Hurling Trial Rules are leading to more flow in early game trends

By Shane Brophy

Ordinarily, a run of the mill third-level hurling match in late October wouldn’t attract anyone more than a hurling die-hard but last Thursday’s Fitzgibbon League game in Mary Immaculate College Limerick between the home side and MTU Cork was a little different.

GAA Director of Hurling Willie Maher and Hurling Expert Advisory Group chairperson John Meyler were among those on hand to observe the latest game in the trial of the 24 rule amendments in the competition.

Indeed, such is the work being put in that Ballingarry native Maher departed before the end to head to Galway to take in another match later that night.

This was MTU Cork’s second game under the trial rules while it was Mary I’s first experience as their first league game against SETU Waterford was rained off the previous week.

Cork inter-county referee Ciaran O’Regan was the man in the middle, supported by experienced referees acting as line-umpires, Limerick’s Johnny Murphy and John Bugler from Clare, as well as his four umpires.

Refereeing

Indeed, the first four rule amendments relate to the match officials, the first of which is the referee is allowed to speak to both teams in the dressing rooms to explain the rules and what he is looking out for.

In games, the referee and line-umpires (now their official title replacing linesmen) are encouraged to work as a team, with each line-umpire patrolling from an end-line to halfway, effectively giving the referee additional support in each half of the pitch.

They are now empowered to alert the referee to technical and aggressive fouls they see. However, the referee retains the authority to overrule them. They are not restricted to identifying fouls in their half of the field.

Ciaran O’Regan revealed post-game that on just one occasion did he receive such an alert from a colleague via microphone for a consecutive handpass, which he had spotted himself in any case.

“I found it grand,” he said of his first match trialling the rules.

“I was nervous coming in that I would remember everything.

“I was probably over thinking and watching everything so it should be easier the next day.”

He added: “The only thing is I felt the game was slower but that was a me thing in terms of the puckouts as I was trying to make sure there were three defenders and three attackers (inside the 45s). In fairness, the teams were good but you still have to look for it so I was slower blowing for the puckout to be taken.”

Handpass

Only one time in the match was a consecutive handpass penalised where a player who receives the ball from a teammate by handpass cannot immediately handpass it again. The next transfer must therefore be made by another legal method. A free isawarded from where the second handpass is made or attempted.

“There was one consecutive handpass but the player half threw it so you could argue which offense I gave that for,” added the referee.

It was a feature of Mary I’s play in the early stages of the match that they used the so-called brick-flick a lot to get a short pass away instead of the handpass in an effort to avoid being bottled up whereby they might have no option but to handpass again, while also saving the handpass for further up the field where it might open up a scoring opportunity.

Of all the trial rules, the clear handpass striking action was the one that caused the most issues. In all nine frees were awarded for throwing whereby the ball was not passed with clear and definite striking action of the hand.

“It’s the separation, it has to be very obvious for all to see,” O’Regan added.

“There were probably one or two I missed as well but they weren’t obvious to me.”

It is now the player’s responsibility to make the striking action obvious. If the referee or line-umpire is in doubt, a free is to be awarded against the player.

Six of the nine frees awarded were against Mary I, which their manager, former Clare dual star Podge Collins, admitted was disappointing.

“We spoke before the game about the deliberate handpass but it was one of the rules that we didn’t focus on over the last couple of weeks which is our fault really as a management,” he began.

“We were penalised six times which was very disappointing; outside of one of them I would completely agree with the referee on, and is a very hard rule to implement anyway.

“The lads have adapted pretty quickly to the brick-flick as well as the consecutive handpasses, but the six steps is something we could utilise more, plus there were very few rucks.”

There were as many as eight other occasions when this reporter recalled what looked like a throw not being penalised. In fairness to the referee, he is closer to the play and might well have seen clear separation of the ball from the hand so deserves the benefit of the doubt, but this subjectivity is why this rule remains difficult to enforce consistently as a clear and definite striking action to one referee might be different to another, which could lead to more frustration among supporters for whom it is a big issue.

“We’ll look to tidy it up ourselves and it would be better for the game itself that it isn’t all throws,” revealed Mary I player and Holycross/Ballycahill clubman and Tipperary senior hurler Joe Caesar.

“It would have flowed a bit more but the only thing is when a puckout is going long the whole time, there isn’t that much play in the middle at all.”

“All in all, it wasn’t too bad but it was kind of a different game to play, more of a conditioned game in training more than a match.”

Six steps

Players being permitted to carry the sliotar for a maximum of six consecutive steps, replacing the existing four-step allowance, is certainly one of the more controversial proposals but there were no obvious situations where players went beyond six-steps that looked obvious.

In fact, what this rule is proposing is what is going on a lot as it is under the four-step rule, particularly when players run at an opposing player, they are taking more than four steps as it is before they have to play the ball.

Indeed, one of the most refreshing aspects of the trial rules in the early games is the reduction in the number of rucks with players looking to avoid carrying the ball into contact, where they could be pulled for steps or forced to throw the ball out of contact.

“The six steps is quite good as it allows you to get away from lads,” added Caesar.

“With four steps, if a lad gets a hand on you at all, you are caught and nearly have to turn back whereas with six you can power on past someone. The six steps allows you get away and move the ball on.”

Puckout

The trial rules relating to the puckout are two-fold, 1 - a minimum of three players from each team must remain in the area between the defending team’s 20-m and 45-m lines when a puck-out is being taken. 2 - The ball must travel outside the 45-metre line before another player from the team taking the puck-out can play it. An opposition player can attack the puck-out inside the 45. If an opponent touches it there, the restriction on the defending team ends.

However, this is one Joe Caesar isn’t a fan of from his first experience of it.

“I wouldn’t be mad about that rule because if you are in the backs, the chance of getting a short puckout away is very hard, especially if they have three players set up on the 45 yard line.

“In Fitzgibbon hurling in January and February against the wind, you could be rightly caught as a puckout might not go beyond the 65 whereas you could use a short one to the corner back to try and work it out. In this rule, you would be dependent on having a ball winner in the half forward line.”

Other Rules

The rule on tackling which specifically prohibits holding an opponent with the hands or arms was strongly enforced by the referee and helped ensure a greater flow to the game.

With not one ruck in the match, there was no need for the referee to throw-in the ball to restart play, apart from the start of each half where one player from each team contests the throw-in at midfield. The second player from each side stands on opposite sidelines at halfway. Both throw-ins saw both players pull as if a player doesn’t or steps in front to draw contact, a free will be given against them.

There was one ‘65 in the game but such was the narrow gap between the two 65-yard lines in Mary I’s pitch, the shot was about 71 yards long and converted easily.

There were no sideline cuts converted for two points in the match.

There were no specified deliberate fouls which denied an attacking player a goal-scoring opportunity, including certain dangerous or off-the-ball collisions, resulting in a penalty puck and a yellow or red card appropriate to the offence.

Fitzgibbon League games continue through the month of November trialing the 24 amendments published by the Hurling Expert Advisory Group which are as follows:

1. Pre-match referee briefing with teams

2. Officials operating as a team

3. Line-umpires become assistant referees

4. Line-umpires can flag fouls

5. No two consecutive handpasses

6. Clear handpass striking action

7. Fair-play wording strengthened

8. Benefit of doubt moves against the hand-passer

9. Six steps allowed

10. Overcarrying and overholding redefined

11. Holding an opponent with the arms prohibited

12. Ground stroke required at all throw-ins

13. New start-of-half throw-in with one player each

14. One-against-one at all other throw-ins

15. Puck-out positioning requirement with 3 players inside the 45m line

16. Puck-outs must clear the 45

17. Referee must restart play after a score or wide

18. Goal-scoring opportunity fouls relating to penalties and black cards

19. Advantage rule altered

20. 65s moved back to own 65

21. Two-point sideline cut

22. Maor Foirne returns

23. Unauthorised Maor Foirne entry prohibited

24. No replacement Maor Foirne