You are right Midleton, the practice of striking the frees from inside the 21 is as old as the 21 yard free itself. The critical thing though is how far inside the 21 it is struck. With the gym work all these lads put in, the size of the hurls they are striking with and the old worn sliothars now replaced by fast new ones, there is a huge difference between the reaction time for a free struck by Christy Ring 18 yards out and one struck by, for example, Nash 15 yards out. With one you have a chance of intentionally saving it, with the other all you are hoping for is that it hits you somewehere safe. You rarely see a free from 25 yards goaled in hurling, because the difference a few yards makes is critical in allowing the people on the line to react.

Also, I see Nash has been scoring these type frees in the Cork county championship. Does he play in goal for Kanturk, and if not does this mean that he can strike them equally well with a regular hurl?

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 16/12/2013 16:27:06    1524294

Lads point of clarification here. Under the rules, there is no such thing as a goalkeepers hurl. All hurls regardless of who is using them cannot be more than 13cm wide at their widest point, this is the rule whether the player is a corner forward, a goalkeeper or a midfielder. The problem here is that particular rule is not implemented and we see players using hurls wider than this on a regular basis both as outfield players and goalkeepers.
In relation to the 21 yard free issue. We have had a motion to ban this at our county convention in wexford for the last two years and it has been comprehensively beaten both years, hammered in fact. I happened to be at both conventions and those speaking against it made some very good points. Health and Safety is a nonsense arguement. Even Nash probably strikes the ball 14 yards away from goal, in a game situation goalkeepers can be subjected to shots from much closer in, so i dont see the point in banning these type of shots from a health and safety point of view unless all shots within a certain distance were going to be banned. For all frees the player taking them ends up striking the ball closer to goal than where the ball was placed, a 65 is normally struck about 62 metres from goal, a free ninety yards out would normally be struck about 87 yards out and the likes of this,where a free taker is at the edge of their range, can be of as much advantage as throwing the ball forward for a 21 yard free yet there is no debate about these types of free. As another poster quite rightly pointed out Nash's technique is incredibly difficult to perform, and even with his unique way of taking the frees there is still a fair contest between free taker and defenders as his conversion record in the all ireland finals indicate.

890202 (Wexford) - Posts: 1278 - 16/12/2013 16:45:37    1524303

good points made there 89020 (as usual!). Do you think taking them with goalkeepers hurls should be banned? (i suppose any player can take one witha goalkeepers hurley as it is). The rules regarding the size of the hurley should be tightened up, i think yhe oversized hurley for the keeper gives him a fair advantage, God knows, its a difficult enough task as it is

flack (Dublin) - Posts: 1054 - 16/12/2013 17:19:53    1524319

That is an interesting post as most people say this issue has only arose because Nash has had such success but clearly it was an issue in Wexford before that! I accept what you say about shots on goalies from closer in, but I still suggest that these are less dangerous than a free struck from 15 yards. Shots from closer in rarely involve the type of swing these frees do, and therefore have nowhere near as much power. Midleton earlier spoke about Cunninghams save in 1990 when he took a sliothar to the face but he got up and played on, because even though it was from close range the power in such a shot is completely different to a free with a full, unimpeded swing. Patrick Kelly claims (and anyone who watches the game would agree) there is no way of saving these type frees unless the ball just hits you as the reaction time is far too small, that to me means it is not a fair contest as there is no way of the defenders counteracting the freetakers skill. It is inevitable that more hurlers will be taking frees this way this year, and it is inevitable that eventually there will be a serious injury from one of them, I don't think anyone can dispute that. It may not be this year or next year, but if 1000's of these frees are being hit each year at defenders who have no time to react, eventually one will cause damage. The idea that other frees are hit from closer to goal isn't really relevant, the emphasis should be on ensuring defenders and goalies are given some chance to both protect themselves and try to intentionally save the shot. I don't think a free hit from 15 yards does either of these things.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 16/12/2013 17:32:50    1524327

Original poster here , interesting points made from both sides , however it seems to come down to 100 odd years and evidence against what could happen in such a such instance , have to say weight of argument would say free here to stay if posters had there way .

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 16/12/2013 17:50:54    1524337

The Claranbridge motion is pure jealousy, he actually used Joe Canning as an example of someone who doesn't use a goal kepper hurley. If it's such an advantage using them then why isn't every keeper taking frees?

RebelCork (Cork) - Posts: 789 - 16/12/2013 18:08:58    1524339

RebelCork
County: Cork
Posts: 223

1524339 The Claranbridge motion is pure jealousy, he actually used Joe Canning as an example of someone who doesn't use a goal kepper hurley. If it's such an advantage using them then why isn't every keeper taking frees?

I agree.

Also afaik, although I'm open for correction on this, there is nothing stopping Joe Canning (or any other outfield player) using a hurl with a bigger bas to take a free.

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 16/12/2013 18:17:33    1524342

if your going to allow a penalty be effectively lifted on the 21 yard line but hit on the 14 yard line after he does his thing
then I feel the opposition players should also be allowed move out towards him as soon as he lifts the ball
as its unfair he gets the advantage of gaining yards but the defending players get penalised for gaining yards.
that way you would have real and fair drama then.not one sided as it now exists

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 16/12/2013 18:22:38    1524346

flack
County: Dublin
Posts: 203

1524319
good points made there 89020 (as usual!). Do you think taking them with goalkeepers hurls should be banned? (i suppose any player can take one witha goalkeepers hurley as it is). The rules regarding the size of the hurley should be tightened up, i think yhe oversized hurley for the keeper gives him a fair advantage, God knows, its a difficult enough task as it is

Flack, as i said the rule about hurl size is there, for god knows how long. There is no point in continuing to have a rule regarding hurl size if it is going to be continually ignored. However, the rule on hurl size was created a long time ago when hurls where closer to hockey sticks in their size of bas. Either the rule should be enforced as it is or changed to be more suitable to the modern game, for example i play as an outfield player yet all of my hurls are wider than 13cms at their widest point and so are 90% of modern hurls used by both goalkeepers and outfield players.
However, i dont believe the wider/oversized hurl is the main issue, the biggest issues which i havent seen mentioned by too many are in my opinion:
1. that when you compare the likes of the Era of Rackard and Ring etc to the present day, the physcial strength, core strength and general conditioning of the players is much higher (i know rackard was a big powerful man but only in comparison to his era) meaning that they are able to strike the ball harder than ever before,
2. the other issue is the balls being used. In the previous decades the balls were much heavier and therefore travelled more slowly in the air, now with improvements in technology, balls are lighter and travel faster.
3. The third issue is that of practice. More and more emphasis is being put on developing players who can take 21 yard frees well and the technique which people are using is constantly being developed with new innovations like Nash or the method of holding the ball on the hurl for a second to gain an extra few yards like Eoin Kelly and DJ Carey did for example.

Overall i feel it is a combination of these factors rather than any one factor which is why i believe it would be a wrong move to only deal with one. For example if oversized or wide hurls were banned, then players would counteract this by getting very thick hurls made which would effectively be the same thing, in fact a thicker hurl would be better than a wide hurl if you think about it.

If a change had to be made to the 20 metre free, i would suggest that the 20 metre line be moved back to become a 22 or 23 metre line. After all the 20 metre line was introduced way back when players were weaker, hurls were narrower, balls were heavier and it was a less specialised discipline. It wouldnt be a difficult thing to change, it wouldnt involve banning anything or adding any extra pressure on referees and it would perhaps give the defending team a better chance when facing the expert free takers. If have faced penalties over the years from some of the countries top penalty takers believe it or not, not at intercounty level i must add, but i do have experience in relation to this and Patrick Kelly is right in saying that saving a very well struck penalty is pure luck, but lets not forget that a penalty or a 21 yard free is supposed to be a deterrent, and should continue to be so.

890202 (Wexford) - Posts: 1278 - 16/12/2013 18:45:07    1524360

Fair point Hill16.

I have a question for you though; Assuming referees get all decisions correct (a big assumption I know) then the reason why the attacking team was given the free in the first place was due to foul/cynical play from the defending team. The attacking team with the greater chance of scoring given the proximity of the ball to opposition goal are denied a chance to score by foul play by the defending team. If giving the defenders an equal chance of stopping the ball as the attacking team of scoring, does this not reward cynical play? When frees are given, is the idea not to punish them for their foul play and not reward them?

Do we not remember the massive furore in the summer when Tyrone played Monaghan? Sean Cavanagh-Gate?

A player is clean through, one on one with the keeper (in hurling) is most likely to score. If he is pulled down, then he or his teammate should be given every opportunity to score - not have it limited.

bennybunny (Cork) - Posts: 3917 - 16/12/2013 18:45:40    1524361

What's to say that the 21 free wasn't awarded for something fairly timid and play wouldn't have resulted in a goal anyway? You're giving a great goal scoring opportunity for what was just a point scoring opportunity being denied

square_ball_69 (Westmeath) - Posts: 826 - 16/12/2013 19:03:45    1524367

I understand what you are saying benny but if I recall correctly some of the 21 yard frees in the all-Ireland this year were for relatively minor infringements and should not be punished with an almost certain goal as will happen once the Nash type technique is perfected. I go back again to the idea of a fair contest and while the attacking team should be compensated, the defending team should be allowed the opportunity to at least try to make amends by saving any goal attempt - a free struck from 20 metres does this but not one from 14 metres. And while Cork may believe they are being punished here for having a gifted fretaker, as the poster above stated due to the many hours of training done by modern players Id be amazed if at least half the top counties did not have someone striking frees in a similar way this year.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 16/12/2013 19:08:06    1524368

I think your way off 89020 when you say modern players are stronger. back in those days, youraverage player was a physical labourer/farmer/builder, etc.working physically all their lives. Way stronger than most modern players who sit around all day, before doing a few hours of gym work a week.

flack (Dublin) - Posts: 1054 - 16/12/2013 19:19:30    1524371

Soma

No problem with your points and I certainly don't see this as anti-Cork. As I said earlier, I have an open mind but am interested in how it would be worded.

bennybunny (Cork) - Posts: 3917 - 16/12/2013 19:22:55    1524372

bennybunny

yes but the punsihment for committing a foul is already rewarded to the attacking team by giving them a free strike at goal thats the reward for foul play.I dont believe this automatically should mean they must get a score from the free,if that was the case then you would just award them a point instead of having them take the placed ball.
the sean cavanagh thing only came about because of joe brolly really,it made headlines his ranting as it clocked up the viewers.
he could have been ranting about anything that night and it would have made headlines as it was more to do with the entertainment value for viewers.sean cavanagh thing pales into significance with something that happened in the dublin sfc final this year involving two county players but didnt get any headlines because no cameras or rants.
They are given every oppurtunity to score from a 21 yard line with a free strike at goal with only three players allowed stop it,
but if you abuse (within the rules or not) the distance of where the strike is rewarded to be taken from then I feel if hes allowed move in with it then technically the free is in play so therefore the defenders or goalkeeper should also be in play and allowed forward.

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 16/12/2013 19:23:30    1524373

flack

hahahahaha your comparing apples with ornages with that comment
labour built muscles no doubt but lifitng weights is designed to build muscles too
its an individual thing not an exact science.
colm cooper could go to the gym which im sure he does
but theres no point in trying to build him up like arnie
first off he hasnt got the genetic body type to be able to do so
and secondly it would not suit his style of play and job he does on a pitch as it would slow him down if he increased muscle mass in certain areas.
also your forgetting one simple thing with striking a sliotar you could be arnie swartz or an under 10 and it wouldnt matter a jot about physical size its about technique of stiking that makes the differance.

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 16/12/2013 19:29:08    1524374

flack
County: Dublin
Posts: 204

Your core is mainly what makes you hit harder (i'm sure golfers do a lot of work theirs), you don't improve that by working on a farm.A few hours in the gym also makes you a lot bigger than working on a farm.

RebelCork (Cork) - Posts: 789 - 16/12/2013 19:35:10    1524377

Hill16

Fair points. Agreed.

bennybunny (Cork) - Posts: 3917 - 16/12/2013 20:13:19    1524387

hurlinspuds
County: Cork
Posts: 1122

1524242
arock, how can it be point blank if people stay on the line as per the rules??

The rule states the defenders should be 20 metres from the ball when its struck, if Nash (or anyone else) flings it forward say 5 metres they be in row Z to make it legal.

I repeat a 20 metre free should actually be just that, you can't surely be arguing that it can be a 17/15/13 metre one?

A throat injury is not new at all, but this type of free if it is allowed continue in its currnt form will have a sad outcome. The player striking the ball is the one moving forward, no problem if both defenders and striker stay on their designated lines. Hopefully it will be corrected.

arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4954 - 16/12/2013 20:48:46    1524393

rebel,bigger isnt the same as stronger, not even close, although bigger invariably means slower. Throw a punch at one of these shapers from the gym and youll see how weak they really are! :) I wasnt talking about technique hill, because 89020 wasnt, some people wil have better technique naturally, or honed in training. not in the gym. Who hits the ball hardest is nash,, because he has the bigest hurley! his technique isnt perfect, seeing as he mishits a few, but thats because what hes trying to do is very dificult

flack (Dublin) - Posts: 1054 - 16/12/2013 20:50:39    1524394