National Forum

Some Updates On The Football Review

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Replying To SaffronDon:  "The black card was not introduced because of Cavanagh gate. It was already approved and ready for introduction before Brolly spat his dummy out on TV over something that had been seen a hundred times before. He even referred to it being approved in his rant. It's funny how you consider that a 'knee jerk reaction' when A, it's false, and B, you make knee jerk calls for rule changes every time you see a poor match as if they never existed before."
That's true Saffron. But if referees consistently applied the yellow and red card rules there should be no need for a black card. Hopefully they can consistently apply any new rules. The officials get way too much abuse during and after games. But the GAA should have previews and reviews of games, including referees talking to players pre-game, answering any rule interpretation questions they have. And talking to players during games.

GreenandRed (Mayo) - Posts: 7571 - 13/09/2024 12:15:38    2569692

Link

Replying To sligo joe:  "The proposed 2 pointer is from 40 metres (44yds), not 35 yds. Which I suppose, wind assisted from in front of goals is not unusual but on average a 40 metre point from play is fairly impressive."
Thanks for the correction - I guess the answer is that 2 point scores will be few and far between at junior level!

It could lead to a return of the big man in the square as many efforts will drop short and keeping it alive would become a virtue in itself.

brianb (Kildare) - Posts: 330 - 13/09/2024 12:59:12    2569698

Link

Replying To GreenandRed:  "That's true Saffron. But if referees consistently applied the yellow and red card rules there should be no need for a black card. Hopefully they can consistently apply any new rules. The officials get way too much abuse during and after games. But the GAA should have previews and reviews of games, including referees talking to players pre-game, answering any rule interpretation questions they have. And talking to players during games."
It must be near on impossible to apply the rules as a referee these days. Yellow and red seemed fair enough to me. But the law was also being exploited to the hilt with cynical drag downs off the ball, players wrapping their arm around their opponents to make it look as though they'd been dragged down. Blocking a players run etc. No matter what solution they come up with there will always be an exploitation to deal with as a result. But I do agree that any changes made must have player, manager and referee involvement as they are the ones who will have to adapt to it while some of the review panel just sit and watch it all unfold like the rest of us.

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2482 - 13/09/2024 13:14:30    2569703

Link

Replying To Pikeman96:  "Well, here's one with the "three up" rule....

You're one of the designated three forwards who must be inside the opposition 45m line. You're standing unmarked just inside the line. Midfield area is empty while other 12 on your team are playing as a massed defence. One of them wins the ball, sees you free up the field, and boots the ball towards you.

He doesn't hit it hard enough and it rolls along a bit before coming to a halt just one the wrong side of the line as far as you're concerned.

Now all you can do is stand there and look at it and wait for somebody else to run and pick up the ball instead."
Another example is if the defender runs the ball out beyond the 65 with 'less than 3' left behind (violation, free at 65).

To work around both, your scenario and mine, it would have to be initially '4 up/4 back' to free up one player to 'go outside'.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 13/09/2024 15:11:00    2569726

Link

Replying To sligo joe:  "Well at the moment some teams when not in possession have all their players back and then when the attacking team press there are maybe 28 or even 29 players in one half, total congestion. With now at least three players "forward" presumably the team in possession will leave at least 3 (probably 4 or 5) back leaving a max of 23 (probably 21 or 22) players in the "congested" half.
It would be unfair if in say the last few minutes a team chasing a goal to save the game could commit all their players forward but the defending team has to leave 3 players looking at each other in the other half, so 3 must stay back."
I got most of that - didn't get - "commit all their players forward....so 3 must stay back". Which is it? Is it '3v3' in the inactive half (required), so we are still facing a congested '11v11' in the half with the ball.
So it would never be '11v3' because the 'blanket' team would know that it becomes too porous when the 'adventurous' team presses with an equal 11?
Do you think this should motivate and bring back man-to-man marking, then?

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 13/09/2024 15:39:31    2569730

Link

Replying To eslinchickenmaryland:  "Because the goalies these days are completely slowing down the pace of the play strolling up the field with the ball, and defenders backpassing to them, and indeed the length of time it takes them to come up and get ready to take a free on goal. Now you might say that is the fault of the attacking team who aren't running up on them and flattening them but this rule would prevent negative delaying tactics.

With all due respect to goalkeepers, if they are very good footballers then they should be in midfield or at half back so we can see their footballing skills, goalkeeping is for footballing skills between the posts"
I agree with all of that - although, I'd be a little flexible - allow the goalie to roam anywhere behind his 'own 20'.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 13/09/2024 15:46:17    2569733

Link

Replying To thelongridge:  "D. Hyde. I think increasing the value of a goal or point, in certain conditions, doesn't make sense to me.
The problem is the ultra defensive footbal, played by club and county sides.

Goalkeepers primary job is to keep their goal intact, but now they are part of team strategy, in kick outs, free taking, and support play."
Yes, the different goalie jersey should signify a 'restricted' role - so ineligible to play beyond 'own 20', including free kicks etc.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 13/09/2024 15:49:09    2569734

Link

Replying To omahant:  "I agree with all of that - although, I'd be a little flexible - allow the goalie to roam anywhere behind his 'own 20'."
Agreed on that, but the ball can't be passed back to him

eslinchickenmaryland (Leitrim) - Posts: 241 - 13/09/2024 15:56:27    2569736

Link

Replying To eslinchickenmaryland:  "Because the goalies these days are completely slowing down the pace of the play strolling up the field with the ball, and defenders backpassing to them, and indeed the length of time it takes them to come up and get ready to take a free on goal. Now you might say that is the fault of the attacking team who aren't running up on them and flattening them but this rule would prevent negative delaying tactics.

With all due respect to goalkeepers, if they are very good footballers then they should be in midfield or at half back so we can see their footballing skills, goalkeeping is for footballing skills between the posts"
Completely agree regarding the length of time it takes for them to take a free, I've always been of the view that they should get the same time as would be afforded a forward. If we had to wait as long for a forward to make his way to the ball and set up a free, the ref would have the ball thrown up and I think the same should be the case for a goalie. If he wants to take a free, he has 10 seconds to get to the spot where the free is to be taken or else it's gone

D.Hyde (Roscommon) - Posts: 211 - 13/09/2024 18:06:03    2569755

Link

Replying To omahant:  "I got most of that - didn't get - "commit all their players forward....so 3 must stay back". Which is it? Is it '3v3' in the inactive half (required), so we are still facing a congested '11v11' in the half with the ball.
So it would never be '11v3' because the 'blanket' team would know that it becomes too porous when the 'adventurous' team presses with an equal 11?
Do you think this should motivate and bring back man-to-man marking, then?"
In general I don't think no matter what rule change that we will have old style man to man marking. Sure marquee forwards will be marked man to man but mostly defending will be zonal as it is now.
Yes you could have max 11v11 in the "attacking" half so yes congested but not as congested as 28?
I agree with the review that 3 must stay forward but also 3 must stay back. If 3 players didn't have to stay back then in an injury time scenario a team losing by a point or two could commit all 14 forward against 11, so it's fair I believe that they can only put 11 forward v 11.
.

sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 781 - 13/09/2024 19:01:55    2569760

Link

Replying To Pikeman96:  "Well, here's one with the "three up" rule....

You're one of the designated three forwards who must be inside the opposition 45m line. You're standing unmarked just inside the line. Midfield area is empty while other 12 on your team are playing as a massed defence. One of them wins the ball, sees you free up the field, and boots the ball towards you.

He doesn't hit it hard enough and it rolls along a bit before coming to a halt just one the wrong side of the line as far as you're concerned.

Now all you can do is stand there and look at it and wait for somebody else to run and pick up the ball instead."
I hadn't thought about that but it's actually maybe not even a bad thing because it would encourage a 4th person needing to be ahead of the ball to play as a connector.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4329 - 13/09/2024 20:10:21    2569763

Link

With all these new changes to football is the any word of refs getting help to handle the games ?

Saynothing (Tyrone) - Posts: 2132 - 13/09/2024 22:06:00    2569778

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "I hadn't thought about that but it's actually maybe not even a bad thing because it would encourage a 4th person needing to be ahead of the ball to play as a connector."
That's really good - we start with '4-6-4' (equally crowded in each zone, i.e. 4 behind each "45" and "6 in the middle 'Croke Park' 54") - so both a defender or attacking player "can come out" without a violation.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 14/09/2024 02:56:06    2569791

Link

Replying To Whammo86:  "I hadn't thought about that but it's actually maybe not even a bad thing because it would encourage a 4th person needing to be ahead of the ball to play as a connector."
It suggests '4-6-4' is an ideal formation to free up one player at both ends to come out for the ball. The only issue I have now is that I'd rather have the '45s' as a cut off instead of the '65s'.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2825 - 14/09/2024 03:14:04    2569792

Link

Replying To Saynothing:  "With all these new changes to football is the any word of refs getting help to handle the games ?"
None of them passed yet.
But hopefully Refs views will be sought and obtained before anything is finalised for a vote.

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1817 - 14/09/2024 10:23:31    2569805

Link

Anything at all being considered by FRC around defining the tackle? The single biggest issue in the game is being ignored. Fix that and you fix the game.

Eddie the Exile (Monaghan) - Posts: 1111 - 14/09/2024 21:48:43    2569891

Link

Replying To Eddie the Exile:  "Anything at all being considered by FRC around defining the tackle? The single biggest issue in the game is being ignored. Fix that and you fix the game."
Has already been redefined lately.

The Tackle

The Tackle is re-defined as:

"The Tackle is a skill by which a player may dispossess an opponent or frustrate his objective within the Rules of Fair Play. The tackle is aimed at the ball, not the player. The tackler may use his body to confront the opponent but deliberate bodily contact (such as punching, slapping, armn holding, pushing, tripping, jersey pulling or a full frontal charge) is forbidden. The only deliberate physical contact can be a Fair Charge i.e. Shoulder-to-shoulder with at least one foot on the ground. More than one player can tackle the player in possession."

tirawleybaron (Mayo) - Posts: 1174 - 15/09/2024 07:47:36    2569906

Link

Replying To tirawleybaron:  "Has already been redefined lately.

The Tackle

The Tackle is re-defined as:

"The Tackle is a skill by which a player may dispossess an opponent or frustrate his objective within the Rules of Fair Play. The tackle is aimed at the ball, not the player. The tackler may use his body to confront the opponent but deliberate bodily contact (such as punching, slapping, armn holding, pushing, tripping, jersey pulling or a full frontal charge) is forbidden. The only deliberate physical contact can be a Fair Charge i.e. Shoulder-to-shoulder with at least one foot on the ground. More than one player can tackle the player in possession.""
So the tackle basically means you can use your body to frustrate your opponent's attempt to play or travel with the ball but not make deliberate contact with him. And I presume you can make plenty of contact with the ball. My question is, then, presuming I live under a rock: what's wrong with that definition?

Tacaí Liatroma (Leitrim) - Posts: 1105 - 15/09/2024 16:59:56    2569962

Link

Is there a definitive list somewhere of these experimental or proposed rules? And what exactly is this rule about keeping three players in a certain area of the field?

Tacaí Liatroma (Leitrim) - Posts: 1105 - 15/09/2024 17:03:02    2569963

Link

Replying To Tacaí Liatroma:  "Is there a definitive list somewhere of these experimental or proposed rules? And what exactly is this rule about keeping three players in a certain area of the field?"
https://www.rte.ie/sport/football/2024/0910/1469373-overtime-showdowns-among-ambitious-frc-proposals/

Seanfanbocht (Roscommon) - Posts: 1817 - 15/09/2024 19:31:04    2569978

Link