|
Replying To essmac: "I'm not a fan of 45s, for 2 reasons:
1. In football, most teams won't have 5 reliable long-range off-the-ground kickers. And if you allow out-of-the-hands, cheating and arguments about the exact location of the kick will be widespread.
2. The defending team can do nothing but watch - the goalie is powerless. That seems wrong. Penalties at least allow teams to attack and defend in some form.
I'm OK with penalties after the first match in initial and interim rounds. However, it seems harsh that an actual trophy would be awarded on the basis of a penalty shoot out. It might be fairer to replay a final and only go to penalties if needed at the end of the replay. Drawn games are common. Drawn replays not so common. And if you've had 2 opportunities to settle it during play, you can't really complain that much if penalties are then used. But there is a very long tradition of replays; and it seems a bit draconian not to at least have a replay after a final.
The GAA also needs to look at 2 other aspects:
i. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that soccer and Gaelic alike both require the first 5 penalty takers to be nominated; but that, thereafter, in soccer, anyone can step up. Whereas the GAA obliges the same 5 players to take the second set. There is no obvious logic behind that requirement. It runs counter to the idea of wider team involvement, which surely is the point of a team game.
ii. Dead ball rule, like rugby:
Rugby Union's rule 5.7 (e) states:
"If time expires and the ball is not dead … the referee allows play to continue until the next time that the ball becomes dead."
Sensible rule, I think. My understanding is that there is no such rule in Gaelic (or in soccer either).
In many cases, in a Gaelic match, the ref will let the passage of play continue to a natural conclusion, e.g., either the ball goes dead (score or wide) or the attacking team (the one chasing the game) is dispossessed. We're all familiar with the "closing kickout", after the ball has gone dead, during which the full time whistle will go before the ball even reaches midfield. And that's a fitting way to end a game.
However, I'm sure we've all seen mean-spirited situations where time on the clock is up, the final phase of attacking play is being played out, your team is a point behind or level, and are about to pull the trigger for an equaliser or a winner, only for the ref to blow it up, just seconds before boot makes contact with leather. You could never prove spite on the part of the ref (as he'd be technically within the rules), but you'd have your doubts.
Often, the ref will let the play go on until the ball is dead. But sometimes they won't. The lack of consistency is unacceptable; and there is a related issue - namely that, nowadays, the team in front will usually do so much time-wasting messing about in stoppage time that you could easily double the time added on anyway.
As with the belated formal adoption of an advantage rule (something that was often applied de facto in practice anyway), I reckon it's time we had a version of the "play until the ball goes dead" rule in GAA.
iii. Time-keeping - take it out of the ref's hands altogether.
Just my 2p/c worth" And put time keeping in the hands of someone from the Board??!!!!
Moyle (Tipperary) - Posts: 86 - 25/09/2020 15:06:22
2294044
Link
0
|
|
Quote - essmac
" ii. Dead ball rule, like rugby: Rugby Union's rule 5.7 (e) states: "If time expires and the ball is not dead … the referee allows play to continue until the next time that the ball becomes dead." Sensible rule, I think. My understanding is that there is no such rule in Gaelic (or in soccer either). "
Did Clive Thomas not famously blow the whistle for half time while the ball was on its way into the net in a World Cup game in the 1970s ? Brazil v Sweden 1978, if I remember correctly. He never refereed an international again.
These days, I don't know how pragmatic referees are but it's surprising how often the whistle goes when the ball is fifty feet in the air over midfield. A cynic might say that's not a coincidence.
lionofludesch (Down) - Posts: 475 - 26/09/2020 17:01:35
2294184
Link
0
|
|
Replying To gatha: "So you play for 60 or so minutes and winning or loosing comes down to a corner or fullback taking a penalty. A skill they never are required to preform at any time. Leave penalties in soccer. Play 5 minute periods whenever a team is a head after one of those periods you have a winner. Once gain if there is a clock that goes off no matter where the ball is I guarantee there won't be many draws. Instead of copying foreign games why don't we look at the Ladies football buzzer goes off game is over." So you say "leave penalties to soccer" . Do we take them out of the game altogether? There part of the game like any other free. Wasn't a fan of them but there growing on me.
Saynothing (Tyrone) - Posts: 2014 - 26/09/2020 20:15:46
2294206
Link
0
|
|
100% against
icehonesty (Wexford) - Posts: 2550 - 26/09/2020 21:35:05
2294224
Link
0
|
|
Replying To icehonesty: "100% against" what do you do instead though? Has to be some form of tie breaker as always having replays or multiple replays isnt the answer
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 3510 - 26/09/2020 23:50:53
2294241
Link
1
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "what do you do instead though? Has to be some form of tie breaker as always having replays or multiple replays isnt the answer" Your right there, would have loved to see extra time and penalties in last night's Cavan Final. Underdogs usually have better chance of upset first day out.
Saynothing (Tyrone) - Posts: 2014 - 27/09/2020 10:22:17
2294258
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Moyle: "And put time keeping in the hands of someone from the Board??!!!!" The Board? Is that your suggestion? Joking aside, refs have enough to do. Give the timekeeping to someone, anyone, from a neutral club, someone who only has to sit and watch a clock and hit a button; not someone who's out of breath, running about the place trying to keep an eye on umpteen other incidents, and who may already have a spite at one team or another anyway, often due to what some hot-head from one team has said to him during a game. I don't think I've ever seen a match with the correct amount of time played; refs are hopeless at it. I'm sad enough to have watched videos a few times with a stop watch and counted the stoppage time in reality and compared it with what was actually awarded. They NEVER match. Time to have a separate time keeper.
This rubbish happens in soccer also, as this annoyed lad notes:
"The referee added 5 minutes of stoppage time, and Brighton scored with the clock at 94:40. Assuming the proceeding goal celebration is a stoppage, that leaves +20 seconds on the clock for the game to be played, yet the referee allowed play to continue for a solid minute, until Manchester United got a corner, then a penalty.
Why was play allowed to continue for that long when there should've been 20 seconds left? This is obviously nothing new, we've seen this exact story with regards to referees manufacturing additional time."
https://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/index.php?threads/stoppage-time-where-are-the-timekeepers.143289/
essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 27/09/2020 11:14:59
2294265
Link
0
|
|
Replying To KillingFields: "what do you do instead though? Has to be some form of tie breaker as always having replays or multiple replays isnt the answer" Simple enough. Extra time and penalties in prior rounds; but extra time and replay for a final. On basis that no trophy should be handed out without a replay.
essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 27/09/2020 11:16:19
2294266
Link
0
|
|
I don't think going to penalties should be the way to decide a final. A reply is what the clubs wanted
FoolsGold (Cavan) - Posts: 2763 - 27/09/2020 11:23:59
2294269
Link
0
|
|
Or how about a clock counting down from 30 or 35 mins in both halves. When the ball is out of play the clock stops. You therefore get 30 mins of actual playing time per half, completely eliminating any time wasting tactics at kick-outs, frees, "injuries", needless substitutions etc.
Even boxing refs, with only a small ring and 2 lads to kep an eye on, doesn't keep time.
A combination of count-down clock and dead ball rule would work well. Players would hear the final hooter, and would know that the next time the ball goes dead the game is over.
If one team was ahead at the final hooter, they'd try to kick the ball dead as quickly as possible.
The team that was behind wiould fight like mad to get the ball back to equalise.
If both teams were level, the one that was lucky to be level would just try to kick it wide as quickly as possible; and the team that was unlucky to be level would try to get a score.
It would cut out all the messing and referee "discretion"; everyone would know where they stood and you;d have no grounds for complaints afterwards.
But fat chance of either change happening.
Instead, for years to come, we'll see refs blowing it up just as one team is about to equalise or win; and we'll see refs inventing extra time to let one team get another chance.
That seems to be what the people want.
essmac (Tyrone) - Posts: 1141 - 27/09/2020 11:29:44
2294270
Link
0
|
|
Replying To essmac: "Simple enough. Extra time and penalties in prior rounds; but extra time and replay for a final. On basis that no trophy should be handed out without a replay." Shouldnt always be penalties as decider. Should look at other forms of tie breakers.
Replay isnt always possible or needed for a final.
Why shouldnt a trophy be handed out without a replay?
KillingFields (Limerick) - Posts: 3510 - 27/09/2020 13:23:37
2294284
Link
0
|
|
Replying To essmac: "Simple enough. Extra time and penalties in prior rounds; but extra time and replay for a final. On basis that no trophy should be handed out without a replay." Jaysus - that's a bit off the wall.
I think you should only have a replay if the first game is drawn.
lionofludesch (Down) - Posts: 475 - 27/09/2020 18:34:12
2294331
Link
1
|
|
From essmac (not quoting the whole post because it's too long and I just want to address this part of it):
i. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that soccer and Gaelic alike both require the first 5 penalty takers to be nominated; but that, thereafter, in soccer, anyone can step up. Whereas the GAA obliges the same 5 players to take the second set. There is no obvious logic behind that requirement. It runs counter to the idea of wider team involvement, which surely is the point of a team game.
The idea of it is to avoid the sort of situation that somebody else above didn't want to see - i.e. that a penalty shoot-out could come down to relying on a corner-back or somebody else who normally wouldn't shoot for goal in a million years. By nominating your best five marksmen, and then sticking with them if it's still level after the first five penalties, you're at least looking to lads who you'd expect to be able to score, instead of lads who could kick or puck the ball anywhere. I actually think it's a good innovation myself.
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2249 - 27/09/2020 19:36:01
2294347
Link
1
|
|
Look lads, the games need to be decided 1 way or other.
I once hit the post with a shot that would have won my club a county title. I don't think for 1 second it defines me as a player. While I was devastated after it, I definitely developed a thick skin after it. My attitude changed from "I let everybody down" to "F them, half of them never hit a ball in their lives".
Matches need to be decided somehow. I think penalties, but allowing the striker to hit the ball out of his hand, is a better way. It is no worse than a free taker having a free to win a match sure. What difference?
StoreysTash (Wexford) - Posts: 1733 - 29/09/2020 16:26:28
2294763
Link
0
|
|
Not a fan of penalty shootouts in county football.
For me if a game ends a draw, the winner should be decided by:
Highest Number of lakes in the county
Lowest number of train stations
Lowest coastline area
Highest number of Provincial Titles
Not Monaghan
Breffni40 (Cavan) - Posts: 12120 - 29/09/2020 17:03:08
2294770
Link
10
|
|
Replying To Breffni39: "Not a fan of penalty shootouts in county football.
For me if a game ends a draw, the winner should be decided by:
Highest Number of lakes in the county
Lowest number of train stations
Lowest coastline area
Highest number of Provincial Titles
Not Monaghan" You forgot 'highest number of Reillys per captia'.
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13709 - 29/09/2020 20:23:09
2294795
Link
3
|
|
Replying To Breffni39: "Not a fan of penalty shootouts in county football.
For me if a game ends a draw, the winner should be decided by:
Highest Number of lakes in the county
Lowest number of train stations
Lowest coastline area
Highest number of Provincial Titles
Not Monaghan" Lowest ratio of spend to income could be another?
StoreysTash (Wexford) - Posts: 1733 - 30/09/2020 12:22:45
2294871
Link
0
|
|
One thing I have said before is that if a game is level that if a team has scored more goals, they should win.
It is one way of making teams try for goals if they can ultimately decide a match.
StoreysTash (Wexford) - Posts: 1733 - 30/09/2020 12:24:05
2294872
Link
0
|
|
5 Foot kicks or hurl pucks out of the hand from the sideline from any angle desired by the taker ?
omahant (USA) - Posts: 2596 - 02/10/2020 18:40:05
2295352
Link
0
|
|
Replying To omahant: "5 Foot kicks or hurl pucks out of the hand from the sideline from any angle desired by the taker ?" A time-clock has been used in New York for seventy years. When the ref blows the whistle to start the game the time-keeper starts the clock and it begins to count down from whatever playing time is desired. Clock is only started and stopped at the ref's direction. Players and spectators can see it. The buzzer sounds to end the period. If the ball has been struck, or hit, and is in flight, before the buzzer sounds and a score results the score stands. No arguments regarding time, no time added, as the clock has been stopped, at the ref's direction per the rules.
Croke Park claims the cost of time-clocks is prohibitive. There should be clocks in Croke Park and at least each county's main venue.
Gaa Fan (USA) - Posts: 749 - 02/10/2020 19:27:30
2295362
Link
0
|