Why wont die hard GAA fans admit football these days is muck?

Because you have little or no understanding. If you honestly think popping over points from 70+ metres is entertaining, off you go and fill your boots. Both codes have issues.

Anyone proposing a rule change in Gaelic football, or hurling for that matter, should be made to consider the following...

1. Can a lone neutral referee with no neutral linesmen or umpires practically apply such a rule on their own in a game, not to mention that does the rule place a significant burden on them to apply the laws of the game more than what they already do?
2. Can the rule be practically implemented for all games played on a full sized playing field, from say U13 up to adult?
3. Any such proposal must make a case as to how they think will help the game in its overall context and not just with one part of it - you must be prepared to accept counterarguments that point out how such a rule could be detrimental as an obvious byproduct of such a rule being brought in, or how that such a rule change will add no essential value to having an open, flowing game taking place.

With (1) above, if it is not practical for a lone neutral referee to be able to apply a new rule change, then it goes straight in the bin. Such examples would include "shot clocks" and very likely also the zoning of specific players. With (2), if the answer is no then it either goes straight in the bin also, or that such a proposal needs to be amended at certain playing levels, for example a rule suggesting that a kickout must cross the defending 45 metre line could prove difficult for the player kicking the ball out at young juvenile levels, in particular if they're playing into a strong wind. (3) Is essentially a "burden of proof" argument where it is up to those wanting to make the amendment to make a constructive case. For example, for those advocating a limit on consecutive handpasses I would suggest this would kill off opportunities for teams to make such short quick passes in the build up to scoring a goal that often tears holes in opposing defences as the attack presses up the field.

If all three of the above result in a valid consensus that a rule change is worth trying, then it shouldn't be immediately adopted at Congress but be subject to a two year trial to be played in certain competitions at both club & county level, to be followed up by appointed assessors to judge how the rule may have changed how such games are played, for better or worse, and then voted for at Congress. And if a new playing rule is adopted, it is subject to a mandatory revision vote three years later (though instead of a 2/3rds vote to change a playing rule, at this revision a simple majority vote would determine wherever the playing rule is either dropped or permanently adopted).

IMO there is definitely scope in looking at to how certain changes in any sport could result in both a better spectacle and playing environment for everyone involved, but I must say that I can think of no other sporting code that I'm aware of that has a large amount of those that regularly follow it that engage in self-flagellation than in Gaelic football. Ironically it's the opposite for hurling.

You do to an extent have to think about a lone ref and no umpires etc but thats the same with all sports and it isnt an issue. they have rule variations at some levels where at higher levels the games are refereed slightly differently because there is more officials/higher level of officials. nothing wrong with that,

U13 should be refereed differently to adult level with different rules and different expectations. both of players and officials. you should be able to put in some rules in only from a certain age level like the example you give with younger players and kick outs.

I do agree about rules and trials at club and county level. closed trials at different levels in different counties/areas. Refs also need better training. needs to be full time ref development officers working in several counties or in case of large counties for that county alone. they are experienced officials and will meet with refs on fortnightly/monthly basis to discuss rules/training etc

No, he can do everything he can do now, solo run, bounce etc but once he includes one solo he must kick the ball when moving possession on. In both mulligans and murchans goal the end result was a kick. Most of the best attacking scores come from a kick. Only some very quick intricate attacking handpassing can come close. Like the goal Corofin scored a fee years ago.

It's mainly to stop the practice of a guy soloing around his own 45 because once he solos a kick must follow. So now the opposition can go full court press. A 5m handpass is no longer and option and any kick especially if under pressure making a turnover far more likely. This will result in attacking teams leaving defenders further back and forwards further forward as the risk/reward balance shifts.

I could see it going down like a lead balloon among the players, just like the 3 handpass experiment.

January 2019.

An updated poll of inter-county players has shown that 90% of them believe the new handpass limit has had a negative impact on the game.

After 96% voiced opposition to the change before it was put into practice in the pre-season games, a survey conducted by the Gaelic Players Association ahead of Saturday’s Central Council meeting has revealed 62% of respondents feel it has had a “very negative” effect on Gaelic football and 28% a “somewhat negative” effect.

The GPA also sought the opinions of inter-county managers with 25 of the 32 responding to the survey. Of the 25, 13 of them (52%) said the quota of three consecutive hand-passes was having a “very negative” impact and six (19%) a “somewhat negative” one.

"...This will result in attacking teams leaving defenders further back and forwards further forward as the risk/reward balance shifts"

And how exactly is that a good thing?

The attacking team will attack with 8/9 players the but defending team will still defend with 14.

Seriously, just think about that. Loads and loads of turnovers and very few scores. And you think that's going to improve the game????

So many suggestions for rule changes in Gaelic Football are ostensibly to do with encouraging positive play and so improving the game as a spectacle, and yet so many of these involve making attacking much harder/defending much easier.

The maximum number of handpasses rule that was trialled and binned because players hated it was one such rule. It would have led to blanket defences being even more effective.

An individual team being sh*te does not mean a whole sport is sh*te.

If you look at the division one table - its almost as if its ordered from positive outlook to negative outlook, Tyrone having overtaken Armagh in that respect

What you want is hurling so. The most important attribute being able to shoot from distance. Working an opportunity inside being of no value as you will run out of time. Teams holding even more players back if they believe the other team doesn't have the outside shooters as they ultimately know possession will be handed back to them. Basically even more like basketball in which the outside shooter is now the stand out "skill"

Absolutely correct, both games that I saw on Tna G yesterday confirmed that this is correct.

No interest whatsoever in engaging the opposition inside their own half once they have the ball.

Its all funnel back and set up the bus.

Load of fcukkery.