Cork GAA Discussion Thread

Gary Neville

Hidalgo wrote: »

Fair play to O' Keefe is right. One camera angle was from down the Cork goal. From this viewpoint, you could see O' Keefe ready to sprint full tilt as soon as Nash began the lift.

I suppose the main benefit was that it happened in what became a forgone conclusion of a game, had it been a tight affair and say Cork lost by a pt, then there would have been uproar.

But Kelly charged out in the AI final last year - It should have stated then whether Kelly was breaking the rules. It was fudged maybe in the hope that congress would address it before this year's c/ship.

Nash/Cork should have been made aware if there was changes in interpretation. Might have influenced the outcome.

Gary Neville

D'Agger wrote: »

Not in the slightest - I'm simply stating that it may be better for you to PM him rather than continue to post about it on the thread when he doesn't seem to be responding. I'd classify it as logical over intemperate tbh

Fair enough - Apologies for that.

rebel girl 15

Hidalgo wrote: »

Do we know if all referees got together and made a group decision to make lift as first part of the strike, or is that just the Sunday Game panel assuming so?

I don't think so - surely it would have been out in the open domain given the debate that surrounded it in the weeks before Congress. The reason why it wasn't debated at Congress is because the wording of the rule would be such that it would affect all frees, not just penalties and 21m frees, hence its withdrawl. There has been central council meeting since then, so should have been discussed then, so as to clarify the situation. Any change in wording in rulebook would have to go before a special congress, whereas interpretation wouldn't

SeaFields

I listened to Pat McEnaney give a radio interview last night on the issue. His suggestion for a new rule would be the penalty being struck before the 20 meter line but with only the keeper on the line to defend it. He believes this would clear it up but also admitted that there is a big loophole and a lot of confusion surrounding the issue since it cropped up last year

webels

SeaFields wrote: »

I listened to Pat McEnaney give a radio interview last night on the issue. His suggestion for a new rule would be the penalty being struck before the 20 meter line but with only the keeper on the line to defend it. He believes this would clear it up but also admitted that there is a big loophole and a lot of confusion surrounding the issue since it cropped up last year

Would tend to agree with this, take a few steps back as would be required by most free takers. But it has to come back to the point that the penalty is penalising the defending team and should be a bigger advantage to the attacking team than it probably is now. For years most penalty takers took 2-3 steps to get into the shot for power and momentum etc. Aussie rules makes the player take steps back to take the kick from the point of mark/free. 1 on the line is possibly too difficult to stop but two on the line would certainly improve the odds for the attacking team.

Horse84

Response to loughnane from bob Ryan

http://www.hoganstand.com/Cork/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=218117&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

eigrod

Horse84 wrote: »

Response to loughnane from bob Ryan

http://www.hoganstand.com/Cork/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=218117&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

About the right response in my opinion. Will be very interesting to see what they do next week though, when the game is over.

Pat McEneaney has said that Cork had no say in the choice of replay referee last year (which is what I believed anyway).

Horse84

Completely! What loughnane said, with no proof given whatsoever except a stupid nod to Cahill, was disgraceful. If Des had a brain he'd have pulled him on that properly. On top of that the man's analysis of the game if you could call it that was pure nonsense. It'll be interesting to see if cusack responds to it at some later stage.

rebel girl 15

eigrod wrote: »

About the right response in my opinion. Will be very interesting to see what they do next week though, when the game is over.

Pat McEneaney has said that Cork had no say in the choice of replay referee last year (which is what I believed anyway).

Gavin refereed the final, with McGrath as the standby - for replays its nearly expected that it will reverse, with the standby becoming the games referee

ShamoBuc

Ger really is a one trick pony. He needs to start upping his game.

zetecescort

Loughnanes crap response to the pull across Cahalane was stupid too. "sure twas early in the game, was hit where there wouldnt be much damage done" or words to that effect

Hidalgo

zetecescort wrote: »

Loughnanes crap response to the pull across Cahalane was stupid too. "sure twas early in the game, was hit where there wouldnt be much damage done" or words to that effect

Were Cork fans so adamant that O' Neill should have seen red in the drawn All Irl.

Loughnanes spiel was the ususal rigmorole, 'ah sure if he sent him off it would have ruined the game' etc etc etc

corkrobinhood

Ger is only on the wind-up,as Pat Spillane would be too,get in Corks heads,thats all hes at.

Off with him,best response would be to beat Clare on Sunday.

Figsy32

Hidalgo wrote: »

Were Cork fans so adamant that O' Neill should have seen red in the drawn All Irl.

Loughnanes spiel was the ususal rigmorole, 'ah sure if he sent him off it would have ruined the game' etc etc etc

As a Cork fan I can fully accept both incidents were red cards. To say anything else is blatant bias. However whether the O'Neill incident was or wasn't a red card has no bearing on what happened on Sunday.

Regarding the Cahalane one, I was in the Town End on Sunday and saw the incident and to be fair, the referee had his back turned. You can't expect the man to have eyes in the back of his head. It's the umpires I'd be questioning as they should have had a good view.

The posts are spot on though, Loughnane is just stirring and I'm sure RTE are only delighted with the coverage his comments have gotten with the week that was in it!

Connorzee

From Joe.ie

a penalty or a 20 metre free will have to be struck on or outside the 20metre line and not inside it, as had previously been the case. The player taking the free or penalty will be allowed to bring the ball back up to seven metres from the 20 metre line to aid their run-up.
Defenders attempting to prevent a score will not be able to leave the line until the ball is struck and by ‘struck’ the GAA have made clear that the lifting of the ball is not counted as a strike, as it was interpreted when O’Keefe stopped Nash’s penalty at Semple Stadium on Sunday.
You can read the exact text of the GAA’s rule changes below, but essentially it will result in a fairly dramatic alteration of both penalties and 20 metre frees in hurling, with the initial reaction suggesting that it will lead to examples of cynical play by defenders inside the penalty area on the basis that they’d be far more confident of saving a penalty struck from further out the field.

The rules will remain in place until GAA Congress next year.
The Management Committee of the GAA has asked Central Council to consider and adjudicate on the following recommendations for Interpretations of Rule in relation to the Playing Rules of Hurling 2.2 Exceptions (i) and (ii), 2.3, 2.5 and 4.16(b)
The terms “taken” or “retaken” in Rules 2.2 Exceptions (i) and (ii) and 2.3 shall mean the ball being “struck”.
A player taking a penalty or a 20m free puck, may bring the ball back up to seven metres from the 20m line for the purposes of making a traditional run at the ball, but shall strike the ball on or outside the 20m line but not inside it.
Exception: In the context of Rule 2.5, if a player taking a penalty or free puck on the actual 20m line fails to lift the ball at the first attempt or fails to strike it with the hurley, and that action causes the ball to marginally cross inside the 20m line, the player, as provided for in this Rule, shall be allowed to strike the ball on the ground without delay.
(a) The players defending a penalty or free puck awarded on the centre point of the 20m line shall stand on their goal-line and may not move towards the 20m line until the ball has been actually struck. ‘Lifting’ the ball with the hurley does not constitute ‘striking the ball’.
(b) The players defending a free puck awarded on the 20m line at a point other than on the centre point of that line shall stand a minimum of 20m from the point of award of the free and may not move closer to that point of award until the ball has been actually struck. ‘Lifting’ the ball with the hurley does not constitute ‘striking the ball’
This Interpretation shall, in accordance with Rule 3.43, Official Guide Part 1, have the force of Rule until Congress 2015, when the issues will be further addressed by way of Motion(s).

zetecescort

Pity Frank is too busy holding the begging bowl to sort out these rule changes outside of congress

dring

I think Cork/Nash had lost any advantage as other players had practiced during the winter which we saw with Reid in the league final. Interesting to see how many goals will be scored now. If there's a low strike rate the new interpretation becomes a licence for cynical fouls at the mere sniff of a goal chance which will probably end up with a new rule with just the goalkeeper facing the shot. Another point-How is the seven meters from the 20m line to be measured? will we see refs taking seven steps out?

ShamoBuc

Well, its kinda cleared up for now anyway. Not sure if there will be more cynical fouling, although the black card system could be used if happens. I hope the next few pens are scored and all the fuss dies down.

Mountainlad

dring wrote: »

I think Cork/Nash had lost any advantage as other players had practiced during the winter which we saw with Reid in the league final. Interesting to see how many goals will be scored now. If there's a low strike rate the new interpretation becomes a licence for cynical fouls at the mere sniff of a goal chance which will probably end up with a new rule with just the goalkeeper facing the shot. Another point-How is the seven meters from the 20m line to be measured? will we see refs taking seven steps out?

Nobody will go back as far as seven metres to take the penalties. To be honest I could see it pretty much reverting to the way it was.

Innish_Rebel

Mountainlad wrote: »

Nobody will go back as far as seven metres to take the penalties. To be honest I could see it pretty much reverting to the way it was.

But now it can't as every single penalty taker used to advance the ball some amount before hitting it - so now even that is outlawed... They are all going to have to move the ball back some distance from the 21 before lifting/striking.

Not sure what the solution is but the history is there - we've all seen the Christy Ring video showing how to take a penalty and he advances the ball to hit it...

Blue Magic

http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2014/0610/622946-hurling-rules-clarification-to-ban-nash-free/

Also bans the TJ Reid free and countless other keepers across the country! FYI - Eddie Keher!

Complete cop-out

D'Agger

Blue Magic wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2014/0610/622946-hurling-rules-clarification-to-ban-nash-free/

Also bans the TJ Reid free and countless other keepers across the country! FYI - Eddie Keher!

Complete cop-out

I don't see how it's a cop out tbh

If a player is advancing serveral yards before lashing a shot at over 90kph then bringing in a rule that prevents advancing and looks to have the ball struck from the position at which the free is given seems fairly logical to me

Innish_Rebel

D'Agger wrote: »

I don't see how it's a cop out tbh

If a player is advancing serveral yards before lashing a shot at over 90kph then bringing in a rule that prevents advancing and looks to have the ball struck from the position at which the free is given seems fairly logical to me

Yes fair enough - but it bans every penalty I can ever remember being taken too. There isn't a penalty that I can remember taken that the striker didn't place ball on the 21 and even if standing side on (most run up) advance the ball anything from 1 - 3 - 9 yards, every one of these penalties are now illegal. It was hard enough to score a penalty before this rule came in - what now, tap it over the bar???

case885

What happens if the player crosses the 21? Will there be a buzzer go off :pac: Will penalty be retaken or overturned? Can see refs getting awful stick for this.

corkrobinhood

I can see every ref watching Nash like a hawk,see if he moves even an inch over the line.....problem is if the ref is watching Nash who's going to be watching the goalie coming off his line?

Damn sure wont be the umpires,if their anything like last Sunday they wont be watching much.....

RGS

The change is a joke and hopefully a more considered amendment will appear at congress next year but i wont hold my breath.

there is too much for the ref to keep an eye on and he wont get any help from his officials.


my suggestion is to move the 20 metre line out to 25 metres and let the free takers continue to take the frees as they have for the past 100 years. less for the ref to keep an eye on. may need to reduce the numbers on the line to two to get the attacking team a reasonable chance of scoring a goal.

Mountainlad

Innish_Rebel wrote: »

But now it can't as every single penalty taker used to advance the ball some amount before hitting it - so now even that is outlawed... They are all going to have to move the ball back some distance from the 21 before lifting/striking.

Not sure what the solution is but the history is there - we've all seen the Christy Ring video showing how to take a penalty and he advances the ball to hit it...

When I say revert that's exactly what I mean and to be honest I can say it going back to that, theyll bring it into the 18 if they have to by way of no goals from penalties.

hurling_lad

There's no reason that Cork can't use this new rule to their benefit. In fact, given the goal threat that Clare represent, the timing might just be perfect.

Slobbery

Nash's scoring rate from penalties isn't great anyway, so it's not like this Nash rule is a huge disadvantage to cork.

The team most pissed of should be Kilkenny because TJ Reid puts them away with the same style

http://www.eveningecho.ie/2014/06/11/cork-missed-nine-last-13-penalties/

Mountainlad

hurling_lad wrote: »

There's no reason that Cork can't use this new rule to their benefit. In fact, given the goal threat that Clare represent, the timing might just be perfect.

Yeah, and I'm not trying to have a go, but I don't remember that many people being so greatly concerned by cynical play a few years ago. Cynicism is inevitable, and while I'd like to see it minimized the reality is that any team that gets the opportunity will take it. Nashs penalty taking style isn't a barrier to cynical play. It might be on the oposing side to Cork, but what's to stop a Cork player doing it to say Waterford and getting away with just because we don't have someone who can do the same?