HoganStand GAA Football and Hurling

National Forum

What Is The Best Of Jim Gavins Ideas

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

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" The 4 point goal will encourage teams to go for goal more. High catching should be a natural skill for any gaelic footballer, no reward required. The one or two extra games won't do a lot for most teams as they just get beaten again. Knockout is the only game in town. realdub (Dublin) - Posts: 8672 - 25/10/2024 17:16:24 2576922 Link
Replying To realdub: "The 4 point goal will encourage teams to go for goal more. High catching should be a natural skill for any gaelic footballer, no reward required. The one or two extra games won't do a lot for most teams as they just get beaten again. Knockout is the only game in town." A former Dublin player reckons 4 points encourages both scoring them and keeping them out! That the positive and negative cancel out! He also reckons 2 pointers will dominate the game. 3 points for a goal won't be worth the risk. There is the argument there though that having a high scoring distance shot should push out the defence. The attacking mark should encourage goal opportunities. 2 pointers could be one of the difficult scores to get. legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 26/10/2024 07:20:27 2576973 Link
Replying To legendzxix: "A former Dublin player reckons 4 points encourages both scoring them and keeping them out! That the positive and negative cancel out! He also reckons 2 pointers will dominate the game. 3 points for a goal won't be worth the risk. There is the argument there though that having a high scoring distance shot should push out the defence. The attacking mark should encourage goal opportunities. 2 pointers could be one of the difficult scores to get." My God! You truly do write some garbage posts! Onion_Sack (Dublin) - Posts: 256 - 27/10/2024 19:10:42 2577239 Link
Just wondering after watching the railway cup experimental games what is next step in the process? Is the next step individual rule changes being put to a vote to see will they be implemented for the following year?. bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 28/10/2024 12:04:23 2577325 Link
I haven't seen it mentioned much, was any consideration given to limiting handpassing to only allow hand passing with closed fish as opposed to handpassing with an open hand, this would surly make handpassing moves harder to complete? bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 28/10/2024 12:07:45 2577326 Link
With the 3 points being kept for goal surely they need to get rid of the 2 point arc hopefully they will also need get rid of brining ball 50 meters up the field Kickitout (Galway) - Posts: 950 - 28/10/2024 14:11:27 2577339 Link
Replying To Kickitout: "With the 3 points being kept for goal surely they need to get rid of the 2 point arc hopefully they will also need get rid of brining ball 50 meters up the field" It is a conundrum. The arc is to encourage defences to push out. 4 points isn't palatable for GAA Central Council and delegates. They also want to retain the positive aspects the arc is expected to bring. Pat Spillane was making the fair point that if goals are worth 4 points, there is more of an incentive to go for goal than fist the ball over the bar. If the arc proves to be successful, 4 points for a goal might have to be reconsidered down the line. It might be more palatable off the back of a successful arc. legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 28/10/2024 15:21:42 2577349 Link
Replying To Tribes88: "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." The 13 a side game is already played in some senior level competitions in more sparsely populated areas, and it's not just 13 players back instead of 15. Some clubs can't field 15 week in week out and if anything this would protect them and ensure the ruleset is consistent from one Sunday to the next. I agree however that it doesn't directly solve the problem that most have identified with the current ruleset, but I don't the proposals fixing any of these problems. I can only see more congestion on the 45 caused by the two-point rule. The 1pt is basically obsolete. What do you see happening when a free kick is given just inside the arc? Death of the free kick taker? SurelyToGod (Donegal) - Posts: 433 - 28/10/2024 15:49:21 2577352 Link
Replying To bdbuddah: "I haven't seen it mentioned much, was any consideration given to limiting handpassing to only allow hand passing with closed fish as opposed to handpassing with an open hand, this would surly make handpassing moves harder to complete?" That would be impossible to police, referees in enough difficulty as it is. Claretandblue (Westmeath) - Posts: 1890 - 28/10/2024 20:03:14 2577381 Link
Replying To Kickitout: "With the 3 points being kept for goal surely they need to get rid of the 2 point arc hopefully they will also need get rid of brining ball 50 meters up the field" So basically no change apart from 3 back and a couple of miniscule bits and pieces like 2 for throw in and no back pass to keeper. Sure what's the point then,we're just going to have the current dross continuing. Overthebar53 (Carlow) - Posts: 271 - 28/10/2024 23:36:37 2577399 Link
Replying To Overthebar53: "So basically no change apart from 3 back and a couple of miniscule bits and pieces like 2 for throw in and no back pass to keeper. Sure what's the point then,we're just going to have the current dross continuing." I would be ok next season with only implementing the 3 up front and not letting goal keeper receive passes outside the large square) in his own half (or better again the opposition half as well) if the option is left open to bring the scoring arc and 4 point goals in the following season if it is needed. It's hard to tell without seeing it for a season if keeping 3 upfront and limiting passing to the goal keeper will be enough on their own to get us out of the bad place that the game is in (these would seem to be the 2 most important rule changes but the other rule changes may be needed to reinforce the impact of the first 2). I really don't like the idea of a 2 point score outside the arc if a goal still only worth 3 points, this obviously makes goals far less important in determining the outcome of a match. I love seeing goals being scored in a game, they are the high points of most games. bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 29/10/2024 10:33:19 2577428 Link
I think the arc is needed. With the safety first policy to predominant, there has to be a reward for taking the longer shot. The kick out one for me seems harsh. The intention seems to be to create more contests but an opposing player should be able to intercept a kick out after 13 metres. With the goalkeeper passing rule, the kick out change seems unnecessary. legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 29/10/2024 12:59:03 2577446 Link
Replying To legendzxix: "I think the arc is needed. With the safety first policy to predominant, there has to be a reward for taking the longer shot. The kick out one for me seems harsh. The intention seems to be to create more contests but an opposing player should be able to intercept a kick out after 13 metres. With the goalkeeper passing rule, the kick out change seems unnecessary." I don't necessarily disagree with you but if we allow 2 point long range points we need the 4 point goal. Goal should be worth at least twice as much as any other score. bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 29/10/2024 17:56:30 2577500 Link
Replying To bdbuddah: "I don't necessarily disagree with you but if we allow 2 point long range points we need the 4 point goal. Goal should be worth at least twice as much as any other score." Agree, you can't have a 2 pointer if the goal stays 3. Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1918 - 29/10/2024 20:02:44 2577515 Link
Replying To bdbuddah: "I don't necessarily disagree with you but if we allow 2 point long range points we need the 4 point goal. Goal should be worth at least twice as much as any other score." Agree. Utterly bizarre decision to remove the 4-point goal. It is reported they they were initially contemplating a 5-point goal, which actually would have made more sense, so it's even more bizarre to leave it at 3 when two outfield, much easier scores (long-points) can exceed its value. CeachtPeile (Cavan) - Posts: 122 - 30/10/2024 11:56:53 2577582 Link
If the arc is a success, the value of a goal can be revised. If the arc is a flop, the two pointer can be dropped. The powers that be tend not to make drastic changes. The two pointer is a one step change. legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 8247 - 30/10/2024 12:57:50 2577593 Link
Replying To legendzxix: "If the arc is a success, the value of a goal can be revised. If the arc is a flop, the two pointer can be dropped. The powers that be tend not to make drastic changes. The two pointer is a one step change." I wouldn't be that certain. When the back door came in ( in hurling in 1997 and football in 2001) we were told it was a step and a group stage was inevitable to follow in following years. We had to wait more than 20 years. bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1394 - 31/10/2024 09:21:35 2577685 Link
Replying To bdbuddah: "I wouldn't be that certain. When the back door came in ( in hurling in 1997 and football in 2001) we were told it was a step and a group stage was inevitable to follow in following years. We had to wait more than 20 years." Group games are ridiculous. A lot of them are "dead rubber contests" and have very little intensity. Bring back straight knockout contests, and generate some excitement. Also, bring back all Ireland finals to September, and maybe GAA should prioritize games, rather than generating revenue from rock band Oasis! Ryanteam (Cork) - Posts: 367 - 03/11/2024 18:08:28 2578174 Link
There is not many players who can shoot over the bar from a large distance so prob gonna see an increase in wides which will be terrible to watch. If they just leave the 3 inside at all times it would prob be enough. Changing scoring in any game is to much. I mean if the game survives for over 100 years do you really need restock changes. But I suppose the tail wags the dog again THE EXTRAMAN (Donegal) - Posts: 554 - 03/11/2024 18:39:44 2578183 Link
Replying To Ryanteam: "Group games are ridiculous. A lot of them are "dead rubber contests" and have very little intensity. Bring back straight knockout contests, and generate some excitement. Also, bring back all Ireland finals to September, and maybe GAA should prioritize games, rather than generating revenue from rock band Oasis!" Agree 100%, Championship should be knockout, we have group stages in our club Championships here in Donegal, nobody pays any interest until it gets to the knockout stage. Th whole thing is mess anyway but no matter how bad it gets it's still way better than tan ball. Tirchonaill1 (Donegal) - Posts: 3001 - 03/11/2024 19:35:10 2578199 Link