Hurling- what’s gone wrong and where do we go from here.

fuinneamh wrote: »

Spot all the lads who don't play anymore. Game has never been better to play at all levels. Every player gets touches on the ball, not just your spine down the middle.

We're going through a phase off puck outs where everyone is bringing 12 men into their half on defence. This means the attacking team has a 8 vrs 3 advantage to manufacture a shot from half way. The defence gives you options and this is the best option. Eventually hurling will follow football and soccer and realise there's an advantage to sometimes pushing up on teams on puck outs. Then you'll get your return to more 50/50 contests.

Every invasion ball sport has combinations of zonal and man to man defending and hurling will be no different in the future.

Finally, beware too heavy a sliothar as that will lead to even more carrying of the ball further up the field. A heavier sliothar means striking long is going into 12 defenders and no player never mind coach is going to do that.

People also saying that upping the goal to 4 or 5 points to encourage goals. What this will actually do is encourage more sweepers and seeding of space to the attacking half backs and will lead to more long range points not more goals

Pogue eile wrote: »

100% and also lads saying make the bas smaller and the ball heavier, what will that lead to? More fecking shortpassing, its like they want to punish the team that actually play the ball long.

I think it is also very clear here that people are talking solely about intercounty senior - the club game has never been healthier or a better spectacle, I would hate to see anychanges being made simply becasue of a tin y majority of the total games played and players in the game.

I do think they should be strick on bas size but not because of impact on the game I just think you should have regulations on equipment in sport so that technology first become a major factor in a sport. But I am someone you doesn't see much wrong with current tactics even the hand passing. My only worry is puckout points as a puckout can't be marked or isn't reward for a foul

For instance I am one of the people who fully supports the strict and finicky UCI rules on bikes and jerseys in cycling.

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Maybe the solution is simpler than it seemed to me before starting this thread. If we went back to the ball used 10 years or so ago and enforced the rule on bad size things could be a lot better. It does seem like there is a demand for a change now, points being scored from huge distances and extremely high scores are not looked at as positively as they were 4/5 years ago.

True enough although I've found myself agreeing with people from all sides of the argument in this thread (actually it's been a great thread in that sense!). Even on this page, I had supported reducing the bas size (or rather enforcing it) and the sliotar returning to its older composition (by the way can anyone say for definite that the composition has been changed, by whom, and when? Or is everyone just assuming that happened?). Then others suggested this could lead to even more protective tactics where nobody will want to move the ball long at all because of how unpredictable the strike and the flight of the ball would be.

This raises two points for me. Firstly, nobody here actually knows what the effect will be of any particular changes in the rules/regulations until we see what happens. So finding the right changes to get the game where we want it will be a slow process of trial and error.

Which brings up the second point: where do we want the game to be? I think while many people here are agreed they don't like a lot of the way the game is played, I'm not sure everyone is on the same page about what they think the ideal would be. A lot of people want to have more one-to-one contests for ball, and what comes with that, visceral excitement and breaking ball that introduces a bit of randomness and favours the backs more than the current situation where backs main job is setting up plays for scoring opportunities rather than defending.

But what is the ideal to which those people are looking? A few people mentioned the eighties, but I don't know if they've watched those matches again recently but I looked at a lot of "classics" during lockdown and it was often dire stuff. I've never been a fan of the "ground hurling is gone out of the game" argument because ground hurling was often just wild flaking that was poor to watch anyway. But I think we all probably enjoy seeing lads going up together to contest high ball and the best man wins the battle. To me the high point of that was probably about 12 years or so ago. But two things about that: 1. as a KK man I remember well that people complained endlessly about our style of play in that era that is now so fondly remembered and 2. that is also the era in which we started seeing the sweeper (first time I saw it was Clare under Daly), short passing (Cork under O'Grady) and backs swarming the forward after he gains possession (KK under Cody) which between them account for most of what we're all complaining about now.

So I dunno.

The skill levels have evolved. That's what's brought the game to where it is today.

Go watch a junior game if you want to see the more of the old fashioned stuff.

fuinneamh wrote: »

Spot all the lads who don't play anymore. Game has never been better to play at all levels.

You must be some veteran if you can comment on the nature of playing the game across the ages. However, people are not talking about playing. The discussion is the game as a spectacle which it seems is not to everyone's taste.

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

But what is the ideal to which those people are looking? A few people mentioned the eighties, but I don't know if they've watched those matches again recently but I looked at a lot of "classics" during lockdown and it was often dire stuff.

The only people mentioning the 80s are people who assume that any changes are designed to bring the game back there. I would doubt anyone mentioned the 80s (or any other period) as the ideal. I think every era including the current one will look like muck to those in decades to come.

fuinneamh wrote: »

Unfortunately Rosita, the two arguments are not mutually exclusive. Rule changes to make intercounty a better spectacle apply all the way down to Junior F. So any rule changes proposed have to include how enjoyable it is to play the game. This always gets lost in this debate, anytime it's brought up.

For example, I'd love a second ref but where would you get them at club level?

There are rules such as duration of games which differ between club and county. 13 aside is allowed in club competitions. Teams provide umpires at lots of matches and don't have to follow inter county standards. I'm sure the difference between the two are plenty. The idea that Junior F holds up the whole system isn't a runner.

breezy1985 wrote: »

Just on the sliotar here is an article from 2003 where a few veteran players talk about the difference between different balls especially the "new" rubber core balls

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/core-values-not-what-they-were-1.369714%3fmode=amp

That ball is no longer in use. It was ridiculous- balls bouncing on the 20m line were regularly flying over the crossbar

Get rid of 65's anyway. The base idea of a 65 is completely ludicrous. When the ball goes out of play, the idea should for it to be got back into play as quickly as possible. That's the case in every sport bar Rugby.

It was ok to put up with this idiocy when they were hard score. Now every decent u14 free taker scores them. A keeper saving a shot or a defender blocking a score does not then deserve an automatic score. Make them indirect at the very least

Keep the goal dimensions the same, but narrow the point posts

leath_dub wrote: »

That ball is no longer in use. It was ridiculous- balls bouncing on the 20m line were regularly flying over the crossbar

The interesting point about something like this is that it existed at all showing the lack of regulation.

Avon8 wrote: »

Get rid of 65's anyway. The base idea of a 65 is completely ludicrous. When the ball goes out of play, the idea should for it to be got back into play as quickly as possible. That's the case in every sport bar Rugby.

It was ok to put up with this idiocy when they were hard score. Now every decent u14 free taker scores them. A keeper saving a shot or a defender blocking a score does not then deserve an automatic score. Make them indirect at the very least

Not saying it wouldn't be worth consideration. But obviously it'd reward negative defensive play if you could play the ball over your endline with impunity. And the frequency of 65s versus frees and even sidelines makes you wonder. Probably wouldn't change much. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad or unworthy idea of course.

Pogue eile wrote: »

My understanding is that you cant actually score direct from a puc out and it has to hit something or someone.

Was at a match maybe 15 years ago and Brendan Cummins hit the opposing crossbar with a puck out and there was an inter county referee standing in from of me and that was his take on it at the time.

Did the Laois keeper not hit one recently?
I also thought there was one in a club game

breezy1985 wrote: »

Did the Laois keeper not hit one recently?
I also thought there was one in a club game

It was the same incident but it wasn't a puckout he caught a ball that fell short around his own 21 and hit it over the bar, it actually bounced over the bar from the ground so not sure if that would count as 'hitting something or someone else'.

I doubt very much if you would get consensus even from the top referees as its not something they would be overly familiar with.