Outdoor basketball? The two-point arc is completely changing Gaelic football

Irish Examiner

09-05-2025

Before the Football Review Committee presented the direction they were taking Gaelic football, they first had to show us what was steering it. Over 7,000 survey responses ranked their top technical skills with a clear top five.
The responses were categorised and dissected in an extraordinarily detailed chapter of the FRC's interim report. Kicking and catching scored highest, with long-range points third. General creative play and goal scoring rounded out the set.
Nothing that could be considered a defensive skill, like blocking or correct tackling, was rated highly.
It was that appreciation for long-range scores combined with a need to entice blanket defences that led to the creation of a 40-metre arc.
Since then, the two-pointer has been a revelation. Teams are living and dying by what it adds, or in certain cases fails to add.
What we know for certain is that shots from outside the arc are on the rise. In the first report by the Games Intelligence Unit, the average number of two-point attempts from play was just over eight per game. In their most recent report on the provincial championships, it was 12.
As soon as the new rule was first proposed, there was a rush to consult the basketball brethren within the game's ranks. Decades ago, the strategy and patterns of the American hardwood sport seeped into Gaelic football coaching.
The new orange flag was only ever going to intensify that crossover. The three-point line transformed shot location in the NBA. Now consider the impact it's already having in GAA.
In last Sunday's Connacht final, Galway only attempted one midrange shot. Their first six attempts were all for two-pointers.
'It is risk and reward,' says former Limerick footballer Stephen Lavin. He runs the website 'Game Sense Coaching', an online coaching guide on skills and tactical awareness.
'This happens naturally. A player says if I go back two yards, the risk that I miss is slightly higher, but it is twice the reward. That is in their mind and the team's mind. I'm not criticising the committee here, I understand why they got rid of the four-point goal, but you have reduced the reward of going for goals. This is all about risk and reward.'
Figure 1.
Coaches can now more easily manipulate defences to create the space for their shooters. 'Overload to isolate,' is Lavin's label.
'Previously it was about width and depth; now it is really where can you bunch anywhere in the scoring area to create space somewhere else.'
Meath manager Robbie Brennan's headline-grabbing assessment of the new rules last March saw him label it 'outdoor basketball with a breeze.'
Eight-time All-Ireland winner and current Éanna basketballer Michael Darragh Macauley predicted that the arc alone will 'completely change Gaelic football'. Now we're starting to see it.
The most recent FRC progress report included a shot map that divided one half of the pitch into 13 zones. The return from a two-point shot outside the arc exceeded that of a mid-range shot inside it.
This is where the rash decision to scrap the four-point goal starts to take its toll. Jim Gavin said at the time that there was agreement it would work in competitive games. Players and Ard Chomhairle members were worried about what it would mean in matches that pitted teams from different divisions against each other. Essentially, it could get ugly fast.
Is there enough incentive for teams to work it in? If not, what does that mean for the nature of the sport?
'When you have players bunching inside for example, the risk isn't worth the reward for kicking a ball in,' says Lavin.
'In my opinion, you'd kick that goal in if you could get four points from it.'
An additional problem is that the numbers can prove boring. Few want to dissect a chaotic and inflammatory game in this cold way. Even if you do, there are complications upon complications. Two-point tallies need to differentiate between frees and from play.
Figure 2.
Frees can be conceded on the arc or result from 50m advancements and 4v3 breaches. There have been numerous examples of teams conceding a two-point free on the arc, but advantage means play continues and a player eventually scores a one. Game state matters. T
he conversion rate tends to differ depending on if teams are drawing, losing or winning. We live on a windy island.
What we are starting to see is how teams are building their game around the arc. Since the removal of the 12v11 scenario, no team in the country has attempted as many two-pointers as Meath. They also have the second lowest goal shots across that stretch, ahead of only Cavan. They didn't score a goal against Dublin in the semi-final shock but they did score twice as many two-pointers.
It was always likely that coaches like Kevin Walsh in Cork, who previously brought his Galway team to the St. Mary's basketball halls for preseason training, would find a way to get creative with his attack.
They kicked six two-pointers to Kerry's one in the Munster semi-final clash. Cork's ability to create space and set screens was true innovation. More of it will follow.
And that will inevitably dictate the future.
'These things evolve over time,' says Lavin. 'You might see a clip from a championship game and see what worked. That's what I'd be doing as a coach. Other teams end up copying that. This happens across sport, like Pep Guardiola in soccer.'
That trend will be worth monitoring. The hope is that the arc will open up the game, not define it. What we know is that change has arrived. What we don't know is how far it will go.