New rules having positive effect but tweaks needed

With two rounds of the Allianz Football League now completed, there is a reasonable body of evidence to assess the new rule changes in operation.

The overall impact has been positive with several thrilling games (the Derry vs Kerry and Roscommon vs Down matches are among those which spring to mind). Although Westmeath have lost both their games, they scored 0-18 against Louth and 2-21 against Monaghan in entertaining contests.

Such was the sense of angst about the state of Gaelic football in recent years that many pundits were greeting the new rules as a sort of bright new dawn before even seeing them tested in competitive fare.

Jim Gavin (chairperson of the Football Review Committee) was being portrayed as some sort of football prophet who possessed a deer reservoir of wisdom that the rest of us could merely dream about.

In reality, one couldn’t really assess the new rules based on the interprovincial games played towards the end of last year as these were glorified exhibition matches.

As Armagh manager Kieran McGeeney quipped following his side’s recent win over Tyrone: “You have to be careful. You’re not allowed to have a bad opinion on them (the new rules), by the looks of it.”

In general, however, since the start of this year’s league campaign, many observers and participants have thankfully regained their critical faculties.

The overall impact has been positive, it must be acknowledged. The requirement for kickouts to travel beyond the new 40-metre arc, the ‘three up’ rule (preventing teams from bringing every outfield player behind the ball) and the ‘solo and go’ rule are helping to make the game a better spectacle.

The change to the advanced mark rule is also positive. The ball must now be kicked from outside the 45m line and caught inside the 20m line in order for the attacking player to gain a mark.

The previous mark rule whereby a player could gain a mark by catching the ball kicked from 20 metres was nonsensical and difficult for referees to adjudicate on. One could argue that there is no need for an advanced mark at all given the other new rules in place, but the removal of the old mark rule is still welcome.

In my view, however, there are some rules that need to be changed or simply removed.

Two-pointers from frees

Former Roscommon footballer Conor Devaney came out particularly strongly on this matter. “Every team in the country has one freetaker that would score 40m frees for fun. And it’s just not justifiable that they should be rewarded with two points, definitely not,” said Devaney.

Speaking after the first round of league games, Devaney even called for this rule to be amended immediately. “In my opinion it’s one rule that needs to go; it needs to go by next weekend. The FRC need to look at it. I think it will go, but I don’t know why they would wait another few weeks and wait until a break. They just need to get rid of it.”

It appears that the FRC felt two-pointers for frees may prevent cynical fouling if a team was chasing a two-point score late in a game. However, this is certainly not a sufficient justification for awarding two points for frees.

After all, a team could score a superb goal only to see it wiped out by two long range frees (possibly awarded for contentious fouls). This hardly makes sense, and there is also a danger of teams playing for frees from outside the arc.

Kieran McGeeney was also among those to question the awarding of two points for such frees. “I think the two-point arc is very good. I don’t think it should exist for a free though. It’s just too big of a penalty for some of the infractions,” he said.

There are other penalties in place for cynical fouling and black cards can now be issued for other obvious examples of cynical play in addition to those previously in place.

Some people have even called for the two-pointers to be dispensed with entirely. But I feel they are worth persisting with from open play on the basis that they encourage players to shoot rather than passing the ball sideways and backways. Also, as teams try to prevent opponents from scoring two-pointers, it will force them to come out of their defensive shells.

Handing the ball back

The requirement to hand the ball back to an opponent for a free is plain daft and will only lead to discord and consternation if a team is penalised (a 50-metre penalty no less) for failing to do so.

Roscommon manager Davy Burke summed up the situation well. “Handing the ball back is a bit ridiculous, just drop it on the ground. Every dog on the street knows if you’re delaying the play, we are all adults here. Drop the ball and move on,” said Burke.

However, the tougher penalties for dissent provided for by the new rules are welcome and they appear to be having a positive impact.

The one v one throw-in

This was initially dismissed by Joe Brolly as “a gimmick” and it was hard to disagree with this pithy assessment.

The rationale for this change was that fouling was taking place among the midfielders at the throw-in. But if referees can’t address fouling when the four midfielders are standing right in front of them and the game has yet to start, God help them in dealing with off the ball falling during a game. If such fouling was a problem, referees could take action by dishing out the appropriate cards.

A far bigger problem is when ‘hop balls’ are awarded during a game. Rather than two players competing for the ball, a group of players tend to congregate around the referee. Incidentally, this is a particular scourge in hurling when throw-in balls during a game often lead to another unedifying ruck and sometimes a further stalemate. Some sort of an exclusion zone is required in these situations.

This one v one rule change for throw-ins has little merit, but one feels it doesn’t make much difference whether it is retained or not.

No good time for irritating hooter

Interestingly, this was the measure which attracted the least support when the new rules were overwhelmingly passed at GAA Congress. There is something special about the uncertainty about when the final whistle will be blown. Even soccer, the sport with the greatest global reach, has not seen the need to introduce a hooter.

People have often said that the hooter works well in ladies football, but I disagree with this notion. When a team has a lead, I feel the countdown clock encourages them to play frustrating ‘keep ball’ in the closing stages.

In the past, there usually wasn’t enough time added on for stoppages and, therefore, teams got away with time wasting when protecting leads. However, this has greatly improved in recent years and the time used for substitutions is also taken into account. Also, there is a fourth official who can assist the referee with timekeeping.

Controversies like the infamous incident involving the late Jimmy Cooney, when he blew the final whistle prematurely in the 1998 All-Ireland hurling semi-final between Offaly and Clare, are very rare.

It hasn’t been made clear how clubs are meant to provide a hooter system in run of the mill fixtures. Overall, I feel there is no good time for the irritating hooter.

Roving goalkeepers

It’s undoubtedly a positive that teams can no longer keep possession by passing the ball back to their goalie ad nauseam. Goalkeepers can now only receive a pass from a teammate in the large rectangle or in the opposing half of the field. However, with the requirement to keep three forwards up in the opposing half, some people are unhappy about the ‘12 v 11’ situation that can develop with the goalie deployed as an ‘extra man’.

Derry manager Paddy Tally, speaking after his charges’ defeat to his native Tyrone, offered strong opposition to this situation. It might be a case of the law of unintended consequences at work.

On the risk/reward axis, however, a team can be severely caught out for allowing their goalie to stray and this can bring an exciting dimension to games. Many people will remember Galway’s Damien Comer punishing Derry goalie Odhran under the old rules a few years ago, and Roscommon’s Diarmuid Murtagh caught out the Down goalie recently.

Furthermore, considering it’s often difficult to attract players to play in goals at underage level, one of the benefits of the recent trend of roving goalkeepers is that it might make being a goalie more attractive.

Many traditionalists simply don’t like goalies emerging far from their goal and joining the play. But it seems the genie is out of the bottle and is unlikely to be fully curbed at this stage.