HoganStand GAA Football and Hurling

National Forum

Penalties - For Or Against?

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post

You need to Login to Post

I'm torn on this. It's a desperate way to settle a contest. But I also like the drama of them. Not sure about the suggestion of taking 50s, for 2 reasons: 1 No chance of a save; and 2 Does every team really have 5 players capable of scoring a 50? (Sorry, 45 - showing my age!) essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 04/09/2020 21:41:52 2290610 Link
I've always liked the idea of a sudden death score. Two teams deadlocked after extra time and it needs to be decided, throw it in as you would to start the match and next score wins. Get the ball and score. No gaelic fundamentals lost to this method plus the drama of that final throw in would be better than telling the lads to stand on the halfway line as they watch one player face the music on the rest of the team's behalf and take penalties, a skill only practiced by a minority of the squad. SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2385 - 04/09/2020 23:08:37 2290617 Link
Replying To essmac: "I'm torn on this. It's a desperate way to settle a contest. But I also like the drama of them. Not sure about the suggestion of taking 50s, for 2 reasons: 1 No chance of a save; and 2 Does every team really have 5 players capable of scoring a 50? (Sorry, 45 - showing my age!)" What else do you do if not penalties? Not all games should have to go to replay or can go to a replay. 45s arent the answer and penalties are better. Opposition has a chance of deciding things in a penalty with a goalie... In rugby at lower levels there is rules around tiebreakers where you can decide a result where teams are tied at end of game(at underage where extra time is forbidden) and adult level where the tie breaker is 1. most tries - whoever scored most tries wins 2. if teams scored most tries it goes to first try 3. if no team scored a try it goes to first score 4. if game finished 0-0 then it can go to team who got least yellows/reds etc But that obviously doesnt really translate well to gaelic/hurling. KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 3510 - 05/09/2020 01:23:56 2290638 Link
Replying To SaffronDon: "I've always liked the idea of a sudden death score. Two teams deadlocked after extra time and it needs to be decided, throw it in as you would to start the match and next score wins. Get the ball and score. No gaelic fundamentals lost to this method plus the drama of that final throw in would be better than telling the lads to stand on the halfway line as they watch one player face the music on the rest of the team's behalf and take penalties, a skill only practiced by a minority of the squad." But wouldn't it be true that, from now on, everyone will start practising their penalties anyway? And is it fair to say that kicking the ball accurately from the ground isn't a Gaelic fundamental also? In my youth, all frees were kicked off the ground anyway, it was a core Gaelic skill. My concern with the golden score rule is that it favours the team with the tallest player, in an era where old style midfield fielding contests are increasingly unimportant in the modern game. And you could see 15 minutes of seriously negative 15 players behind the ball stuff from the team not in possession. I suppose the argument for penalties is you had 80+ minutes to settle it on the scoreboard. essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 05/09/2020 11:04:02 2290656 Link
Replying To essmac: "But wouldn't it be true that, from now on, everyone will start practising their penalties anyway? And is it fair to say that kicking the ball accurately from the ground isn't a Gaelic fundamental also? In my youth, all frees were kicked off the ground anyway, it was a core Gaelic skill. My concern with the golden score rule is that it favours the team with the tallest player, in an era where old style midfield fielding contests are increasingly unimportant in the modern game. And you could see 15 minutes of seriously negative 15 players behind the ball stuff from the team not in possession. I suppose the argument for penalties is you had 80+ minutes to settle it on the scoreboard." There are arguments for and against every method to be fair. Id just like to see how it would pan out for a while if the sudden death score happened. I take your point on the throw in but the practice of fielding should be higher on the coaching priority list than penalty taking as every player will need that skill at some point in a game. I suppose the negative tactics could be an issue but playing too deep could cost a team as well, any mistake back there could be a lot more costly than a mistake in the opponents half. It should create that last bit of desire to put the contest to bed but I guess the only way to find out is give it a trial run. SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2385 - 05/09/2020 11:49:36 2290661 Link
Instead of the old way of extra time being 10mins x 2 and then 5mins x 2 they should have done 3 sets of 5mins x 2. If still level then penalties are probably the best option imo. MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13707 - 05/09/2020 12:06:13 2290664 Link
Replying To essmac: "I'm torn on this. It's a desperate way to settle a contest. But I also like the drama of them. Not sure about the suggestion of taking 50s, for 2 reasons: 1 No chance of a save; and 2 Does every team really have 5 players capable of scoring a 50? (Sorry, 45 - showing my age!)" Nothing against penalties but why not keep playing until a team goes 2 up. You could be a point down and score a goal and it's over. Saynothing (Tyrone) - Posts: 2012 - 05/09/2020 12:29:03 2290668 Link
Against them in normal circumstances. A gaa team shouldnt have to settle a game through penalties. It's not a skill that was ever required. Teams if they're lucky have 2 penalty takers However during covid. Yes unfortunately I agree the longer these games go on the higher the risk a club will have to shut down because of a covid case or postpone while awaiting results. Or that new restrictions will be brought in. All games need to finish on the day galwayfball (Galway) - Posts: 1678 - 05/09/2020 14:45:24 2290676 Link
I think there should be a winner on the day and penalties should be the way to decide it. At least with penalties it take the power away from officials and places it firmly at the feet of the players and teams involved. No mystery of too much time being played or was it or wasn't it a point. Its a level playing field for all. Bon (Kildare) - Posts: 1908 - 05/09/2020 15:42:35 2290680 Link
Replying To SaffronDon: "There are arguments for and against every method to be fair. Id just like to see how it would pan out for a while if the sudden death score happened. I take your point on the throw in but the practice of fielding should be higher on the coaching priority list than penalty taking as every player will need that skill at some point in a game. I suppose the negative tactics could be an issue but playing too deep could cost a team as well, any mistake back there could be a lot more costly than a mistake in the opponents half. It should create that last bit of desire to put the contest to bed but I guess the only way to find out is give it a trial run." Had this discussion over on the Wexford board earlier in the championship about Hurling and the same applies for football. They went away from 65/45s to penalties - with the 65/45 you have to rely on the umpires etc to say if its over the bar or not which will always lead to arguments. Also how many can score them. In hurling we reckoned it would be better to let the player take the shot from his hand from the 20m line against the goalkeeper. There would be more people capable of taking a penalty in football than in hurling so its not as much of an issue. The biggest issue I think in sudden death is it would place way to much scrutiny on the ref. In a regular game a decision by the ref is never seen as the decision maker for the game - in sudden death it could be and therefore if it is, that decision will be slowed down, replayed and analysed for ever - the result will be forever put down to a call the ref made not the skill of the players. zinny (Wexford) - Posts: 1804 - 05/09/2020 16:16:34 2290685 Link
Replying To zinny: "Had this discussion over on the Wexford board earlier in the championship about Hurling and the same applies for football. They went away from 65/45s to penalties - with the 65/45 you have to rely on the umpires etc to say if its over the bar or not which will always lead to arguments. Also how many can score them. In hurling we reckoned it would be better to let the player take the shot from his hand from the 20m line against the goalkeeper. There would be more people capable of taking a penalty in football than in hurling so its not as much of an issue. The biggest issue I think in sudden death is it would place way to much scrutiny on the ref. In a regular game a decision by the ref is never seen as the decision maker for the game - in sudden death it could be and therefore if it is, that decision will be slowed down, replayed and analysed for ever - the result will be forever put down to a call the ref made not the skill of the players." Is it any different for a ref at the end of the 70 if two teams are level and trying to snatch victory? Its the refs job to make decisions at the end of the day. There will always be scrutiny as we well know from years on hoganstand. That's the game we know in its purest form. Penalties are awarded for fouls and one or two lads per team practice them. Id rather my club focused on in-play skills that serve them over 70 mins than practicing endlessly at penalties that will only really be called upon in very rare circumstances. SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2385 - 05/09/2020 17:53:29 2290704 Link
Penalties are gripping/cruel drama at it's best, it can be a difficult watch even for a neutral and unbearable when your own team is involved. I think they are the best way to resolve a fixture though if the two teams can't get the best of each other after extra time and we're looking to avoid replays. Htaem (Meath) - Posts: 8657 - 06/09/2020 12:39:33 2290791 Link
Rock paper scissors lilypad (Kildare) - Posts: 1363 - 06/09/2020 20:08:57 2290845 Link
Zinny has already referred to the discussion we had over on the Wexford forum, where the focus was more on hurling (it took place during the knock-out stages of the hurling championship here) than on football, which most of the talk here seems to have been about. There was what I believe to be an excellent suggestion by another poster (StoreysTash) that in hurling, the shots should be taken from the hand, from outside the 20 metre line. It's much more representative of an ordinary skill of the game than taking penalties. Out of five penalty takers, you could have two or three who hadn't taken one in years. But every team should have at least five players who can shoot for goal the "ordinary" way from 20 metres out. You could do the same in football. Have players shoot from the hands from the 13-metre line. Again, it's something that every attacking player should be able to do and should be comfortable with, as opposed to relying on penalty takers who hadn't taken one in years. Definitely wouldn't be in favour of a "next score wins" system in hurling in particular. You could have a situation where the ball is thrown in to start extra time, there's a mistimed challenge or a bad pull two seconds later, and suddenly you have a scoreable free from midfield and it's game over. That would be far less satisfactory than giving both teams five shots at goal each. Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2244 - 07/09/2020 11:03:27 2290928 Link
Incidentally, with talk of penalties, I've never understood the thing you sometimes hear after a shoot-out that "we didn't even practice them". Happens in soccer regularly (I think even the famous Ireland v Romania in Italia '90 was one of them), and there was another example last week in Tipp when Drom & Inch beat Borris-Ileigh - https://www.the42.ie/tipperary-drom-inch-penalties-hurling-5190815-Aug2020/ Want to emphasise that I'm just using this as an example, and am not having a cut at the manager there himself, but in general, to me this attitude just smacks of poor preparation. You're facing into a crucial knock-out match, where you know there's a chance it might come down to penalties, but yet you decide "ah, we're not going to bother practising something that might be the difference between whether we stay in the championship or not"???!!!! It wouldn't have to be a case of endlessly practising penalties, as the Antrim man above suggests. For instance, a few weeks back, my own club was facing into the knock-out stages of the Wexford championship. At the last training session before the match, all the lads lined up and took two penalties each. It only took about 15 minutes total, but at least they all got some bit of a measure of how well they can strike one, and how likely they might have been to score if the match itself came down to a shoot-out. Maybe even more importantly, it gave our goalkeeper practice of facing about 50 penalties, to allow him get a read on different styles of striking and anticipating what side a shooter might go for. We never had a shoot-out in the end, but at least if we had, we'd have been some way prepared for it. Why then would anybody else not take 15 minutes to practice something that could turn out to be so crucial? Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2244 - 07/09/2020 11:19:03 2290933 Link
The Tyrone club championship is knockout, 4 games to complete. They would have had time for replays, without penalties but those who are the rules in place. A lot of praise for the Tyrone championship. Its a good quality, but you'd imagine there would still be competitive games if it was group stages or backdoor system FoolsGold (Cavan) - Posts: 2763 - 07/09/2020 11:27:06 2290937 Link
Replying To SaffronDon: "Is it any different for a ref at the end of the 70 if two teams are level and trying to snatch victory? Its the refs job to make decisions at the end of the day. There will always be scrutiny as we well know from years on hoganstand. That's the game we know in its purest form. Penalties are awarded for fouls and one or two lads per team practice them. Id rather my club focused on in-play skills that serve them over 70 mins than practicing endlessly at penalties that will only really be called upon in very rare circumstances." Its just how people feel about it. Its the feeling that its a new game and to then just have it over in a couple of seconds would not go down well. Even now, extra time is almost considered a new game and everyone forgets what went on in the previous sixty minutes. I would also say its very rare that the last kick of the game is a scoring free. zinny (Wexford) - Posts: 1804 - 07/09/2020 11:48:32 2290947 Link
We keep stealing rules from every other game in the world why stop now. gatha (Kilkenny) - Posts: 318 - 07/09/2020 11:55:24 2290950 Link
Replying To gatha: "We keep stealing rules from every other game in the world why stop now." So what would you propose then? KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 3510 - 07/09/2020 12:15:55 2290957 Link
I don't really like the idea of penalty shootouts in GAA, soccer is a different sport where only goals count so, to me it makes more sense in soccer. I've always thought the GAA often takes on what other sports do too much. Eddie Keher was right a few years ago about yellow and red cards, since they came in the mindset of referees/ commentators changed and they seemed to be given out much easier than the when a ref used to book/ send off players. Rugby was copied with the use of extra subs, this breaks up the rhythm of the game, aids the implementation of a running game and benifits the stronger teams. Even the penalty spot was moved in to match soccer, why should a minor foul in the box result in a near certain goal, I preferred the old penalty, a the penalty taker had the option to tap over the bar for a point or take a real risk and go for a goal. Bringing in innovations from other sports isn't always the right way to go. bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1347 - 07/09/2020 12:54:38 2290967 Link