Attacking mark be damned and the Rossies' 'healthy hate'

Between the full programme of football and all the hurling, there wasn't much time to argue the merits of the proposals arising from Congress on League Sunday last weekend.

Personally, I like the make-up of the latest version of the Football Review Committee - anything with Jim Gavin in a senior role is bound to do good - but I'd be wary of dumping a load of new rule changes down on the sport.

From my perspective, if the FRC get rid of the attacking mark, then it will have been worth it. It's a farce of a rule and has been since it was introduced. In recent weeks, we've seen it showcased again for the nonsense that it is.

Niall Morgan gave an almost directly lateral pass to Conn Kilpatrick in the dying minutes against Galway - a mark and score. The Dubs - in an otherwise explosive performance - took a handy mark at a rare dicey moment midway through the second half to keep Kerry at arm's length.

The midfield mark? Grand. That's fine. In truth, we don't have enough of those aerial contests from kickouts for it to matter any more. But the attacking mark? It has to go.

It adds nothing to the game, either from an attacking or a defensive standpoint. I've never heard one positive sentiment expressed by any player on that rule.

Nonetheless, I'd be reassured by the composition of the committee. Alongside Gavin, you've the likes of James Horan, Eamonn Fitzmaurice and Malachy O'Rourke, all of whom understand the modern game and how it's evolved. Crucially, they're all 'current' and won't be too swayed by misplaced nostalgia.

I'm also enthused by the noises from Jarlath Burns, who sounds like he'll be a proactive and energetic president.

On to more immediate matters, the Rossies are coming to Castlebar with a bounce in their step; always