|
Post by eastwarrior on May 5, 2021 12:04:19 GMT
Sean Bawn gave a brilliant interview on Off the Ball this morning. Great insight into a few changes he is aware to the senior panel. He sheds a brilliant light on the lack of clarity for the underage inter county players also. I’ll attach a link below. m.youtube.com/channel/UCfGDs3EEl0RHUwgdEGeCL_A
|
|
|
Post by The16thMan on May 5, 2021 17:18:17 GMT
Sean Bawn gave a brilliant interview on Off the Ball this morning. Great insight into a few changes he is aware to the senior panel. He sheds a brilliant light on the lack of clarity for the underage inter county players also. I’ll attach a link below. m.youtube.com/channel/UCfGDs3EEl0RHUwgdEGeCL_AThe government must have been listening as it was announced today the underage intercounty teams can now train from May 10th with games from June 7th. It'll be interesting to see how Declan gets on with the U20s this season.
|
|
|
Post by hurlingman on May 11, 2021 7:15:27 GMT
Conor Jordon from Stacks is part of the Clare panel for the year. I'm not sure if he's still playing with Stacks or not.
|
|
|
Post by dc84 on May 11, 2021 7:43:11 GMT
Sean Bawn gave a brilliant interview on Off the Ball this morning. Great insight into a few changes he is aware to the senior panel. He sheds a brilliant light on the lack of clarity for the underage inter county players also. I’ll attach a link below. m.youtube.com/channel/UCfGDs3EEl0RHUwgdEGeCL_ASean Bawn always impresses me when i hear him, very underrated player aswell it was often him giving Donaghy the best diagonal ball back in the day.
|
|
|
Post by southward on May 15, 2021 17:18:09 GMT
Apparently, even if they get to it, Kerry won't play the League Final as they have Clare in the championship the following week. Instead, they'll "share" the title with the other finalist. What kind of bullsh*t is this?
|
|
|
Post by givehimaball on May 15, 2021 18:23:16 GMT
Apparently, even if they get to it, Kerry won't play the League Final as they have Clare in the championship the following week. Instead, they'll "share" the title with the other finalist. What kind of bullsh*t is this? All because the Munster Council arranged the game against Clare for the 26th of June. The Munster Council could easily have held the Clare game on the 3rd of June, with a week to the Tipperary game instead of two.
|
|
|
Post by onlykerry on May 15, 2021 21:33:08 GMT
League is a warm up for the championship in reality - only three games plus a possible final for two sides. The championship is the old style straight knock out as we had in 2020 - its the best we can get in the circumstances and I like it (despite the pain of losing to Cork in 2020). The real crazy aspect is there will be relegation and promotions. 2021 is a year where normality is suspended and we are fortunate to have any football. All competitions are truncated in an effort to fit in as many as possible (club and county)into a condensed timeframe. The league is not happening as we know it in any way shape or form and that is what it is - we should not be promoting or relegating teams in such a scenario.
|
|
|
Post by buck02 on May 17, 2021 9:01:41 GMT
After watching a few games across both codes and the highlights show last night its hard not to think that the rule makes have made a complete and utter shambles of our games.
A few years ago somebody with the ear of the head man in the GAA forced a situation where the drop off in players is going to increase by moving the minor grade to Under 17. The effect on rural clubs will be seen in the next 10 years with clubs having to amalgamate due to lack of numbers. All because some academic was worried about Sigerson players - about 0.01% of the players - getting burned out.
Then Joe Brolly forced the hand of the GAA by bringing in a black card rule and subsequently a sin bin that has been applied in such an inconsistent basis that was highlighted in the Kerry game this weekend. Then they further mess around with it to give a penalty if the perceived 'black card' offence occurs in a certain area of the pitch.
Not content with the black card farce, they then bring in an attacking (and defending) mark. If this absolutely ridiculous rule is allowed to stand it will make a mockery of the game of Gaelic Football. Who wants to go to a match to see somebody catching a ball into their chest and getting a free for it.
And hurling now is getting like basketball - every time a team gets possession they either score or if somebody gets tackled its a free.
I would love if the people who made all these changes to the games would stand up publicly and tell us how they have improved the game. Or even if we knew who the people that are making the changes are - and to what level they played or coached or what level of expertise they have.
|
|
|
Post by taibhse on May 17, 2021 9:04:15 GMT
After watching a few games across both codes and the highlights show last night its hard not to think that the rule makes have made a complete and utter shambles of our games. A few years ago somebody with the ear of the head man in the GAA forced a situation where the drop off in players is going to increase by moving the minor grade to Under 17. The effect on rural clubs will be seen in the next 10 years with clubs having to amalgamate due to lack of numbers. All because some academic was worried about Sigerson players - about 0.01% of the players - getting burned out. Then Joe Brolly forced the hand of the GAA by bringing in a black card rule and subsequently a sin bin that has been applied in such an inconsistent basis that was highlighted in the Kerry game this weekend. Then they further mess around with it to give a penalty if the perceived 'black card' offence occurs in a certain area of the pitch. Not content with the black card farce, they then bring in an attacking (and defending) mark. If this absolutely ridiculous rule is allowed to stand it will make a mockery of the game of Gaelic Football. Who wants to go to a match to see somebody catching a ball into their chest and getting a free for it. And hurling now is getting like basketball - every time a team gets possession they either score or if somebody gets tackled its a free. I would love if the people who made all these changes to the games would stand up publicly and tell us how they have improved the game. Or even if we knew who the people that are making the changes are - and to what level they played or coached or what level of expertise they have.
|
|
|
Post by taibhse on May 17, 2021 9:12:55 GMT
Apology for messing up your post buck02. My IT skills not up to the mark.
You are spot on with your comments. I’m curious about views on one of the new rules. The new Cynical Foul is the most radical and likely to be controversial. The rule states:-
If a cynical foul is committed on an attacking player with a goal-scoring opportunity inside the 20-metre line or the semi-circular arc, then a penalty will be awarded to the team affected.
As I see it, the implementation of this rule hinges on the interpretation of “goal-scoring opportunity”. This can be a very broad spectrum for referees to evaluate in a split second. There were three such penalties in the Roscommon/Dublin game yesterday and other referees may not have seen one of those fouls as a “goal-scoring opportunity”. (depending on that player’s skills etc.).
We are forever tinkering with the rules. So much so that I think the great game of hurling is now reduced to the level of a free-taking contest. I’m finding it difficult to watch an entire game if my own county is now involved.
|
|
|
Post by onlykerry on May 17, 2021 10:12:20 GMT
Apology for messing up your post buck02. My IT skills not up to the mark. You are spot on with your comments. I’m curious about views on one of the new rules. The new Cynical Foul is the most radical and likely to be controversial. The rule states:- If a cynical foul is committed on an attacking player with a goal-scoring opportunity inside the 20-metre line or the semi-circular arc, then a penalty will be awarded to the team affected. As I see it, the implementation of this rule hinges on the interpretation of “goal-scoring opportunity”. This can be a very broad spectrum for referees to evaluate in a split second. There were three such penalties in the Roscommon/Dublin game yesterday and other referees may not have seen one of those fouls as a “goal-scoring opportunity”. (depending on that player’s skills etc.). We are forever tinkering with the rules. So much so that I think the great game of hurling is now reduced to the level of a free-taking contest. I’m finding it difficult to watch an entire game if my own county is now involved. Totally agree that the concept of "GOAL SCORING OPPORTUNITY" is ill defined and effectively allows a referee decide the outcome of a tight game. Whether the goal was likely to be scored or not does not come into the call it would seem. It also brings in the issue of double penalty as we saw yesterday with both a penalty and a black card being awarded. I think the third penalty yesterday for Dublin was for a foot block - a poor call as the foot block should be where there is an element of dangerous play (the foot block can cause injury to the kicker) and there appeared to be significant distance between the kicker and the foot block. Too many of the changes are ill conceived, poorly defined and add to the already unworkable workload on one man - the referee.
|
|
kot
Fanatical Member
Posts: 1,122
|
Post by kot on May 17, 2021 10:32:15 GMT
After watching a few games across both codes and the highlights show last night its hard not to think that the rule makes have made a complete and utter shambles of our games. A few years ago somebody with the ear of the head man in the GAA forced a situation where the drop off in players is going to increase by moving the minor grade to Under 17. The effect on rural clubs will be seen in the next 10 years with clubs having to amalgamate due to lack of numbers. All because some academic was worried about Sigerson players - about 0.01% of the players - getting burned out. Then Joe Brolly forced the hand of the GAA by bringing in a black card rule and subsequently a sin bin that has been applied in such an inconsistent basis that was highlighted in the Kerry game this weekend. Then they further mess around with it to give a penalty if the perceived 'black card' offence occurs in a certain area of the pitch. Not content with the black card farce, they then bring in an attacking (and defending) mark. If this absolutely ridiculous rule is allowed to stand it will make a mockery of the game of Gaelic Football. Who wants to go to a match to see somebody catching a ball into their chest and getting a free for it. And hurling now is getting like basketball - every time a team gets possession they either score or if somebody gets tackled its a free. I would love if the people who made all these changes to the games would stand up publicly and tell us how they have improved the game. Or even if we knew who the people that are making the changes are - and to what level they played or coached or what level of expertise they have. they really are making a dogs dinner of the whole thing..... if memory serves me the additional "offensive" mark as suggested was from a kick outside the 45 inside the attacking 21. How can they go from that to what they are pushing now? And the penalty thing was just the solution for fellas in the forward line slipping on a fellas ankle and getting black carded 70 yards from goal ..... jesus wept!
|
|
|
Post by Annascaultilidie on May 17, 2021 10:39:25 GMT
Whatever the rights of wrongs of individual rule changes we are too quick to tinker.
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on May 17, 2021 12:19:31 GMT
watching hurling now is sleep inducing when played by a few of the top teams
|
|
|
Post by eastwarrior on May 17, 2021 13:03:54 GMT
Brilliant to see a excellent football performance and more importantly the blooding of some new players to the panel. I am wondering what is the current rule with regard to playing both senior and u20 football. Can you still no longer play u20 inter county football once u have played for the senior team? A lot of good young players made appearances at the weekend like our own Paul o Shea and the likes of Aaron Mulligan in Monaghan.
|
|
|
Post by givehimaball on May 17, 2021 13:52:47 GMT
In terms of who is to blame/who is responsible for recent rules - the Standing Committee on Playing Rules is the group which has a massive impact on the rules. They are the ones who come up with motions for Congress on a reguar basis [because that is their remit].
The Standing Committee on Playing Rules is comprised of:
David Hassan (Chair), Tracy Bunyan (Sec), Pat Daly, Seamus Kenny, Brian Cuthbert, Michael Delaney, David Collins, Alex McQuillen, Frank Murphy
As others have said the new rule is vague and gives no actual definition of what constitutes a "goal-scoring opportunity"
I'd argue that the way the rule is written, any time a cynical foul is committed inside the 20-metre line or the semi-circular arc a penalty has to be given no matter how slight the goal chance and personally I'd be of the opinion that this is no bad thing.
Imagine a situation where a team is 2 points down in the 8th minute of injury time in an All-Ireland final after the sideline official has signaled for 4 minutes and the defending team has all 15 fifteen players inside their own 20-metre line and the attacking team has the ball right out in the corner. A situation where the chance of scoring a goal is utterly miniscule (one in a million or even a billion) but not completely zero. A defender blatantly pulls the attacker down happy to concede a free, gambling that as long as they don't concede a goal they will win the game.
The philosophical question is in such a situation should a penalty be awarded or not? I argue that is should and that it will be a good thing for the game.
The problem I have is that the rules about the black card offence need to be improved - in the above situation - numerous defenders can swarm around the player in possession at the same time, two or three of them can grab hold of his jersey and pull and drag him around the place but because the black card offences were so poorly drafted that wouldn't be regarded as a cynical offence so under the rules no penalty could be awarded. I wish the committee would review games for other cynical behaviours e.g. pulling a jersey, pulling a player back and add them to the black card offences.
The foot block rule is another example of a poorly written rule.
The current rule says it's a Category 1 Aggressive Foul "To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking the ball from the hand(s)."
Fenton had kicked the ball when the footblock was made as the ball had left his foot so under the rules as written no penalty should have been awarded. He wasn't in the act of kicking - he had clearly kicked it. However always and ever refs have been instructed to allow little to no leeway in terms of foot blocks. This decision to award a penalty here is not going to get the ref in any bother with the ref assessor.
The reason for this is that the authorities to be do not want players diving in feet first as there is such serious potential for injury if it goes wrong. I don't think there is any room for foot blocks in the game, even if the player who commits the foot block is five/ten metres away from the kicker. The vast majority of foot blocks tend to occur in the large square and often times there will be more than just the kicker and the blocker in the area so even if the player who blocks with their feet is a safe distance away from the kicker there is the potential that they might catch another player. Given the danger to players if it goes wrong, I have no problem with the rules on foot blocks being "harsh".
The obvious solution is just to ammend the rule to make it clearer - "To block or attempt to block with the boot when an opponent is kicking or has kicked the ball from the hand(s)."
|
|
|
Post by givehimaball on May 17, 2021 14:10:36 GMT
Brilliant to see a excellent football performance and more importantly the blooding of some new players to the panel. I am wondering what is the current rule with regard to playing both senior and u20 football. Can you still no longer play u20 inter county football once u have played for the senior team? A lot of good young players made appearances at the weekend like our own Paul o Shea and the likes of Aaron Mulligan in Monaghan. Current rule is that an U20 player can play league no bother. If they play a senior championship game, they are ineligible to play in the U20 championship until after their senior team finishes in the championship. For hurling this rule only applies to Tier 1 i.e. Liam McCarthy counties.
|
|
|
Post by southward on May 17, 2021 14:23:17 GMT
Apology for messing up your post buck02. My IT skills not up to the mark. You are spot on with your comments. I’m curious about views on one of the new rules. The new Cynical Foul is the most radical and likely to be controversial. The rule states:- If a cynical foul is committed on an attacking player with a goal-scoring opportunity inside the 20-metre line or the semi-circular arc, then a penalty will be awarded to the team affected. As I see it, the implementation of this rule hinges on the interpretation of “goal-scoring opportunity”. This can be a very broad spectrum for referees to evaluate in a split second. There were three such penalties in the Roscommon/Dublin game yesterday and other referees may not have seen one of those fouls as a “goal-scoring opportunity”. (depending on that player’s skills etc.).
We are forever tinkering with the rules. So much so that I think the great game of hurling is now reduced to the level of a free-taking contest. I’m finding it difficult to watch an entire game if my own county is now involved. Indeed. Like, if Clifford has the ball, anywhere, it's a goal-scoring opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by buck02 on May 17, 2021 15:08:09 GMT
On the GAA Hour podcast they said this new 'penalty' rule was proposed by Willie Barrett - a hurling ref.
It got through congress by something like 160 votes to 100.
The GPA had outlined their opposition to it.
So just another example of how messed up all this tinkering with the rules is.
|
|
|
Post by givehimaball on May 17, 2021 15:36:37 GMT
On the GAA Hour podcast they said this new 'penalty' rule was proposed by Willie Barrett - a hurling ref. It got through congress by something like 160 votes to 100. The GPA had outlined their opposition to it. So just another example of how messed up all this tinkering with the rules is. To be fair the main impetus behind the rule change was the situation in hurling where because there was no black card you had backs pulling down forwards week-in week-out whenever a forward was through on goal. In a sense the hurling fraternity screwed themselves by not adopting the black card when the footballers did. When the black card was brought in there was a lot of guff from some of the hurling fraternity about how there was no cynicism in hurling. It was blatantly obvious in the last few years, that hurlers are every bit as capable as cynical play as footballers. If the hurling fraternity had accepted the black card from day one, the odds of the current penalty rule being passed would have been tiny.
|
|
|
Post by veteran on May 17, 2021 15:36:49 GMT
I only recognise two names from that rules committee- Brian Cuthbert and Frank Murphy. Frank Murphy is a hurling man and I thought he had been put out to grass in any case. When the rules of football and hurling are being debated the first "rule" should be that there should be separate committees for football and hurling. That would ensure that the respective committees would have the genuine interest of their particular code at heart. I suspect most hurling aficionados have little interest in the welfare of football and vice versa.
The fact that most of the names on the committee are unknown to me suggests that they are not famous for playing the game. Would it be inappropriate to have current or recently retired players on the committee? I suppose there is always the danger they have a feel for and understanding of the game. No good would come out of that.
The result is we have the farrago of the offensive mark and the penalty/black card for " a goal scoring opportunity". Would any self respecting, serious current footballer commit those blasphemies?
Kevin McStay suggested last night that in assessing this "goal scoring opportunity" the referee has to adjudicate on about five different criteria in a split second! No room for mistakes there!
Regarding the foot block, in the Dublin game, a penalty was awarded for a foot block when the offending foot was about a yard away from the attacker's leg/foot. Cormac Costelloe was so embarrassed with the decision he decided to tap it over the bar.
The result of the new rules outlined in the fourth last paragraph is the awarding of cheap scores with no consideration for the defender or indeed for the aesthetic value of football. They certainly do not enhance our game which should be their raison d'etre.
|
|
|
Post by givehimaball on May 17, 2021 16:03:39 GMT
I only recognise two names from that rules committee- Brian Cuthbert and Frank Murphy. Frank Murphy is a hurling man and I thought he had been put out to grass in any case. When the rules of football and hurling are being debated the first "rule" should be that there should be separate committees for football and hurling. That would ensure that the respective committees would have the genuine interest of their particular code at heart. I suspect most hurling aficionados have little interest in the welfare of football and vice versa. There seems to be a bizarre idea held by some in the GAA that the rules of hurling and football be as close to each other as possible. I wouldn't be surprised if the fact that the same committee is in charge of the rules for both is somehow related to this. Separate committees for both sports seems a complete no-brainer. Beyond that you would think that it would makes sense to have at least one (if not more) person in the room representing players [someone from the GPA] and at least one person representing referees when discusing rule changes. I would say a committee of nine for both codes is way too small. If I was running the show, I'd be looking to expand the number to something of the order of 25 plus. The more people involved from the get-go would reduce the odds of bad rules getting passed and increase the odds of good ideas on how to tweak things/make improvements. I don't think it would be a bad idea if the general GAA public could submit suggestions and opinons on propsed rule changes directly to the committee as opposed to the current situation of trying to get a motion voted on at Congress. I'd also think it would be a good idea that no proposed rule change could be sent to Congress to be voted on until it had be tested in multiple trial games. It's nuts that the rules of the game can be changed without being tested whatsoever. The current situation in terms of rules changes reeks of throwing muck at the wall and seeing what sticks.
|
|
|
Post by playitfair on May 17, 2021 17:06:08 GMT
My opinion after watching the Kerry game and the Tyrone Vs Donegal game is that both games were enjoyable and no problems with the rules. I think the "kick-out" mark has been a great addition as has the black card in general. I am agnostic on the offensive mark but do not like at all the penalty black-card but I understand the reasons for introducing it.
Personally, I believe the main issue continues to be the standard of refereeing. There are an elite batch of referees in both codes who are very good but there continues to be the challenge of bringing through new referees who are not quite ready but are getting matches. A really difficult one to fix but worth focusing on for the next couple of years rather than the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Ballyfireside on May 17, 2021 19:33:09 GMT
We were otherwise in for another vintage hurling year with such amazing close encounters just out of traps - can the rules not revert? Looks like everyone thinks it is a balls up!
Even on here we have outlined the practicality of implementation, and minimal referee discretion should be a factor.
We are playing these game for over a century now and surely with all the brains we have between us we are still capable of making a mash of it and it is unfair on players most of all.
|
|
|
Post by The16thMan on May 17, 2021 21:56:30 GMT
The biggest rules I have the problem with are the black card rules and the advanced mark rule. The problem I have with the black card rule is when you bring down a player inside the 21 there should not be a penalty, the sin bin is enough in my opinion. However, I have more of an issue with the advanced mark rule. It completely discourages goals, in most games goals are fairly uncommon with teams flooding defences with 12+ players. But now instead of a forward catching a ball, turning his man and running direct at the goal.. forwards are now catching the ball and instead of looking around to see what might be on they just throw up the arm and take their mark. David Cliffords second goal would not have occured if the original pass played into Killian Spillane was outside the 45, even though Killian tried calling the mark the kick to him took place inside the 45 and therefore he had no choice but to play on and as a result Kerry scored a goal.
|
|