The dillema of one-sided Hurling Games

Danno

After a weekend that saw the following teams loose by:

Limerick 16pts
Laois 20pts
Wexford 24pts

is it time to look at reducing 3pts per goal to 2pts per goal in Hurling? I think it would make for better games. I also liked the 2pts for a sideline cut over the bar which encouraged the skill.

Thoughts?

keeponhurling

no, that is not the problem here

Kavrocks

Danno wrote: »

is it time to look at reducing 3pts per goal to 2pts per goal in Hurling?

No its time to look at how we can improve the game in weaker counties. For example in Dublin quite a lot of our very good Minor and U21 players end up playing football when they reach Senior level. How can we attract those players to play Hurling? One suggestion has been to disallow dual players at Minor and U21 grades and make people choose.

Danno wrote: »

I also liked the 2pts for a sideline cut over the bar which encouraged the skill.

This I agree with but it's a different issue altogether.

willabur

there is very little wrong with the game itself so leave the rules alone.

The problem is with resources and organisation of the weaker counties. Not enough done to expand the competition outside the top 8 or so sides

blackcard

Danno wrote: »

After a weekend that saw the following teams loose by:

Limerick 16pts
Laois 20pts
Wexford 24pts

is it time to look at reducing 3pts per goal to 2pts per goal in Hurling? I think it would make for better games. I also liked the 2pts for a sideline cut over the bar which encouraged the skill.

Thoughts?

No, goals provide excitement, Wexford would still have lost by 19 points if the scoreline remained the same
As it is, most counties have specialists at taking line cuts so I think 1 point is fair enough

Dirty Dingus McGee

Leave the goal scoring the way it is.With 3 points there is enough incentive to go for the goal without making point scoring redundant.

2 points for a sideline cut is a terrible idea.

A player gets deliberately dragged to the ground on the 45 and a free is awarded the punishment for the deiiberate foul is 1 point.

A players gets skilfully blocked down by a defender who cleanly marked him and a sideline is awarded which results in the defedning team conceding 2 points.

The above scenarios which would happen quite alot would result in good defedning is punished by conceding 2 points and bad defending is punished by conceding 1 point.

Also this may be controversial opinion but I am not sure the sideline cut is the great skill people claim it is.Most sideline cuts have zero precision to them and it is basically a player htting the ball as hard as they possibly can and hoping it goes over the bar so why should a hit an hope shot be awarded double.

It's ridiculous to award points based on the supposed skill of the score should Kevin Brodericks great point all those years ago been awarded double seeing as it inviolved great skill.

niallo27

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Leave the goal scoring the way it is.With 3 points there is enough incentive to go for the goal without making point scoring redundant.

2 points for a sideline cut is a terrible idea.

A player gets deliberately dragged to the ground on the 45 and a free is awarded the punishment for the deiiberate foul is 1 point.

A players gets skilfully blocked down by a defender who cleanly marked him and a sideline is awarded which results in the defedning team conceding 2 points.

The above scenarios which would happen quite alot would result in good defedning is punished by conceding 2 points and bad defending is punished by conceding 1 point.

Also this may be controversial opinion but I am not sure the sideline cut is the great skill people claim it is.Most sideline cuts have zero precision to them and it is basically a player htting the ball as hard as they possibly can and hoping it goes over the bar so why should a hit an hope shot be awarded double.

It's ridiculous to award points based on the supposed skill of the score should Kevin Brodericks great point all those years ago been awarded double seeing as it inviolved great skill.

I don't think you realise how hard it is to score a sideline cut. You think when joe canning does it, it is just hit and hope.

Clareman

I don't like the idea of changing the rules to make the games closer, that's just punishing the stronger teams. I would like to see 2 points for scores from the ground, there's no reason a free can't be taken like a sideline cut, let players take frees like that for 2 points, maybe even bring it in for points from open play as well (wouldn't like to be figuring that 1 out though as a ref)

Dirty Dingus McGee

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't think you realise how hard it is to score a sideline cut. You think when joe canning does it, it is just hit and hope.

I'm well aware there is skill in getting the distance and getting a clean strike but a large amount of them don't seem to be struck with great precision like a free would be struck.

Canning hits a huge percentage of his sideline cuts wide and yet generally in these shots they have plenty of power in them.

niallo27

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

I'm well aware there is skill in getting the distance and getting a clean strike but a large amount of them don't seem to be struck with great precision like a free would be struck.

Canning hits a huge percentage of his sideline cuts wide and yet generally in these shots they have plenty of power in them.

So you can't really compare it to a free really so because for every 60 or 70 frees that get converted we see one side line cut converted.

Clareman

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

I'm well aware there is skill in getting the distance and getting a clean strike but a large amount of them don't seem to be struck with great precision like a free would be struck.

Canning hits a huge percentage of his sideline cuts wide and yet generally in these shots they have plenty of power in them.

Lots of players now have very short hurleys which means ground striking is very difficult which in turn makes side line cuts even harder.

wonga77

Scoring a sideline cut takes a huge amount of skill and talent. Very few of them are scored, you make it sound like they are easy to nail...

zombieHanalei

Always a good idea to make all sweeping changes to the rules of a game based on the back of the results of just three games on one weekend.

Diabhal Beag

Taking two points for cutting a sideline over the bar away was one of the worst decisions ever, especially considering the fact there's intercounty players that are consistently awful at them when trying to find their own team-mate.

Toffeeboy

we just need to split cork, Kilkenny and tipp into 2 counties each . That'll fix it.

Dirty Dingus McGee

wonga77 wrote: »

Scoring a sideline cut takes a huge amount of skill and talent. Very few of them are scored, you make it sound like they are easy to nail...

I'm not saying it's easy I'm just saying that I'm not sure if there is a huge amount of precision to the taking of sideline cuts and that the ball is struck hard in the direction of the goal with the hope of going over rather than with a normal strike where players precisely pick out where they want the ball to go and it goes there.

LMK

I think that the sliothar could be modified to reduce the length it travels, 10 -15 Years ago the ball definitely did not travel as far or as quickly, plus its responsiveness means you don't have to as precise with the srike , skill levels have improved but a really skillful hurler now has also to be really quick as well to survive at the top, I believe that the great ones would be great in any era in that they would find a way to get the job done, but 2 off the top of my head that fall into that category that would have to adapt to the speed today were Brian Whelehan and Brian Corcoran

Warper

Why the hell would we change the greatest game on earth?

Kavrocks

Warper wrote: »

Why the hell would we change the greatest game on earth?

To make it better...

danganabu

Toffeeboy wrote: »

we just need to split cork, Kilkenny and tipp into 2 counties each . That'll fix it.

I think the Cork County Board are doing a fine job on that as is!

Re the sideline cuts, it is farcical to suggest that it is not a huge skill, but I don't agree with awarding two points for it, simply because it slows the game down and sidelines for the most part aren't earned or as the result of good attacking play, unlike most frees and all scores from play.

Hulk Hands

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

Taking two points for cutting a sideline over the bar away was one of the worst decisions ever, especially considering the fact there's intercounty players that are consistently awful at them when trying to find their own team-mate.

You thought it was a good rule?? It was probably the low point of my confidence in the GAA tbh, how they could think the massive achievement of winning a line ball was worth an attempt at 2pts. All it does is punish good defending as someone said above. I'd be inclined to leave it as is, as its a great skill tbf, even if I dont think line balls deserve free shots at scores. What certainly illogical is 65's, where defenders and keepers get their good play punished by an almost certain score. Every week of the year we see defenders bravely block down point attempts, only to see the ball deflected wide and the attacker get an almost certain point attempt. Should be either made indirect or taken from the ground similar to sidelines

dastardly00

I still don't get what the 'dilemma' is?

You will always get one sided matches in hurling if Team A is a lot better than Team B. KK, Tipp and Galway were a lot better on this particular than Wexford, Limerick, and Laois.

keeponhurling

Yes, Galway and Kilkenny were always going to win by big scores last weekend.

Tipp's winning margin was indeed a surprise, but sometimes you just get days like that. A combination of Tipp playing brilliantly, and Limerick having an off-day.

zombieHanalei

Let's just take the OP's suggestions at face value;

2 points for a goal; No incentive to score a goal any longer, would lead to more negative tactics, why play three men in the full forward line if you'll only get two points as a reward for a goal? Teams would just play deeper and try to pick off points from long distance. Would they even have any incentive to go beyond the 45 yard line?? Consequently, if members of the full forward line are sacrificed, then it stands to reason that members of the full back line will be used further up the pitch too. Play bunched up in the middle of the pitch, more scrambles around the ball, like a bad under 12's game, no thank you.

2 points for sideline; Yes, it looks great when they go over, but 9 times out of 10 they go wide. Which is very frustrating as a spectator.

Diabhal Beag

Hulk Hands wrote: »

You thought it was a good rule?? It was probably the low point of my confidence in the GAA tbh, how they could think the massive achievement of winning a line ball was worth an attempt at 2pts. All it does is punish good defending as someone said above.

I thought it was a great rule. Not only did it reward phenomenal skill, it also actually improved the quality of sideline cuts for a while. And you say "punish good defending" as if it was a regular thing to see sideline cuts put over the bar.

CrabRevolution

Firing over a point from the corner flag is also a tremendous piece of skill, as would be volleying the ball first time in the air over the bar. Should we give double points for that?

What about in football if you kick it off your bad side, give 2 points for that?

Maybe I'm being hard on myself, but I can put a ball over the bar from a sideline even on a wide pitch. As far as I'm concerned, nothing I'm capable of doing is a mind blowing piece of skill worth 2 points.

Hulk Hands

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

I thought it was a great rule. Not only did it reward phenomenal skill, it also actually improved the quality of sideline cuts for a while. And you say "punish good defending" as if it was a regular thing to see sideline cuts put over the bar.

Nothing, no matter how skillful or rare, should be a reward for winning a line ball. Line ball's should simply be a method to get the ball back in play. It's borderline unfair that you can score from them as is. It's not that rare either, quick googling tells me there was 1 every 2.5 games from 08-12. I agree it's an excellent skill, but i'd be inclined to find different ways to reward proficiency at it (65's possibly)

Powerhouse

willabur wrote: »

The problem is with resources and organisation of the weaker counties. Not enough done to expand the competition outside the top 8 or so sides

To be fair that battle is not one you're going to win. The biggest problem at the moment is the lack of competitiveness inside the top 8.

Diabhal Beag

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Maybe I'm being hard on myself, but I can put a ball over the bar from a sideline even on a wide pitch. As far as I'm concerned, nothing I'm capable of doing is a mind blowing piece of skill worth 2 points.

You're lucky to see a sideline cut get 5 metres and to the first man these days. Maybe I'm just jaded of seeing awful sideline cuts.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

I agree it's an excellent skill, but i'd be inclined to find different ways to reward proficiency at it (65's possibly)

If you're suggesting a certain distance to double it that's probably a better idea.

Powerhouse

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

I thought it was a great rule. Not only did it reward phenomenal skill, it also actually improved the quality of sideline cuts for a while. And you say "punish good defending" as if it was a regular thing to see sideline cuts put over the bar.

It's not a phenomenal skill comparatively. Scoring on the run with a defender closing you down is far more of a skill. The sideline cut looks good and is very conspicuous as a skill because it's a set piece but there are far more demanding skills exhibited during every game.

Powerhouse

Hulk Hands wrote: »

You thought it was a good rule?? It was probably the low point of my confidence in the GAA tbh, how they could think the massive achievement of winning a line ball was worth an attempt at 2pts. All it does is punish good defending as someone said above. I'd be inclined to leave it as is, as its a great skill tbf, even if I dont think line balls deserve free shots at scores. What certainly illogical is 65's, where defenders and keepers get their good play punished by an almost certain score. Every week of the year we see defenders bravely block down point attempts, only to see the ball deflected wide and the attacker get an almost certain point attempt. Should be either made indirect or taken from the ground similar to sidelines

Making a '65 indirect? Fair play, at last a good idea coming from somewhere.

In this day and age with the sliotars so light and user-friendly a '65 is a score more often than not, and sometimes a very handy one.

One of the problems hurling has is that it's too easy to score. That means that gaps in quality between teams become exaggerated on the scoreboard. An indirect '65 would help with this. The possible risk of encouraging negative defending should be offset by not wanting to have to defend a ball lobbed into your square from a '65.

At least you are making a suggestion that actually tackles the problem on the pitch. Unlike bonkers suggestions like two points for a sideline cut which is faffing around the edges and solving nothing.

robbiezero

Powerhouse wrote: »

Making a '65 indirect? Fair play, at last a good idea coming from somewhere.

In this day and age with the sliotars so light and user-friendly a '65 is a score more often than not, and sometimes a very handy one.

One of the problems hurling has is that it's too easy to score. That means that gaps in quality between teams become exaggerated on the scoreboard. An indirect '65 would help with this. The possible risk of encouraging negative defending should be offset by not wanting to have to defend a ball lobbed into your square from a '65.

At least you are making a suggestion that actually tackles the problem on the pitch. Unlike bonkers suggestions like two points for a sideline cut which is faffing around the edges and solving nothing.

Ya, It would be a good idea to do something with 65's. It must be disheartening for defender to make a great block and still see an easy point from a free shot at goal result from it. Indirect is a good idea. Or move it back to the other 65 line. The original intention of 65's was surely not for an easy score.

Re. the point of this thread, I think there was a difference between the weekends hurling matches and say Dublin - Longford in the football. Dublin - Longford was never going to be anything other than what it was.
Laois have improved hugely this season, but were always going to get a tanking off a top team, but will hopefully learn from it and push on further. I hope they can give Dublin a game which will leave them with plenty encouragement for next year.
Limerick were very flat and up against a ravenous Tipp team that desperately needed that win. One would expect Limerick to perform much better for the rest of the year. Even so 15 minutes into the second half there was only a point in it,so it was reasonably competive.
Wexford were very poor, inexplicably so after a very good year last year. Maybe the hiding from Limerick last year really knocked them back, but again they should be capable of much better and really need to get out of Division 2.
The nature of the game of hurling means there will always be hidings even between reasonably evenly matched teams.
Tipp were hammered down in Cork in 2010 and went on to win the All-Ireland. Kilkenny were hammered by Galway in 2012 and went on to win the All-Ireland, to use just two examples.

Borders no.2

Last weekend was a disappointment but taken in the wider scheme of things hurling is arguably at its most competitive in a long time.

In Munster, for the first year in a long time all 5 Munster teams could start the year with genuine aspirations of a Munster title.

Tipp inches away from the All Ireland last year, Waterford League Champions, Cork last 4 or better for the last 3 years, Clare All Ireland winners 2 years ago and 3 x u21 all ireland winners, Limerick semi-finalists last two years.

Leinster is less balanced but outside Kilkenny you have Galway making progress after a couple of bad years, Wexford will be disheartened after last Sunday but they beat Clare and Waterford last year, have been building at underage and are arguably at their best level in at least 6 or 7 years. Dublin have taken a step back but from the base they originally came from are still very strong and could still cause problems to someone in the qualifiers, Laois were a puck of a ball away from beating Galway last year and are in a different place compared to when Cork bet them by about 40 points in 2011.

Outside of that the round robin was very competitive and showed that Westmeath are making progress. Kerry look to be making significant strides again if you look further down.

The two counties that will worry hurling supporters are Offaly and Antrim. Doesn't really appear to be much hope on the horizon for either county.

Last weekend was a disappointing one for hurling followers but bar one or two games in the qualifiers there shouldn't be many scores like last weekends between here and the end of the season.

PTH2009

Dublin vs Laois- Will be close but Dublin will pull away in the end

Westmeath vs Limerick- Limerick will win handy

Clare vs Offaly- Similar to the Dublin/laois match it will be close for a while but Clare should pull away

Wexford vs Cork- will be the closest of the qualifers but i can see Wexford winning because of home advantage

Tipp to win munster by about 4-5 points
Galway to win leinster by 1-2 points

Qf

Wexford to beat Waterford
Kilkenny to beat Clare

Sf
Galway to beat Wexford
Kilkenny to beat Tipp

F
Galway to beat Kilkenny

tastyt

Powerhouse wrote: »

Making a '65 indirect? Fair play, at last a good idea coming from somewhere.

In this day and age with the sliotars so light and user-friendly a '65 is a score more often than not, and sometimes a very handy one.

One of the problems hurling has is that it's too easy to score. That means that gaps in quality between teams become exaggerated on the scoreboard. An indirect '65 would help with this. The possible risk of encouraging negative defending should be offset by not wanting to have to defend a ball lobbed into your square from a '65.

At least you are making a suggestion that actually tackles the problem on the pitch. Unlike bonkers suggestions like two points for a sideline cut which is faffing around the edges and solving nothing.

Nail on the head with it being too easy to score. When there are so many opportunities for scores the team with the most skilled players will almost always win. Not much chance of underdogs fighting tooth and nail , backs to the wall and hitting the big teams with a sucker punch like happens in other sports sometimes.

By all means reward skillful play and encourage it but make them earn their scores