Mayo GAA Discussion

What was the story with Neary, why didn't he play the last day?

Didn't listen to it but McGeeney made some very good and simple points after the Dublin game. The main one being that it's pretty ridiculous for Managers to be left in limbo / for the rules to potentially change again so close to Championship. I think his overall point was, change the rules, but at least give certainty that the rules will be in place for a full year and then carry out a review - at the moment, they don't know what the rules will be and championship is only around the corner.

Agreed, it's not perfect but I would say it's the best option. Just had a quick listen to the pod and if it is just "tweaks", then I suppose it is something that managers should be able to adjust to fairly quickly. The goalkeeper one would be more than a tweak though. All teams / managers will be in the same boat so there is fairness in that... But I do get why managers are frustrated by it.

Some fantastic groups there, including a few where you can see all 4 teams fancying their chances. Group 3 in Senior especially, I'd struggle to call a winner or likely for relegation.

I'd have been thinking Westport for Senior (the underage coming through nudging them just ahead of Ballina), Moy Davitts for intermediate (though a host of teams that'll compete hard there - excited to see what The Neale can do if they get a decent run on injuries) and a toss of a coin between 4 or 5 in Junior… but with the new rules it'll be harder than ever to predict so zero confidence in myself on those.

Can't wait. I'd be hoping for a few of the newer faces to have breakout years across the grades.

Group 3 in the senior does seem to be wide open. Can see Group 2 being fairly tight as well.

Balla and Mayo Gaels will be sick of the sight of each other. Think it's the third year in a row they've been in the same group.

Any sign of the fixtures for the league? Any idea when its starting?

Happy to see the rules tweaked for the last two rounds.

They've been great to now and the tweaks will improve them.

Feck the managers opinion TBH, they'd be complaining no matter what. It's a much better spectacle and I have no doubt a much more enjoyable game to play for the players.

The managers will come and go and will need to adapt but not too much heed should be paid to them on the rules.

I thought it was end of March

"If the punishment for breaking this rule is now just a free at the halfway line…"

It's not.

The punishments there (4.35 & 4.36) haven't changed (free on the halfway when breaching it while contesting or carrying the ball and a free on the 20m line [or 40m arc if you choose] for breaching it in every other scenario - though some messy new exceptions where it won't get pulled when not interfering in play that make it a little convoluted), just the wording of them that has been tweaked to take into account the new 4/3 setup instead of the old 3/3 one.

Ah, that makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying!

I presume if you an extra player up and ANY interfere with play, then that's penalised.

Yup. That's a messy one.

Still waiting on clarification if those 5 nuances mentioned are "or" or "and", with the wording used to describe it varying across different sources & it being ambiguous in the official proposed wording (crossing my fingers it doesn't make the rule-book in that state). I'm guessing it'll have to be "and" so breach any single one (e.g. go more than 4m or interfere with play even inside the 4m) and it'd result in the normal punishment.

(For context for anyone unfamiliar:
"2. A breach of this Rule does not occur where the player(s) who would otherwise cause the breach:
(a) have done so unintentionally,
(b) are within 4m of the half way line,
(c) are not interfering with play,
(d) are not interfering with an opponent, and
(e) are not gaining an advantage")

If that is the case… yup. We're very quickly going to need firm guidelines on what constitutes interfering with play, interfering with an opponent & gaining an advantage. They're completely open-ended, subjective, and nothing like them in the rule-book previously to build from. With all sorts of headaches around the previous advantage rule where they've actively moved to remove that same level of subjectivity. Questions on right hand knowing what the left is up to.

(Wouldn't be quite so worried on the question of 'who breached', that'll be a question of timing on which of the two players did it second. We'd the exact same question being asked under the old wording of the rule, so 50/50 there)

I'm personally ok with having the same punishment for breaches of the defending 4 or offensive 3 (both 20m frees, rather than 13m which only applies in rare dissent breaches), or having a lesser penalty for breaches where contesting the ball, but wouldn't at all be a fan of turning something that should be black & white so everyone can be on the same page into one of the most debatable and subjective calls that'll need to be made on a pitch. Just opens the door for so many poor decisions or hugely negative reactions from players/management/fans. Sounds fine in theory having more pragmatism but in practice I'd fear it'll be a large misstep alright.

(I'd be a fan of the other new tweaks.
Except them forgetting to fix the incorrectly worded 1.11(a) for backpasses in the large square and the loop-hole where you can't ever tackle a S&G [& now a kick-out mark] within 4m, regardless of time or number of actions in possession.)

https://mayogaa.com/2025/03/11/abbvie-senior-league-division-1-3-fixtures-2025/