HoganStand GAA Football and Hurling

National Forum

Introducing The Mark

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

The mark will change nothing in terms of kick out strategy at all. At present keepers go for the high percentage ball, be it short or long. That doesn't change with the introduction of the mark. If any thing keepers will kick a little less to the middle as they'll be looking for higher percentage chances because of the threat of the opposition mark. The majority of successful marks, be they overhead or into the chest will be uncontested. Hardly an amazing skill worth rewarding with a free kick. Even in cases of nearly 50/50 contests, where one player is at a slight disadvantage to the other, the player with the slight disadvantage will probably back off now and get positioned for the free kick rather than take the chance and compete. For me the art of high fielding involved both the catch and the subsequent move away from the opposition in anyways. A high contested catch in the era of mark is now only half as good because one part of it has special protection. At least it's only for the odd kick out here and there so the rule change will have little or no impact on the game we love. MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13707 - 09/01/2017 15:16:22 1944322 Link
Replying To downredhand: "As per MTM's comments above, the new rule only proceeded to slow the game down in Breffni Park but it wasn't the only thing the ref struggled with (the poor critter looked completely lost at times) so it might not be the best example to make judgements on." what's the story with the advantage rule. I mentioned this on here before. Yesterday a Tyrone player was fouled going towards goal, ref waves advantage, player advances in to penalty area is fouled again, ref brings it back and gives free from where original foul was committed. Can someone explain to me Is that correct interpretation of the rule. Surely if advantage is being played then the ball is in play and if a second foul is committed then the free or Penalty should be from where the second foul is committed. s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 09/01/2017 15:22:23 1944328 Link
Replying To s goldrick: "what's the story with the advantage rule. I mentioned this on here before. Yesterday a Tyrone player was fouled going towards goal, ref waves advantage, player advances in to penalty area is fouled again, ref brings it back and gives free from where original foul was committed. Can someone explain to me Is that correct interpretation of the rule. Surely if advantage is being played then the ball is in play and if a second foul is committed then the free or Penalty should be from where the second foul is committed." If advantage is played and no advantage accrues the play may be brought back for the original free. If the player in possession of the ball fouls in any way during his advantage then it is a free against him. In the example you give, one could only but wonder if the ref brought play back because he didn't feel there was a second free and brought it back for the original incident. If there was a second foul then the free should have been taken from the more advantageous position. Maybe too, the ref saw the player in possession foul and didn't want to penalise him and incorrectly just brought play back. Impossible to say which happened as I didn't have the pleasure of being there.... Torcaill (Australia) - Posts: 204 - 09/01/2017 16:04:21 1944338 Link
Replying To doratheexplorer: "If that happened there would be no fielding. A team will put a runner in midfield and he can use all the empty space to pick up kick outs." If you wish to modify, offer something - like, in order to retain possession, the ball MUST BE fielded by the kick out team - otherwise, possession is lost if fielded by the other team, or via a free kick where the ball hits the ground. omahant (USA) - Posts: 2593 - 09/01/2017 16:32:35 1944349 Link
Replying To omahant: "If you wish to modify, offer something - like, in order to retain possession, the ball MUST BE fielded by the kick out team - otherwise, possession is lost if fielded by the other team, or via a free kick where the ball hits the ground." Cluxton etc.... will still give it to one of his runners who'll field it chest high. doratheexplorer (Cavan) - Posts: 1467 - 09/01/2017 17:07:20 1944357 Link
There were two Marks in the whole game between Kildare and Longford on Saturday. In the first one when the referee blues the whistle to signify the Mark, the Kildare player thought he had blown for a free. lilywhite1 (Kildare) - Posts: 2990 - 09/01/2017 17:28:17 1944364 Link
Replying To doratheexplorer: "Cluxton etc.... will still give it to one of his runners who'll field it chest high." Makes no odds, claiming the mark in that instance would only slow our game down, there would be someone running off said fielder. realdub (Dublin) - Posts: 8592 - 09/01/2017 22:17:55 1944428 Link
Replying To royaldunne: "Yeah it was excellent to see, the ref did get excited after the second one, but that's minor. It mightn't make much difference to overall game, but from somebody from my vintage its a art form and hopefully it will increase the amount of high fielding in games." Royal you are deluding yourself. We have tried this stupid rule three times now. How often do we have to go back and keep trying to introduce something that is useless. We had three throw ups in breffni pk yesterday after players delayed when they won the mark. How does that add to the flow of the game? Then with each throw up an offence is immediately committed when a posse of players are not 13 metres away from the contested ball. It's a joke and needs to go mayotyroneman (Tyrone) - Posts: 1821 - 09/01/2017 23:27:12 1944443 Link
Mark is a good idea if introduced with a few other: 1. Kick out must pass the 45 2. Teams can only have 2 players standing between the 45's when the kick out is taken Failing that it should also be a rule after any dead ball- free/sideline kicked into the scoring area that is caught cleanly results in a free kick at goal Better still, introduce a "rugby style" tackle and use an oval ball and now we are getting somewhere tirawleybaron (Mayo) - Posts: 1109 - 10/01/2017 06:15:07 1944459 Link
Replying To tirawleybaron: "Mark is a good idea if introduced with a few other: 1. Kick out must pass the 45 2. Teams can only have 2 players standing between the 45's when the kick out is taken Failing that it should also be a rule after any dead ball- free/sideline kicked into the scoring area that is caught cleanly results in a free kick at goal Better still, introduce a "rugby style" tackle and use an oval ball and now we are getting somewhere" Obviously never get passed but they are genuinely attractive ideas. The contested high ball is one of the best parts of the GAA. In fairness at a weekend game, the mark was probably only blown 5-6 times so had negligible effect but after the first 2 marks the crowd were genuinely drawn in and there was some excitement every time the kickout looked to be going past the 45. It was a little victory every time for the ball winner and this will only increase as games become more important wicklu (Wicklow) - Posts: 331 - 10/01/2017 08:08:16 1944463 Link
Replying To tirawleybaron: "Mark is a good idea if introduced with a few other: 1. Kick out must pass the 45 2. Teams can only have 2 players standing between the 45's when the kick out is taken Failing that it should also be a rule after any dead ball- free/sideline kicked into the scoring area that is caught cleanly results in a free kick at goal Better still, introduce a "rugby style" tackle and use an oval ball and now we are getting somewhere" I think that''s how gaelic football was originally played between parishes before the GAA was founded and developed it into a proper game. Unfortunately as it continued to develop the 'pundits' and the various forms of the media have taken control of the game and we have the continuous clamour for non-sensical changes to the game despite the objections of practically all of the players. neverright (Roscommon) - Posts: 1648 - 10/01/2017 14:34:26 1944562 Link
I am in favour of the mark. Theres nothing worse than a great catch at midfield being penalised for over carrying when they get set upon by an army as they hit the deck. Pat McEneaney who was the best ref in ireland for years consistently blew a free almost immediately when someine won a high catch. BUT here is the part that bugs me. How long has a player to take a free ? At the weekend throw ups were given if a player didnt take it quickly. Yet the likes of stephen cluxton or rory beggen can take up to a minute to take a free by the time they run forward place the ball etc.players who take frees from the habd are never given the same time. How often have you seen a guy in defence taking a free out and he hesutates once or twice looking for a runner. The oppisition crowd start jeering and the ref runs in and throws up the ball even though it might only have been thirty seconds. Theres no consistency. Can anyone please clarify the length of time permitted ? Malonemagic (Laois) - Posts: 766 - 10/01/2017 16:47:28 1944602 Link
Replying To Torcaill: "If advantage is played and no advantage accrues the play may be brought back for the original free. If the player in possession of the ball fouls in any way during his advantage then it is a free against him. In the example you give, one could only but wonder if the ref brought play back because he didn't feel there was a second free and brought it back for the original incident. If there was a second foul then the free should have been taken from the more advantageous position. Maybe too, the ref saw the player in possession foul and didn't want to penalise him and incorrectly just brought play back. Impossible to say which happened as I didn't have the pleasure of being there...." Thanks for the reply. I have just seen the actual rule and there is nothing in the rule that states if a second foul is commited , that the free should be from where the second foul is commited (if it is more advantageous). This is a fault with the rule and needs amending. I saw it happen before once when it happened a Dublin player (I think it may have been in the league v Monaghan). He deserved a penalty, yet the ref brought it back for the original foul. If this continues then it gives carte blanche for defenders to foul with impunity if advantage is being played (which is totally wrong). s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 10/01/2017 18:14:32 1944638 Link
Replying To Malonemagic: "I am in favour of the mark. Theres nothing worse than a great catch at midfield being penalised for over carrying when they get set upon by an army as they hit the deck. Pat McEneaney who was the best ref in ireland for years consistently blew a free almost immediately when someine won a high catch. BUT here is the part that bugs me. How long has a player to take a free ? At the weekend throw ups were given if a player didnt take it quickly. Yet the likes of stephen cluxton or rory beggen can take up to a minute to take a free by the time they run forward place the ball etc.players who take frees from the habd are never given the same time. How often have you seen a guy in defence taking a free out and he hesutates once or twice looking for a runner. The oppisition crowd start jeering and the ref runs in and throws up the ball even though it might only have been thirty seconds. Theres no consistency. Can anyone please clarify the length of time permitted ?" you see this is the issue. They are existing rules in place to cover this. The refs should be blowing for a free if hands are laid on a player in possession The only tackle permitted is one to attempt to dislodge the ball . The player himself must not be tackled. There are enough rules in place already if only the referees would apply them. the 2tackle" is the single most important aspect of the game that needs addressing and by that I mean it needs proper refereeing. s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 10/01/2017 18:22:17 1944640 Link
Replying To s goldrick: "Thanks for the reply. I have just seen the actual rule and there is nothing in the rule that states if a second foul is commited , that the free should be from where the second foul is commited (if it is more advantageous). This is a fault with the rule and needs amending. I saw it happen before once when it happened a Dublin player (I think it may have been in the league v Monaghan). He deserved a penalty, yet the ref brought it back for the original foul. If this continues then it gives carte blanche for defenders to foul with impunity if advantage is being played (which is totally wrong)." In fairness, if you had to include every scenario in the game the rule book would be some thesis. Logic follows that if a player is fouled, whether during advantage or not, a free may be awarded at that spot. As I said before, maybe the refs interpretation of the latter tackle is different to yours, i.e. he felt it wasn't a free and brought play back for the original free. No other reason for it. Just saying!!! Torcaill (Australia) - Posts: 204 - 10/01/2017 22:58:31 1944738 Link
Replying To Torcaill: "In fairness, if you had to include every scenario in the game the rule book would be some thesis. Logic follows that if a player is fouled, whether during advantage or not, a free may be awarded at that spot. As I said before, maybe the refs interpretation of the latter tackle is different to yours, i.e. he felt it wasn't a free and brought play back for the original free. No other reason for it. Just saying!!!" I take your last point and I hope that was the case but based on other similar incidences I have my doubts. s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 11/01/2017 14:18:21 1944858 Link
Replying To Malonemagic: "I am in favour of the mark. Theres nothing worse than a great catch at midfield being penalised for over carrying when they get set upon by an army as they hit the deck. Pat McEneaney who was the best ref in ireland for years consistently blew a free almost immediately when someine won a high catch. BUT here is the part that bugs me. How long has a player to take a free ? At the weekend throw ups were given if a player didnt take it quickly. Yet the likes of stephen cluxton or rory beggen can take up to a minute to take a free by the time they run forward place the ball etc.players who take frees from the habd are never given the same time. How often have you seen a guy in defence taking a free out and he hesutates once or twice looking for a runner. The oppisition crowd start jeering and the ref runs in and throws up the ball even though it might only have been thirty seconds. Theres no consistency. Can anyone please clarify the length of time permitted ?" As far as I know a player calling a mark has just 5 seconds to play the ball on if he does stop. It isn't actually a free, it's a mark, which may be the reason it is being treated so differently by referees. AHP (Dublin) - Posts: 323 - 11/01/2017 20:46:08 1944967 Link
Oh god lads listen to yourselves!! It's a stupid rule. The gaa has now introduced it for the third time!!!! That's three attempts to bring in a rule that is absolutely useless. It brings nothing to the game. When Mick o Connell fielded high catches in the seventies he was set upon by tacklers. For gods sake that's the game! We all had to deal with that when we played the game. Enough of this nonsensical rule! mayotyroneman (Tyrone) - Posts: 1821 - 11/01/2017 23:33:22 1945035 Link
Replying To AHP: "As far as I know a player calling a mark has just 5 seconds to play the ball on if he does stop. It isn't actually a free, it's a mark, which may be the reason it is being treated so differently by referees." Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification. But i still believe that defenders from the hand ate much more likely to have a free thrown up for delaying than forwards taking from the ground are Malonemagic (Laois) - Posts: 766 - 12/01/2017 00:34:34 1945041 Link
Replying To mayotyroneman: "Oh god lads listen to yourselves!! It's a stupid rule. The gaa has now introduced it for the third time!!!! That's three attempts to bring in a rule that is absolutely useless. It brings nothing to the game. When Mick o Connell fielded high catches in the seventies he was set upon by tacklers. For gods sake that's the game! We all had to deal with that when we played the game. Enough of this nonsensical rule!" Exactly why are they rewarding tall people heard burns today waxing on about it being a skill what to be 6ft something haha if they reward tall people who done nothing but be born that way shouldn't they have brought in a rule to reward small players who catch a ball in the attacking 45 line with a mark too? If anything that's more endangered with the mass defences these days. hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 13/01/2017 10:03:47 1945392 Link