National Forum

Can Gaelic Football (Handball?) Be Saved?

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Replying To Whammo86:  "Policing the number of steps is first port of call. Having an Aussie Rules or Rugby tackle changes the game completely."
Agreed. "Tucking" or wrapping the ball in the tackle should be called as overcarrying too.
Similar to AFL holding the ball

Eddie the Exile (Monaghan) - Posts: 1021 - 30/11/2023 10:30:15    2515052

Link

Replying To Eddie the Exile:  "Agreed. "Tucking" or wrapping the ball in the tackle should be called as overcarrying too.
Similar to AFL holding the ball"
Yep.
If a tackler forces you to take more than 4 steps , good defending and free against the ball holder.

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1143 - 30/11/2023 10:54:41    2515057

Link

Replying To Seanfanbocht:  "Yep.
If a tackler forces you to take more than 4 steps , good defending and free against the ball holder."
I think also swarm tackling is an issue too.

If swarm tackling were policed more I think it'd hurt the effectiveness of the everyone behind the ball strategy and also force teams to defend more on the front foot. It'd be good to have a rule that hurts the passive team.

The game really needs to be played across the whole field and not just at the perimeter of the scoring zone and it's good to see others are aware of it.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4053 - 30/11/2023 15:04:27    2515106

Link

Replying To Seanfanbocht:  "Yep.
If a tackler forces you to take more than 4 steps , good defending and free against the ball holder."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eEesN1V7_I

Something in this for football. A clear definition of overholding (though maybe not directly transferrable).

Eddie the Exile (Monaghan) - Posts: 1021 - 30/11/2023 17:24:25    2515117

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "I think also swarm tackling is an issue too.

If swarm tackling were policed more I think it'd hurt the effectiveness of the everyone behind the ball strategy and also force teams to defend more on the front foot. It'd be good to have a rule that hurts the passive team.

The game really needs to be played across the whole field and not just at the perimeter of the scoring zone and it's good to see others are aware of it."
Well, 4-6-4 with the 45s splitting the pitch into three zones?

As the ball crosses the attacking 45, both teams no longer have player count restrictions, until the ball crosses that 45 out again.

I imagine an attacker taking a pass before the 45, soloing in, pursued by his marksman, so player population in the zone is not static at 4v4 + goalkeeper. Would need to be trialled to see if it works.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2409 - 30/11/2023 18:01:30    2515125

Link

Replying To omahant:  "Well, 4-6-4 with the 45s splitting the pitch into three zones?

As the ball crosses the attacking 45, both teams no longer have player count restrictions, until the ball crosses that 45 out again.

I imagine an attacker taking a pass before the 45, soloing in, pursued by his marksman, so player population in the zone is not static at 4v4 + goalkeeper. Would need to be trialled to see if it works."
I'd be a proponent of small changes with high impact. Your suggestions feel a bit over engineered to direct the game down a very defined way of playing. The game's strength at it's best is that it's relatively unstructured and also some of the advances in the game where positions are more fluid and more players are engaged in the play at any given time are good things and you wouldn't want that to change so drastically.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4053 - 01/12/2023 10:26:19    2515151

Link

Replying To omahant:  "Well, 4-6-4 with the 45s splitting the pitch into three zones?

As the ball crosses the attacking 45, both teams no longer have player count restrictions, until the ball crosses that 45 out again.

I imagine an attacker taking a pass before the 45, soloing in, pursued by his marksman, so player population in the zone is not static at 4v4 + goalkeeper. Would need to be trialled to see if it works."
Again I'd like to say that when there are 2 teams playing proactively the game and even the heavy use of the handpass isn't an issue. Pointless handpassing gets punished by teams running down blind alleys and possession being turned over. The very best intercounty teams mostly are aiming to play on the front foot, to be able to win you have to be able to turn the ball over. It's the issue with the also rans who's best shot is to keep the game dour and low scoring and hope they fluke a result that are an issue and I think small changes could hurt the effectiveness of their game plans further.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4053 - 01/12/2023 10:31:21    2515152

Link

Replying To omahant:  "Well, 4-6-4 with the 45s splitting the pitch into three zones?

As the ball crosses the attacking 45, both teams no longer have player count restrictions, until the ball crosses that 45 out again.

I imagine an attacker taking a pass before the 45, soloing in, pursued by his marksman, so player population in the zone is not static at 4v4 + goalkeeper. Would need to be trialled to see if it works."
How many more times do we need to hear players, managers, and referees say we need less rules not more rules. As well meaning as your concept is, it is too complicated and next to impossible to referee. As I've said, majority of matches are now played with one neutral official, and with fixture pileups and GAA's inability to consistently produce new referees this will become even more prevalent. The assumption has to be that the rulebook is enforced by the referee and referee alone.

SurelyToGod (Donegal) - Posts: 321 - 01/12/2023 11:51:56    2515169

Link

Replying To SurelyToGod:  "How many more times do we need to hear players, managers, and referees say we need less rules not more rules. As well meaning as your concept is, it is too complicated and next to impossible to referee. As I've said, majority of matches are now played with one neutral official, and with fixture pileups and GAA's inability to consistently produce new referees this will become even more prevalent. The assumption has to be that the rulebook is enforced by the referee and referee alone."
How about first strictly implementing the 4 steps rule to make the ball more available to be tackled?

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1143 - 01/12/2023 12:48:22    2515182

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "Again I'd like to say that when there are 2 teams playing proactively the game and even the heavy use of the handpass isn't an issue. Pointless handpassing gets punished by teams running down blind alleys and possession being turned over. The very best intercounty teams mostly are aiming to play on the front foot, to be able to win you have to be able to turn the ball over. It's the issue with the also rans who's best shot is to keep the game dour and low scoring and hope they fluke a result that are an issue and I think small changes could hurt the effectiveness of their game plans further."
That's exactly it. All the proposed changes would bolster negativity.

Ulster club this year is actually a good example recently of what you are talking about. Teams whose default - as is top inter county teams - is defence and who ruthlessly punish over possession out the field and even close to goal. And who are then able to move forward at speed, And have forwards capable of scoring.

BarneyGrant (Dublin) - Posts: 2195 - 01/12/2023 13:04:54    2515184

Link

Replying To Seanfanbocht:  "How about first strictly implementing the 4 steps rule to make the ball more available to be tackled?"
100%. The current rulebook needs to be enforced better before adding rules. Have been hearing for years about inter-county referees getting directives about high-challenges, throwballs, and steps, but none of those problems ever went away. I don't know where the initiative to enforce the rulebook better should or will come from. Can't pass a motion to implement a rule which is already in the rulebook.

Often hear that it should be 6 steps and strict, but over time that would eventually stretch out further than today's over-carrying.

SurelyToGod (Donegal) - Posts: 321 - 01/12/2023 13:45:04    2515193

Link

Replying To SurelyToGod:  "How many more times do we need to hear players, managers, and referees say we need less rules not more rules. As well meaning as your concept is, it is too complicated and next to impossible to referee. As I've said, majority of matches are now played with one neutral official, and with fixture pileups and GAA's inability to consistently produce new referees this will become even more prevalent. The assumption has to be that the rulebook is enforced by the referee and referee alone."
Seems to me over the years between rule changes and the way referees mindset is to refereeing the game has left less room for defenders on a one on one basis to stop/ dispossess the player in possession.

This maybe has in part resulted in a possession based game and blanket defenses being a logical way to play the game.

I wonder if we tried to rebalance the rules a bit more in favour of the tackler would this leave managers happier to play without a blanket (as defenders on a one on one basis would have more opportunity to stop/ dispossess players in possession) or would it encourage the blanket as there would be less options for the player in possession?

bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1196 - 01/12/2023 17:23:15    2515238

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "I'd be a proponent of small changes with high impact. Your suggestions feel a bit over engineered to direct the game down a very defined way of playing. The game's strength at it's best is that it's relatively unstructured and also some of the advances in the game where positions are more fluid and more players are engaged in the play at any given time are good things and you wouldn't want that to change so drastically."
With your words in mind - "I'd be a proponent of small changes with high impact" -
I try with one rule change (4v4 inside ONLY when the ball crosses INSIDE the 45) - everything else stays - short or long kick outs, unlimited hand passess, even kicking the ball backwards to own half (which now would no longer make sense or be needed, as a weaker team could no longer have their blanket defence).

With your words in mind again - "The game really needs to be played across the whole field and not just at the perimeter of the scoring zone and it's good to see others are aware of it" -
well, a targetted 4-6-4 formation (not required) - would open up more space, I think, promoting contests for the ball - rather than engineered, I like to think my rule would "alter the game's parameters", while still allowing coaches to be innovative within the new constraint (4 inside) - you could try different tactics, like switching the 4 inside, playing 7 in midfield and swarm the zone as you solo in etc.
I don't think it would be too burdensome for the linesman to spot an unmarked 5th player inside, only at the time the ball enters inside the 45. Thinking of the Junior club game, maybe if the referee had to assume making this call, it may be more difficult (just force someone to do the line).

I think the game flow would look more traditional - sucking the life out of it would no longer be possible - would need to trialled for verification, of course.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2409 - 01/12/2023 23:30:53    2515244

Link

The 9 step rule invoked for Kilmacud's 9th point.

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1143 - 02/12/2023 14:50:22    2515261

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "Again I'd like to say that when there are 2 teams playing proactively the game and even the heavy use of the handpass isn't an issue. Pointless handpassing gets punished by teams running down blind alleys and possession being turned over. The very best intercounty teams mostly are aiming to play on the front foot, to be able to win you have to be able to turn the ball over. It's the issue with the also rans who's best shot is to keep the game dour and low scoring and hope they fluke a result that are an issue and I think small changes could hurt the effectiveness of their game plans further."
"Again I'd like to say that when there are 2 teams playing proactively the game and even the heavy use of the handpass isn't an issue."

I absolutely agree - but isn't that the crux of the problem? - both teams need to want to play positively for the audience to see a decent game? Somehow we need to take the power away from managers sucking the life out of it.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2409 - 02/12/2023 17:06:32    2515269

Link

The Naas/ Kilmacud game was a very enjoyable game of football, fair play to Naas for having a go. I thought they had to work harder to earn their frees, final score doesn't do them justice.

tireoghainabu (Tyrone) - Posts: 248 - 02/12/2023 19:54:59    2515281

Link

I watched the Kilk v Lime AI SHC Final 2023 in full again recently - with curiosity, I observed how often there were "no more than 4" inside the 45 before the slioatar entered - when it did enter, both teams typically swarmed in - while hurling plays well without the player count requirement, it naturally plays this way - I imagine the football version played like this with similar excitement, but unfortunately it has to be "forced".

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2409 - 05/12/2023 14:27:18    2515608

Link