Former FRC member Paul Earley concerned by proposed rule changes

“My big issue is every time you bring in a rule change, you have to ask does it make it easier or more difficult for referees," said Earley.

CONCEREND: Former Football Review Committee (FRC) member Paul Earley is concerned the proposed rule changes are going to heap pressure on referees. Pic credit: Piaras Ó Mídheach / SPORTSFILE

Former Football Review Committee (FRC) member Paul Earley is concerned the proposed rule changes are going to heap pressure on referees.

The ex-Roscommon star and Ireland International Rules manager was part of the previous FRC body headed by the late Eugene McGee that brought in measures such as the black card.

Earley is in general agreement with several of the proposals, like expanding the black card to holding players and the 50-metre penalty, due to be voted on at Special Congress on November 30.

However, being a long-time advocate for a second referee he believes the suite of enhancements will laden match officials with extra responsibilities.

“I would be supportive of a lot of the rule changes in because the game is in a bad way and I think everybody accepts that,” said 1985 All-Star full-forward Earley.

“I like the discipline ones in particular because not only does it speed up the game it also cuts down on the messing around frees.

“My big issue is every time you bring in a rule change, you have to ask does it make it easier or more difficult for referees. Already, the game is a difficult game to referee as it is, although the way it’s been played recently it’s been easier for them because of how slow it is and most of the game is played between the two 45-metre lines effectively.

“But with these new rules and looking at the first evening of the interprovincial games there were 20% more high-speed running by players and that has to transfer to referees as well. There’s an issue with fatigue in a demanding role as it is.

“We all know that when you get tired towards the end of games, your concentration drops and mistakes are likelier to happen for both players and referees. Add to that, (keeping) the three outfield players up front places more demand on a referee.

“You have more support from the linesmen but the 40m arc is another one the referee must adjudicate on top of the square ball, which I always believed was impossible to adjudicate. You have the mark inside the 20m, which is something else the referee must judge.

“To me, there is an absolute necessity for a second referee and a lot of people would support that view. I’m not saying the review committee should have brought it in but I don’t know why it hasn’t been looking at seriously.

"For the new rules to be effective, there does need to be a second referee as it places a huge burden on an already overworked referee.”

Earley also reckons reducing a goal from four points to three while successful kicks from play and frees outside the new 40m arc are worth two points may compel teams to play more conservatively.

“It does diminish the value of the goal in terms of taking risks. You want players to take a bit more risk in the forward line and be rewarded for doing that.

"I can understand why they returned the 45 to a one-point score but I’m not sure there was a need for them to go back to the three-point goal. The four-point goal went hand-in-hand with the two-point score.

“The feedback (FRC chairman) Jim Gavin has spoken of is the exact same we received in 2013. People want more kicking, more long-range scores and more high fielding. I’m sure they want more goals too because they create excitement but will this now reduce the number of chances taken?

“It won’t be absolutely right on day one and the fact that they have the opportunity to review it at the end is very important.”