hill, labour, (unless your a good skiver!) involves heavy work for 8 hours a day, how much gym can one person do? especially an amateur?

flack (Dublin) - Posts: 1054 - 16/12/2013 20:54:24    1524396

I think it should be banned too dangerous in my opinion. anyone that just dismisses the danger element hasn't stood in front of many normal 21s as far as i can see

someday (Limerick) - Posts: 1104 - 16/12/2013 21:19:15    1524405

The only thing I've to say, and that is if you can use Gaelic Football as a suitable comparison for determining rules; I've always wondered about free taking in Hurling in comparison to football. In football, when the free taker opts to take it from his hands, the point at where the referee deems that the foul was committed is pointed out, and the free taker is generally not meant to go past this point (dependent on how picky the ref is). So the footballer will take a few steps back and aim to kick from that point. Whereas in Hurling the ball is placed at the point in which the foul was committed, and because of the dual contact type of free that Hurling allows the player is allowed to take a few steps forward when taking the free. No sports that I've ever watched have a similar type of free to Hurling so it's difficult to compare but generally like football the player is not allowed to go past the point in which the foul was committed. Now I realize that very few sports have the dual contact type of free so it's a tricky one but I always thought it unfair that players were allowed take frees in Hurling past the point of where the foul was committed.

The only sport I can think of that has a similar type of approach is the penalty shot in Ice Hockey, where the player is allowed a free run at the goals to try and score. But this is a much smaller goals and I don't the same thinking can be applied.

JMK (Kerry) - Posts: 273 - 16/12/2013 21:26:38    1524408

Some sports (including hurling) are dangerous, its what attracts some people to it. The game is going to be unrecognizable in another 30 years if the rules are changed because there's a low chance of a player been injured(I think he hit one player this year,which was when kelly charged him down). You have as much of a chance of getting injured off a pitch in baseball than a 21 in hurling. It's not like Nash is aimlessly smacking ball either, if from what 14 yards he can't avoid hitting a player's body than he shouldn't be taking them.

RebelCork (Cork) - Posts: 789 - 16/12/2013 21:31:21    1524412

flack
County: Dublin
Posts: 206

1524396
hill, labour, (unless your a good skiver!) involves heavy work for 8 hours a day, how much gym can one person do? especially an amateur?

well seen as people who go to the gym and do it right(like an inter county player would be as they follow programmes) would work each muscle specificaly,then when they finish a session eat the right food to build the muscle.
where as a labour worker is more at risk of injury than building muscle as they will over do certain muscles and nine times out of ten will be lifting with bad posture or using the wrong muscle to lift,then they dont have the time to eat the right food either.
so if you want to be technical a person doing a strength training programme will always be stronger then the person who does labour only.

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 16/12/2013 21:45:29    1524414

bennybunny
County: Cork
Posts: 2154

1524387
Hill16

Fair points. Agreed.

cheers benny

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 16/12/2013 21:46:23    1524415

JMK
County: Kerry
Posts: 115

1524408 The only thing I've to say, and that is if you can use Gaelic Football as a suitable comparison for determining rules; I've always wondered about free taking in Hurling in comparison to football. In football, when the free taker opts to take it from his hands, the point at where the referee deems that the foul was committed is pointed out, and the free taker is generally not meant to go past this point (dependent on how picky the ref is). So the footballer will take a few steps back and aim to kick from that point. Whereas in Hurling the ball is placed at the point in which the foul was committed, and because of the dual contact type of free that Hurling allows the player is allowed to take a few steps forward when taking the free. No sports that I've ever watched have a similar type of free to Hurling so it's difficult to compare but generally like football the player is not allowed to go past the point in which the foul was committed. Now I realize that very few sports have the dual contact type of free so it's a tricky one but I always thought it unfair that players were allowed take frees in Hurling past the point of where the foul was committed.

JMK, I'm not sure this is a good example because footballers, when taking a free from the hands, don't necessarily take steps back before their run up. More often they will take a few slow steps forward/to the side which narrows the angle, and then swing it over. People used to complain about this as taking advantage but now nobody mentions it.

I hope there is no rule change just to stop Nash because I loved the anticipation of it. As other have said, the advantage should go to the team who were fouled against, and if there is one particularly skillful player who is a threat from set pieces, let him/her have at it. A sliotar could hurt you bad if you get it in the groin or the ear but it's not something to be afraid of for any self respecting defender.

Suas Sios (None) - Posts: 1558 - 17/12/2013 10:16:08    1524448

Its amazing skill to do what he does but I think the ruling around it is wrong!

If you concede a 21 yard free how is it ok to strike it from say 13 yards. If you want to argue that the free is actually taken on the 21 yard line then the initial pickup brings the ball into play so the opposition should be allowed play it..

Ban (Westmeath) - Posts: 1468 - 17/12/2013 12:40:57    1524484

Dunno hill, I've been labouring all my working life, and I can say from experience that I'm stronger than most gym monkeys, if not all of them!;-) injuries usually caused by the amount of work done, minor tears building up, rather than bad postures. You even get courses now in how to lift, for the really thick!

flack (Dublin) - Posts: 1054 - 17/12/2013 12:58:30    1524490

It is ridiculous to allow this type of free. It is dangerous and it is not nice to watch. If a goalkeeper is taking this type of free, he should only be allowed use a standard outfield hurley.

fainleog (Limerick) - Posts: 602 - 17/12/2013 13:00:02    1524492

Maybe its time to bring in compulsory Jock-straps...... would'nt fancy standing up to a new era of Antony Nash prodogys lining up your Town Halls every second Sunday....not funny....iv'e seen the results

kikfada (Louth) - Posts: 2091 - 17/12/2013 13:36:03    1524504

Regards the jock straps , and the he could hurt someone , as mentioned in initial thread can someone please give evidence or point towards research carried out as opposed to the guess work going on ,
Have people been injured directly from this free Yes/No
Is there a credible danger Yes/No
Has risk assessment been carried out Yes/No
If yes , is level of danger sufficent to warrant change in laws as currently ussed Yes/ No
Some of the knee jerk reaction posts here are comical , you could make a case for the lads wearing American football outfits if you really nit- pick .

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 17/12/2013 15:02:34    1524546

flack
County: Dublin
Posts: 212

1524490
Dunno hill, I've been labouring all my working life, and I can say from experience that I'm stronger than most gym monkeys, if not all of them!;-) injuries usually caused by the amount of work done, minor tears building up, rather than bad postures. You even get courses now in how to lift, for the really thick!

hahaha yeah the manual handling course that takes two days to do in some jobs to show you in two minutes how to lift a box by bending your knees haha
yeah you probably are but thats because 99% of the people you see in a gym dont know how to do exercises right and dont know what type of exercise is for the correct muscles and what programmes they should be doing.
If you do the correct exercises for the correct muscles and do it right the then resistance training is the best way to build muscle

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 17/12/2013 15:18:28    1524554

damothedub

injurys as you say its not clear at all I agree with you
but fairness is the problem most would have with it.
if the free or penalty is supposed to be awarded from the 21 yard line then once he moves the ball forward moving in with it the defending players should be allowed move out towards him too thats the only fair way of keeping it allowed

hill16no1man (Dublin) - Posts: 12665 - 17/12/2013 15:20:55    1524557

I will try and answer your questions for you Damo
Have people been injured directly from this free No, I dont think so. But one of the country's best keepers lost one and a bit testicles previously trying to stop a penalty, the less reaction time you have to block the greater the chance of the sliothar hitting you.
Is there a credible danger Yes, because if it is hit from a distance where reaction times do not allow you to block the sliothar or avoid it hitting you in more 'delicate' places then it is only a matter of time before it happens. I dont see how anyone can dispute this. There will always be danger, but leaving players completely exposed to this with no way of protecting themselves seems stupid to me.
Has risk assessment been carried out No, I dont think so.
If yes , is level of danger sufficent to warrant change in laws as currently ussed N/A

Now here are 2 questions for you
Do you agree that if frees continue to be struck from 15 yards at defenders who have not got any reaction time, then it is inevitable that someday someone will gethit and receive a very, very serious injury, especially if it hits them on the throat?
If yes, how many times would you need this to happen before you would consider changing the law to make sure the free is hit from no closer than 19 or so yards?

17/12/2013 15:20:55
hill16no1man
County: Dublin
Posts: 6808

1524557
damothedub

injurys as you say its not clear at all I agree with you
but fairness is the problem most would have with it.
if the free or penalty is supposed to be awarded from the 21 yard line then once he moves the ball forward moving in with it the defending players should be allowed move out towards him too thats the only fair way of keeping it allowed

Hill if people are against out of an idea that its an unfair advantage , that ok with me. , while Id be more inclined to go with giving the advantage to Nash , but its those posting from a health issue I have issue with as they have no evidence to back it up .also might add that Ive heard nothing from current players, opponents , coaches giving out about this , and as we know hurling players aint short of an opinion .

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 17/12/2013 16:02:17    1524586

17/12/2013 15:21:47
Soma
County: UK
Posts: 37

1524559
I will try and answer your questions for you Damo
Have people been injured directly from this free No, I dont think so. But one of the country's best keepers lost one and a bit testicles previously trying to stop a penalty, the less reaction time you have to block the greater the chance of the sliothar hitting you.
Is there a credible danger Yes, because if it is hit from a distance where reaction times do not allow you to block the sliothar or avoid it hitting you in more 'delicate' places then it is only a matter of time before it happens. I dont see how anyone can dispute this. There will always be danger, but leaving players completely exposed to this with no way of protecting themselves seems stupid to me.
Has risk assessment been carried out No, I dont think so.
If yes , is level of danger sufficent to warrant change in laws as currently ussed N/A

Now here are 2 questions for you
Do you agree that if frees continue to be struck from 15 yards at defenders who have not got any reaction time, then it is inevitable that someday someone will get hit and receive a very, very serious injury, especially if it hits them on the throat?
If yes, how many times would you need this to happen before you would consider changing the law to make sure the free is hit from no closer than 19 or so yards?

Let me answer like this , ban cars and all automobiles and you reduce road fatalities fact , ban horse racing no jockeys die tragically , no boxing no brain injuries , have been on a skiing holiday in one weekend saw two broken collar bones and a broken leg , the list can go on and on , Ive seen someone doubled over having got it in the nuts from a sideline in hurling yet not from a free ? ,
My point being I dont like playing the inevitable game as there is an element of chance and bad fortune to life , those who try to out law chance are the same people that have schools with a no run policy and in my own kids school hes not allowed bring his hurl and solitar to school for break as it could be used as a weapon . Some bridges you cross only when you have to .

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 17/12/2013 16:10:14    1524592

Ah I see what you are saying Damo its just I think this is an unnecessary risk. You are allowed to drive cars, but not at 120mph because the risk is too great, jockeys have to wear helmets and back protectors etc. There is always danger and there is nothing wrong with that but this seems a stupid danger for no real reward. I have stood in goal for many a penalty and 21, but I really wouldnt want to stand in goal for a free struck from 15 metres, both because it is dangerous and you have no chance of stopping it unless it actually hits you.

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 17/12/2013 16:48:17    1524612

Soma do you think its right to change a rule because of one man , who by the way according to Pa Kelly only hits the ball as hard as he does due to hours and hours of practice and skill , Cluxton came out and took frees then everyone started to have a go , however they weren't as successful a lot of them as its not as easy as it looks , now haven't seen Gary O Dwyer or too many other net stoppers jumping up to be the next Nash . Seems extreme that one keeper steps forward offers a bit of skill and theatre and now we talk about possible rule changes

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 17/12/2013 17:07:39    1524619

In football I believe you can back up and take 3-4 steps to the point the free was given from but you cannot pass that point and kick it. Why should Nash's free taking be any different? He is striking the ball 10 yards past the infraction point where the free was intended to be taken. It is utilizing a loophole in the rules which can be resolved by simply saying the ball must be struck no closer to the goal than where the infraction took place. I don't think it is a skill, I think it is a trick shot designed to cheat.
Plain and simple. By that contention if a footballer was able to chip the ball into the air ten yards closer to the goal and run in and strike it and score a goal before anyone else got to it, the goal should stand. Highly unlikely to happen but is there a rule that specifically prohibits that?
What other field sport in the world where a ball is used and frees given allows someone to strike that free either with foot or stick 10 yards closer than where the free happened? Answer: None!

Dubfan Abroad (Dublin) - Posts: 282 - 17/12/2013 17:07:52    1524620