45s or penalties - which should it be ?

Fr Tod Umptious

So to many people's surprise an FBD game between Leitrim and Mayo was settled by a penalty shootout after 70 minutes yesterday.

Now there was talk last year about settling games with a 45 shootout and i believe one NHL game was settled a a 65 (or whatever it is) shootout

But it seems it is back on the agenda now with the association going to decide on a way to finish games that finish level after extra time has been played and extra extra time also I think.

But which would people prefer, 45s or penalties ?

I'd reckon penalties are a more egalitarian.
Most teams could muster at least 5 players that could take decent penalties were as they might only have one or two that would be adept at hitting 45s

And in this day and age where the poor small teams always tells us how much of a bad deal they get, a penalty competition may be fairer than the longer distance competition

PARlance

I'm surprised they've stolen the penalty shootout directly from soccer. I would have expected them to try to at least differentiate a little (e.g sudden death from the off or 7 penalties etc) but no, it's just a rip off. I think that's a little embarrassing.

It doesn't have to be only penalties or 45's. They could engage the brain cells more than that... have frees from certain positions (left, centre, right) both from the ground and out of hands. It wouldn't take much to create something of it's own.

Fr Tod Umptious

PARlance wrote: »

I'm surprised they've stolen the penalty shootout directly from soccer. I would have expected them to try to at least differentiate a little (e.g sudden death from the off or 7 penalties etc) but no, it's just a rip off. I think that's a little embarrassing.

It doesn't have to be only penalties or 45's. They could engage the brain cells more than that... have frees from certain positions (left, centre, right) both from the ground and out of hands. It wouldn't take much to create something of it's own.

They took red and yellow cards straight from soccer about 20 year ago and the association is still doing fine
I don't get the embarrassment factor

As regards the creating something different, you don't want to over complicate it either, you just want to get a result with something that allows little room for officiating error or controversy

PARlance

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

They took red and yellow cards straight from soccer about 20 year ago and the association is still doing fine
I don't get the embarrassment factor

As regards the creating something different, you don't want to over complicate it either, you just want to get a result with something that allows little room for officiating error or controversy

I find it embarrassing that they couldn't come up with a unique way. (I've managed to leave the house all the same...and the association will probably make it through this)

It wouldn't take much to create something that 1. wasn't over-complicated but 2. still created tension and 3. wasn't stolen from soccer.

Mid-range frees or 45s can create more excitement than penalties imo.

hurlingman97

Hockey style penalties would be my preference.

dastardly00

PARlance wrote: »

I find it embarrassing that they couldn't come up with a unique way. (I've managed to leave the house all the same...and the association will probably make it through this)

It wouldn't take much to create something that 1. wasn't over-complicated but 2. still created tension and 3. wasn't stolen from soccer.

Mid-range frees or 45s can create more excitement than penalties imo.

You're embarrassed that they didn't come up with an unique way... Jesus wept :rolleyes:

PARlance

dastardly00 wrote: »

You're embarrassed that they didn't come up with an unique way... Jesus wept :rolleyes:

Almost as embarrassing as using the term "jesus wept"... rolleyes.

I'm not personally embarrassed, I think it's embarrassing that HQ couldn't come up with a novel approach.

To answer the OP's question. I'd be in the 45 camp vs penalties.

Jeju

How about sudden death extra time where a team has to win by 2 or more points, a goal would seal it.

Stevecw

Maybe who used the least hand passes during the game, as they seem intent on eliminating this from the game!

Fann Linn

Stevecw wrote: »

Maybe who used the least hand passes during the game, as they seem intent on eliminating this from the game!

Meeting on Jan 19 to discuss and review recent rule changes and there is a general consensus that this handpass rule could be scrapped before it even gets off the ground.

lawred2

PARlance wrote: »

I'm surprised they've stolen the penalty shootout directly from soccer. I would have expected them to try to at least differentiate a little (e.g sudden death from the off or 7 penalties etc) but no, it's just a rip off. I think that's a little embarrassing.

It doesn't have to be only penalties or 45's. They could engage the brain cells more than that... have frees from certain positions (left, centre, right) both from the ground and out of hands. It wouldn't take much to create something of it's own.

Hardly a rip off. It's not like they manufactured an artificial set piece for the purpose. Football has had a penalty for a long time.

lawred2

PARlance wrote: »

Almost as embarrassing as using the term "jesus wept"... rolleyes.

I'm not personally embarrassed, I think it's embarrassing that HQ couldn't come up with a novel approach.

To answer the OP's question. I'd be in the 45 camp vs penalties.

What would your suggestion be?

Isn't extra time just 'copying' other sports as well?

crusier

They are now to be known as prentys

Boom__Boom

I would prefer 45s as it would give teams/players/coaches just a little bit more incentive to practise their long-distance shooting which I think would be a benefit overall.

Coillte_Bhoy

Before Sunday i would have said 45's but i can't see much excitement watching players kick from 45m with no goalie etc. Penos for me. Don;t see anything wrong with copying the soccer format, it's know the world over and has given us some of the most iconic moments in sport. And as for having 3 or 7 or whatever to distinguish it from soccer, now that would be emmbarassing

OldMrBrennan83

Throw ball on the 21, two players from each team and a goalie. Clear past the 45 (or a wide) means no score. Goals and points count. 5 of each.

CrabRevolution

While we're being unique we should have green and purple cards,and also make them triangular. Just to avoid the "embarrassment" of being similar to soccer.

OldMrBrennan83

CrabRevolution wrote: »

While we're being unique we should have green and purple cards,and also make them triangular. Just to avoid the "embarrassment" of being similar to soccer.

I remember when they were being introduced sitting in the pub beside some aul fella who was absolutely foaming at the mouth because the cards were the same colour as soccer

cj maxx

I'd think penalties would be best . 5 peno each . Normal scores apply so score a goal =3. Blaze it over =1 rather than just goals count.

The Lost Sheep

PARlance wrote: »

I'm surprised they've stolen the penalty shootout directly from soccer. I would have expected them to try to at least differentiate a little (e.g sudden death from the off or 7 penalties etc) but no, it's just a rip off. I think that's a little embarrassing.

It doesn't have to be only penalties or 45's. They could engage the brain cells more than that... have frees from certain positions (left, centre, right) both from the ground and out of hands. It wouldn't take much to create something of it's own.

that just makes extra hassle and why do you need to "create" something when there is an extremaly functional successful process already there in penalties. I dont see how echoing whats used in another sport(s) is embarrassing. Embarrassing for who btw? The association as a whole?

PARlance wrote: »

I find it embarrassing that they couldn't come up with a unique way. (I've managed to leave the house all the same...and the association will probably make it through this)

It wouldn't take much to create something that 1. wasn't over-complicated but 2. still created tension and 3. wasn't stolen from soccer.

Mid-range frees or 45s can create more excitement than penalties imo.

Why does it matter if its copied from other sports. Why should sudden death decider have to be something unique? How would mid range frees be more exciting when theyre far more likely to be misses and you have tension of one v one in attacker vrs keeper

cjmc wrote: »

I'd think penalties would be best. 5 peno each. Normal scores apply so score a goal =3. Blaze it over =1 rather than just goals count.

Including normal scores would be better as would allow certain risk. go for 5 points and guarantee a score or properly go for goal and see what happens...

KevRossi

7 free kicks each, Out of the hands.
Start anywhere on the 20m line, can be kicked anytime, anywhere up to 13m line.
Solo or hop after 3 steps.
Can only move forward.
Player can score a goal or point.
Kicking order ABBAABBAABBAAB
Sudden death to decide if still level

CrabRevolution

Reading the match report, it seems at the Meath/Dublin match tonight that Barry Dardis took a penalty in the shootout despite having been substituted at half time and not having been subbed back on. Either the match report missed him being subbed back on, or substitutes can take penalties in the GAAs version of a shootout.

LeinsterDub

Fann Linn wrote: »

Meeting on Jan 19 to discuss and review recent rule changes and there is a general consensus that this handpass rule could be scrapped before it even gets off the ground.

Hopefully it's absolutely ****e

StupidLikeAFox

Patww79 wrote: »

Throw ball on the 21, two players from each team and a goalie. Clear past the 45 (or a wide) means no score. Goals and points count. 5 of each.

That would be an interesting one, I'd say it would probably suit the defence more

Red Lightning

Go all mighty ducks and an attacker has to run from the 21 yard line and finish past the out rushing goalie. 5v5. Sorted

RMAOK

cjmc wrote: »

I'd think penalties would be best . 5 peno each . Normal scores apply so score a goal =3. Blaze it over =1 rather than just goals count.

To be fair, I'd agree with you that it would be the best option. But say, for example, that it was level after the 5 penalties, should points be allowed.

In other words, if the first team in sudden death went for goal and missed (either saved or went wide), then the second team would only have to chip the ball over the bar to win. It would give team b too easy a means of winning the shoot out.

By all means have points and goals for the first 5 penalties each, then just have goals

OldMrBrennan83

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

That would be an interesting one, I'd say it would probably suit the defence more

Would be apt enough then as the whole sport suits defences and they keep adding new rules to suit defences.

Sterling Archer

KevRossi wrote: »

7 free kicks each, Out of the hands.
Start anywhere on the 20m line, can be kicked anytime, anywhere up to 13m line.
Solo or hop after 3 steps.
Can only move forward.
Player can score a goal or point.
Kicking order ABBAABBAABBAAB
Sudden death to decide if still level

Came here to post this exactly.. Think It'd work rather well

OldMrBrennan83

Penalties in the Kehoe Cup hurling final today too. Who's actually deciding what they do on the day as it was frees last year and there hasn't been anything from the GAA changing that.

Okon

I'd go with penalties myself, it seems fair to everyone.

Coillte_Bhoy

Patww79 wrote: »

Penalties in the Kehoe Cup hurling final today too. Who's actually deciding what they do on the day as it was frees last year and there hasn't been anything from the GAA changing that.

Its the provincial council that makes the decision

OldMrBrennan83

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Its the provincial council that makes the decision

Was that always the case or have they just taken it on themselves? Could they have decided a replay instead after the match?

Fr Tod Umptious

Patww79 wrote: »

Was that always the case or have they just taken it on themselves? Could they have decided a replay instead after the match?

The FBD games only had a week between each and the final is today the week before the league starts.

So replays were not an option

And dead right too, a much smaller (no college teams) and quicker FBD was better I thought.

OldMrBrennan83

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The FBD games only had a week between each and the final is today the week before the league starts.

So replays were not an option

And dead right too, a much smaller (no college teams) and quicker FBD was better I thought.

Wouldn't be looking for a replay myself either but juat wondered who has the authority to come up with these on a whim on a game by game basis. There was no communication from the GAA changing hurling from free taking yet they just went with penalties yesterday regardless.

Fr Tod Umptious

Patww79 wrote: »

Wouldn't be looking for a replay myself either but juat wondered who has the authority to come up with these on a whim on a game by game basis. There was no communication from the GAA changing hurling from free taking yet they just went with penalties yesterday regardless.

Well with regards to the FBD the decision was not made on a whim as you suggest.

The Connacht council had decided it before Christmas and had got the all clear from central council.
There was an article on RTE the day after the Mayo v Leitrim game explaining the

OldMrBrennan83

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well with regards to the FBD the decision was not made on a whim as you suggest.

The Connacht council had decided it before Christmas and had got the all clear from central council.
There was an article on RTE the day after the Mayo v Leitrim game explaining the

Ah right, cheers. If missed that as the first I'd heard of it at all was when it happened. Hopefully it's clarified and put in place permanently across all competitions at all levels.