During the public unveiling of FRC’s preliminary report on Thursday, a handful of us assembled to engage with Jim Gavin at Croke Park, post his presentation that spanned an hour. This preliminary report is certainly an extensive and meaty document, consisting of 208 pages and tipping the scales at a just above one kilogram (precisely 1,010 grammes, as we discovered upon weighing it at home).
A small stack of these reports were placed on a windowsill, and upon a more detailed examination, it was apparent that each had been autographed on the inside cover by committee members. Their signatures, lined one below the other, resembled those on a formal declaration. The GAA has constantly churned out voluminous reports over many years, yet seldom have their creators felt compelled to go all-out with an elaborate launch, akin to how Pearse, Connolly, and MacDonagh would have done.
No matter how seriously you perceive the FRC’s commitment to this endeavour, it’s likely you’re underestimating it. Absolutely nothing here is superficial or transient. The main objective is to establish a lasting legacy that endures through the years. If successful, this moment can be pinpointed as the starting point.
The opening headlines would instantly catch the attention of anyone tuning into the games scheduled for next weekend. Modifications like three players holding position in the rival half, the frees taking an unaided run, imposing a cap on goalkeeper passes, and the two-point scoring arc—these are among the most conspicuous changes. The expectation is for the game to retain its unique Gaelic football identity despite the alterations, while also making it a more entertaining sport.
However, the committee’s purview is considerably wider than previously anticipated. In addition to proposing the high-profile changes, the report also includes a myriad of minor, meticulous adjustments that the committee believes should be codified into rules. If you compare the major changes to the blueprint of a construction project, then these minor tweaks can be likened to the snag list.
There’s an initiative to standardise the ‘square ball’ rule in football, so there’ll be no difference whether the ball is kicked into play or from a free kick. Another proposition focuses on expanding the ‘black card’ to cover players attempting a cynical foul without necessarily grounding an opponent. There’s also a desire to permit linesmen to inform a referee of foul behaviour during gameplay rather than waiting for the ball to go out of play, which is the current procedure. Generally, these changes are not controversial.
What has stirred interest, however, are the proposals concerning player dissent. The Football Review Committee’s (FRC) recommendations, when examined thoroughly, are quite transformative and have been overlooked because people didn’t anticipate that this was the type of reform the committee was established to propose.
The idea of moving the ball 50 metres upfield as punishment for certain transgressions has been considered over the years but never actualised. Yet, if the FRC’s motions are approved, this could drastically change how players and coaches interact with referees.
Specifically, Motion 34 stipulates that any form of dissent towards a referee by a player will result in the ball being brought forwards 50 metres. Motion 35 restricts inquiries about why a free was given to the team captain only, or a player appointed by the captain when the keeper is the captain. If anybody else demands an explanation, the ball is advanced 50 metres.
Additional measures include action against misconduct off the field. If Motion 49 is implemented, any manager, coach or non-playing substitute found guilty of abusing a referee, linesman, or umpire will see their team penalised with a 13-meter free, or alternatively, a 40-metre free directly in front of the goal, equating to two points.
The idea of imposing a 50-metre penalty for certain acts is being brought to the table. These acts primarily enclose continuous disturbing behaviour demonstrated by players who occasionally hand out fouls or touchline balls. According to the freshly proposed regulations, if a player stays firm with the ball post a free-kick, or throws the ball around, or indeed, even hands it to the referee, they’re accused of the 50-metre fine. To be precise, the proposition clearly states that post the declaration of a foul, players holding the ball have to transfer it to their contenders. A failure to comply would result in a 50-metre fine.
An intriguing insight was offered by Gavin whilst sharing a casual conversation about these laws with us. His excitement about the changes was palpable, perhaps more so than other major topics. His reasoning is quite clear: for as long as anyone can recall, the GAA has expressed the need to combat referee maltreatment but has not been successful in making substantial progress.
The potential amendments could fill this gap. They could provide a lasting solution. They could instil as significant a change in the game’s culture as any other proposition made before. This level of ambition is certainly worthy of everyone’s endorsement.