International Rules 2013

minecrafter1

Aussie's have woken up now!

shiibata

Glenswilly not gonna be too happy with Murphy playing the whole game and the county final on tomorrow..

itac

Now that was a miss and a half. And we've had the mini-fisticuffs...If i'd on switched on for this quarter, i would've thought it an entertaining match.

tbh, the start/stop really kills it...it seems a lot more prevalent than i remember...that, coupled with the piercing whistle followed by "play on" makes for occasionally confused watching!

minecrafter1

Lovely point

seligehgit

shrewdness wrote: »

The game had genuinely put me to sleep but the rattle of the crossbar woke me up.

Yeah woke me up too,the bit of handbagging has livened it up a tad.Kevin Mc's goal has reintroduced a bit of daylight between the teams.

FixdePitchmark

Strange game,

Just we are not use to seeing no flow - the mark
Then the lads are so nervous of the tackle they are looking over their shoulder (as you would) - but then no flow with the ball when no mark.

Hard work - but an odd fascination all the same.

Flukey

Australia did not make the most of their biggest advantage - the round ball. Ireland did not exploit Australia's main disadvantage - the goalie.

minecrafter1

Well I'm hoping the one in CP is better than this one, or at least excitement the whole way through.

minecrafter1

Flukey wrote: »

Australia did not make the most of their biggest advantage - the round ball. Ireland did not exploit Australia's main disadvantage - the goalie.

Australia's advantage was the round ball?

wirelessdude01

Wonder where both teams will be going on the beer tonight?

wirelessdude01

minecrafter1 wrote: »

Australia's advantage was the round ball?

Was wondering that myself.

TakeTheVeil

Im hoping after lessons learned tonight it will be a much better game next week.

Is there any word on ticket sales for Croke Park. I'm gonna pick up a couple myself but I reckon it could be very low numbers next week - and Croke Park ca feel cavernous when its less than 30,000

wirelessdude01

TakeTheVeil wrote: »

Im hoping after lessons learned tonight it will be a much better game next week.

Is there any word on ticket sales for Croke Park. I'm gonna pick up a couple myself but I reckon it could be very low numbers next week - and Croke Park ca feel cavernous when its less than 30,000

I actually think that when it is less than 60k. Can hear an echo in the place.

Duckworth_Luas

Liam Hayes

kksaints

Flukey wrote: »

Australia did not make the most of their biggest advantage - the round ball. Ireland did not exploit Australia's main disadvantage - the goalie.

Aussie rules uses an oval ball not a round one.

Flukey

minecrafter1 wrote: »

Australia's advantage was the round ball?

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Was wondering that myself.

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

wirelessdude01

They are programmed to kick the oval ball in a certain way and it is alien to the way of kicking a round ball. Tadhg Kennelly said it took him the guts of 6months when he came back to be comfortable kicking a round ball again.

kksaints

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

Its not really an advantage considering they have kicked an oval ball for all of their careers.

aveytare

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

What the fup

Flukey

kksaints wrote: »

Its not really an advantage considering they have kicked an oval ball for all of their careers.

Exactly! Rory McIlroy is used to hitting a golf ball into a hole 4.25 inches wide for all of his career. So he wouldn't have much difficultly trying to adjust to hitting into one 212.5 inches wide. The "they are used to playing with an oval ball" excuse is ridiculous. It is not as if they never saw a round ball in their lives. It is not that difficult to kick, and far easier to predict the bounce of. I've been going to these games since the 1980s and I've yet to see one Australian have even the slightest difficulty with the round ball. Take off all of their shirts and in terms of handling the ball, you would not know which were the Irish and which were the Australians. I didn't see any of them having any trouble with it tonight. The line about them having difficulty with the round ball is frequently trotted out, but there is never even the absolute tiniest bit of evidence of it. Give both teams a pyramid-shaped ball next time.

robbiezero

Watched first two quarters and switched over.
Dire stuff.
The mark destroys any momentum whatsoever in the game.

Shout Dust

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

That's the most ridiculous things I've read in a while. The lads playing with a round ball every week are going to have an advantage playing with a round ball over lads who play and train with an oval ball. There's a serious logic failure there somewhere

Flukey

Shout Dust wrote: »

That's the most ridiculous things I've read in a while. The lads playing with a round ball every week are going to have an advantage playing with a round ball over lads who play and train with an oval ball. There's a serious logic failure there somewhere

Yes, and it is your logic that is flawed. If you are skilled at doing something difficult, then doing something far easier, even if you are not used to doing it, is far easier. If you don't believe me, look at the the evidence of the game. As I said, there was no evidence of any of the Australians having any difficulties, and there never has been. Sure, they dropped a few and missed catches, but then that is exactly what the Irish players do.

It has been an issue at press conferences and in the media or on forums like this, but never on the field of play. Think of all the times they've beaten us, hammered us indeed. No problem with the round ball then. We are talking about a ball, not some highly technical piece of equipment that you'd have to read a manual to learn to use. It is a complete red herring, blown hugely out of proportion, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

ShamoBuc

Pretty poor affair, crowd were silent, no real passion on display, bit of a nothing game really.

Tom Joad

Just back from the match - surprised at how low the attendance was - about 17,500 - really flat atmosphere too but sound was atrocious. Game lacked flow and intensity for me but still enjoyed the novelty factor of being up close and getting to see things you don't see on telly. Zach Tuohy was a natural for this game and commanded a lot of the good Irish play. Jack McCaffrey is lightning quick :eek:. Sheehan is a beast of a man too - would do very well in Aussie rules..

ShamoBuc

Tom Joad wrote: »

Just back from the match - surprised at how low the attendance was - about 17,500 - really flat atmosphere too but sound was atrocious. Game lacked flow and intensity for me but still enjoyed the novelty factor of being up close and getting to see things you don't see on telly. Zach Tuohy was a natural for this game and commanded a lot of the good Irish play. Jack McCaffrey is lightning quick :eek:. Sheehan is a beast of a man too - would do very well in Aussie rules..

He would, but I hope he gets a long run of injury free years with his county instead.

elefant

Flukey wrote: »

Yes, and it is your logic that is flawed. If you are skilled at doing something difficult, then doing something far easier, even if you are not used to doing it, is far easier. If you don't believe me, look at the the evidence of the game. As I said, there was no evidence of any of the Australians having any difficulties, and there never has been. Sure, they dropped a few and missed catches, but then that is exactly what the Irish players do.

It has been an issue at press conferences and in the media or on forums like this, but never on the field of play. Think of all the times they've beaten us, hammered us indeed. No problem with the round ball then. We are talking about a ball, not some highly technical piece of equipment that you'd have to read a manual to learn to use. It is a complete red herring, blown hugely out of proportion, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

There's clear evidence- all the time, bordering on constantly, that the Australians struggle with the round ball. Their kicking is awful with it; you'd be shocked if one of the Australians scored a point from near the sideline.

Your posts on this issue are frankly bizarre, as it seems just about everyone agrees.

SomethingElse

Flukey wrote: »

Exactly! Rory McIlroy is used to hitting a golf ball into a hole 4.25 inches wide for all of his career. So he wouldn't have much difficultly trying to adjust to hitting into one 212.5 inches wide. The "they are used to playing with an oval ball" excuse is ridiculous. It is not as if they never saw a round ball in their lives. It is not that difficult to kick, and far easier to predict the bounce of. I've been going to these games since the 1980s and I've yet to see one Australian have even the slightest difficulty with the round ball. Take off all of their shirts and in terms of handling the ball, you would not know which were the Irish and which were the Australians. I didn't see any of them having any trouble with it tonight. The line about them having difficulty with the round ball is frequently trotted out, but there is never even the absolute tiniest bit of evidence of it. Give both teams a pyramid-shaped ball next time.

You don't know what you are talking about. Your analogy would have been just as useful had Rory McIlroy been striking an orange with an umbrella.

Absoluvely

Flukey wrote: »

Yes, and it is your logic that is flawed. If you are skilled at doing something difficult, then doing something far easier, even if you are not used to doing it, is far easier. If you don't believe me, look at the the evidence of the game. As I said, there was no evidence of any of the Australians having any difficulties, and there never has been. Sure, they dropped a few and missed catches, but then that is exactly what the Irish players do.

It has been an issue at press conferences and in the media or on forums like this, but never on the field of play. Think of all the times they've beaten us, hammered us indeed. No problem with the round ball then. We are talking about a ball, not some highly technical piece of equipment that you'd have to read a manual to learn to use. It is a complete red herring, blown hugely out of proportion, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

It's hard to believe that someone could actually think that the best way to train for a sport that uses a round ball is to train with a more "difficultly-shaped" ball. It's a remarkably stupid idea.

If you wanted to train someone to be a golfer, would you make them practise putting only using rubber eggs instead of golfballs? It's more difficult; therefore it's better practice!

And I actually think it's easier to accurately punt a rugby ball than a Gaelic football anyway.

Tom Joad

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

Wow - the two most ignorant and ridiculous things I have read on an internet forum in quiet some time and you managed them both in the one post. Wow you should get a special prize for that.

Squirtle McTurtle

micar wrote: »

Have TG4 on mute and listening to it in Newstalk.
The radio is about 1-2 seconds behind the TV picture

It was on setanta

Flukey

elefant wrote: »

There's clear evidence- all the time, bordering on constantly, that the Australians struggle with the round ball. Their kicking is awful with it; you'd be shocked if one of the Australians scored a point from near the sideline.

Your posts on this issue are frankly bizarre, as it seems just about everyone agrees.

Yes, there were bad kicks from the Australians, but the target was about 3 times as wide for the Gaelic Football players than normal, and we were still putting shots well wide. We had some absolute shockers. Their open goal miss looked good compared to some of our shooting. In other words, the Australians were no worse. In fact, some of the scores they did get, any Gaelic Footballer would be proud to get.

Yes, you can pick isolated incidents where an Australian made a bad kick or pass or missed a catch, but overall they are no worse. You could easily find some magnificent kicks, passes and catches by them too. You could also find lots of mistakes that make us look like the ones that don't normally play with a round ball. For every mistake they make, you could find one just as bad that an Irish player made. For every class point we score, you could find one just as good by an Australian. So the Australians are no worse than we are. That is all I am saying, and there is nothing bizarre about that.

The way some people portray this is as if they couldn't do anything with the ball. They just take the fact that they play with an oval ball and assume that they'd have to be bad with a round one, and then focus on every mistake they make with it as evidence and ignore all the good stuff they do. I don't. I look at the game as a whole, see the good and bad that both teams do, weigh it all up and see no difference. From when I went to my first matches in the 1980s, I have never seen them have more problems than the Irish. As I keep saying, if they are so bad, how have they ever beaten us over the years? When they have lost, it hasn't been down to problems with the round ball. They are not bad with the round ball, not bad at all. Some are exceptional with it.

Lemlin

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

That's just about the most sexist comment I've ever read on here.

As for the Aussies handing out hammerings, did you ever consider, like most sane people, that it's because they are professional athletes that play sport for a living playing amateurs.

That's their big advantage.

rebel girl 15

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage. It would be like having a golf hole 50 times bigger than a regulation one and asking Rory McIlroy to try to putt the ball in from 6 inches. Their one and only disadvantage is not having a goal keeper in their game. The guy they put in was like a Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper, flapping at the ball or just looking at it as it went past him, and yet Ireland only scored two goals.

As a ladies football goalkeeper, I take huge offence to that statement! I've seen many a men's keeper flap around as well - and I'm disappointed that someone would use that statement.

You said it yourself - he isn't a natural goalkeeper, and its very hard to go from being an outfield player to a keeper in a game that is different to yours anyway!

The rest of your post baffles me, they are used to kicking an oval ball, and from experience and past history, it is much easier to go from kicking a round ball to kicking an oval ball, rather than the way they are going from kicking an oval ball to kicking a round ball. I've watched the Rules games for quite a while, and the Australians have struggled badly with their kicking in the past, I didn't see tonight's game due to being away, but as far as I know, the ball used is lighter, more akin to a size 4 football weight. Have you ever seen an intercounty footballer go from kicking a size 5 weight to a size 4? I have, and the first few times was not pretty at all, which is why Ireland would have some poor passes and kicks

muincav

Flukey wrote: »

Yes, there were bad kicks from the Australians, but the target was about 3 times as wide for the Gaelic Football players than normal, and we were still putting shots well wide. We had some absolute shockers. Their open goal miss looked good compared to some of our shooting. In other words, the Australians were no worse. In fact, some of the scores they did get, any Gaelic Footballer would be proud to get.

Yes, you can pick isolated incidents where an Australian made a bad kick or pass or missed a catch, but overall they are no worse. You could easily find some magnificent kicks, passes and catches by them too. You could also find lots of mistakes that make us look like the ones that don't normally play with a round ball. For every mistake they make, you could find one just as bad that an Irish player made. For every class point we score, you could find one just as good by an Australian. So the Australians are no worse than we are. That is all I am saying, and there is nothing bizarre about that.

The way some people portray this is as if they couldn't do anything with the ball. They just take the fact that they play with an oval ball and assume that they'd have to be bad with a round one, and then focus on every mistake they make with it as evidence and ignore all the good stuff they do. I don't. I look at the game as a whole, see the good and bad that both teams do, weigh it all up and see no difference. From when I went to my first matches in the 1980s, I have never seen them have more problems than the Irish. As I keep saying, if they are so bad, how have they ever beaten us over the years? When they have lost, it hasn't been down to problems with the round ball. They are not bad with the round ball, not bad at all. Some are exceptional with it.

"isolated incidents"??? Your having a laugh....the Aussies kicking was the worst I have ever seen, and I have been going to these games since 1984. Im telling you for a fact that they are the worst team AUstralia has ever had and you can forget about your "isolated incidents" as there so many wayward kicks from the Aussies that even the children playing at half time were ten times better at kicking the ball,,,,,,,

Flukey

muincav wrote: »

"isolated incidents"??? Your having a laugh....the Aussies kicking was the worst I have ever seen, and I have been going to these games since 1984. Im telling you for a fact that they are the worst team AUstralia has ever had and you can forget about your "isolated incidents" as there so many wayward kicks from the Aussies that even the children playing at half time were ten times better at kicking the ball,,,,,,,

Ok, so you've been going since 1984 too, and so you have seen plenty of very good stuff from them too. It hasn't all been bad. A lot of it over the years has been very good, guys who were fantastic with a round ball. Sure, this isn't the best team they've ever sent, but they got some good scores tonight and did lots of good stuff. People are focusing exclusively on the mistakes they made. I saw mistakes tonight, but it seems that unlike anyone else who has posted, I saw some good stuff with the round ball from the Australians too. Yes, it is different for them, but it is not as big a jump from an oval to a round ball as people like to make out or believe. If we were taking a group of Australian Rules players and handing them a hurley and a sliothar and putting them up against an All-Star team, now that would be a huge jump for them. Some people seem to equate it with that much of a jump the way they go on about how difficult it is for them. Going from an oval ball to a round ball is different but it is not such a massive jump for them as people make out. That is all I have been trying to say.

As has been pointed out, they are professional sports people, so they should adapt to other sports a bit easier than the ordinary person. From what I have seen over the years, they adapt very well to the round ball, often well enough to hammer us. Some will say that is because they are professionals, but if they are professionals with bad round ball skills, they would maybe have run rings around on us on the pitch, but then went wayward with shots and kicks and would not have been able to beat us.

No matter how much people say it, they are not that bad with the round ball. Some of them may not be as good or as used to it as us, but they are very far from bad with it and some Australians over the years have been absolutely brilliant with it. We won and won comfortably tonight, but the way some people go on about the oval to round ball issue, we'd have won about 150 to nil. Leaving the behinds aside, it was 2 - 12 to 1 - 7 in Gaelic Football terms. 1 - 7 for a group of guys who are apparently useless with a round ball. Plenty of senior county teams wouldn't score 1 - 7 in the same amount of time. A mission for you all: Watch next Saturday and look out for some of the good stuff they do and some of the bad stuff we do. If anyone can come back without having seen one good thing they did, be it a pass, a catch, a kick or a score and without having seen one bad thing we did, there might be a case. I don't think it will happen though.

As to the Ladies Gaelic Football goalkeeper comment, sorry, no offence was intended.:o

Shout Dust

Flukey wrote: »

Yes, there were bad kicks from the Australians, but the target was about 3 times as wide for the Gaelic Football players than normal, and we were still putting shots well wide. We had some absolute shockers. Their open goal miss looked good compared to some of our shooting. In other words, the Australians were no worse. In fact, some of the scores they did get, any Gaelic Footballer would be proud to get.

Yes, you can pick isolated incidents where an Australian made a bad kick or pass or missed a catch, but overall they are no worse. You could easily find some magnificent kicks, passes and catches by them too. You could also find lots of mistakes that make us look like the ones that don't normally play with a round ball. For every mistake they make, you could find one just as bad that an Irish player made. For every class point we score, you could find one just as good by an Australian. So the Australians are no worse than we are. That is all I am saying, and there is nothing bizarre about that.

The way some people portray this is as if they couldn't do anything with the ball. They just take the fact that they play with an oval ball and assume that they'd have to be bad with a round one, and then focus on every mistake they make with it as evidence and ignore all the good stuff they do. I don't. I look at the game as a whole, see the good and bad that both teams do, weigh it all up and see no difference. From when I went to my first matches in the 1980s, I have never seen them have more problems than the Irish. As I keep saying, if they are so bad, how have they ever beaten us over the years? When they have lost, it hasn't been down to problems with the round ball. They are not bad with the round ball, not bad at all. Some are exceptional with it.

This is like some idea that you've gotten into your head and your too stubborn to consider anything else. The series is a compromise between the two codes, to give each side a chance of winning. Asking how come the Aussies have ever won is therefore nonsense, it's not as if they're coming in and playing an actual Gaelic match and beating the Irish side.

Flukey

Shout Dust wrote: »

This is like some idea that you've gotten into your head and your too stubborn to consider anything else. The series is a compromise between the two codes, to give each side a chance of winning. Asking how come the Aussies have ever won is therefore nonsense, it's not as if they're coming in and playing an actual Gaelic match and beating the Irish side.

I am taking the evidence of what I have seen over the years of going to this. It is not an idea, but what I have actually seen. I see the good and the bad, while others seem to only see the Australians making mistakes with the ball. My point is that the way some people go on, they are so out of their depth with the round ball that they can't ever kick it properly. On that basis, they wouldn't ever beat us no matter how good they were at all of the other aspects, but of course that is not the case.

The way you hear some people go on about the problems they have with it, it is as if all the Irish players could lie down on the pitch at the throw-in and have a sleep and let the Australians play, and then with a minute to go in the match, all wake up and make one move up the pitch and take one shot and win the test by a point to nil. It is not the major disadvantage it is made out to be. Some of our kicks, passes, shots, catches etc. are just as bad. Some of their ones are brilliant.

So they can do the good stuff with the round ball and do enough of it to be very competitive and even beat us. Whatever about all of the other aspects of the game, what you do with the ball is central, and in the game played, it is a round ball they have to do it with. It would not matter how fit or fast they were if they could not control, catch, pass or kick the ball and score. But they are more than good enough with it, even if not as good as us, to do enough with the round ball to beat us.... and often have.

ThunbergsAreGo

I have always wondered how they choose the keeper for these games, is it like "shortest straw" etc, must admit he gave me a laugh, oddly found myself almost rooting for the Aussies half way through the game just to make it interesting.

Its clear the fights/aggro is the main attraction and i thought the officiating was a bit overly picky tonight, with frees blown up for everything.

SSK

Flukey wrote: »

I am taking the evidence of what I have seen over the years of going to this. It is not an idea, but what I have actually seen. I see the good and the bad, while others seem to only see the Australians making mistakes with the ball. My point is that the way some people go on, they are so out of their depth with the round ball that they can't ever kick it properly. On that basis, they wouldn't ever beat us no matter how good they were at all of the other aspects, but of course that is not the case.

The way you hear some people go on about the problems they have with it, it is as if all the Irish players could lie down on the pitch at the throw-in and have a sleep and let the Australians play, and then with a minute to go in the match, all wake up and make one move up the pitch and take one shot and win the test by a point to nil. It is not the major disadvantage it is made out to be. Some of our kicks, passes, shots, catches etc. are just as bad. Some of their ones are brilliant.

So they can do the good stuff with the round ball and do enough of it to be very competitive and even beat us. Whatever about all of the other aspects of the game, what you do with the ball is central, and in the game played, it is a round ball they have to do it with. It would not matter how fit or fast they were if they could not control, catch, pass or kick the ball and score. But they are more than good enough with it, even if not as good as us, to do enough with the round ball to beat us.... and often have.

Some bizarre logic being applied here. I've seen first hand some excellent Aussie Rules players struggle massively to kick the round ball. In general they use a completely different technique to kick the oval ball which is with the straight foot like a punt kick in gaelic football. Sure they can adapt to it after a while but for most it's pretty uncomfortable and particularly when it comes to shooting the Irish have an advantage. I only saw bits and pieces of today's game but Aidan O'Shea and Ciaran Byrne kicked 2 superb scores that I would expect Irish players (at that level) to kick maybe 70% of the time. From experience the Aussies would be lucky to get 10% of those shots. That's a huge advantage. Most of the Aussie scores come from short kick passes (using a punt kick, which is the technique they are used to using) which are marked close to the goal. Their long range scoring in general is minimal.

Your assertion that its far easier to kick a round ball than an oval ball is based on nothing more than your opinion. If you'd seen what the likes of Motlop, Betts, Jetta etc can do week in week out with an oval ball they make it look like the easiest thing in the world. Similarly Zach Tuohy and Pearce Hanley are widely regarded as 2 of the best kicks of the oval ball in the AFL even having come from GAA backgrounds. So maybe it isn't that much more difficult, its just different.

In addition, kicking for a goal (the GAA version) on the run with a round ball is a technique which most top class gaelic footballers have mastered and again is something which the AFL players would have no experience with.

Another important point to note is that the games are not played using an O'Neills ball, a lighter version is used so as to somewhat neutralise the Irish advantage. This would explain why some of the Irish kicking was wayward, the ball, round as it is, is still pretty alien to the Irish lads as well.

Lemlin

Well would ya look at what the Australian press thought:

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/aussies-struggle-against-ireland-in-first-international-rules-test/story-fnca0u4y-1226743258400

AUSTRALIA fought back in the second half of the first International Rules Test in Cavan but Ireland's superior round-ball skills proved decisive, with the hosts winning 57-35.

Ireland was first to score with a three-point over off a free kick within the first minute of play before Geelong's Steven Motlop, one of the Indigenous All Stars' best, opened Australia's account.

The tourists clearly struggled to control the round ball off the boot whereas the Gaelic footballers consistently curved it through the posts for overs.

To be honest that you're still trying to argue this is ludicrous.

Maybe you should raise your conspiracy theory with the editor that playing with a ball alien to the Aussies is actually an advantage.

And another:

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2013-10-20/irish-draw-first-blood

Ireland's win was built on its superiority with the round ball and edge in strength

SSK

SSK wrote: »

Most of the Aussie scores come from short kick passes (using a punt kick, which is the technique they are used to using) which are marked close to the goal. Their long range scoring in general is minimal.

As an Irish man who watches AFL, I have to pull you up on this.

Can you provide figures to back up the claim that most of their scores are kicked from close range?.

The chances of someone marking it close to goal are pretty slim, well because it would cost you 6 points 99% of the time so defensively you don't allow it.
It would have to a mark taken in a group of 4+ so naturally it doesn't happen often.

Most kicks are 30+ metres out, and more of the angles as the pockets are easier to lead into.

Far more AFL players can kick consistently from 40-50 than GAA players as unlike GAA where you can pass your free kicks etc off to the best player, you have to take your own score.

SSK

gilberto_eire wrote: »

As an Irish man who watches AFL, I have to pull you up on this.

Can you provide figures to back up the claim that most of their scores are kicked from close range?.

The chances of someone marking it close to goal are pretty slim, well because it would cost you 6 points 99% of the time so defensively you don't allow it.
It would have to a mark taken in a group of 4+ so naturally it doesn't happen often.

Most kicks are 30+ metres out, and more of the angles as the pockets are easier to lead into.

Far more AFL players can kick consistently from 40-50 than GAA players as unlike GAA where you can pass your free kicks etc off to the best player, you have to take your own score.

In the International Rules I'm talking about, not Aussie Rules.

My point being that because they are used to the round ball, the Irish players have a far greater range of scoring areas in the compromise game than the Aussies, who rely on 30 yard and closer shots from relatively central areas to score (no stats to back this up, just a general observation)

Flukey

Australia lost, so of course the media are going to make an issue of the round ball. It is and always has been the perfect scapegoat when they have poor performances. When they've won, and they often have, there is hardly a mention, if any at all, about the shape of the ball. Even last night, when talking about the third quarter, there is little or no mention of the round ball in reports I've seen, even on Australian media.

They had a howler in missing that open goal. We've all seen Gaelic Footballers have worse ones. We've all looked on incredulously as skilled Gaelic Footballers have hit balls nearer to the corner than to the posts from perfect positions with no pressure on them in the many Gaelic Football matches we've been at. Shouts of "My granny could have scored that!" can be heard in such instances. Many of Australia's misses last night were far closer than those kinds of shots. It may be more difficult for the Australians, but not as difficult as made out.

It is a compromise rules game, between two football sports. In better times there has even been talk of bring soccer, rugby and American Footballers on board in an effort to expand the game. All of these sports have similarities in the broader sense, coming from the same family. But the way some of the media talk about the way the Australians struggle with the round ball, you'd think they were jockeys or synchronised swimmers or from some other completely unrelated sport coming to play the game. We have Shinty and Hurling players on next Saturday too, again related sports. It might be possible to come up with a cricket/baseball/rounders compromise game. It would be unfair to ask the Australian Rules Footballers swap for the Shinty players to play the Hurlers and put the Shinty players up against the Gaelic Footballers. You'd expect the Shinty players to struggle with the big ball and the Australian Rules players to struggle with a hurley and sliothar. An earlier post said I was too stubborn to consider anything else. From what I have seen I am the only poster who has seen the good and bad stuff the Australians did, while everyone else seems only see the bad stuff. Again I come back to the central point that it is not as difficult for the Australian Rules players with the round ball as is made out, and some of their good play proves that.

Shout Dust

Nobody is saying they can't do good stuff, you were trying to make out that somehow the Australians have a big advantage when it comes to playing with the round ball, which is nonsensical

SSK

Flukey wrote: »

Come on now, did you really ask that with a straight face? From day one that has always been the biggest advantage they have, by a country mile. They play their game with the oval ball, a far more difficult ball to deal with. Then they are given a far simpler one to deal with. Now if you can do something really difficult and then are given something easy to do, of course it is an advantage.

It may be more difficult for the Australians, but not as difficult as made out.

So which one is it

Flukey

Both. It is not a disadvantage to them, certainly not to the extent that is made out. In their sport they have no goalkeeper. That is their main disadvantage, though we never seem to exploit it enough.

sid waddell

A common description of this game I've heard in the past is that is Gaelic football with a tackle.

I'd say Aussie Rules with a round ball is if anything a more accurate description.

Skid X

It doesn't look any better in the cold light of day ...

bruschi

Flukey wrote: »

Both. It is not a disadvantage to them, certainly not to the extent that is made out. In their sport they have no goalkeeper. That is their main disadvantage, though we never seem to exploit it enough.

that wasnt the point being debated. you were actually trying to claim that having a round ball is an advantage to them. people were pulling you up on it quite obviously stating that it is clearly not an advantage to them.

what went on after with regards to the difficulties etc stemmed from your original, and absoutley obsurd, point.