I’d usually listen, but not to Jimmy’s views on rules revision
But when I lift the newspaper and see Jim McGuinness and Mickey Harte commenting on the Football Review Committee (FRC), I only skim read the article.
Why? Part of the reason is that I can safely predict what they are going to say. As successful managers, McGuinness and Harte have mastered the rules of Gaelic football.
They have adapted their gameplans and their players to the rules as they exist. And as both men have done it more successfully than their rivals, it is entirely understandable that they will resist change.
Managers are in the business of winning games. That is their sole concern. Put simply, Jim McGuinness and Mickey Harte are not necessarily interested in what is good for the game of Gaelic football. They are motivated by what is good for Donegal and Tyrone.
While the Donegal management team can be difficult to contact, it was notable that they were quick to answer their telephones when the FRC’s proposals were announced.
Assistant manager Rory Gallagher voiced his opposition less than 24 hours after the proposals were revealed. He was soon followed by McGuinness.
Martin McHugh, father of Donegal player, Mark, echoed the sentiments of the management team in his newspaper column. The uniformity of the trio’s argument was particularly striking.
Martin McHugh wrote: “Gaelic football as a game is fine and I don’t see why we have to tinker with the rules every year.”
Jim McGuinness said: “I don’t see a whole lot wrong with the game. For me, it’s a very good spectacle, yet they’re tinkering with it all the time.”
Rory Gallagher said: “There is nothing wrong with the way the game is being played now.”
Yet, when the growth of Gaelic football is compared to other sports, their argument rings hollow.
For example, while basketball was invented seven years after the GAA was founded, the game is now played in more than 200 countries by hundreds of thousands.
Outside of Ireland approximately 16,000 people play Gaelic Games.
The fact is, when newcomers look at our sport, they aren’t gripped by a desire to play it. That in itself should tell us something.
When foreigners watch a midfielder soar into the air and take a magnificent catch, they must be downright astonished when they witness the same player being penalised for over-carrying when he hits the ground and is swarmed by five players.
Yet the Donegal triumvirate are all opposed to the introduction of the mark, a rule which rewards one of the most treasured spectacles of Gaelic football.
Rory Gallagher doesn’t even attach that much importance to the high catch.
He asked: “Why reward someone who is just performing one of the game’s basic skills?”
Like all the most successful teams, Donegal concede the overwhelming majority of their fouls in areas of the field where a free-kick represents a relatively harmless penalty.
Midfield is one of the ‘foul zones’.
Examine the catch made by Barry Moran in the 40th minute of the All-Ireland final. Having collected possession, Moran was immediately fouled by Patrick McBrearty. Keen to take the free quickly, Moran threw the ball to Andy Dillon whose path was deliberately blocked by Neil Gallagher. Referee Maurice Deegan brought the ball forward 13 metres and set it on the ground. By the time Dillon picked the ball off the surface, Donegal had a dozen men in their defence.
What was Mayo’s reward for their clean catch? What was Donegal’s punishment for fouling Moran and preventing a quick free from being taken quickly? Now imagine that scenario under the rules proposed by the FRC. When Moran took his catch, he could have instantly claimed a mark. If a Donegal player stopped him from taking a quick free, the ball would have been brought forward 30 metres to around the 45-line. Mayo’s dead-ball specialist Cillian O’Connor converted three 45s in the All-Ireland semi-final against Dublin. Under the new rules, everything changes.
When teams start conceding points from 45s, it will not take long before the foul count is reduced at midfield.
It is the tactical fouling in the other sectors of the pitch which will continue to be a cancer on the game.
On the eve of last year’s All-Ireland final, Joe Brolly accused Mayo of rampant cynical fouling during the semi-final against Dublin.
After studying the match, Brolly claimed that on 27 occasions a Dublin player was “simply held or pulled down, but there was not a single yellow card”. Brolly’s analysis did not note those fouls were mostly desperate and led to scores for the Dublin revival.
A study of Donegal’s performance in the All-Ireland quarter-final against Kerry reveals a trend. In all, Donegal committed 25 deliberate fouls. What was their penalty? Five yellow cards, finishing the game with 15 men, and Kerry only scored 0-2 from frees.
The latter fact demonstrates how good Donegal can be at tackling when they really don’t want to concede fouls.
Yet, we are repeatedly being told that there is nothing wrong with a game where there is no real penalty for deliberately stopping play.
Sadly, the FRC’s proposals to counter tactical fouling are probably too extreme. A forced substitution for a yellow card places too much power in the hands of referees. More pertinently again, the rules would be unworkable at many club games where many teams struggle to get 15 players, never mind substitutes.
We deserve a game where it pays to be positive, and where there is profit to be gained from having players who can execute the ancient arts.
High catching is not a basic skill.
Neil Gallagher’s father never dreamed of the day when he would see his son blocking a ball in Croke Park – and Rory Gallagher knows this all too well.
There is a time and a place for listening to men who are out to win games — and the debate surrounding the FRC’s new proposals isn’t one of them.
