Club calls for change to curb blanket defending

The Ballynacargy club had two motions on the clár at county convention concerning the current state of football and attempting to find a way of resolving the modern day problems that see nearly all players revert to defensive duties.

In the O’Byrne Cup game in Longford, for example, there were 28 players behind the ball for a lot of the second half as Westmeath played on the counter attack against the home side. In the end the Lake County lost by two points.

While the first Ballynacargy motion, ‘that all frees be kicked forward’, received solid support, the rejection of their second motion is one that went under the radar.

Delegate Brian Sheridan explained that the motion was an effort to try and improve the skill level of football and the spectator value of the game.

“If the numbers don’t come to our games, we are in big trouble. I know players and coaches say the game is evolving, but I’m really wondering what is it evolving to? Cross the field, back the field - you all know what I’m talking about,” he said.

“I don’t have the expertise to put this forward (to GAA congress), but I’m calling on you to support it in any way you can, at the top table: it will try to prevent this blanket defence. If you have a talented forward, they will have space to run and play, and make the game that bit more entertaining for everybody.”

Sean Carroll (The Downs) raised concerns around how the game would be refereed in these circumstances.

Chairman, Frank Mescall said the motion would make the game impossible to referee. “The way it is (worded) there - but we could bring it around differently,” he remarked.

Patrick Doherty agreed it would leave the game impossible to referee, and in terms of tweaking the motion, he dismissed the idea.

“I don’t think, frankly, with the greatest respect to Ballynacargy, that it is even close. In terms of, for example, each team keeps three forwards behind the 45-metre line at all times: so does that mean a team has to defend with 12, whilst the other team could attack with 15? For example,” he remarked.

“So if our three attackers have to stay up, can our markers go forward and can the goalkeeper go forward with the, so that leaves a 15 against situation in the other half of the field. Things like that, that are practical.

“Somebody might say, ‘well that’s not really what would happen’, but that’s exactly what would happen. That’s what happened for example in the Leinster club final in Croke Park. We all saw what happened when the defending team broke away and had the attacker up the field.

“But that point is moot. I just would be concerned that there would be so much needed to be done, what we would be doing is rewriting a motion. I don’t think that would be within our gift, to be honest.”

Frank Mescall added: “How is the referee to decide who is a forward, or who is a defender?”

Kevin Jordan (Southern Gaels) felt it could be changed to three players rather than three forwards. However, he still had concerns.

“Let’s say, for example, some team had one players sent off, or in a real bad situation, if he had two players sent off, now you are going to have three forwards, minus two: you are fairly stretched at the back,” he observed.

“It might tighten up on discipline, but it is a consideration.”

The motion was soundly defeated when it was put to the floor.