Mobile Version  |  Register  |  Login
home  |  speak out!  |  content zone archives  |  "speak out!" archives  |  vote on it  |  soap opera  |  pub crawl  |  links  |  contact us  |  search  
 Follow us! 
Speak Out! - Gaelic Games
Notices
"Speak Out!" Home  |  Topic Listing  |  Post New Topic  |  Post Reply
Yesterday's HOT topics  |  Today's HOT topics
 |  Jump to:  
First 1 2 Last
Select a page:   PageSize:   Page 1 of 2
Topic: New square ball rule
sandy
(13 Posts)
Posted: 08-Jul-2012 21:58
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Are Cork the only team that have this Rule sussed?

Colm O Rourke said all 3 goals illegal but Cork have the inside information that the Referee will not implement the new rule if the player inside the square before the ball has been kicked does not interfere with play but Nick Murphy goal????? No No No

Cute Cork Hoors
greendolphin
(2,177 Posts)
Posted: 08-Jul-2012 22:03
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
O Rourke is still bitter to Cork after 1990. One of the goals shouldn't of stood imo. But these lads get paid to talk sh!te when there's no need to I suppose.

Originally posted by sandy:
Are Cork the only team that have this Rule sussed?Colm O Rourke said all 3 goals illegal but Cork have the inside information that the Referee will not implement the new rule if the player inside the square before the ball has been kicked does not interfere with play but Nick Murphy goal????? No No No Cute Cork Hoors

Smallsquare Bigball
(316 Posts)
Posted: 08-Jul-2012 23:28
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by greendolphin:
O Rourke is still bitter to Cork after 1990. One of the goals shouldn't of stood imo. But these lads get paid to talk sh!te when there's no need to I suppose.
O'Rourke highlighted that Murphy was inside for all 3, so technically could have been frees. Think he was making a laugh though.

daylo
(642 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 10:57
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
frank would ahve still got them off on a technicality

the gaa is horrible

Originally posted by Smallsquare Bigball:
O'Rourke highlighted that Murphy was inside for all 3, so technically could have been frees. Think he was making a laugh though.

Taxi Driver
(1,152 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 11:05
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
The new rule is not difficult. In open play, players can enter the 'square' as soon as the ball has been hit rather than the equivocal definition of the ball being 'in the square' as previously used.

It wasn't clear for the Goulding and Walsh goals but it seemed clear for the goal he scored himself that Murphy ran into the square after Kerrigan handpassed it. As long as this is the case he can be there before the ball. Whether it got to the ball before it crossed the goalline may be another matter.

For the first two goals he doesn't really matter if Murphy was in the sqaure as a free can only be awarded of the player is interfering with play. In both cases the ball went to the far side of the goals and Murphy's position has no bearing on the play.

The first two goals were fine. The third was not a square ball.
The Pope of Chilli Town
(14 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 11:19
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
For the first two goals he doesn't really matter if Murphy was in the sqaure as a free can only be awarded of the player is interfering with play. In both cases the ball went to the far side of the goals and Murphy's position has no bearing on the play.The first two goals were fine. The third was not a square ball.

This is not correct. There is no part of the rule that states that a player must be interfering with play before a free can be awarded for a square ball with the exception of if the player in question legally entered the square and the ball subsequently left the square and returned before the player had the opportunity to leave the square. He is then allowed to be in the square as long as he doesn't interfere. This was not the case for the first two Cork goals.

However, one would think that a degree of common sense should apply in these cases but, technically, the ref would have been fully within his rights to disallow these goals.
stones_off
(2,815 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 12:05
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by The Pope of Chilli Town:
This is not correct. There is no part of the rule that states that a player must be interfering with play before a free can be awarded for a square ball with the exception of if the player in question legally entered the square and the ball subsequently left the square and returned before the player had the opportunity to leave the square. He is then allowed to be in the square as long as he doesn't interfere. This was not the case for the first two Cork goals. However, one would think that a degree of common sense should apply in these cases but, technically, the ref would have been fully within his rights to disallow these goals.

The old rule was if the ball goes over the bar it is ok be in the square, but if a goal is scored then it is a free out.
Bright Vision
(565 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 12:21
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Would the simplest and easiest rule not be to disallow all goals scored inside the small rectangle unless the ball is carried into the square by the scorer
The Badger
(862 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 12:25
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by greendolphin:
O Rourke is still bitter to Cork after 1990. One of the goals shouldn't of stood imo. But these lads get paid to talk sh!te when there's no need to I suppose.

What are you on about lad. O'Rourke won more All Irelands against Cork than he lost.
This message has been edited - 09-jul-2012 @ 12:26
The Pope of Chilli Town
(14 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 12:29
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by stones_off:
The old rule was if the ball goes over the bar it is ok be in the square, but if a goal is scored then it is a free out.

This part of the rule remains the same as long as the ball is sufficiently high to be out of reach of the players. I assume if the ball was just going to clear the bar and the gaolie / defender had an opportunity to catch it then the square ball rule would still apply to incoming forwards.
About a Bicycle
(1,741 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 12:30
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Having looked at all 3 again, I would think all 3 should have been disallowed, but it is not completely clear, as as you cannot see Murphy at the moment the ball is struck for all 3 strikes (the last one was a punch), regardless of which TV angle is shown. You can assume that he is in the square but you cannot say it for definite. And, because the play in all 3 cases is coming from the opposite direction, the umpire is not looking to see if there is anyone in the square. It's pretty lazy umpiring at best, and the umpire may not even know the new rules properly. In any case it looks like we got away with 3 goals and there would be an outcry if it happened to us or one of he other big teams. It isn't even the powers that be that have this attitude; the Sunday Game discussed the goals and literally sniggered at the end of the discussion.

As to whether Cork are the only team to have the new rule sussed, I think Counihan and his team will work with Murphy on getting it right. We're in Croke Park now, we'll have tougher opposition in the next match and I think refs and umpires will be spoken to so as this type of incident does not happen again. I can see Kerry working on this as well with Donaghy and Declan O'Sullivan and I'm sure the Dubs and Meath will do the same.
bp
(2,408 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 13:32
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply

from Tyrone Gaa

Appendix:

Rule 4.9 Official Guide Part 2 – Rules of Foul Play – Rule 4 Technical Fouls:

“For an attacking player to enter opponents’ small rectangle:

(a) During Play (excluding Set Play), before the final play of the ball into the small rectangle

(b) In Set Play, before the ball enters the small rectangle.

Exception:

(i) If an attacking player legally enters the small rectangle, and the ball is played from that area but is returned before the attacking player has time to leave the area, provided he does not play the ball or interfere with the defence, a foul is not committed.

(ii) When a point is scored from outside the small rectangle and the ball is sufficiently high to be out of reach of all players, the score shall be allowed even though an attacking player may have been, otherwise illegally, within the small rectangle before the ball – provided that the player in question does not interfere with the defence.”

bp
(2,408 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 14:23
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply

Fom reading the above rule ( 4.9 ) on technical fouls and then looking at the Sunday game footage, it appears that all three of Cork's goals should have been disallowed.
daylo
(642 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 14:52
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
dont know lad
we lost and should take our beating

hopefully we can go well in the qualifier
its hard to take but we must move on ...

Originally posted by bp:

Fom reading the above rule ( 4.9 ) on technical fouls and then looking at the Sunday game footage, it appears that all three of Cork's goals should have been disallowed.

bp
(2,408 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 15:31
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by daylo:
dont know lad
we lost and should take our beating hopefully we can go well in the qualifier
its hard to take but we must move on ...

I fully accept all of that daylo,
but at the same time it's disappointing to suffer at officals failure to implement a rule that was after all only amended in the first place to make their jobs easier and more straightforward.
If it had happened in a tighter game, or if it happens again from here on in there will be uproar.

daylo
(642 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 15:53
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
i know bud
i have been going to games now for quite some time
and tis hard when you get knock like that to pick ur self up again
very dissapointing i know as u said

does not make things much easier after yesterdays fiasco
Originally posted by bp:
I fully accept all of that daylo,
but at the same time it's disappointing to suffer at officals failure to implement a rule that was after all only amended in the first place to make their jobs easier and more straightforward.
If it had happened in a tighter game, or if it happens again from here on in there will be uproar.

About a Bicycle
(1,741 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 16:15
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by daylo:
i know bud
i have been going to games now for quite some time
and tis hard when you get knock like that to pick ur self up again
very dissapointing i know as u said does not make things much easier after yesterdays fiasco

Lads, one thing ye should remember is that if Murphy had been pulled for the first one, it is unlikely that he would have made the same mistake again, so in all reality the second and third goals would have been valid. Also, when Gary Brennan mis-hit a shot across goals after about twenty minutes, David Tubridy just failed to make contact for what would have probably been a certain goal. But he was standing inside in the square for a few seconds beforehand and I'm sure you'd have taken it if it was allowed. I think this rule will cause more problems as the season goes on, mainly because I don't think umpires are up to it. I said earlier that the umpire for the 3 Cork goals wasn't even looking to see where Nicholas Murphy was. I would think most other umpires would be the same.

bp
(2,408 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 17:34
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply

Not wishing to sound pedantic, but ....
the third goal wouldn't have stood as without Murphy's intervention it would have been a fistpass to the goal.

Now don't get me wrong, Cork were the better team yesterday and fully deserved their win, that being said it surely isn't too much to expect that the officials appointed to do such a big match would be fully versed in the rules that they are charged with implementing.
If teams and officials don't get fully up to speed on this mattter there will be another Meath/Louth incident before the year is out.

Best of luck to Cork for Sam,
and also best of luck to Clare for three weeks time.
About a Bicycle
(1,741 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 18:00
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by bp:

Not wishing to sound pedantic, but ....
the third goal wouldn't have stood as without Murphy's intervention it would have been a fistpass to the goal.Now don't get me wrong, Cork were the better team yesterday and fully deserved their win, that being said it surely isn't too much to expect that the officials appointed to do such a big match would be fully versed in the rules that they are charged with implementing.
If teams and officials don't get fully up to speed on this mattter there will be another Meath/Louth incident before the year is out.Best of luck to Cork for Sam,
and also best of luck to Clare for three weeks time.

I agree totally about what should be expected of officials. It is not too much to ask. Without wanting to sound too cocky, or disrespctful to Clare, I think Cork would have won anyway. And, even though it was a Munster final, that will have done Cork a lot of good. Clare showed up our defensive frailties and Counihan can work on that. Cork are improving constantly up front, but the defence still has big question marks. More experienced teams like the Dubs and Kerry will zone in on those weaknesses if they are not worked on. We have a month to work on that and, please God, Canty will be back in some form or other for August.

Best of luck in the back door, here's hoping ye see Croke Park.
rebelrebel30
(8,531 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 18:37
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by About a Bicycle:

I agree totally about what should be expected of officials. It is not too much to ask. Without wanting to sound too cocky, or disrespctful to Clare, I think Cork would have won anyway. And, even though it was a Munster final, that will have done Cork a lot of good. Clare showed up our defensive frailties and Counihan can work on that. Cork are improving constantly up front, but the defence still has big question marks. More experienced teams like the Dubs and Kerry will zone in on those weaknesses if they are not worked on. We have a month to work on that and, please God, Canty will be back in some form or other for August.Best of luck in the back door, here's hoping ye see Croke Park.

We will improve im sure bike. Infact we had the best defensive record in the league all season, only conceded 2 goals all season in league and championship, same in league final, kerry only put 12 on us in the munster championship, 1 less than clare and that match was played at a faster pace. Again fair play to Clare but it was very obvious Cork had that inate confidence that they could up the level if needed yesterday and leading by 9pts at half time i think they eased off in the levels in the second half and conbined with Clare played with their best intensity we had those chances. Im confident we will be ok come august, canty, paddy kelly( fingers crossed) to come back in aswell.
Manus
(44 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 20:00
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
I like this idea. I see problems with it, but fewer than previous, & current situation. I'd include that goal scored from within square will stand if scorer received ball from another player who was also in the square.

Originally posted by Bright Vision:
Would the simplest and easiest rule not be to disallow all goals scored inside the small rectangle unless the ball is carried into the square by the scorer

frasiercrane
(1,843 Posts)
Posted: 09-Jul-2012 21:00
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Was there is full shot of Nicholas Murphy entering the square for the third goal.The ball was over the line before he punched it so it shouldnt have been a goal but I was unsure whether he was in the square before the ball was fisted.Under the old rules he was in the square before the ball entered it but we didnt get a wide enough sot on TV3 to see if he had broken the new rules
Remy Martin
(129 Posts)
Posted: 10-Jul-2012 10:46
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply

frasiercrane
(1,373 Posts
Was there is full shot of Nicholas Murphy entering the square for the third goal.The ball was over the line before he punched it so it shouldnt have been a goal but I was unsure whether he was in the square before the ball was fisted.Under the old rules he was in the square before the ball entered it but we didnt get a wide enough sot on TV3 to see if he had broken the new rules

I was there at that end of the field and can absolutely assure you that he was parked there well in advance of the ball leaving the last man. Of course it made no difference to the out come but why is there no outcry when it happens against minnows.
About a Bicycle
(1,741 Posts)
Posted: 10-Jul-2012 13:15
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
Originally posted by Remy Martin:

Of course it made no difference to the out come but why is there no outcry when it happens against minnows.

I agree Remy, it was discussed on the Sunday Game but at the conclusion of the discussion the 3 lads just kind of sniggered, it was like 'sure, it's only Clare'. Can you imagine if we had been plating into the Hill against the Dubs and got those 3 goals, do you think Cahill would be sniggering then?

As an aside, The Sunday Game needs major surgery, it's like visiting an old relative, there's a few nice memories rekindled, but, in general, the room is damp and musty.
squareba11
(304 Posts)
Posted: 11-Jul-2012 02:22
Quote   Edit   Delete   Report Post   Post Reply
How would you define a player interfering with play? If the forward is loitering around the square the back can't leave his man to go to man coming through would that be considered interfering as it is preventing the defender from going to man on the ball?

First 1 2 Last
Select a page:   Page 1 of 2
"Speak Out!" Home  |  Topic Listing  |  Post New Topic  |  Post Reply
Content Zone
‘We talk just like lions, but we sacrifice like lambs…’.
Whatever Happened to….
Anyone you know in your club?
Bin Tags Don't Make a County
‘Some a’ Dem’ Lads are only Dow-en for the Showers….’
Heavenly Hurling: How the Gods pass their time...
GAA Time and Real Time
Saint Patrick and the camogie princesses
Keats and Chapman at the Munster Final
Mass, the Mater, ‘The Dergvale’ and Mullingar…

More "Content Zone" Topics >>


Speak Out!

More "Speak Out!" Topics >>

There are 10,277 members signed up to anfearrua.com
All times are Dublin, Ireland. Always here... with the best in GAA discussion and comment! © An Fear Rua, 2000 - 2026
Bookmark AFR  |  Make AFR your home page About Us  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use [ Top of Page ]