Should the GAA introduce a Professional Foul rule?

Fandango

Personally i think it is well overdue. Not picking on any county as there are incidents all over the country but the most recent example would be Cork v Down. Cant remember who did it but the Cork back who used an ankle tap to bring down a man through on goal. Obviously under the rules he only deserved a yellow card and was shown one but who thinks its fairly stupid that a rule doesnt yet exist that would see players sent off for incidents like this?

Havent seen a thread about this so apologies if one does alread exist.

Mountainlad

Would have previously been an advocate of it but not anymore. Do we really want to see teams going down to 14 men? Yellow card is sufficient. Remember players on a yellow card are in a precarious position, and I think it's much easire to foul in a sport like Hurling or Football than in soccer so when you're on a yellow you've to be careful which in turn gives an advantage to the opposition.

keane2097

No.

The reason this sort of rule is necessary in soccer is that a goal is so important that stopping a clear cut chance for one needs more punishment then a free-kick which is very tough to score from.

In football, a goal just isn't as decisive as a goal in soccer 99 times out of 100, and coupled with the fact that the team will usually throw the resultant free over the bar you're really only compensating for the possible loss of two points, which is pretty overbalanced by giving a guy his marching orders imo.

keane2097

keane2097 wrote: »

No.

The reason this sort of rule is necessary in soccer is that a goal is so important that stopping a clear cut chance for one needs more punishment then a free-kick which is very tough to score from.

In football, a goal just isn't as decisive as a goal in soccer 99 times out of 100, and coupled with the fact that the team will usually throw the resultant free over the bar you're really only compensating for the possible loss of two points, which is pretty overbalanced by giving a guy his marching orders imo.

Teams often lose by narrow scorelines, had your goal chances not being evaporated by a defender purposely fouling you might go onto win a game you could have lost by one or two.

Why should the advantage go to the defender?... so what if you can get a point, you were just about to get three of them.
The point of it isn't getting the man sent off, the point is having it set up that the foul doesn't happen in the first place.

keane2097

It's a question of whether 1 point + a yellow, or 1 point + a red is a more judicious punishment for a potential 3 points.

If you apportion a conversion rate of 66% to the goal chances that are stopped by so-called professional fouls (which would be on the high side imo) then we're really talking about a team losing ~2 points in Sklansky dollars.

I don't think a red card is a fair punishment for what would in the long run usually roughly amount to a marginal loss of a single point, I think a yellow card covers it pretty well.

eigrod

Fandango wrote: »

Personally i think it is well overdue. Not picking on any county as there are incidents all over the country but the most recent example would be Cork v Down. Cant remember who did it but the Cork back who used an ankle tap to bring down a man through on goal. Obviously under the rules he only deserved a yellow card and was shown one but who thinks its fairly stupid that a rule doesnt yet exist that would see players sent off for incidents like this?

Havent seen a thread about this so apologies if one does alread exist.

I think you're referring to the Michael Shields ankle tap. Even if there were a red card for a professional foul, this incident wouldn't have merited one. There was another Cork defender coming across to cover, so, on the basis of the same rule applying as soccer, it shouldn't have been a red.

Browney7

I voted no.

My thoughts on yellow cards are that if a player makes an honest attmept to play the ball like flicking it off his opponents hurley and just gets it wrong and results in a foul I don't think it should be a yellow. Only a ticking.

If a player makes no attempt to play the ball like throwing the hurley through the attackers legs or sticking out a leg to trip or ankle tap an instant yellow card should be awarded and maybe a warning given to the fouling team that another one of those fouls by that team will result in a red. I'm just thinking aloud here and obviously it would be very subjective as to what constitutes an honest attempt to play the ball.

I hate when yellows are handed out for little things where players making an honest attempt to play the ball. Personal opinion. It's never going to be brought in anyway.

listermint

Browney7 wrote: »

I voted no.

My thoughts on yellow cards are that if a player makes an honest attmept to play the ball like flicking it off his opponents hurley and just gets it wrong and results in a foul I don't think it should be a yellow. Only a ticking.

If a player makes no attempt to play the ball like throwing the hurley through the attackers legs or sticking out a leg to trip or ankle tap an instant yellow card should be awarded and maybe a warning given to the fouling team that another one of those fouls by that team will result in a red. I'm just thinking aloud here and obviously it would be very subjective as to what constitutes an honest attempt to play the ball.

I hate when yellows are handed out for little things where players making an honest attempt to play the ball. Personal opinion. It's never going to be brought in anyway.

Throwing your hurl between someones legs or ankle tapping someone whos on for a goal does not make any honest attempt to play the ball. They both should be reds. Your line is very far from reality.

Oasis_Dublin

I voted Yes. Ridiculous fouls, like the one committed by the Cork defender last week, where no attempt to play the ball need to be stamped out immediately. They are completely cynical and saying to the defender that, essentially, "you are allowed one atrociously cynical foul per game without being sent off" only encourages teams to do it.

ArmaniJeanss

The after-match debates over 'what was a goal scoring opportunity deserving of a redcard' would be loltastic and would keep me entertained for hours. The current inability of refs/umpires to know if the ball has gone over the bar properly or not would suggest they'd make a complete mess of such a new rule.

Much better would be to give the penalised team a choice of a) the freekick (as currently is the situation) or b) a free run on goal from the position of the foul with other players having to start 10 metres behind the ball.
What a spectacle the latter would be.

But by far the best solution by the way would be to increase the size of the penalty area to 18Metres or even 20metres so that more of these fouls would result in a penalty kick.

keane2097

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

But by far the best solution by the way would be to increase the size of the penalty area to 18Metres or even 20metres so that more of these fouls would result in a penalty kick.

TopOfTheRight

What stood out for me this year was Marc O Se's deliberate handling of the ball on the goal-line against cork. He took a definite goal and turned it into a slightly better than 50/50 chance in a penalty kick, and for this he recieved no booking, not even a ticking as his offence was considered a technical foul.

It would have been a goal if he hadnt intervened but if the resulting penalty had of been missed i'm sure there would have been much more made of it - it was a win-win situation for O Se and with the current rules i'm sure every player would do the same thing which just isnt right - it should never pay to foul

Mountainlad

TopOfTheRight wrote: »

What stood out for me this year was Marc O Se's deliberate handling of the ball on the goal-line against cork. He took a definite goal and turned it into a slightly better than 50/50 chance in a penalty kick, and for this he recieved no booking, not even a ticking as his offence was considered a technical foul.

It would have been a goal if he hadnt intervened but if the resulting penalty had of been missed i'm sure there would have been much more made of it - it was a win-win situation for O Se and with the current rules i'm sure every player would do the same thing which just isnt right - it should never pay to foul

Yeah maybe they should introduce a yellow card, but again it would be very subjective as someone said earlier.

Plus you can't call a penalty a slightly better than 50/50 chance when you look at the conversion rate, there really isn't any excuse for a missed penalty.

Fandango

listermint wrote: »

Throwing your hurl between someones legs or ankle tapping someone whos on for a goal does not make any honest attempt to play the ball. They both should be reds. Your line is very far from reality.

This is my point. In GAA as the rules stand, a defender knows a yellow card is a small price to pay for what will more than likely be a goal so will happily give a cynical little tug, ankle tap or trip. As for goals not being as decisive as in soccer, true but look over the games for the last few weeks. 6 of the 8 football matches over the last 2 weekends finished with 6 points or less between the teams. So as the rule stands, 2 yellow cards in each game could potentially have overturned the result of 75% of the games. It would be up to the ref to use his initiative as to whether it was a genuine attempt at a fair takle or an illegal challenge aimed only to bring the player down but as it stands, players can take advantage of it knowing they will not be walking.

Edit: Another idea would be a penalty goal (like rugby). In rubgy though, it is usually given for persistent fouling within a couple of metres of the line which wouldnt be the same as a 1v1 in football/hurling.

keane2097

Fandango wrote: »

This is my point. In GAA as the rules stand, a defender knows a yellow card is a small price to pay for what will more than likely be a goal so will happily give a cynical little tug, ankle tap or trip. As for goals not being as decisive as in soccer, true but look over the games for the last few weeks. 6 of the 8 football matches over the last 2 weekends finished with 6 points or less between the teams. So as the rule stands, 2 yellow cards in each game could potentially have overturned the result of 75% of the games. It would be up to the ref to use his initiative as to whether it was a genuine attempt at a fair takle or an illegal challenge aimed only to bring the player down but as it stands, players can take advantage of it knowing they will not be walking.

wat?

Fandango

keane2097 wrote: »

wat?

Prevent 2 goals by cynical fouls, your backs pick up 2 yellows and save 6 points (well, 4 i suppose as they would be tap over frees).

keane2097

Fandango wrote: »

Prevent 2 goals by cynical fouls, your backs pick up 2 yellows and save 6 points (well, 4 i suppose as they would be tap over frees).

I see.

Yeah you can't on one hand just assume that these chances would all have been converted as goals and not assume the frees would be scored.

Like I said before, I wouldn't be too inclined to apportion much more than a 66% probability to successful conversion of any but the most ridiculously straightforward of goal chances.

The yellow card is not a zero-effect sanction either despite it seeming to be considered so in this thread.