I've Fixed It !!!

Prop Joe

I think with small tweaking the championship could be improved

#1-Score catchers in all grounds (Nets around the top posts)
#2-Umpires all referees and dressed in a white referees kit,Easier to move about in
#3-with the score catchers the umpires can solely concentrate on Square balls,Off the ball incidents etc..
#4-Linesmen giving the power to call free's
#5-Only captains allowed to speak to officials
#6-A 5th official to keep time & recommend the amount of injury time to be played (Final call will still be with the ref)
#7-a 2 week,max 3 week break between all games,except back door games
#8-A major PR company to promote all games in the champ
#9-Common sense regards the fixing of games E.G Cork,Kerry & Limerick all traveling to Croker for a Q/F when Thurles would of been a better alternative,Meath v Kildare in Tullamore & Laois v Dublin in Navan would of brought as many as the 40,000 that watched in in croker..
#10-If a game is not expected to sell out E.G 1st round games-Bring every underage club team in the province to the game (A little organisation would make this very applicable)
#11-Ticket Prices to be further slashed and more family tickets for games to be made available


Hawk eye is only applicable in Croker and the other major stadia does that mean games in the likes of Aughrim are a thing of the past?

Bumblegoose

Prop Joe wrote: »

I think with small tweaking the championship could be improved

#1-Score catchers in all grounds (Nets around the top posts)
#2-Umpires all referees and dressed in a white referees kit,Easier to move about in
#3-with the score catchers the umpires can solely concentrate on Square balls,Off the ball incidents etc..
#4-Linesmen giving the power to call free's
#5-Only captains allowed to speak to officials
#6-A 5th official to keep time & recommend the amount of injury time to be played (Final call will still be with the ref)
#7-a 2 week,max 3 week break between all games,except back door games
#8-A major PR company to promote all games in the champ
#9-Common sense regards the fixing of games E.G Cork,Kerry & Limerick all traveling to Croker for a Q/F when Thurles would of been a better alternative,Meath v Kildare in Tullamore & Laois v Dublin in Navan would of brought as many as the 40,000 that watched in in croker..
#10-If a game is not expected to sell out E.G 1st round games-Bring every underage club team in the province to the game (A little organisation would make this very applicable)
#11-Ticket Prices to be further slashed and more family tickets for games to be made available


Hawk eye is only applicable in Croker and the other major stadia does that mean games in the likes of Aughrim are a thing of the past?

Score catchers.. you mean a massive net to catch the ball goin over?

padd b1975

Prop Joe wrote: »

I think with small tweaking the championship could be improved


#1-Score catchers in all grounds (Nets around the top posts)
#2-Umpires all referees and dressed in a white referees kit,Easier to move about in
#3-with the score catchers the umpires can solely concentrate on Square balls,Off the ball incidents etc..
#4-Linesmen giving the power to call free's
#5-Only captains allowed to speak to officials
#6-A 5th official to keep time & recommend the amount of injury time to be played (Final call will still be with the ref)
#7-a 2 week,max 3 week break between all games,except back door games
#8-A major PR company to promote all games in the champ
#9-Common sense regards the fixing of games E.G Cork,Kerry & Limerick all traveling to Croker for a Q/F when Thurles would of been a better alternative,Meath v Kildare in Tullamore & Laois v Dublin in Navan would of brought as many as the 40,000 that watched in in croker..
#10-If a game is not expected to sell out E.G 1st round games-Bring every underage club team in the province to the game (A little organisation would make this very applicable)
#11-Ticket Prices to be further slashed and more family tickets for games to be made available


Hawk eye is only applicable in Croker and the other major stadia does that mean games in the likes of Aughrim are a thing of the past?

All very laudable suggestions but if I could be so bold to make a couple of alternative suggestions?
I would prefer to see a rugby union style timing system with to referee calling time on and off as the need arises.

The rule regarding extra time being a new game needs to be looked at also. Donegal used this to their advantage at the weekend by making extra substitutions.

The score catcher is a simple yet brilliant solution to disputed points, it is also one that is available to virtually every ground in the country.

davegrohl48

The likes of Donal Shine can kick it higher and beyond a score catcher net like what you mention. It won't catch a very high kicked point that drifts to the right or left. You still have the issue of did it go over the top of the post and curl into your score catcher net which is not a point.

padd b1975

davegrohl48 wrote: »

The likes of Donal Shine can kick it higher and beyond a score catcher net like what you mention. It won't catch a very high kicked point that drifts to the right or left. You still have the issue of did it go over the top of the post and curl into your score catcher net which is not a point.

Would the kicker not ensure that his shot for goal landed in the score net?? I know i would. Imagine going for a spectacular score which goes needlessly over the net and umpires are unable to call it accurately, a right bollocking from the players manager would be on the cards.

Clareman

I like your ideas, 1 tweak I would make would be that instead of a score catcher that some technology is put in place to tell if the ball has gone over or not. By putting a net in place you are limiting the scoring zone to the height of the posts. I would have some kind of technology in place that could tell if the ball has gone over or not, but I wouldn't rely solely on the technology. I would leave everything the way it is officials wise, but if a manager wanted to contest a score he's signal somehow to the ref, then the technology would be used, if it was inconclusive the ref's decision stands, if it was a wrong decision then the decision is reversed and the manager isn't charged for a "referral", limit the referrals to 3 a game maybe.

In regards to the officials wearing all white, what happens when Kildare are playing?

I'm a big advocator for only captain's being allowed talk to the ref, but with the pitch being so big and goalies being captains, I would have 3 people nominated on each team to speak to the ref, maybe have a C on the jersey or something.

Linesmen are allowed alert the ref's attention to frees, and I think by and large this works well, I would increase their power though and if they alert the ref's attention to something, they recommend a course of action, which the ref then takes. IMVHO, linesmen are often in the best place to judge a score, I would include them in this decision making process.

padd b1975

You would not technically decreasing the scoring zone, but obviously players will be aware that kicking the ball to high leaves the door to wrong calls by umpire open.

Colm R

Most of your ideas are good. But I personally would prefer not to have a score catcher.

Some of the best points you'll see are scored from the near the corner where giving the ball as much height as possible is needed for the score. I think Hawk eye would be the quickest solution. It can create a virtual post of infinite height, and decide what would have happened with the ball if it hit this virtual post.

The decision would probably be quicker than the time it takes for players and officials to currently argue over the matter.


I would like to see the timing taken away from the ref. And injury time needs to be changed to added time, to take into account blatant time wasting. A team winning by a point or 2 can take up to 30 seconds to make a substitution towards the end of the game.
As we saw in Limerick the other night, a lot can happen in 30 seconds.


Umpires wearing referee clothing is probably unnecessary. I would not like to be standing still at the end of a pitch on a cold Winters night in shorts. But yes, they need to be qualified referrers.

On the referee issues, I think Congress needs to do as much as possible to help referees, rather than paying lip service. But fundamentally, it needs to start at Under 10, like in rugby where the respect for the ref is drilled in to them.

I've no idea what to do with square ball. I think its impossible for a ref or umpire to make the call positively. Therefore, I think video referee is required. This requires money, and like hawk eye, creating a difference between the All Ireland Championship and the Junior C game in played on the Aran Islands.

Agus

Colm R wrote: »

I've no idea what to do with square ball. I think its impossible for a ref or umpire to make the call positively. Therefore, I think video referee is required. This requires money, and like hawk eye, creating a difference between the All Ireland Championship and the Junior C game in played on the Aran Islands.

The square ball rule was simply abolished as an experiment in the league a couple of years back and it worked just fine without it.

bren2001

Prop Joe wrote: »

I think with small tweaking the championship could be improved

#1-Score catchers in all grounds (Nets around the top posts)
#2-Umpires all referees and dressed in a white referees kit,Easier to move about in
#3-with the score catchers the umpires can solely concentrate on Square balls,Off the ball incidents etc..
#4-Linesmen giving the power to call free's
#5-Only captains allowed to speak to officials
#6-A 5th official to keep time & recommend the amount of injury time to be played (Final call will still be with the ref)
#7-a 2 week,max 3 week break between all games,except back door games
#8-A major PR company to promote all games in the champ
#9-Common sense regards the fixing of games E.G Cork,Kerry & Limerick all traveling to Croker for a Q/F when Thurles would of been a better alternative,Meath v Kildare in Tullamore & Laois v Dublin in Navan would of brought as many as the 40,000 that watched in in croker..
#10-If a game is not expected to sell out E.G 1st round games-Bring every underage club team in the province to the game (A little organisation would make this very applicable)
#11-Ticket Prices to be further slashed and more family tickets for games to be made available


Hawk eye is only applicable in Croker and the other major stadia does that mean games in the likes of Aughrim are a thing of the past?

Some good ideas alright. However, I have a few problems, notpicking I suppose.

The score catchers wont work imo. Apart from the obvious you can kick over them on very windy days they would just catch the wind and either rip or put the goal under needless stress. I think with the amount of wrong calls made every year it is not that vital to address that issue. There has only been two so far this year; Dublin v Galway and Wexford v Limerick (correct me if I am wrong) only one of them really had an impact.

Although I agree that Cork etc should of been played in Thurles common sense changes from person to person e.g. why would you hold a Dublin game outside of Croker? Most of the Dublin fans will not travel, even to Navan and you would not get 40,000 people at it. I think big matches involving Leinster teams should be in Croker, Munster teams in Thurles etc. but if it is between two provences then Croker is the obvious venue.

The last point is just not practical. A lot of the youngsters will go with their parents anyway and the GAA are just losing out on a fiver.

ArmaniJeanss

Think of the current basic goal net, normally two back stanchions and 20 or so pegs hammered into the ground to keep it in place. When these come lose its a trivial method to refix them.

However for a 'point' net you'd need a total redesign of the posts, probably at least 2 new uprights behind them acting as back stanchions. The original posts would need to have metals links so that the net could be tied to them and hence to the back stanchions. You'd also need a crossbar at the very top to hold the structure in place.
At the very bottom the posts would have to go about 2 feet further into the ground to stabilise the whole thing and prevent it taking flight in a strong gust.
It would also take about 30 minutes to erect and any fixes that were neded during the game would be very disruptive.

I do like it though, but I don't think its feasible.

ArmaniJeanss

Colm R wrote: »

I think Hawk eye would be the quickest solution. It can create a virtual post of infinite height, and decide what would have happened with the ball if it hit this virtual post.

I'd be fairly sure, from watching cricket and tennis, that Hawkeye can't do any of these things at the moment.

Prop Joe

Bumblegoose wrote: »

Score catchers.. you mean a massive net to catch the ball goin over?

http://www.goalpostireland.com/index.cgi?sport=a_07_Newsletter

Think the solve the problem

bren2001

Agus wrote: »

The square ball rule was simply abolished as an experiment in the league a couple of years back and it worked just fine without it.

I quite like the square ball rule. I think the keeper deserves a bit of protection. I'm a full forward and taller than most keepers, if there was no rule I'd constantly be annoying the keeper by standing in his way to try and fluke a goal.

Prop Joe wrote: »

http://www.goalpostireland.com/index.cgi?sport=a_07_Newsletter

Think the solve the problem

Forgot about them. I think they should be installed alright with maybe something a bit more technological in Croke Park.

Prop Joe

My biggest problem with hawk eye is that it can only be implemented in certain grounds,I dont agree with that..Also with the score catcher the post's are increased to 16 meters high.Thats some kick to clear that,very far a few between shots would go over and your officials are all there to see it

nice_guy80

video referee at all championship games.
up to the referee to refer incidents to him - only things to do with play - scores (posts and over the line), wides, square ball, is it a penalty (inside box etc)

make sure umpires are able to move.
some of the umpires I have seen are way overweight and cannot move into position quickly enough to judge wides/scores.

SomeFool

one way to sort out the square ball issue would be to simply not allow any player but the keeper in the small rectangle.

Fireball07

SomeFool wrote: »

one way to sort out the square ball issue would be to simply not allow any player but the keeper in the small rectangle.

I'd be firmly against that. Think of all the scoring chances that would go to waste because of that...and think of all the great scores in the past that wouldn't have counted.

Plus some teams would be bound to abuse it by passing the ball back to an untouchable goalkeeper to waste time.

bren2001

Fireball07 wrote: »

I'd be firmly against that. Think of all the scoring chances that would go to waste because of that...and think of all the great scores in the past that wouldn't have counted.

Plus some teams would be bound to abuse it by passing the ball back to an untouchable goalkeeper to waste time.

I concur.

Are people really against having Hawk Eye, or a different technology, purely at big games? A lot of people are of the view that is should be something that can be introduced into every stadium in Ireland as well as at grass roots. I for one think that a solution for the grass roots should be sought after and implemented in every game but for the bigger games if there is better technology out there that will give definitive answers on any rule then it should be implemented at every level possible even if this just means at the highlest level.

Prop Joe

bren2001 wrote: »

I concur.

Are people really against having Hawk Eye, or a different technology, purely at big games? A lot of people are of the view that is should be something that can be introduced into every stadium in Ireland as well as at grass roots. I for one think that a solution for the grass roots should be sought after and implemented in every game but for the bigger games if there is better technology out there that will give definitive answers on any rule then it should be implemented at every level possible even if this just means at the highlest level.

But does that mean every manager will want all there games played at croker?

bruschi

a lot of people seem to forget about hurling in all this score catcher thing. there are lots of shots in hurling that clear the goal posts height, and it would not help that. and you cant be telling a hurler to limit his strike so that it falls into the net.

hawk eye could realistically be placed in the majority of provincial grounds. and be used for championship games. do you hear of rugby teams at local level advocating the need for the TMO? or cricket or American football local leagues for video refs etc? ordinary games will work away as they are, but if we want our best players at the top level to have the best available to showcase games and get things right, then it should be used there.

they used hawkeye as a trial there in April or so, but never heard anything about it since. I cant see how it would be that hard to impliment a laser type beam up from the posts and that when the ball passes through it indicates a score

keane2097

Prop Joe wrote: »

But does that mean every manager will want all there games played at croker?

The team with the worse forwards will probably want it played anywhere else.

keane2097

I really hate this argument that there's no merit to getting some extra decisions right if we can't get them all right, which is essentially what "if you can't install them everywhere you shouldn't install them anywhere" boils down to.

It's seriously devoid of any logic whatsoever.

Prop Joe

Im just wondering on average how many points scored clear 50+ feet,Score catcher would resolve alot of scores..

WinstonOno

hawk eye would slow the game down too much. 5 mins break after every score to determine if it was a score?? lets say its not used after every score but only after doubtful scores, who decides when it should be used??? the ref?? the players?? teams leading would use it as a way of killing time, teams behind would want it used for every half chance they get. would completely kill the atmosphere in fast frantic championship football.
Also, large screens would be needed to show the crowd whats going on, otherwise they're left in no mans land with not a clue whats going on.
if this equipment is unfeasible in the premiership, where only the goal mouth needs to be monitored, i don't know how the GAA could afford to implement a system that is required to monitor an undefined area above the goals.

bruschi

Prop Joe wrote: »

Im just wondering on average how many points scored clear 50+ feet,Score catcher would resolve alot of scores..

it might. serious maintenance cost in keeping them going. plus, as I said, it still wouldnt help hurling completley.

WinstonOno wrote: »

hawk eye would slow the game down too much. 5 mins break after every score to determine if it was a score?? lets say its not used after every score but only after doubtful scores, who decides when it should be used??? the ref?? the players?? teams leading would use it as a way of killing time, teams behind would want it used for every half chance they get. would completely kill the atmosphere in fast frantic championship football.
Also, large screens would be needed to show the crowd whats going on, otherwise they're left in no mans land with not a clue whats going on.
if this equipment is unfeasible in the premiership, where only the goal mouth needs to be monitored, i don't know how the GAA could afford to implement a system that is required to monitor an undefined area above the goals.

seriously, that is the most over exxagerated negative response to hawkeye. why would it take 5 minutes to determine? and why would it be needed for every score? it would only be needed if the umpires were in doubt, and in all honesty, it doesnt happen that often. any system that uses hawkeye at the moment takes seconds to resolve. by the time the keeper is ready to take a puck out or kickout, it would be sorted.

keane2097

Football is a slow game anyway.

After every shot you'll have seen two replays of it and still have time to see the goalkeeper pricking around with his boots before kicking the ball out.

The idea that hawkeye would slow anything down is lol, and I can only assume comes from people who have never seen it used. It literally takes seconds in tennis.

padd b1975

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Think of the current basic goal net, normally two back stanchions and 20 or so pegs hammered into the ground to keep it in place. When these come lose its a trivial method to refix them.

However for a 'point' net you'd need a total redesign of the posts, probably at least 2 new uprights behind them acting as back stanchions. The original posts would need to have metals links so that the net could be tied to them and hence to the back stanchions. You'd also need a crossbar at the very top to hold the structure in place.
At the very bottom the posts would have to go about 2 feet further into the ground to stabilise the whole thing and prevent it taking flight in a strong gust.
It would also take about 30 minutes to erect and any fixes that were neded during the game would be very disruptive.

I do like it though, but I don't think its feasible.

I think it should be more similar in size and structure to the nets that are behind the goals to prevent the ball going into the crowd.

Mountainlad

keane2097 wrote: »

I really hate this argument that there's no merit to getting some extra decisions right if we can't get them all right, which is essentially what "if you can't install them everywhere you shouldn't install them anywhere" boils down to.

It's seriously devoid of any logic whatsoever.

My problemn is we could implement hawk-eye in the 'big' games but it isn't really solving the problem.

You will still have problems at club level. Is club level not important. It isn't an improvement, it's more of a cover up and possibly an excuse not to have a long hard look at what could be done to make things easier and better.

Fandango

davegrohl48 wrote: »

The likes of Donal Shine can kick it higher and beyond a score catcher net like what you mention. It won't catch a very high kicked point that drifts to the right or left. You still have the issue of did it go over the top of the post and curl into your score catcher net which is not a point.

Exactly what i was thinking. I dont know if it would be possible but how about having some sort of laser technology along the top of the crossbar pointing directly up. Each laser would be just less than the width of a ball apart and can sense a ball going through it over the height of the goalposts. Like in tennis for a let, maybe the system could make a beep when the ball breaks the laser beam and the ref hears this in his earpiece. A bit far fetched maybe but i would imagine it could be done. Dragons Den anyone?

gooch2k9

A sensor would be needed at the other side of the ball to know when the laser has been broken.

Fandango

Mountainlad wrote: »

My problemn is we could implement hawk-eye in the 'big' games but it isn't really solving the problem.

You will still have problems at club level. Is club level not as important. It isn't an improvement, it's more of a cover up and possibly an excuse not to have a long hard look at what could be done to make things easier and better.

If this was the question then, no its not. Club level is of course important but dont buy for a second this "has to be across the board" nonsense. If so many other sports can easily introduce technology at the higher levels of the game, why in gods name is it so difficult for the GAA?

Fandango

gooch2k9 wrote: »

A sensor would be needed at the other side of the ball to know when the laser has been broken.

Ah, thats true. Which would bring in the height restrictions again. How about flamethrowers. If you need to replace the ball, it was a point Another serious suggestion tho, ya know the cameras used on the stumps in cricket? One of them pointing directly up just inside the goalpost on each side.

gooch2k9

Fandango wrote: »

Ah, thats true. Which would bring in the height restrictions again. How about flamethrowers. If you need to replace the ball, it was a point Another serious suggestion tho, ya know the cameras used on the stumps in cricket? One of them pointing directly up just inside the goalpost on each side.

Can't say I do:p

Oasis_Dublin

Clareman wrote: »

I would leave everything the way it is officials wise, but if a manager wanted to contest a score he's signal somehow to the ref, then the technology would be used, if it was inconclusive the ref's decision stands, if it was a wrong decision then the decision is reversed and the manager isn't charged for a "referral", limit the referrals to 3 a game maybe.

The problem is tactical use of these "referrals." Say team A is a point ahead and kicks a ball a mile wide. The manager of team A calls for a referral and the quick kick out that team B has taken has to be called back, thus taking the momentum out of the attack.

It's an interesting idea, but still has issues that need ironing out.

gooch2k9

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

The problem is tactical use of these "referrals." Say team A is a point ahead and kicks a ball a mile wide. The manager of team A calls for a referral and the quick kick out that team B has taken has to be called back, thus taking the momentum out of the attack.

It's an interesting idea, but still has issues that need ironing out.

Surely it wouldn't be allowed to be used unless there was genuine indecision.

Mountainlad

Fandango wrote: »

If this was the question then, no its not. Club level is of course important but dont buy for a second this "has to be across the board" nonsense. If so many other sports can easily introduce technology at the higher levels of the game, why in gods name is it so difficult for the GAA?

How is club level not as important? All county players play for clubs and would never have gotten where they are without them.

I won't argue that Inter-County standard is higher, but the term higher level is one you need to be careful with. There all still amateurs. In other sports, at professional levels they have measures in place that aren't there at amateur levels. But there all amateurs in GAA so it's preferential treatment.

My problem is not that I don't want to see an improvement, it's just I want to see a porblem solved, not half a problem solved. If they brought in technology, would there be no alteration to anything else therefore no improvements for club level officiating?

I support my club religiously, and would be as angerede by an outrageous decision doing my club out of a game as I would Waterford. The only thing is I couldn't talk about it as much as only people supporting the club would have any interest.

yabadabado

A TMO at all championship games would be the best solution imo ,the score cather would also help.I dont think the TMO would slow the game down much at all could be just used for scores and square ball.Have 2 players form each team nominated to talk to the ref and along with TMO, it would be quicker than the usual story after a debatable call of the whole team and ref arguing about the decision for a couple of mins.
Also the ref should not do the time keeping.

Oasis_Dublin

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Surely it wouldn't be allowed to be used unless there was genuine indecision.

How do you define genuine indecision though. How close to the goal does it have to be? I just think it is open to abuse. In the same way as tennis players use them to slow the game down when there is no hope of them being successful.

Prop Joe

So what defines use of the tmo, The Bernard Brogan Free v Kildare??
Just square ball or debatable scores.
Fouls in or outside the square
what happens if a guy scores a goal after taking too many steps,can it be used then?? think it would be opening a massive can of worms tbh

Fandango

gooch2k9 wrote: »

Can't say I do:p

Its a tiny camera in the middle stump. Doesnt get in the way at all as its very small and fully imbedded in the wood. Think that could help alot.

ArmaniJeanss

Prop Joe wrote: »

So what defines use of the tmo, The Bernard Brogan Free v Kildare??
Just square ball or debatable scores.
Fouls in or outside the square
what happens if a guy scores a goal after taking too many steps,can it be used then?? think it would be opening a massive can of worms tbh

People also never actually explain what they mean by a referral to a TMO and seem to swap between it being a 'referee' referral like in rugby or a 'player/manager' referral like in tennis or American football.
But they are hugely different things obviously.

There's also the issue of what question the referee asks the TMO. Should the referee be asking 'is it a penalty?' or should he be asking 'I have given a penalty, is there any overwhelming evidence to suggest that it isn't a penalty'. The first way is more obvious but it will often lead to a 50/50 decision going the opposite way, even though the decision is so close that either answer would be perfectly fine.

Then the issue of whether what happens in the runup to the decision counts or not. A forward is fouled, the TMO declares penalty, but then notices that the midfielder who made the final pass took 6 steps. Penalty or not? How far back do we go in the build up to the referred incident to spot the first illegality?

Then the question about whether there can be a TMO referral when the ball is still in play, and if not, are people willing to accept that 3 or 4 minutes may pass while say Donegal hand pass the ball up the field for a point, before the play comes back to TMO the earlier incident.

So many complications, annoys me when the clowns on the tv panels blithely say how simple it would be.