What system?

TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 21/03/2013 12:51:26    1353356

21/03/2013 12:51:26
TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6261

1353356
What system?

I suppose it all depends on your definition of a system. I don't think any decent county team in the last 40 years has just thrown 15 jersies on their backs and figured it out as the game went along.

To me, if a team works out a way of playing that makes the most of the talents at their disposal then that is a system. They may come in all shapes and sizes but as far as I'm concerned everyone past Under 8 has been using a system of some description since God was a young fella.

MuckrossHead (Donegal) - Posts: 5030 - 21/03/2013 13:05:24    1353368

TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6262

1353356
What system?
_________________
Winning!

brendtheredhand (Tyrone) - Posts: 10897 - 21/03/2013 13:11:14    1353380

2009 is one of many years that proves a thread like this at this time of the year is absolutely pointless, nearly everyone/ most people gave kerry no chance at all, had dublin has one of the main favorites for the all ireland, and look what happened in the quarter final keery 1-24 dublin 1-7

kerryluck (Kerry) - Posts: 2517 - 21/03/2013 13:33:05    1353406

Quite a waffly answer muckross. The reality is the 'system' kerry played was actually how the game was defined in the first place, 1 33 2 33, man for man, play the ball and may the most skillful team win. So in truth, they werent playing a system, they were playing gaelic football. That was how the game was defined and how it was meant to be played. Now if you cant play it that way to a level where you are as good as the best, i.e. winning an equal amount as the top teams, then you can either get better, or try to spoil that type of play using various crowding-out systems, and search out and exploit weaknesses in the rules to gain an advantage. And thus, anti-football was born. But it wouldnt have been born if all things were equal, because if that was the case then everyone would have an equal amount of wins before anti-football was introduced.

TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 21/03/2013 15:20:49    1353503

TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6266

1353503
Quite a waffly answer muckross.

"A waffly answer" Master, you crack me up. You should go on the stage, you really should.

There are 4 lines in my answer compared to nearly 7 in yours and that pales into insignificance compared to some of the ramblings you have posted in your time.
People have grown old reading some of your posts & to make matters worse those same posts were nothing more than rehashes of something you had posted only 10 minutes before!! When it comes to waffle..................

As to the issue in hand. It really comes down to what you define as a system.

MuckrossHead (Donegal) - Posts: 5030 - 21/03/2013 15:34:20    1353518

The Master
You are right in that the game of GAA was defined as 15 a side 1,6,2,6 but there was no rules defined that said that was how the game was to be played and in reality wing backs were under every generation found to be in the attacking side of the pitch and were lauded for that, ala Paul Curran in the Dubs team of the 90's!! It has only got on peoples back when teams reversed these tactics by bringing forwards into the defensive half.

Since the beginning of the GAA every team would play to their strengths, i.e their system. If you had a team with rather big full forward then the long high ball was your goal like Kerry to the bomber liston, Cork to Corkery etc. If you had nippy corner forwards then you'd play a diagonal to the space in the corner like Mc Carten and Linden in the 90's Down team. These were all systems of play and lauded because they were attacking systems. Some teams didn't have them attacking players to bring them success by playing traditional positions so they added a more defensive strategy to become competitive and why not if it brings you success.

I have always thought that Donegal had 3 or 4 good forwards at any time but rarely had the 6 to go man for man against the best defences in the country. Jim Mc Guinness also seen this and devised a system for the current team. He said in his first season that he wanted to change the way we play to make us more competitive and if you're competitive then you have a chance of winning. Isn't this what any manager worth his salt would want?

Every county plays a defensive system now or as you call it anti-football therefore everything is equal!!!

Tir Conaill Abu (Donegal) - Posts: 1686 - 21/03/2013 15:47:33    1353536

Another waffly answer muckross, and then you repeat the already disproven punchline line at the end. You dont expect that to be taken seriously do you?


Tir Conaill Abu

Well that isnt totally accurate. True, there is no rule against it, yet anyway, but the reality is the rules that were put in place were designed for football being played to this ideal, so now the goalposts have changed and the rules are not equiped to handle it. It again goes back to the change in ethos from lets win playing our football, to lets find naiveties in the rules to exploit so we can win. So what we are getting now is effectively smash and grab football, while the rules are getting sorted out.

You reference paul curran, but his first responsibility was to defend. I have no issue with that, it is an intelligent player that can pick the right time to get forward and make a difference. However, he was still one of the 6 defenders and marked his man. That is more down to the individual ability of the player to pull that off and not get caught out. What we are seeing now is not forwards doing their job as a forward and defending at the opportune moment, but instead forwards going back into their own half to simply crowd the opponents out and not being a forward at all. They are doing it as part of a system which has been set up as a method of exploitation more than any great footballing nous. It is not like it is great defending, it is just sheer numbers in front of the goal combined with tactical fouling out the field. That is very different to paul curran or t o'se arriving late to pop a ball over the bar. While this isnt really good for the game, I can accept that teams are allowed to do this, and they arent really doing anything terribly wrong. However the thing they shouldnt be allowed to do is the systemic fouling that always goes along with it.

As regards, 'their system' as I pointed out earlier, it wasnt their system it was the design of the game. However, what is happening now is like a team being 2 points up, bringing on 3 lads in their ff line and playing them all back on their goal line like extra goalkeepers, and that is what they are, because unlike soccer, everyone can use their hands in the gaa. It is kind of cheating the ethos of the game and then calling it a system or style of play, and everyone involved, apart from the winners of course, cant help but feel a bit cheated when that type of thing occurs. For this reason, I believe efforts should be made to ensure teams are playing 6 forwards and 6 backs.

As you say yourself, donegal probably had 4 good quality forwards, like a lot of teams, but the reality is, the game was designed for teams with 6, so if you can only produce 4 forwards, then you are not good enough to win at this game, or at least not as deserving as a team with 6. That is the point about systems, if teams were good enough with 6 backs and 6 forwards then they wouldnt be using these systems, and at the end of the day the game should always be set up so that the best 15 should win.

TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 21/03/2013 17:24:36    1353623

TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6273

1353623
Another waffly answer muckross, and then you repeat the already disproven punchline line at the end. You dont expect that to be taken seriously do you?

All right Master, we'll do this your way, but first off you have to define what you mean when you talk about a "system"

Does knocking a high ball into the square because your full forward is a big man qualify as a system or are you talking about something else altogether?

MuckrossHead (Donegal) - Posts: 5030 - 21/03/2013 17:37:48    1353638

To me the only teams with a chance this year are in order...
Dublin
Cork
Tyrone
Donegal

I note the bookies have Mayo at 9/1 but that seems extremely short odds. Kerry cant be totally written off but look past it a bit.

tyroneed (Tyrone) - Posts: 753 - 21/03/2013 19:48:55    1353757

everybody remember 2009!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kerryluck (Kerry) - Posts: 2517 - 21/03/2013 20:27:23    1353788

I still don't reckon Tyrone are in the running for Sam, I still think they're 1-2 more years away from truly competing at AI level again.

CaisleanCnucha (Dublin) - Posts: 1379 - 21/03/2013 20:44:53    1353799

kerryluck
County: Kerry
Posts: 888

1353788 everybody remember 2009!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry i didnt reply sooner, only getting to the end of the exclaimation marks now!

AthCliath (Dublin) - Posts: 4347 - 21/03/2013 20:45:25    1353800

Does knocking a high ball into the square because your full forward is a big man qualify as a system or are you talking about something else altogether?

No, because the guy is a forward, playing as a forward. He is playing his position. That is perfectly with the ethos of the game. Taking 2-3 forwards back crowding out your own goals to stop the opposition isnt. Just like routinely fouling your opponent every time they win a kickout isnt. This is a tactic to spoil instead of beat the opposition with ability, which is again, against the ethos of the game.

TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 21/03/2013 21:45:26    1353850

1. Donegal
2.Dublin
3.Kildare

KingOfJacks (Kildare) - Posts: 361 - 21/03/2013 21:45:30    1353851

TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6276

1353850
Does knocking a high ball into the square because your full forward is a big man qualify as a system or are you talking about something else altogether?

No, because the guy is a forward, playing as a forward. He is playing his position. That is perfectly with the ethos of the game. Taking 2-3 forwards back crowding out your own goals to stop the opposition isnt. Just like routinely fouling your opponent every time they win a kickout isnt. This is a tactic to spoil instead of beat the opposition with ability, which is again, against the ethos of the game.

Hold on a minute. One minute we were talking about systems now we are talking about the ethos of the game. They are not the same thing.

Who decides what the ethos of the game is? While I agree that routinely fouling your opponent is against the ethos of the game, I can't agree that not playing 1-6-2-6 isn't. Since nobody plays that way rigidly anymore, then every county & most club teams are going against the ethos which I can't agree with.

MuckrossHead (Donegal) - Posts: 5030 - 22/03/2013 09:22:44    1353893

KingOfJacks
County: Kildare
Posts: 269

1353851
1. Donegal
2.Dublin
3.Kildare

HA HA. Now I wonder who this chap could be ??

He's on the Kildare forum as a Kildareman telling us we're cocky !

Anyone any ideas ?

St.Conleth (Kildare) - Posts: 1745 - 22/03/2013 09:55:26    1353910

Kerry have the quality to break loose and hammer everybody. I'd never count them out.

Daith (Kildare) - Posts: 1172 - 22/03/2013 10:22:39    1353932

Hold on a minute. One minute we were talking about systems now we are talking about the ethos of the game. They are not the same thing.
Who decides what the ethos of the game is? While I agree that routinely fouling your opponent is against the ethos of the game, I can't agree that not playing 1-6-2-6 isn't. Since nobody plays that way rigidly anymore, then every county & most club teams are going against the ethos which I can't agree with.

But this particular change of system displays a change of ethos. Fouling systems, crowding out the opposition attacks. These are anti-football tactics designed to remove the emphasis from skill, so the ethos behind them is different.
Who decides? The people who set the game up as man for man, forward and defence, they decided. That is the definition fo the game. The issue is we compare football with soccer, when in reality there are big chunks of it that has far more in common with rugby. In truth the gaa probably needs more rules around where players can be, or how many can be in a certain area, in the same way rugby has some position based rules to prevent deliberate spoiling. Maybe an offside rule of some description where attackers cannot get back into their own 40 until the ball has been played could be an option. This 13 men back inside the 40 idea isnt really showcasing any skills, it is just limiting the exhibition of skill in an underhanded way. In reality it is just an oversight that this wasnt mitigated for at the start. But, like they brought the offside rule into soccer, which in fairness is was a great move, we should be thinking of something along those lines also.

TheMaster (Mayo) - Posts: 16187 - 22/03/2013 10:47:12    1353951

TheMaster
County: Mayo
Posts: 6284

1353951
Hold on a minute. One minute we were talking about systems now we are talking about the ethos of the game. They are not the same thing.
Who decides what the ethos of the game is? While I agree that routinely fouling your opponent is against the ethos of the game, I can't agree that not playing 1-6-2-6 isn't. Since nobody plays that way rigidly anymore, then every county & most club teams are going against the ethos which I can't agree with.

But this particular change of system displays a change of ethos. Fouling systems, crowding out the opposition attacks. These are anti-football tactics designed to remove the emphasis from skill, so the ethos behind them is different.
Who decides? The people who set the game up as man for man, forward and defence, they decided. That is the definition fo the game. The issue is we compare football with soccer, when in reality there are big chunks of it that has far more in common with rugby. In truth the gaa probably needs more rules around where players can be, or how many can be in a certain area, in the same way rugby has some position based rules to prevent deliberate spoiling. Maybe an offside rule of some description where attackers cannot get back into their own 40 until the ball has been played could be an option. This 13 men back inside the 40 idea isnt really showcasing any skills, it is just limiting the exhibition of skill in an underhanded way. In reality it is just an oversight that this wasnt mitigated for at the start. But, like they brought the offside rule into soccer, which in fairness is was a great move, we should be thinking of something along those lines also.

This is one of those conversations that could go on for ever.
I agree with your dislike of cynical fouling but to call it a "system" is over egging the pudding a bit. I have no problem at all with good defensive play as defence is as much part of the game as attack & no way would I see this as "anti-football".

Neither do I think that we have to remain true to the ideas of the people who set up the game in the first place. If you are trying to tell me that you would want us to go back to the way football was played in their day then I wish you good luck with that. Even the football from the 60's is desperate stuff to watch nowadays & they are adhering to your man to man approach.

Many of the games I watched last year were very entertaining, maybe because I can also appreciate good defence as well as good forward play. They are certainly light years ahead of the man to man games from years ago. As for new rules, please no.

MuckrossHead (Donegal) - Posts: 5030 - 22/03/2013 12:04:39    1354011