I wonder what Meatloaf would have made of the new proposed rule changes to Gaelic Football? He famously sang that two out of three ain't bad but I doubt if he would have had as good a ratio with what the GAA are proposing here.

Personally I think that three of the five rules are a disaster waiting to happen.

I understand that the rationale behind the proposed rule changes are to make the game more enjoyable for the viewer but I just don't think this will result in any long term improvement in that regard.

In fact what I fear most is that when top level coaches adapt to the rule changes what we will actually see is a more negative game.

Two of the rule changes, the sin bin and kicking of side line balls forward I don't have any major issue with. The latter will have a minimal impact on the game and the former I think will be more of a deterrent than the black card. It is the other three where I see the problems starting.

1 - Three hand pass maximum

This has been tried before. It didn't work then and it will not work now. I often hear people say glibly that the game is called Gaelic 'Football', with the unsaid insinuation that there is not enough kicking. We all like to see good long kick passing, but I for one would rather consign the hoof it and hope type tactic to the past. The problem I have always had with many who advocate blindly to lumping the ball long is that they have a complete contempt for the hand pass, and how intricate and well designed hand passing moves can be.

When executed correctly, with runners coming off the shoulder and changes of angles, hand passing can be a beautiful way to cut open a defence. In fact it is often the best way to overcome a blanket defence.

We have to understand that teams do not want to give the ball away and there is nothing wrong with the maxim that possession is a vitally important factor in the game.

This rule proposal will actually cause teams to play the ball back more, especially when faced with numbers back in the opposition defence. Coaches will start to tell players that they should be analysing the situation after the second hand pass. They will tell players that rather than play a teammate into potential danger with a third hand pass forward that the ball should go back to safety. The we will see a kick pass, but this will be lateral, or dare I say it, back even further. Just watch how many times we see a 40 or 50 yard kick back when these rules are trialled. Goalkeepers will be busier for an entirely different reason.

2 - Mark inside the 20 yard line

There is a notion in Gaelic games that teams should go out and play 15 v 15 with the rationale that the best team will win. I never understood this. Given the unequal county system it would mean teams could never be competitive against opposition with better players. It's a nonsensical view. And as such the mark inside the 20 meter line will never have the benefits that those argue for its introduction believe it will have. The neutral won't be able to marvel as ball after ball is plucked from the sky and converted into points.

What we will see are coaches taking more severe steps to counteract an accomplished target man. What right thinking manager or coach will sit and watch as one team hit long ball into an outstanding fielder who is one on one inside? Teams don't allow it to happen now and they certainly won't if once the ball is fielded the forward has a free shot on goal. This rule could quite conceivably see teams operate with more men back and certainly any sweepers deployed will be in a deeper set up.

3 - Kick Out

This rule change proposes that a goalkeeper and maximum of six players from his team, along with their direct opponents, will be behind the 45m line and that only two men from each team will be between the two 45s. The irony of this rule is that it will do away with the perceived advantages of the mark that was introduced in the midfield area just a few years ago. I don't think people realise just how big an area between the two 45s is. I can see teams setting up so that the majority of kick outs are won by a player who is running into space and taking the ball after the first bounce. It could all but eradicate high fielding in the middle of the field because it will come down to percentages for coaches.

What type of kick has a great chance of retaining possession? A high drive where it will be contested or a placed kick to man running at pace who has inevitably been a yard ahead of his marker by virtue of the fact they know where the ball is going?

This rule has been proposed to curb blanket defending with the rationale I presume that because teams have to set up for each kick out in traditional positions that they will not be able to collapse men back as quickly. There is an argument to be made for that. But it will stop high fielding and it will also slow up the game as we wait for players to make their way into their designated positions following each wide or score. There are around 40 to 50 kick outs in a 70 minute game by the way. There will be a lot of waiting around.

In trying to solve one problem a few more are being created.

Now, in conclusion I am not trying to say that the game is rosy. It is not and there does need to be more done to incentivise attacking play and create more space. My problem with the three rule changes above is that they will be quickly out thought by coaches.

It would have been much better to trial playing at 13 aside and perhaps increasing the value of a goal or a point from distance. But, we will wait and see. Perhaps a surprise in in store.