Improvements that are needed in GAA

blinding wrote: »

If they can’t count to Three they might be a bit brain deficient !

Try reffing a game and keeping track of the number of handpasses

blinding wrote: »

1...2 ....3.....Kick forward .

The rugby leagues refs count to six tackles the entire game .:eek:

It's hardly the same thing, the 6 tackles concept is basically the entire focal point/purpose of the game so obviously has to be counted by the ref.
Your 3 handpasses idea is (whether its a good idea or not) basically a sideshow add-on to the current rules, so it's adding to the referees work.

By the way am I right in saying that the ref now would have a triple count in his head during some phases? Player A handpasses to B who handpasses to C, who goes on a 30 metre run during which the ref is counting steps, alternating hops, and remembering that this is handpass #2?
It seems ott to me.

blinding wrote: »

1...2 ....3.....Kick forward .

The rugby leagues refs count to six tackles the entire game .:eek:

And while the ref is watching that the inside forwards are being hung by their entrails off the crossbar before the ball is being kicked in!

Forcing the attacking team to kick suits the blanket defence. The goal is to force them to take a poor decision in the final third. If the rules do that for them already, all they have to do is sit and wait. It would actually make the blanket defence more effective.

The idea of making forwards stay in their own half doesn't work either - what happens when their man goes forward? They cant follow him...

One quite simple way would be to give a mark if the ball is kicked from outside the 45 and caught inside the 20. It might also offer an outlet for bigger players to get more gametime, who at the minute are being phased out of intercounty football.

How about this for a rule,

Once the ball enters the zone between the two 45's the only way the ball can leave said zone is with a kick.

Would encourage long kicking

Would encourage fast direct kicking

Would eliminate defensive football as if you had 15 behind the ball when you turned it over you would have no1 to kick it to

Very easy to implement for referees

The hand pass or in hurling the 'throw' pass should be banned, 100%. No exceptions to the rule. The game is FOOTBALL or HURLING. Use of anything other than a foot or a hurley penalised.
All frees and side lines kicked from the ground.
Jersey pulling anywhere on the field, free to opposition from 25 metre line in front of goal.
That should get rid of the silly black card.

A few more simple, dos and donts would make both games watchable and more enjoyable for players to play.

end of rant

blinding wrote: »

Thats well worth a trial . Something has to be tried . A perfect day for football with two good teams ( Mayo v Galway ) was ruined by the terrible tactics used . The rules need to be tweaked to stop teams doing this .

I think it would be a success. The less invasive the better is the way to do these rules I believe.
Well, I would contend that the wind aided a defensive setup, in the sense that it made it difficult to kick over it. Then mayo get a man sent off when they had the wind, and so had to go defensive themselves, so those things probably made it even worse of a spectacle than maybe it might have been normally.

The thing is, those tactics work in salthill or mchale park, with lashing rain or a strong breeze. But they wont work in croke park half as well, so is it a tactic that is going to bring silverware? Although I must say, I would be interested to see how galway v dublin in the championship, on a bad day in salthill would play out. If the wind took away cluxtons kickouts, what would happen then? So potentially you could have a very interesting spectacle also. Maybe we will see it in the super 8s.

pimpmyhat wrote: »

A 13 yard free for any cynical tackles that occur anywhere on the pitch.

Absolutely

Reduce the black card to just a delebrate pull down/cynical tackle and add a 13m free for every black card.

danganabu wrote: »

Exactly, most people including referees it wouls appear, seem to think that a cynical foul can only occur in front of goal, the truth is the majority of them occur in the other half of the field before the move/counter attack gets going at all, ehich in turns allows the defending them to re-organise and funnel players back, usually all feckin 15 of them.

True. Donegal in '12 were experts at this. If they lost their own kickout, they fouled. If they tuned over a ball in the middle third, they fouled. They rotated their foulers, they got in the way of quick frees while making it look like it was something else - no easy thing to do convincingly. While blocking runners was an art form for them. I remember joe brolly lambasting mayo's fouling the dubs in the 2012 semi, and then championed donegal in the next breath, and just thinking what is he raving about... What donegal were doing that year was in fact light years more advanced than mayo's rather crude efforts against dublin, where they basically fouled guys in point scoring positions, right in front of the posts

I actually think the wording of cynical fouls is holding the rule back. You shouldnt have to pull them to the ground for it to be deemed cynical. It should simply be that any foul if deemed to be carried out in a cynical fashion by the ref should be a black card offence.

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

True. Donegal in '12 were experts at this. If they lost their own kickout, they fouled. If they tuned over a ball in the middle third, they fouled. They rotated their foulers, they got in the way of quick frees while making it look like it was something else - no easy thing to do convincingly. While blocking runners was an art form for them. I remember joe brolly lambasting mayo's fouling the dubs in the 2012 semi, and then championed donegal in the next breath, and just thinking what is he raving about... What donegal were doing that year was in fact light years more advanced than mayo's rather crude efforts against dublin, where they basically fouled guys in point scoring positions, right in front of the posts

I actually think the wording of cynical fouls is holding the rule back. You shouldnt have to pull them to the ground for it to be deemed cynical. It should simply be that any foul if deemed to be carried out in a cynical fashion by the ref should be a black card offence.

Well thats completely untrue. Im not sure if its bitterness cos they beat you in the final/memory failure/lack of knowledge of the game but any way its causing you severe delusions

harpsman wrote: »

Well thats completely untrue. Im not sure if its bitterness cos they beat you in the final/memory failure/lack of knowledge of the game but any way its causing you severe delusions

I'm not finding fault with them harpsman. All credit to them, it was intelligent play. They didn't actually do that much of it in the final tbh, they just deserved to win on the day, and again all credit to them for that also. I don't think you can say that is bitterness.

But I do believe that mcguinness had them fouling when they lost a kickout or turnover, to prevent them getting caught when coming out of their defensive shape. If you think about it, those are the only times when they might have bodies committed forward and not have possession, so eliminating those eliminate a high number of potential goal chances. As I said, it is smart play, and if anything I think it deserves a bit of praise.