Advertisement

Advertisement

Should Football Teams Now Focus On Two-Pointers?

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

Replying To GreenandRed: " Replying To omahant: "[quote=GreenandRed: "[quote=omahant: "[quote=Commodore: "To my mind, it may be best to target a similar 'yield' across the 'three' scoring varieties (including goals) - i.e. like having a narrow 'pts per attempt' range (e.g. 0.9 - 1.0 above) - but with the added dimension of incorporating 'per time interval'. Overall, as the game evolves, the time factor may very well tip the scales towards one-pointers, as two- and three-pointers (goals) produce less efficient yield. Ideally, 'similar yields' across goal, 'arc' and short point (per time interval) would allow a team to play with greater finesse and unpredictability, without impacting their total score. What do you think? omahant (USA) - Posts: 3523 - 22/08/2026 14:29:55 I agree that the best guarantee of success is to target a similar yield across the three scoring varieties, focus on Goals, 2-Pointers and 1 pointers in equal. Any team who isn't posing a 2-pointer threat, will likely face a deeper sitting defence who will clog up running lanes. I'm sure almost every Inter-county coaching team have been crunching these numbers. However its clear that their calculations were based on the previous 2025 years stats and not on emerging changing variables that we seen this past 2026 season, such as improved defending across the board, which severely impacted scoring averages. Top teams who could dominate midfield, and who prefer low risk 1 pointers, were then getting turned over in the final 3rd by teams with a better man to man defenders, and thus why we seen such early elimination. 2 pointers are also environment dependent, get a bad weather day and nobody will hit them." In the NBA, yield from 3-pt attempts has fluctuated - up and down - across different decades, as reflected in the link below: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9915101/ Food for thought - re: gaelic football 2-pointer! - what should you do?" Basketball is a minimum contact indoor sport with limited scoring methods compared to the more skilful, more physical outdoor game of Gaelic Football. Why are you comparing them?"]I was just making the point if premium score attempts are worth it. As the NBA reflects fluctuating results - premium score yields more, or less, at different points in time - this could be indicative that emphasis on the GAA two-pointer might also fluctuate in the future - as a manager, what should you do? - bottom line for me - play to your own team's strengths."]Exactly. But also try and improve your team's strength by exploiting the 2 pointer so if it means getting a corner back, with a great boot on him, closer to the arc at times or having some players improving their 2 point kicking, outside the main training time,similar to a freetaker practicing frees before or after training."]Did we need the arc? Maybe outside the 45 would right-size the 2-pts reward (ok, then longer from an angle, but so be it). omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 28/08/2026 19:13:23 2691745 Link
Replying To crankyincorofin: "2 points for over the bar 4 for a kick from outside the arc 6 for a goal would bring balance to the force" You do realise this is 1-2-3 ? In the past, another poster suggested 2-3-7. It works but scores would look unnatural. omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 30/08/2026 17:31:56 2691983 Link
Replying To gunman: "More scores does not mean better games.It could get to the stage where a point barely raises a cheer.The 2 point arc should be 50 M." In lieu of complicated 50m arc (pitch not 100m wide at the 20 or anywhere), let's just say a kick from outside the 45. Per Pythagoras, two-pointer distance grows as the angle does. Club groundsmen would appreciate straight lines too when marking the pitch. omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 30/08/2026 17:40:02 2691986 Link
Replying To WunderBar: "Any player shooting a one point shot from play should be immediately substituted." Nonsense. omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 30/08/2026 17:42:27 2691988 Link
This is the way forward - it's actually a more drastic change of rules in comparison to the 3pkinter being introduced in basketball . That was a 50% increase in value for a shot thag could technically be inches either side of the line whilst the GAA went with a 100% increase. Shots within 40-35 metres are now ludicrous and have to be avoided. Goals should be increased to 4 Paidi04 (Westmeath) - Posts: 21 - 03/09/2026 04:19:10 2692479 Link
Replying To Paidi04: "This is the way forward - it's actually a more drastic change of rules in comparison to the 3pkinter being introduced in basketball . That was a 50% increase in value for a shot thag could technically be inches either side of the line whilst the GAA went with a 100% increase. Shots within 40-35 metres are now ludicrous and have to be avoided. Goals should be increased to 4" Interesting column by Kieran Shannon (Examiner) below. https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport-columnists/arid-41904985.html He argues a 4-pts goal might discourage 1-pointers. Also, he says a 2/3/6 (or its clumsy 1/1.5/3 equivalent) might be appropriate. In spirit of that scale, but without halves, how about 1/2/4 'with a twist'? Twist being goals worth 4-pts, only when three 1-pointers for each goal are scored as well (otherwise, 3-pts goal). So, 'two 2-pointers and a goal' (7 pts) is worth the same as 'three 1-pointers and a goal'. Separately, I'd like scores reported along traditional lines with 2-pointers shown in parentheses for information purposes. Example: 3-16(4) = four 2-pointers; so then, eight 1-pointers; and three goals worth 11 pts (4+4+3) for a total 27 pts (more simply, three 4-pointers + 16 - 1). omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 04/09/2026 14:38:22 2692725 Link
i think so with the ko so hard won.. keep shooting on sight SAMFORHILLS9292 (Donegal) - Posts: 7 - 08/09/2026 12:47:40 2693141 Link
I think teams should concentrate on getting the ball over the bar or under it as quickly and often as possible, whether that be for 1, 2,3 or 4 points Freethinker (Wicklow) - Posts: 2344 - 08/09/2026 13:19:15 2693148 Link
Replying To Freethinker: "I think teams should concentrate on getting the ball over the bar or under it as quickly and often as possible, whether that be for 1, 2,3 or 4 points" Yes, I agree - keep the scoreboard turning over! Arguments will be made that 2-pointers are the way to go - but given the time to stretch the defence and set up the optimal time to shoot, maybe a close-range point or two could have been registered in that time interval. Example: 2 x (1 pt x 90%) > 1 x (2 pts x 50%). omahant (USA) - Posts: 3553 - 08/09/2026 19:13:42 2693190 Link
Replying To omahant: "Yes, I agree - keep the scoreboard turning over! Arguments will be made that 2-pointers are the way to go - but given the time to stretch the defence and set up the optimal time to shoot, maybe a close-range point or two could have been registered in that time interval. Example: 2 x (1 pt x 90%) > 1 x (2 pts x 50%)." That's it. There's no absolute and thank god there isn't. It's not a computer game. There a million variables in a football match, how opportunities might present themselves, what weaknesses and strengths different teams have which can be exploited, weather conditions. Every team should be trying to improve their capacity to kick two-pointers, but that doesn't mean they should be focusing on two-pointers when it doesn't make sense to do so. WanPintWin (Galway) - Posts: 3048 - 08/09/2026 20:19:06 2693193 Link