Football

GAA task force bringing forward proposals to encourage skills and reward risk-taking in football

Jim Gavin Football Review Committee hopes to encourage what public wants in Gaelic football

2
Under the proposed new rules, Down's 2-6 would have been better than Armagh's 0-13 in this year's Ulster semi-final. Pic Philip Walsh

ENCOURAGING skills and rewarding risk-taking are the twin drivers of the GAA’s Football Review Committee (FRC) and they gave an update on their progress at Croke Park on Tuesday.

All-Ireland-winning Dublin manager Jim Gavin articulated the wide range of recommendations the committee has fine-tuned over the summer after a series of five ‘sandbox’ trial games that followed a meticulous consultation and research process.

A widespread survey concluded that the sport of Gaelic Football is in no danger of losing its popularity and Gavin stressed that the purpose of his committee was to enhance a game “which is in a good state”.

The ‘emerging themes’ from the rot-and-branch work the FRC has carried out include new scenarios from the throw-in to an ‘overtime showdown’ proposal to decide the outcome of drawn games. In between there are proposals for a crackdown on dissent, an overhaul of the scoring system and measures to speed up the game and to reward skills, kick-passing, high catching, long-range shooting and, perhaps most importantly, excitement and risk-taking.

The seven ‘core enhancements’ that have emerged are:

The throw-in: A one-on-one in the middle of the field for the referees’ throw-in to start the game which would rule out the tedious aggression now commonplace between two players from either side.

“The reason we’re looking at this is because of all the nonsense,” Gavin explained.

“When you go back to the 1980s and ‘90s, there was no grappling going on – the ball was thrown-in and they got on with it. We looked at the 1993 All-Ireland final – the ball was thrown up, Anthony Tohill caught it and the game was on.”

Kickouts: Players can be inside the 20m line from which kickouts are taken but all kickouts have to go beyond the 40m line.

The pass back: The number of back passes played to the goalkeeper more than doubled from just over 11 per Championship game in 2019 to almost 23 last season. The FRC is recommending that outfield players cannot pass to the goalkeeper unless the goalkeeper is in the large rectangle or has gone past either the 65m line or the halfway line (the FRC are considering recommending that a halfway line is introduced on GAA fields).

“There wasn’t one shot on goal (apart from Armagh’s goal) in the All-Ireland final so the goalkeeper’s job was simply to kick out the ball,” observed Gavin.

“We’re trying to get a balance between utilising the goalkeeper. If the ball hits the post or breaks in the large rectangle he can still move up the field but once he gives it, he can only get it back when he’s past the 65m line or the halfway line. That’s what we’re considering.”

Four for a goal: A ‘scoring Arc’ (40 metres from the posts and 80m wide) will be introduced (and marked on all pitches) and teams will get two points for a shot (including frees) that goes over the bar from outside the Arc. Having a foot on the Arc line counts as being outside it. 45s will still be worth one point as will shots from inside the Arc.

Goals will be worth four points instead of three and to put that in perspective: Down scored 2-6 in last summer’s Ulster semi-final. Under the proposed new rules that would be enough to beat Armagh who won with 13 points.

“The umpire will wave the white flag when the ball goes over the bar,” Gavin explained.

“If it’s a two-pointer the referee will signal that and then we’re consider a red flag for the umpire.

“What we witnessed (in the trial games) was that if a two-pointer was on, players will go for it and there was great excitement when it went over.”

Three-up, three-down: In a structural development both teams will have to have at least three outfield players inside the halfway line or opposition 65m line at all times.

In practical terms, that will mean that at least three opposition players would have to stay in their own half to mark them, creating more space for 11 v 11 in the other half of the field.

Gavin said the innovation had “worked quite well” in the trial games and he added that the rule had become “self-policing” but said it may not ‘cascade’ down to club level because referees might find enforcing it impractical.

Feedback from inter-county managers on the proposal was “majority positive” said Gavin although some did see it as “restrictive”.

Solo and go: The potential introduction of a ‘solo and go’ or ‘tap and go’ rule will mean that if a player is fouled he (or a team-mate) can simply solo the ball and play on rather than stopping the game to kick a free.

“We’re still considering whether, if we decide to do a solo and go, a player can be tackled immediately or does a defender have to give him four steps or 13 metres,” added Gavin.

The mark, mark 2: Research found that the public did not like the mark and it will be replaced with a new version which has an advantage element built in. The FRC hopes the new version will promote long-range kick-passing and high-fielding. When the ball is kicked from outside the 45m line and caught inside the 20m line a mark will be awarded. After catch the ball the player in possession can continue on and try and score but, if no advantages accrues, the game will then be brought back for the mark.

“David Clifford caught two balls in the first half of the All-Ireland final in 2022,” Gavin explained in order to illustrate the new mark proposal.

“He made two phenomenal catches but then he stopped. This (new version) will mean that when David Clifford catches the ball he can spin and go for a goal, or pass to Seanie O’Shea for a tap-in, or whatever and if it doesn’t work out they can come back and get the mark. We’re trying to get the balance between rewarding risk, rewarding skill, long-range kick-passing, high-fielding and get the balance with traditional stuff.

“We’re encouraging teams to kick the ball in for a one-to-one contest and, if an advantage has not accrued, we come back for the mark.”

Tyrone  referee Sean Hurson  at the All Ireland Final at Croke Park.
PICTURE COLM LENAGHAN
The FRC proposals take a firm line against dissent towards GAA referees and officials. PICTURE COLM LENAGHAN

THE Football Review Committee will introduce severe sanctions to stamp out one-in, all-in melees and dissent in Gaelic Football.

“Unless you’re striking in a melee, you don’t get sent off,” observed Jim Gavin.

“We are suggesting that if a player contributes to a melee it is viewed as a Category Two infraction and a black card. This, we believe, will tidy that bit of nonsense that goes on on the pitch.”

Turning to dissent, Gavin referred to an entire chapter in the GAA Official Guide devoted to the topic but said the laws were not being enforced.

“Pick your colour (of card), you can get it for dissent,” he explained.

“And yet, culturally we accept it. The standard you walk by is the standard you accept and we all accept it. We might ‘tut-tut’ and say: ‘That shouldn’t be happening’ but it’s accepted because the rule is not being enforced.”

The FRC recommend that if a player forcefully challenges the referee the ball will be brought 50 metres up the field giving the opposition a scoring opportunity. Also, if there is aggressive dissent from a team official or a non-playing sub a 13-metre free-kick will be awarded against that team.

“Any abuse of the referee from the sideline, you’re essentially conceding a score,” Gavin explained.

“If you want to disincentivise it, there has to be a severe-enough punishment that will stop people giving abuse to referees. It doesn’t stop bainisteoirs and mentors roaring and encouraging their teams – we want that, we want players to be encouraged – but we don’t want referees to be abused.”

For U17s and below, the FRC is recommending that any player giving “a bit of lip” to the referee is given an automatic black card.

“This advises young men and women aged U17 and below that dissent is just not acceptable,” Gavin added.

“It doesn’t matter if the referee makes a mistake, you can’t abuse them.”

The recommendations of the committee also examine the issue of ‘technical fouling’ which is interfering with a free-kick or sideline ball and this will result in the ball being brought up 50 metres.

The FRC will also recommend a no-tolerance approach to ‘tactical’ and ‘aggressive’ fouls. Tactical fouling is defined as a deliberate intention to slow down the opponents’ play and, if the FRC recommendations become rules, any tactical foul will result in a black card and 10 minutes in the sin bin.

Meanwhile, after reviewing the findings of a report from the Scientific and Welfare Group headed by John Dunnion, any head-to-head contact “intentional or unintentional” will result in a straight red card.

The FRC are also putting forward a recommendation to stop players walking away with the ball to delay the other team from taking a quick free.

“If I foul and I pick up the ball, I have to hand it back to the opposition,” Gavin explained.

“If I don’t the ball is brought up 50 metres. So rolling it on the ground, throwing it up in the air… Anything that is intended to delay the game… up 50 metres. After the pain of the first couple of games people will go: ‘Ok, now we get it – there’s the ball’.”