JIM Gavin has the air of a fresh faced young Mormon selling bibles door to door. Serene as the buddha, he could persuade you of almost anything. Imagine him as a US trial lawyer, beaming down from a gigantic billboard, with the slogan: Honest Jim Gavin, Trial attorney. Just because you did it doesn’t mean you’re guilty. Call 01-900-74756.

At Pat Gilroy’s mother’s wake a few years ago, Jim and I got into an animated debate in the front hall about solutions to the problem of the world’s most boring spectator sport. Jim took up one of the memorial booklets and started scribbling his ideas down. Eventually, Brian Gilroy asked us to move outside. I came away from the debate feeling that Jim had agreed with my ideas. This was of course a misinterpretation.

Brian Clough, the legendary Nottingham Forest manager, was asked once on the BBC, “How do you react when someone from your playing staff says to you ‘Boss, I think you’re doing this wrongly?” Clough said, “Well, I ask him which way he thinks it should be done, we get down to it. We generally talk about it for 20 minutes, and then we decide I was right.”

Jim’s Review Committee has now announced their final package of rules and there is no doubt they will improve the game. My issue is that it does not solve the sweeper/zonal defence problem, which is what caused all the bother in the first place. Their attempt – three players from each team must remain inside one half of the field at all times – merely dilutes the problem slightly. It will not prevent the sweeper stifling the quick ball to the inside forwards. Nor will it prevent the dreaded zonal defence from forming up inside the 45. Eleven zonal defenders will still comfortably be able to kill attacking play (Galway’s zone has 11 players and they are virtually impossible to score a goal against), with the caveat that the new goalkeeper rule will tempt the defending team to press high at least now and again, leaving space behind them for an adventurous attacking team to exploit.

I’ll go through each of the playing rule ‘enhancements’:

1. 1 v 1 throw in to start the game. This is only a tweak but it is a good one. It means that the midfielder who wins possession will have room to quickly attack.

2. Kick-outs must go beyond the new 40-metre arc. This is good since it enforces contests. Also, if an opposition player interferes with the goalie or intercepts the ball inside the 40-metre arc, the ball will be advanced 50 metres and a free kick awarded. One criticism is that with the new limits on passing to the goalkeeper rule (see 3 below), the ‘keeper should have been allowed to take short kick outs, which would be extremely risky given the new rule 3.

3. Goalkeeper may only receive a pass from a team mate a) if he and his team mate are inside the large rectangle and b) if the goalie has advanced over the half way line into the opposing half. This is by far the most important rule change. It solves one of the two fundamental problems that have destroyed the game as spectacle. Playing keep ball with the goalie has been a game killer, meaning it is pointless for the opponents to push up and press, instead incentivising them to drop off and retreat into their own half. Yawn. My solution was a complete ban on the keeper taking a pass from an outfield player. Jim’s recommendation is a more refined solution and is in truth, a better one. Teams will now be able to push up and tackle the defenders, forcing the defenders to break out and forcing them to look for a relieving kick pass. An excellent, essential rule change.

4. A player who is fouled can now solo and go rather than stopping to take the free. Another good rule which will keep the game moving. If I win a ball inside the 40 and am pulled back, I can elect to drive on. The ref may allow an advantage up to four metres. The rule does not apply inside the 20-metre line.

5. Each team must keep any three outfield players in each half of the field. This is not a solution to the problem of the sweeper/zonal defence. It will help a bit, especially in tandem with the new No pass to the goalkeeper rule but leaves the sweeper and zonal defence intact. An 11 man blanket defence is still a game killer. The Committee appears to have taken the view that leaving zonal defending and the sweeper intact will help to reduce inequality between teams by assisting weak sides compete against the strong. In my view, this is a fallacy.

6. An attacking mark will only be awarded in future for a ball caught inside the 20-metre line from a kick outside the 45. This is better than what we have, but the real improvement is that the player who wins the mark doesn’t have to call it unless he wants to and can instead continue on until the ref decides no advantage has accrued. This at least gets rid of the current ridiculous mark which is an embarrassment.

7. Two points from a point from outside the 40 metre arc. Another tweak, but a good one. Great incentive for accurate long kicking, with the hope also being expressed by the Committee that it will also draw out the zonal defenders leaving more room inside. Proof, if proof were needed, that their 3 v 3 rule does not solve the sweeper/zonal defence problem. Interestingly, this also includes free kicks outside the 40 metre arc and 45s.

8. Four points for a goal. Again, a tweak but again, a fun one. The problem will be that against modern blanket defences (managers will now formulate 11 man defences and do not forget that because of the 3v3 rule they will only have to cope with a maximum of 11 attackers) it will remain almost impossible to score a goal.

I have set out my sweeper/zonal defensive proposal in detail on many occasions. I’ve also sent the proposal to Jim, which is actually a solution and is easy to police. But after we spend 20 minutes discussing it, I will probably agree Jim was right all along.