Football Crisis - What's to be done?

wackokid

klairondavis wrote: »

All sports thrive on competition. Gaelic football moreso than most. Ulster football gets a lot of criticism from neutrals. Some of it is justified. However, the local crowds will flock to watch the Ulster Championship. It might not be pretty a lot of the time but almost every county believes they have a chance and that's what gives it meaning and relevance.

The obvious contrast is with Leinster football. I was at the Laois v Kildare match on Saturday evening and although the conditions were poor it was a fairly open and entertaining game. Despite this the attendance was disappointing. When both teams were competitive 15 years ago a local derby between the two would have drawn twice the crowd that was there on Saturday night. I've noticed a huge drop off in the Kildare support in recent years and it's a similar story up in Meath. They're two of the traditionally best supported counties but many matchgoers have given up because they don't see any hope of success in Leinster. On the other side of the coin Dublin's support has also dropped off. Between 1996 and 2001, Dublin couldn't win a Leinster Championship yet they would draw much bigger crowds for provincial games than they do now. A lot of fans probably think what's the point in paying €30 to watch a turkey shoot. I suspect if more Leinster teams adopted much more negative tactics there would probably be an increase in attendances because the championship would be a lot more competitive. There's no point in being easy on the eye if you're getting hammered out the gate whenever you meet a good team.

A few small tweaks to the rules would make a big difference to football:

All kickouts having to travel beyond the 45 would be a good starting point. Most teams are happy to surrender possession from a short kickout because it allows them to pull men back and pack their defence. It would also promote high fielding which is one of the great spectacles of our game and is in danger of becoming a lost art.

Give referees the power to advance the ball thirty metres rather than thirteen. It's a pity this proposal wasn't passed not so long ago. Teams strategically foul in their own half of the field to give themselves time to get their forwards back into defensive positions. The amount of quick frees that are stopped by opposition players is staggering. They'll think twice if the ball is brought forward by the referees and suddenly it becomes a scoreable free. It works very well in Australian Rules Football.

Only allow two men tackle an opponent at the one time. One of the ugliest sights in the game is when one of these rucks develop where the man in possession is surrounded by three or four opponents. Referees interpretations of these rucks are often inconsistent, particularly at club level. It is a great source of frustration for players and spectators. When there are more than two tacklers, surely they can't all be tackling the ball legally?

Abolish the black card and trial the sin bin again instead. Granted this would probably be scuppered because of the difficulties implementing it at club level. The thinking behind the black card is sound enough but it isn't really enough of a deterrent. Reducing a team to fourteen players for seven or eight minutes goes a bit further. Also widen the scope beyond the so-called 'cynical fouls' to include persistent fouling. Multiple frees against you, take a break for seven or eight minutes.

Congrats........really good attempt at improving the game for players and spectators which is surely the object of the exercise. Not sure about the long kick out though, as the 1st two changes you propose would probably be enough to change the game.
Having read through every post on this subject I am amazed that referees have escaped so here's my tuppence worth to improve the game for everybody.

RULE 1 A senior intercounty referee must have played senior intercounty football for at least one year.

Yes I know that is radical, but not impossible. Make it worthwhile for ex players financially to become refs and make life difficult for players who disagree with their decisions on the playing field as in rugby. I believe one of the main reasons that ex players do not become refs has to do with the abuse.

robbiezero

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

However, taking a county with 10 times the average population and a squad that is far far stronger than everyone elses, and making two teams with 5 times the average population (yes, you would still have 5 times the population of mayo or donegal - each), does make sense.

It's not far stronger than everyone elses. We would need to wait at least 10 more years before we can see if Dublin are so strong that this step might be required. For now there have been far, far more dominant teams than this Dublin team have been i.e. Kilkenny in hurling for the last 15 years, Kerry and Tyrone in the last decade. Kerry in the 70's , 80's.

I would certainly do away with the provincial system or separate it from the All-Ireland championship, the excitement is long gone out of it and the likes of the Leinster championship is a stroll for Dublin whereas the Ulster championship is a huge dogfight.

Nidgeweasel

Stoner wrote: »

TBH that suggests that the defensive system was developed to stop Dublin.

Its overstating the significance of McGuinesses single win against Dublin

Dismissive of Mayos non defensive system victory over Dublin in 2012

And completely dismissive of two fantastic teams Tyrone and Kerry.

It was most likely Tyrone McGuinesses planned to overthrow with that system.

Trying to create fear that without this system the dreaded Dubs wound run riot is a little small minded if you ask me as I don't believe the majority of Football fans genuinely think like that, also the system was most likely development to Out Tyrone, Tyrone.

That wasn't the intention.

We all know what the media are like, and the general population. Dublin the best thing since sliced bread win a couple of Irelands, the jealousy kicks in, then people start advocating defensive teams to stop them.

That type of thing.

MayoAreMagic

robbiezero wrote: »

It's not far stronger than everyone elses. We would need to wait at least 10 more years before we can see if Dublin are so strong that this step might be required. For now there have been far, far more dominant teams than this Dublin team have been i.e. Kilkenny in hurling for the last 15 years, Kerry and Tyrone in the last decade. Kerry in the 70's , 80's.

It absolutely is stronger. Plus, you don't seem to factor in that there are numerous players in Dublin that, given the opportunity could develop into high level county standard players. I mean if donegal, Kerry, tyrone and mayo can put together teams with roughly 150,000 people, then surely Dublin can make 2 with 1.5 million?

Kilkenny and Kerry are different - they had the same resources as everyone else and then went to dominate. If you split Dublin and one of their teams dominated for a decade that would be fair enough, because they would have had the same starting point as the rest.

robbiezero wrote: »

I would certainly do away with the provincial system or separate it from the All-Ireland championship, the excitement is long gone out of it and the likes of the Leinster championship is a stroll for Dublin whereas the Ulster championship is a huge dogfight.

Has it not occurred to you that the reason for that is because it is so unbalanced? If donegal had 10 times the population of everyone else in ulster, that would just be a stroll too.

robbiezero

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

It absolutely is stronger. Plus, you don't seem to factor in that there are numerous players in Dublin that, given the opportunity could develop into high level county standard players. I mean if donegal, Kerry, tyrone and mayo can put together teams with roughly 150,000 people, then surely Dublin can make 2 with 1.5 million?

Kilkenny and Kerry are different - they had the same resources as everyone else and then went to dominate. If you split Dublin and one of their teams dominated for a decade that would be fair enough, because they would have had the same starting point as the rest.




Has it not occurred to you that the reason for that is because it is so unbalanced? If donegal had 10 times the population of everyone else in ulster, that would just be a stroll too.

Dublin are not that much stronger than Cork or Kerry and possibly Mayo if the new management manage to keep them at their levels of the previous few years. The Kerry squad is arguably as strong.

Dublin has had "10" times the population for as long as the GAA has existed. Why are they only "dominating" in the last 5 years. And I use the word dominating very loosely here. Its a good period for Dublin but there is no guarantee it will last, it is far too soon to be talking of breaking up Dublin.

MayoAreMagic

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

That wasn't the intention.

We all know what the media are like, and the general population. Dublin the best thing since sliced bread win a couple of Irelands, the jealousy kicks in, then people start advocating defensive teams to stop them.

That type of thing.

So it kicks in when Dublin scrape two 1 point AI final wins, but not when Kerry win 4 AIs in one decade...:rolleyes:
The defensive system wasn't brought in for Dublin at all. The actual reason why it is annoying Dublin fans is because they are struggling with beating teams using it. I recall many of them were happy enough with it in 2011, when they were using one themselves.

bucketybuck

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

If donegal had 10 times the population of everyone else in ulster, that would just be a stroll too.

If population is king, then why do Antrim struggle?

elefant

robbiezero wrote: »

Dublin are not that much stronger than Cork or Kerry and possibly Mayo if the new management manage to keep them at their levels of the previous few years. The Kerry squad is arguably as strong.

Dublin has had "10" times the population for as long as the GAA has existed. Why are they only "dominating" in the last 5 years. And I use the word dominating very loosely here. Its a good period for Dublin but there is no guarantee it will last, it is far too soon to be talking of breaking up Dublin.

It would be great financially for the GAA and as a spectacle to have 2 or 3 strong Dublin teams, but it would be earth-shattering in terms of breaking of tradition and the spirit of county pride that's very important to the inter-county game.

MayoAreMagic

robbiezero wrote: »

Dublin are not that much stronger than Cork or Kerry and possibly Mayo if the new management manage to keep them at their levels of the previous few years. The Kerry squad is arguably as strong.

I think you are confusing squad with starting team. The Dublin squad is unmatched by anyone ever. Again, given time to develop, Dublin would easily produce 2 teams of the level of mayo or donegal etc.

robbiezero wrote: »

Dublin has had "10" times the population for as long as the GAA has existed. Why are they only "dominating" in the last 5 years. And I use the word dominating very loosely here. Its a good period for Dublin but there is no guarantee it will last, it is far too soon to be talking of breaking up Dublin.

Well because it has become more professional, and that brings a reliance on resources. Not to be confused with paying players - that's not what Im saying, but the preparation, gyms, best of care etc costs money, Dublin can throw a lot more around than anyone else. Also, the gaa is far more popular in Dublin now, they have clubs with more members than some counties have players to pick from. To sum up, they weren't really using that financial and population muscle in the past, they are now.

Jampip

keane2097 wrote: »

TBF, that just isn't accurate.

In the games against Mayo and Donegal, when they needed to, that was what Kerry resorted to.

MayoAreMagic

bucketybuck wrote: »

If population is king, then why do Antrim struggle?

Because unlike in Dublin these days, the game isn't popular.
And before you say it isn't popular in Dublin - How many divisions are there for mens gaelic football in Dublin? How many teams in each division?

keane2097

Jampip wrote: »

In the games against Mayo and Donegal, when they needed to, that was what Kerry resorted to.

It wasn't.

Big Ears

robbiezero wrote: »

Dublin are not that much stronger than Cork or Kerry and possibly Mayo if the new management manage to keep them at their levels of the previous few years. The Kerry squad is arguably as strong.

Dublin has had "10" times the population for as long as the GAA has existed. Why are they only "dominating" in the last 5 years. And I use the word dominating very loosely here. Its a good period for Dublin but there is no guarantee it will last, it is far too soon to be talking of breaking up Dublin.

Not that I'm arguing for the splitting of Dublin but that's not strictly true.
When the GAA formed Dublin took up less than 1/4 of the population of Leinster. Today it is over 1/2.

keane2097

Splitting Dublin in two doesn't make any sense. Split it in 13 if you're using the population vs 150k argument. Why is two teams with a million against other teams with 150k any better than one team with 2 million against the rest? If anything it's worse. One team can get caught on the hop, two teams will probably split the wins between them for eternity if the population advantage is so significant.

Why not combine Mayo with Leitrim, Galway and Roscommon? Seems as feasible if not more so than splitting Dublin into 13.

Also, this seems to have a tangential connection at best to the discussion on modifying the playing rules to make the game a better spectacle.

MayoAreMagic

keane2097 wrote: »

It wasn't.

True. In fairness, Kerry beat mayo in the middle third with david moran having a stormer. They pressed mayo high up the pitch and got rewards from that, albeit with Cormac Reilly putting in an all-star performance for them... They weren't defensive though.

keane2097

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

True. In fairness, Kerry beat mayo in the middle third with david moran having a stormer. They pressed mayo high up the pitch and got rewards from that, albeit with Cormac Reilly putting in an all-star performance for them... They weren't defensive though.

They were a bit, but your man is talking rubbish about them having 14 men behind the ball. It just isn't true. Doesn't even need to be true for him to have a reasonable POV.

robbiezero

I don't really think any rule changes are necessary quite yet.
Teams cannot win with a defensive system only. Derry will not get anywhere unless they add a reasonable attacking element to this system, they were utterly inept on Saturday night on the attack. Donegal added this in 2012 which made them a much better side to watch.

MayoAreMagic

keane2097 wrote: »

Splitting Dublin in two doesn't make any sense. Split it in 13 if you're using the population vs 150k argument. Why is two teams with a million against other teams with 150k any better than one team with 2 million against the rest? If anything it's worse. One team can get caught on the hop, two teams will probably split the wins between them for eternity if the population advantage is so significant.

Because they don't have to be exactly the same as regards population. Kerry often beat cork for example, but cork have a much bigger population. I think the case with Dublin is they have gone past the point where the difference can be absorbed, they are dominant at all grades bar the odd surprise loss. That isn't the case for Kerry in munster or mayo in Connacht etc.
Splitting them would make it harder for them at the start and you have to keep them competitive. There is no point taking them out of the equation by splitting them into 8 or 10. 2 would be a reasonable experiment. I genuinely think 2 teams would be a good move.

keane2097 wrote: »

Why not combine Mayo with Leitrim, Galway and Roscommon? Seems as feasible if not more so than splitting Dublin into 13.

Well nobody is saying split Dublin into 13, just 2. Splitting one team into 2 strong teams makes more sense than joining up 4 teams, 3 of which are competing in the top 2 divisions.

keane2097 wrote: »

Also, this seems to have a tangential connection at best to the discussion on modifying the playing rules to make the game a better spectacle.

Well people are saying the defensive football is being played to counteract Dublin. Maybe people are looking at it the wrong way. If everyone needs to play defensively to get near Dublin, why are we changing everyone else and indeed the game itself? Surely the common denominator is the strength of Dublin here?

MayoAreMagic

keane, Im agreeing with you re kerry

bucketybuck

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Because unlike in Dublin these days, the game isn't popular.
And before you say it isn't popular in Dublin - How many divisions are there for mens gaelic football in Dublin? How many teams in each division?

So now the metric isn't population, but the notoriously variable "popularity"?

keane2097

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

keane, Im agreeing with you re kerry

Oh yeah I know you are, sorry if there was any confusion.

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Because they don't have to be exactly the same as regards population. Kerry often beat cork for example, but cork have a much bigger population. I think the case with Dublin is they have gone past the point where the difference can be absorbed, they are dominant at all grades bar the odd surprise loss. That isn't the case for Kerry in munster or mayo in Connacht etc.
Splitting them would make it harder for them at the start and you have to keep them competitive. There is no point taking them out of the equation by splitting them into 8 or 10. 2 would be a reasonable experiment. I genuinely think 2 teams would be a good move.




Well nobody is saying split Dublin into 13, just 2. Splitting one team into 2 strong teams makes more sense than joining up 4 teams, 3 of which are competing in the top 2 divisions.




Well people are saying the defensive football is being played to counteract Dublin. Maybe people are looking at it the wrong way. If everyone needs to play defensively to get near Dublin, why are we changing everyone else and indeed the game itself? Surely the common denominator is the strength of Dublin here?

If you read that back it starts to look very much like population has no correlation with success and isn't much of an advantage at all.

Or to put it another way, try to imagine what the GAA would look like if population wasn't a huge advantage and see if it would be anything like the above.

Miccoli

2 points for a shot outside the 45.

Mal-Adjusted

bucketybuck wrote: »

If population is king, then why do Antrim struggle?

As you well know, at least half the population of Antrim think GAA is the devil, same goes for Down and Armagh.

That said, the idea of splitting Dublin into 2 teams is stupid and really has no place in a thread about defensive tactics.

Tombo2001

robbiezero wrote: »

I don't really think any rule changes are necessary quite yet.
Teams cannot win with a defensive system only. Derry will not get anywhere unless they add a reasonable attacking element to this system, they were utterly inept on Saturday night on the attack. Donegal added this in 2012 which made them a much better side to watch.

I'd question that one.

They didn't hit that many wides. The fact is that they were defending a lead until late in the game. They weren't trying to attack.

I'd have thought Dublins shooting was far worse on the night.

And bear in mind, windy evening, rain sheeting down, crowd booing them.....hostile conditions in more way than one. Derry did a pretty decent job given what they set out to do; they were still in the game with five minutes to go.

GBXI

As has been said many times in the thread already, the rules, broadly speaking, do not need any changing. Though I could write a thesis on ways to improve Gaelic football, but nothing would get past the dinosaurs in Congress!! Just because Brolly has one of his rants, does not mean that anyone needs to pay it any attention.

Anyway, my point which has been touched upon a few times above already, is the sheer ignorance towards the Donegal team of the last 4 years. In 2011 they were overly defensive and thus couldn't get past Dublin. But in the 3 seasons since then under McGuinness they have been one of the most attacking and exciting teams in the country. In 2012 they were the most impressive AI winners in a long time, in my opinion. They defend and attack in numbers, with no little skill in terms of scoring. This from a Mayo man by the way!

Anyway, football is going through a very interesting time and I for one have no interest in seeing sweeping changes to the game.

keane2097

I think there's possibly more complaining about Donegal being misunderstood than complaining about Donegal these days.

MayoAreMagic

keane2097 wrote: »

If you read that back it starts to look very much like population has no correlation with success and isn't much of an advantage at all.

Or to put it another way, try to imagine what the GAA would look like if population wasn't a huge advantage and see if it would be anything like the above.

I would disagree. To me, it reads like I am saying that there is a critical mass as regards population, where, when exceeded, simply outweighs all other factors. An example would be an archery competition, where one guy gets one arrow to hit the target, while the other gets 2, then 5 then 10, all the way up to 100. The first guy might be a far superior archer, but at some point the second guy is going to start beating him, due to the sheer volume he has available. In this case, the second guy has become just as good as the first, but he is still getting his 100 shots. Im just suggesting we make it fair again.

I cant for the life of me figure out how you can say I claimed it wasn't an advantage. I said that to a certain point, other metrics can have an influence that can maybe absorb the imbalance in population. For instance, if nobody in the county plays the game then population isn't really an issue. That was the case in Dublin to an extent, but now the game is hugely popular. It is a results driven analysis really, with the combination of all factors, measured in how strong the squads being produced are. And clearly, as it stands, the results are telling us that Dublin have gone far too strong compared to everyone else. This would resolve the problem.

Tom Joad

Talk about splitting Dublin is just bringing a strawman into the discussion. Absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic unless you let the two Dublin teams play together to counteract the blanket.

dog_pig

keane2097 wrote: »

I think there's possibly more complaining about Donegal being misunderstood than complaining about Donegal these days.

I would just ask for cool heads on this from people. I feel that two years ago we had a chance to move away from this when Dublin won a fantastic All-Ireland playing expansive, free-flowing football.
"But then Donegal brought [defensive football] to a new level last year when they beat Dublin in the semi-final using those tactics.
“We all know what the problem is but trying to solve it is going to be a very difficult task without making radical changes, and nobody wants to do that.

When you read tripe like that from GAA officials are you surprised?

MayoAreMagic

Tom Joad wrote: »

Talk about splitting Dublin is just bringing a strawman into the discussion. Absolutely nothing to do with the thread topic unless you let the two Dublin teams play together to counteract the blanket.

Well people were saying that basically every football team is gone so defensive now because they simply cannot match Dublin. So if Dublin is the common denominator then obviously there is an issue around the strength of Dublin compared to all the other teams.

davegrohl48

Does anyone have any attachment to 15 a side anymore?
Full backs and full forward don't generally operate around the square anymore. So it's not as if we are losing some type of King of the square full back versus full forward contests from the game.
I'v coached a team in 13 a side and it was a very good spectacle with plenty goals. The usual nonsense without any thought is spouted that it wouldn't change anything.
It simply can't be as defensive with 13 a side. The midfielders and forwards in posession have more space in which to shoot or pass.
The other rules that need immediate adjustment from Jarlath Burns group.
- The slowing down of frees is dire. Almost every free is being delayed and is leading to scuffles. A poster mentioned Aussie Rules had this problem and they introduced a 50 m instead of 15 m penalty. Problem solved overnight. Do we need anymore evidence? A very similar sport had the exact same problem and the proposed solution worked
- The black card is ridiculously light weight. A team can receive three black cards and still not be down a player. You have three free chances to prevent goals by doing a drag down.
- The steps rule is not being applied early enough. If you tuck the ball up and run direct into contact you do not have extra steps to wriggle your way free. There are some high profile players who are pulling the p*ss with the amount of steps they take, it's one of the main components of their game.

DoctaDee

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Well people were saying that basically every football team is gone so defensive now because they simply cannot match Dublin. So if Dublin is the common denominator then obviously there is an issue around the strength of Dublin compared to all the other teams.

Ah stop please... it wasn't Dublin who were handing out the towelling to Donegal pre McGuinness .. you've others to thank for that

Godge

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

It absolutely is stronger. Plus, you don't seem to factor in that there are numerous players in Dublin that, given the opportunity could develop into high level county standard players. I mean if donegal, Kerry, tyrone and mayo can put together teams with roughly 150,000 people, then surely Dublin can make 2 with 1.5 million?

Kilkenny and Kerry are different - they had the same resources as everyone else and then went to dominate. If you split Dublin and one of their teams dominated for a decade that would be fair enough, because they would have had the same starting point as the rest.

Has it not occurred to you that the reason for that is because it is so unbalanced? If donegal had 10 times the population of everyone else in ulster, that would just be a stroll too.

It is mostly fans of teams like Mayo, Cork, Donegal and Kerry who argue for Dublin to be split up (as well as local rivals Meath and Kildare). The rest of the country don't care because it wouldn't change their chances of winning All-Irelands or Leinsters.

It is not for the good of football that people like you want Dublin split up, it is merely to increase your own county's chance of glory.

If Dublin ever dominate and win four-in-a-row like Kerry in the late 1970s you might have a point. The current crowd haven't even matched the achievements of the 1970s team that won six Leinsters in a row and got to six All-Ireland finals in a row.

Envy and jealousy rather than the good of football are driving attempts to split up Dublin. Similarly, you will see people here and elsewhere praising the defensive muck because it has worked effectively against Dublin.

Now I don't have a problem with any of that except for the pretense that fans of counties are interested in the "good" of football. They are not, they are interested in their own county and its success.

Godge

GBXI wrote: »

As has been said many times in the thread already, the rules, broadly speaking, do not need any changing. Though I could write a thesis on ways to improve Gaelic football, but nothing would get past the dinosaurs in Congress!! Just because Brolly has one of his rants, does not mean that anyone needs to pay it any attention.

Anyway, my point which has been touched upon a few times above already, is the sheer ignorance towards the Donegal team of the last 4 years. In 2011 they were overly defensive and thus couldn't get past Dublin. But in the 3 seasons since then under McGuinness they have been one of the most attacking and exciting teams in the country. In 2012 they were the most impressive AI winners in a long time, in my opinion. They defend and attack in numbers, with no little skill in terms of scoring. This from a Mayo man by the way!

Anyway, football is going through a very interesting time and I for one have no interest in seeing sweeping changes to the game.

There is a lot of truth in this.

Also people forget that Dublin were beaten by Donegal last year and the final featured two teams that played defensively all year. Success will be copied and if a defensive team can beat either type of set-up, then that type of defensive set-up will be copied.

What the game needs is for a team like Dublin or Mayo to consistently beat the defensive teams but occasionally lose to an attacking team in a shoot-out. That will swing the pendulum back towards attacking teams because success will be copied. We might have seen the start of that on Saturday night when Dublin set-up slightly less attacking and despite the conditions favouring the ultra-defensive Derry team, Dublin won out.

davegrohl48

Godge wrote: »

There is a lot of truth in this.

Also people forget that Dublin were beaten by Donegal last year and the final featured two teams that played defensively all year. Success will be copied and if a defensive team can beat either type of set-up, then that type of defensive set-up will be copied.

What the game needs is for a team like Dublin or Mayo to consistently beat the defensive teams but occasionally lose to an attacking team in a shoot-out. That will swing the pendulum back towards attacking teams because success will be copied. We might have seen the start of that on Saturday night when Dublin set-up slightly less attacking and despite the conditions favouring the ultra-defensive Derry team, Dublin won out.

Dublin won but the game as a spectacle was beyond dire. The game is there to provide entertainment at some level. There wont be any return to open football without rule changes. The percentage of open games the last five years is tiny. You really think we'll return full pendulum swing to open football for the majority of games without rule changes? 13 a side will help weaker counties be more competitive. Leitrims Emlyn Mulligan has more game winning impact in 13 a side compared to 15 a side.

davegrohl48

Godge wrote: »

There is a lot of truth in this.

Also people forget that Dublin were beaten by Donegal last year and the final featured two teams that played defensively all year. Success will be copied and if a defensive team can beat either type of set-up, then that type of defensive set-up will be copied.

What the game needs is for a team like Dublin or Mayo to consistently beat the defensive teams but occasionally lose to an attacking team in a shoot-out. That will swing the pendulum back towards attacking teams because success will be copied. We might have seen the start of that on Saturday night when Dublin set-up slightly less attacking and despite the conditions favouring the ultra-defensive Derry team, Dublin won out.

Dublin won but the game as a spectacle was beyond dire. The game is there to provide entertainment at some level. There wont be any return to open football without rule changes. The percentage of open games the last five years is tiny. You really think we'll return full pendulum swing to open football for the majority of games without rule changes? 13 a side will help weaker counties be more competitive. Leitrims Emlyn Mulligan has more game winning impact in 13 a side compared to 15 a side.

JRant

The only problem I see in the game is a lack of strong referees.

The amount of off the ball stuff going on is ridiculous.

Now considering there is a ref, 2 linemen and 4 umpires I can't for the life of me understand how they don't see it.

Players will always try to stretchthe rules and it's up to the ref to put order into a game.

Alot of the pulling and dragging would be gone overnight if the refs clamped down on it.

JRant

davegrohl48 wrote: »

Dublin won but the game as a spectacle was beyond dire. The game is there to provide entertainment at some level. There wont be any return to open football without rule changes. The percentage of open games the last five years is tiny. You really think we'll return full pendulum swing to open football for the majority of games without rule changes? 13 a side will help weaker counties be more competitive. Leitrims Emlyn Mulligan has more game winning impact in 13 a side compared to 15 a side.

If you want open football then the easiest solution is to do away with the winter league and begin games in April/May.

When the ground firms up the better players can thrive. If we persist in playing on sodden pitches then the fare will not change.

There's no need for 13 a side. Plenty of room on a pitch for 15 each when teams use the space properly.

corny

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Well people were saying that basically every football team is gone so defensive now because they simply cannot match Dublin. So if Dublin is the common denominator then obviously there is an issue around the strength of Dublin compared to all the other teams.

Ah... 'people' said did they.:rolleyes:

McGuiness worked out this structure when Dublin were also rans. Teams then copied Donegal because its effective. **** all to do with Dublin.

Dirty Dingus McGee

13 a side should have been brought in about 10 years ago in my opinion and should definitely be considered as an option to improve the game.It would leave more space on the field and loosen the game up a bit.

The only negative about 13 a side is that some coaches would use this as a licence to increase physical training and run the sh1te out of players at the expense of their skills.

davegrohl48

JRant wrote: »

If you want open football then the easiest solution is to do away with the winter league and begin games in April/May.

When the ground firms up the better players can thrive. If we persist in playing on sodden pitches then the fare will not change.

There's no need for 13 a side. Plenty of room on a pitch for 15 each when teams use the space properly.

There is no space inside the 40 yard scoring zone if one side plays a blanket.

LeinsterDub

davegrohl48 wrote: »

There is no space inside the 40 yard scoring zone if one side plays a blanket.

Ice hockey like rule were you must keep a set number of players in the opposition half?

homewardbound11

A good time for a list of changes .
Pick your own or make a poll .
Mine would be .

-) remove the black card it's making a joke of referees.
-) video referee or 2 referees on the pitch.
-) sin binning for persistent fouling . On top of that moving the ball 30 yards for the foul.
-) if black cards are kept then they should carry on through the season. 3black / yellow cards would be a ban.

By the way . I enjoyed donegal last year. Enjoyed their football and for the most part Monaghan .
Tyrone were difficult to watch. As for Dublin supporters . They made the evening enjoyable in castlebar a few weeks ago . Great travelling support. As were Monaghan before them .

dxhound2005

How many scores do people expect in competitive matches? In Division One out of 24 games so far just two have been under 20 scores and they were real outliers, 14 and 12. The rest were 20 scores or more with some over 30.

https://www.gaa.ie/fixtures-and-results/national-fixtures/allianz-football-league/

This is not out of step with any other year I remember. Going back to the days of 60 minute football very low scores were often the order of the day. Just look at the results in League finals and All Ireland finals from the old days. If it was all based on everyone staying in their positions playing catch and kick the forwards had a lot of off days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_(Ireland)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_All-Ireland_Senior_Football_Championship_finals

Whatever else is happening in football it seems the defensive approach has not made much change to scorelines in general.

Dirty Dingus McGee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

How many scores do people expect in competitive matches? In Division One out of 24 games so far just two have been under 20 scores and they were real outliers, 14 and 12. The rest were 20 scores or more with some over 30.

https://www.gaa.ie/fixtures-and-results/national-fixtures/allianz-football-league/

This is not out of step with any other year I remember. Going back to the days of 60 minute football very low scores were often the order of the day. Just look at the results in League finals and All Ireland finals from the old days. If it was all based on everyone staying in their positions playing catch and kick the forwards had a lot of off days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_(Ireland)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_All-Ireland_Senior_Football_Championship_finals

Whatever else is happening in football it seems the defensive approach has not made much change to scorelines in general.

Which indicates that the players are much more skilful these days and the game could be even better than it currently is.

I don't think anyone wants to go back to the 70's and 80's style football but in my opinion the game can be a lot better than it currently is and the GAA should be trying to maximise the potential the game has by encouraging teams to play more attack minded football.

JRant

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Which indicates that the players are much more skilful these days and the game could be even better than it currently is.

I don't think anyone wants to go back to the 70's and 80's style football but in my opinion the game can be a lot better than it currently is and the GAA should be trying to maximise the potential the game has by encouraging teams to play more attack minded football.

Just get the refs to clamp down on the dirty stuff. A blanket defense can be beaten with quick passing and interchanges. It can't when persistent fouling is allowed on the attacking team.

I'd like to see a real push on developing referees further before any more rules are changed or new ones come in.

They also need to clear up the tackle area as well. The rules seem to change depending on what way the wind is blowing. Perfectly good tackling is being blown up while persistent jersey pulling and stray digs are let slide.

WesternZulu

Is there any other sport that gets ridiculed as much as Gaelic football on the basic of individual games?

Watch out for the 1st bad televised game in the Championship and we'll hear the same statements predicting 'the death' of the game.

average_runner

Direct football will always beat the defensive game.

iDave

Godge wrote: »

It is mostly fans of teams like Mayo, Cork, Donegal and Kerry who argue for Dublin to be split up (as well as local rivals Meath and Kildare). The rest of the country don't care because it wouldn't change their chances of winning All-Irelands or Leinsters .

Nonsense

iDave

We have a huge problem with overreactions in GAA. Maybe its the lack of big games due to the nature of the competitions that causes this but it certainly contributes. With such a small pool of games a few bad ones stick out like a sore thumb. No one declares the end of the Premiership after a few boring defensive games as the season is 38 games long.
Its the same if a team has a bad or good game. They are either the best thing since sliced bread or hopeless, then the perception turns on its head after the next game.
Regardless of the rules there will be dire games. Its inevitable. It even happens in hurling believe it or not.
Lets stop being reactionary and see how the season pans out. Unfortunately the sensationalist pundits will keep whipping up these storms.