced. The 2 pointers are overly rewarding. If a goal remains at 3 points then, a goal is unrewarding. Will there be enough reward to try and claim an attacking mark goal? Take your 2 pointers and from a ball dropping short, a goal might follow."
The aim of the 2 pointer being so rewarding is to force defences to push out more, which will should leave more space inside. They won't actually be that easy to score as teams will put a lot more pressure around the arc, but that should create more space to work chances inside, particularly goals.

WanPintWin (Galway) - Posts: 2187 - 25/10/2024 10:55:07    2576827

Link

Every argument I've seen in favour of any of Gavin's ideas have all hinged on "sure if we don't try we'll never know". That's not good enough to implement a change of ruleset across the board. Trial it at schools football, or college B instead.

Making the game a 13 player sport in men's football is a far better starting point than any of the FRC suggestions. Are there any problems solved by the proposed rules that wouldn't be solved by moving to a 13 man game, bar dissent?

SurelyToGod (Donegal) - Posts: 433 - 25/10/2024 11:21:57    2576835

Link

Replying To SurelyToGod:  "Every argument I've seen in favour of any of Gavin's ideas have all hinged on "sure if we don't try we'll never know". That's not good enough to implement a change of ruleset across the board. Trial it at schools football, or college B instead.

Making the game a 13 player sport in men's football is a far better starting point than any of the FRC suggestions. Are there any problems solved by the proposed rules that wouldn't be solved by moving to a 13 man game, bar dissent?"
what would 13 a side solve?
Managers/coaches and some players are happy to win a game 1-0.
They don't mind dropping everyone back and and try hit on the counter attack. 13 a side doesn't solve this, its just 13 players back defending instead of 15.
With the numbers playing GAA now, reducing the numbers in the starting team wouldn't be a great idea, it be more players not getting games.

Tribes88 (Galway) - Posts: 17 - 25/10/2024 12:15:38    2576849

Link

Replying To KillingFields:  "But the players deserve a lot m9re and better than straight knockout. Even with qualifiers. 2 games in championship isn't enough for what players put in.
4 point goal shouldn't really have a negative effect on point taking. How many goals are in games as it is.
Rewarding high fielding should be a good thing no?
2 point score shouldn't see lot of wides but will see plenty balls drop short, potential goals etc. Nothing wrong there.

The game needs a better defined tackle/means of dispossessing the opposition and more help and respect for referees"
I agree with most of this post (apart from not liking any mark rules).

Going back to straight knockout not on for me.

The tackle in Gaelic football really needs to be defined better, the situation currently favours the man in possession too much which is going to be a bigger issue seeing as the 3x3 rule is coming in.

bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 25/10/2024 12:16:58    2576851

Link

Replying To SurelyToGod:  "Every argument I've seen in favour of any of Gavin's ideas have all hinged on "sure if we don't try we'll never know". That's not good enough to implement a change of ruleset across the board. Trial it at schools football, or college B instead.

Making the game a 13 player sport in men's football is a far better starting point than any of the FRC suggestions. Are there any problems solved by the proposed rules that wouldn't be solved by moving to a 13 man game, bar dissent?"
For most people the starting point is drifting and doing nothing is a terrible option because football styles have gotten into a terrible place and seeing as it has been so for a long time it is not just going to sort itself out.

You can argue about what the specific changes should be, everyone will have different ideas but the most important thing is the GAA have gotten serious about tackling the issues and are going to implement serious changes that will make a difference.

We can't go on as we are.

bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 25/10/2024 12:33:07    2576856

Link

Replying To WanPintWin:  "The aim of the 2 pointer being so rewarding is to force defences to push out more, which will should leave more space inside. They won't actually be that easy to score as teams will put a lot more pressure around the arc, but that should create more space to work chances inside, particularly goals."
That's all fine but there is a concern that the 2 pointer is over rewarding. The encouragement is needed for shooting from distance though and forcing defences to push out.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 25/10/2024 14:13:06    2576884

Link

Replying To SurelyToGod:  "Every argument I've seen in favour of any of Gavin's ideas have all hinged on "sure if we don't try we'll never know". That's not good enough to implement a change of ruleset across the board. Trial it at schools football, or college B instead.

Making the game a 13 player sport in men's football is a far better starting point than any of the FRC suggestions. Are there any problems solved by the proposed rules that wouldn't be solved by moving to a 13 man game, bar dissent?"
I think 3 players staying forward is better than 13 a side. When the defence turns over ball, the option is there to go "vertical"! One of the buzz words of the "core enhancements".

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 25/10/2024 14:19:45    2576886

Link

Replying To legendzxix:  "I think 3 players staying forward is better than 13 a side. When the defence turns over ball, the option is there to go "vertical"! One of the buzz words of the "core enhancements"."
Coaches should have been going with "2 up" all the time.
Would have meant 3 back to watch them plus goalie wouldn't stray too far.

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1918 - 25/10/2024 15:35:03    2576903

Link

Replying To Seanfanbocht:  "Coaches should have been going with "2 up" all the time.
Would have meant 3 back to watch them plus goalie wouldn't stray too far."
I agree totally…. As I have said many times… there's very little wrong with the game.. it's the negative ( paid ) coaches that's the problem…!!!!

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2974 - 25/10/2024 16:00:53    2576910

Link