Improvements that are needed in GAA

Flukey

Poor_old_gill wrote: »

I don't know why you are maintaining such a childless approach to the debate.
You're either on the wind-up or there is something very wrong with you.
I think the former but I'm not 100% sure

First of all, I am not childless. I have a lovely little boy. When he is older, I will bring him to Croke Park to see the Dubs play. If we get any home games, I'll bring him to Parnell Park. Now, I know you meant childish, but it is not childish or a wind-up to state a fact. That Croke Park is not Dublin's home ground is not a matter for debate. Whether playing there has any advantages for Dublin may well be, though the statistics would show otherwise. Now, can we please drop this and get back on topic.

Syferus

Flukey wrote: »

First of all, I am not childless. I have a lovely little boy. When he is older, I will bring him to Croke Park to see the Dubs play. If we get any home games, I'll bring him to Parnell Park. Now, I know you meant childish, but it is not childish or a wind-up to state a fact. That Croke Park is not Dublin's home ground is not a matter for debate. Whether playing there has any advantages for Dublin may well be, though the statistics would show otherwise. Now, can we please drop this and get back on topic.

You seem to be convinced everyone doesn't already know Parnell is the 'official' home of Dublin GAA. Very few don't know that, and certainly everyone in this thread did before you typed a single word on the topic.

To say you're completely avoiding the point isn't an understatement.

klairondavis

So we can conclude from this thread that Croke Park is Dublin's de facto home ground.

Duckworth_Luas

klairondavis wrote: »

So we can conclude from this thread that Croke Park is Dublin's de facto home ground.

De only facto is dat Parnell Park is da home of da Dubs!

derealbadger

Having to buy a ticket for croke park for a baby 6 months old is crazy and not the same in any other sport

Dirty Dingus McGee

gucci wrote: »

Surely if you were good enough at it (whether goal keeper or wherever) you would get more than 3 or 4 scoring opportunities a game to do it!! Would probably be worth practicing!!

In most games each team gets 3 or 4 45's that is all.Other frees can be kicked from the hand so it isn't necessary to practice kicking from the ground to take these especially when kicking from the ground isn't a required skill in Gaelic Football except for the goalie.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

This shíte of players not allowing other players take a quick free inside their own half (or anywhere for that matter) is as bad as the cynical fouling. 10 yards, when inside your own half, is of little relevance. Any player that prevents a free being taken, whether by holding onto the ball, standing in the way, running across the free kick taker, etc, should be booked and the free moved 10 yards further up. Would put a hasty stop to all that shíte. GAA could learn a lot from other sports (likewise other sports could learn a lot from GAA).

On a similar note, and this irks me because it's prevalent in all sports, why can't the referee take note of the players number when booking a player, and just show him the yellow card and get it done with. Then at the end of the game he can either ask the player then for his name or check the match programme. We could even introduce a rule where all players booked during the game must report to the ref at the half-time or full-time whistle or else he gets a second yellow. A good 30 seconds is wasted when a referee has to stop the play, call the player over, take note of his number and name, and then show him the card. Why can't he, as he is running, whip out the notebook, take note of the players number and brandish the card. 5 seconds tops, and no break in the momentum.
Obviously for black and red cards the taking of names is understandable.

InchicoreDude

Syferus wrote: »

It was! Think about what 'exhibition' game was on in McHale between Roscommon and Mayo in June

Aah very good, dint realise that it was on that day.

At least that shows some attempt at improving hurling in the Mayo . Roscommon

keane2097

THFC wrote: »

This shíte of players not allowing other players take a quick free inside their own half (or anywhere for that matter) is as bad as the cynical fouling. 10 yards, when inside your own half, is of little relevance. Any player that prevents a free being taken, whether by holding onto the ball, standing in the way, running across the free kick taker, etc, should be booked and the free moved 10 yards further up. Would put a hasty stop to all that shíte. GAA could learn a lot from other sports (likewise other sports could learn a lot from GAA).

They actually had an increased punishment for this on the table at congress, moving frees up 30 yards for dissent and slowing the free. Unfortunately they voted on it immediately after the black card. The black card having needed impassioned speeches to get through, they did literally no talking about the need for this before voting, and I think as much as a reaction to having been swayed to vote for the black card as anything counties voted no on this one.

Hopefully it will be revisited soon, it would have been more important than the black card IMO.

THFC wrote: »

On a similar note, and this irks me because it's prevalent in all sports, why can't the referee take note of the players number when booking a player, and just show him the yellow card and get it done with. Then at the end of the game he can either ask the player then for his name or check the match programme. We could even introduce a rule where all players booked during the game must report to the ref at the half-time or full-time whistle or else he gets a second yellow. A good 30 seconds is wasted when a referee has to stop the play, call the player over, take note of his number and name, and then show him the card. Why can't he, as he is running, whip out the notebook, take note of the players number and brandish the card. 5 seconds tops, and no break in the momentum.
Obviously for black and red cards the taking of names is understandable.

Cool idea having players booked on the fly and having to report to the ref. Definitely a problem with teams losing momentum at the moment.

InchicoreDude

derealbadger wrote: »

Having to buy a ticket for croke park for a baby 6 months old is crazy and not the same in any other sport

Is this really not the same in other sports?

I remember a few years ago when Tyrone were in the AI, a family with a young baby went to a lot of media outlets about how they shouldnt have to pay for a ticket for a young baby.

A croke park guy came on the radio to argue his case. His point was Croke Park is insured to hold 82,300 people and they were not going to break the law. I would imagine the same is the case with the Aviva too??? Or Thomond Park???

This is one thing I would not change about the GAA.

Frankie Lee

THFC wrote: »

On a similar note, and this irks me because it's prevalent in all sports, why can't the referee take note of the players number when booking a player, and just show him the yellow card and get it done with. Then at the end of the game he can either ask the player then for his name or check the match programme. We could even introduce a rule where all players booked during the game must report to the ref at the half-time or full-time whistle or else he gets a second yellow. A good 30 seconds is wasted when a referee has to stop the play, call the player over, take note of his number and name, and then show him the card. Why can't he, as he is running, whip out the notebook, take note of the players number and brandish the card. 5 seconds tops, and no break in the momentum.
Obviously for black and red cards the taking of names is understandable.

Some referees are worse than others with this. Coldrick for example feels the need to give a long lecture to every player he books while I find Maurice Deegan is fairly quick.
It is very frustrating the amount of time referees waste that will never be covered by the standard two minutes of additional time.

Syferus

InchicoreDude wrote: »

Is this really not the same in other sports?

I remember a few years ago when Tyrone were in the AI, a family with a young baby went to a lot of media outlets about how they shouldnt have to pay for a ticket for a young baby.

A croke park guy came on the radio to argue his case. His point was Croke Park is insured to hold 82,300 people and they were not going to break the law. I would imagine the same is the case with the Aviva too??? Or Thomond Park???

This is one thing I would not change about the GAA.

Really don't see why anyone would want to bring a child that young to a game in the first place, maybe if both parents were attending the match and they couldn't get a babysitter but still. They take up space same as anyone so the minimal fee ( usually 5 Euro at Croker) is understandable.

Flukey

THFC wrote: »

This shíte of players not allowing other players take a quick free inside their own half (or anywhere for that matter) is as bad as the cynical fouling. 10 yards, when inside your own half, is of little relevance. Any player that prevents a free being taken, whether by holding onto the ball, standing in the way, running across the free kick taker, etc, should be booked and the free moved 10 yards further up. Would put a hasty stop to all that shíte. GAA could learn a lot from other sports (likewise other sports could learn a lot from GAA).

As I mentioned earlier, there is the other side of that. You often see players deliberately kicking a ball at an opponent in order to get the free brought forward. That is equally cynical. So maybe a free should be brought forward if a player is stopping it, and if the taker deliberately kicks the ball at an opponent, the ball could be thrown in.

harpsman

keane2097 wrote: »

One improvement would be acknowledging the fact that Croke Park is Dublin's home ground and has been for years so we no longer have to listen to this asinine garbage.

I wouldnt even dignify the idiotic nonsense with a response

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Flukey wrote: »

As I mentioned earlier, there is the other side of that. You often see players deliberately kicking a ball at an opponent in order to get the free brought forward. That is equally cynical. So maybe a free should be brought forward if a player is stopping it, and if the taker deliberately kicks the ball at an opponent, the ball could be thrown in.

Tried that myself recently enough... and in a pretty big match... got caught out rotten:o

Flukey

THFC wrote: »

Tried that myself recently enough... and in a pretty big match... got caught out rotten:o

Now we know why you made your original point. He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones, or kick footballs at other players to win dodgy frees.

derealbadger

InchicoreDude wrote: »

Is this really not the same in other sports?

I remember a few years ago when Tyrone were in the AI, a family with a young baby went to a lot of media outlets about how they shouldnt have to pay for a ticket for a young baby.

A croke park guy came on the radio to argue his case. His point was Croke Park is insured to hold 82,300 people and they were not going to break the law. I would imagine the same is the case with the Aviva too??? Or Thomond Park???

This is one thing I would not change about the GAA.

Well we have never had to pay to bring him to Leinster rugby matches

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Flukey wrote: »

Now we know why you made your original point. He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones, or kick footballs at other players to win dodgy frees.

Actually, a player ran across in front of me as I was about looking for an option, so I drove the ball up his hole . Wasn't the first it had happened. I've only player against teams from Ulster maybe 6 times, and each one of those times they were bloody experts on slowing the game down. Players that kick a ball at a player generally do so because opposing players are trying to slow down the game.

Probably the second biggest area of the game that needs addressing imo (i.e. stopping free kicks being taken quickly), after defining the tackle.

Flukey

THFC wrote: »

Actually, a player ran across in front of me as I was about looking for an option, so I drove the ball up his hole

I hope you didn't explain it that way to the referee.

nice_guy80

saw a player being ordered off in a challenge games last week after he took a sideline cut and hit the referee

the player claimed he got in the way

referee claimed he did it deliberately (never saw such accuracy with a sideline cut as the referee was running parallel to the sideline

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Flukey wrote: »

I hope you didn't explain it that way to the referee.

I may have worded it differently alright :pac:

Hidalgo

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Its got absolutely nothing to do with a a lack of skill. I dont like players opting for a fisted point if a goal is on however in some cicumstances a player can be bottled up and has no other option but fist the ball over the bar.Not allowing fisted points would punish attacking teams.

Ciaran Kilkenny scored a fisted point against Kildare a few weks ago from about 20 yards because it was the best option available to get a score, he didnt decide to fist the ball over the bar bcasue he lacked skill which he certainly doesnt.

Surely a similar argument could have been made when handpassing goals was ended?

keane2097

Hidalgo wrote: »

Surely a similar argument could have been made when handpassing goals was ended?

I don't really think so. Seems easy enough to me to argue that punching the ball over the bar takes more skill than punching the ball under it.

Hidalgo

keane2097 wrote: »

I don't really think so. Seems easy enough to me to argue that punching the ball over the bar takes more skill than punching the ball under it.

II think kicking should be encouraged as much as possible over handpassing, from as young as an age as possible.
imo not a great amount of skill in handpassing a ball over or under the bar.

keane2097

Hidalgo wrote: »

II think kicking should be encouraged as much as possible over handpassing, from as young as an age as possible.
imo not a great amount of skill in handpassing a ball over or under the bar.

I think there are a lot of situations in which trying to kick a point is just inelegant. Does it take any more skill to kick the ball over the bar from six yards than it does to fist it over? It's a pretty trivial thing to do either way tbh and I'm saying that as a fairly useless footballer.

Probably takes more skill to punch the ball over from an acute angle at speed while being tackled than it does to tap over a 14 yard free, but you won't be arguing for goal-bound shots from 14 yards only any time soon.

The skill argument just seems very flimsy to me.

Flukey

You have to have the flexibility to allow scores with the foot and fist. In tight situations a player could not kick the ball. He would be allowed to punch pass it, so it makes sense to be able to punch it for a score. As long as there is a completely clear striking action, then there is no problem. A handpass was always slightly more difficult to police and much easier to disguise a throw with.

Hidalgo

Flukey wrote: »

You have to have the flexibility to allow scores with the foot and fist. In tight situations a player could not kick the ball. He would be allowed to punch pass it, so it makes sense to be able to punch it for a score. As long as there is a completely clear striking action, then there is no problem. A handpass was always slightly more difficult to police and much easier to disguise as a throw.

So why not allow handpass a goal so??

Dirty Dingus McGee

Hidalgo wrote: »

Surely a similar argument could have been made when handpassing goals was ended?

You could but I think most people are fairly happy with not having hand passed goal as looking at the old videos a huge amount of those goals weren't hand passed they were effectively thrown into the net.

Poor_old_gill

I've heard suggestions before about restricting players from hand passing a point but I just don't see the point (terrible pun unavoidable).

The majority of forwards will want to score a goal and will, hopefully, be aware that a goal is worth more than a point but the simple fact of the matter is that in many instances- it is the correct decision to fist a point.

An example: if the ball breaks to you at an angle about 12 yards out and the keeper has it covered, what would people suggest you do? Just kick it straight at the keeper knowing that he will save it?

That's just idiotic!

markomuscle

have stadiums been mentioned yet? roofs should be put on the terraces

the colours of the seats in croke park are discusting