Antrim Football Thread

[AllStar15]

Disappointed in those names released so far for the Antrim squad. Seems we are using division 4 to massage some aging egos rather than develop the future.

where did you see this list or is it pub talk,hearing PG1 minor manager stepping in to take Ahoghill seniors

According to Niall McCoy, who only released some names, Tomas McCann/ John Carron/ Paddy McAleer all back.

[AllStar15]

Just to add to that he also said about Conor & Kevin Small and John McNabb.

[Spike]

until we see a full list of names we are only guessing

we want the best players playing for our county. 

if they are good enough they will be playing.  if they are not they will be standing at the wire like the rest of us.

by all accounts there was a large number up so we can expect plenty of complaining and hard luck stories from the noncommitted and the not good enoughs as the panel gets smaller and smaller as we approach McKenna Cup time

[Spike]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

Dont disagree with this.

Clubs who can field a team should not be in amalgamations end of. Acceptance is a Coach's ego boost.    It needs to be 2 or 3 clubs who cannot field that need to be merged together. 

Not disagreeing here, but would be keen to know what would the number be for a team nowadays? Are we talking 22 for likes of availability over the year to allow for the injuries exams and the other reasons young ones give?

As entering a team because you have 15 won't cut it when teams that waiting on a game don't get one as someone is unavailable and two teams then lose out..

expect 17 or 18 would be enough. plenty of clubs with that. isn't there a rule you can line out with 13 players which many do around exam time which helps.     

[UpTheSaffs17]

i know exactly what has been done and from what i have been told every player has been committed that has been there thus far, must be whispers from outside encouraging selections.

[Milltown Row2]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

Dont disagree with this.

Clubs who can field a team should not be in amalgamations end of. Acceptance is a Coach's ego boost.    It needs to be 2 or 3 clubs who cannot field that need to be merged together. 

Not disagreeing here, but would be keen to know what would the number be for a team nowadays? Are we talking 22 for likes of availability over the year to allow for the injuries exams and the other reasons young ones give?

As entering a team because you have 15 won't cut it when teams that waiting on a game don't get one as someone is unavailable and two teams then lose out..

expect 17 or 18 would be enough. plenty of clubs with that. isn't there a rule you can line out with 13 players which many do around exam time which helps.     

Not sure if you have taken juvenile teams but I'm personally not taking a team with 17 of a squad.. That's just me, I've taken many teams and if at the start of the year that's all I had that SAY they are playing, come league or championship is different.. 2 subs (if you are lucky) isn't fair either as some players may be expected to play injured and so on..

Yes the rule is in place and every time I've spoken to the managers of the team with all their players there is usually a good aul rant, its not perfect but there are winners and losers all round when you have just 17 to call on.

Long gone are the days when you could have bigger squads as first year under 16's could play minor

[Gaels1789]

i know exactly what has been done and from what i have been told every player has been committed that has been there thus far, must be whispers from outside encouraging selections.


It'll be hard to know Untill a list of players comes out,

Probably different views from people who still there and the ones who have been dropped

[Spike]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

Dont disagree with this.

Clubs who can field a team should not be in amalgamations end of. Acceptance is a Coach's ego boost.    It needs to be 2 or 3 clubs who cannot field that need to be merged together. 

Not disagreeing here, but would be keen to know what would the number be for a team nowadays? Are we talking 22 for likes of availability over the year to allow for the injuries exams and the other reasons young ones give?

As entering a team because you have 15 won't cut it when teams that waiting on a game don't get one as someone is unavailable and two teams then lose out..

expect 17 or 18 would be enough. plenty of clubs with that. isn't there a rule you can line out with 13 players which many do around exam time which helps.     

Not sure if you have taken juvenile teams but I'm personally not taking a team with 17 of a squad.. That's just me, I've taken many teams and if at the start of the year that's all I had that SAY they are playing, come league or championship is different.. 2 subs (if you are lucky) isn't fair either as some players may be expected to play injured and so on..

Yes the rule is in place and every time I've spoken to the managers of the team with all their players there is usually a good aul rant, its not perfect but there are winners and losers all round when you have just 17 to call on.

Long gone are the days when you could have bigger squads as first year under 16's could play minor

You've been spoiled MR2 if you have never taken a team with low squad numbers.  wont say you'll win a trophy with a squad of 17 or 18 but you will at least keep them playing that season.   nothing perfect but that 13 rule gets a game

[delgany]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

I've been told that these are also being reviewed

[YoungSaff]

i know exactly what has been done and from what i have been told every player has been committed that has been there thus far, must be whispers from outside encouraging selections.

Surely this would not be the case ?

I'd imagine they would go off performances in training etc not just because of an outsider whisper

[SaffronSports]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

Dont disagree with this.

Clubs who can field a team should not be in amalgamations end of. Acceptance is a Coach's ego boost.    It needs to be 2 or 3 clubs who cannot field that need to be merged together. 

Not disagreeing here, but would be keen to know what would the number be for a team nowadays? Are we talking 22 for likes of availability over the year to allow for the injuries exams and the other reasons young ones give?

As entering a team because you have 15 won't cut it when teams that waiting on a game don't get one as someone is unavailable and two teams then lose out..

expect 17 or 18 would be enough. plenty of clubs with that. isn't there a rule you can line out with 13 players which many do around exam time which helps.     

Not sure if you have taken juvenile teams but I'm personally not taking a team with 17 of a squad.. That's just me, I've taken many teams and if at the start of the year that's all I had that SAY they are playing, come league or championship is different.. 2 subs (if you are lucky) isn't fair either as some players may be expected to play injured and so on..

Yes the rule is in place and every time I've spoken to the managers of the team with all their players there is usually a good aul rant, its not perfect but there are winners and losers all round when you have just 17 to call on.

Long gone are the days when you could have bigger squads as first year under 16's could play minor

You've been spoiled MR2 if you have never taken a team with low squad numbers.  wont say you'll win a trophy with a squad of 17 or 18 but you will at least keep them playing that season.   nothing perfect but that 13 rule gets a game

Its not brilliant but i figure in my case, even if im a useless coach, getting matches will help the kids more than just sitting on a bench at an older age group.

I coach girls football u14. I had 15 u14s and 3 u12s came up to play with us too so total panel of 18. Ladies football allows 11 a side minimum. Think the lowest we went to a game with was 12 but we lost both games when we were down to 12/13 and the opposition had a rake of subs. One probably would have beat us anyway but i think the other we would have beat as we were well ahead but one of our best players got hurt and went into nets.

Ultimately, i do think trying to get games will benefit the kids but as Spike says, if trophies are important to you, its going to be very difficult.

[Milltown Row2]

There are a significant number of these transfers which come from sanctions.
A young lad sanctions for maybe 4 years and then decides to fully transfer.
It's hard to argue that he should return to his "home" club when he has spent more time playing underage football with his sanctioned club.
However, the sanction/amalgamation rules need looked at. There are clubs with a pile of their own players sanctioning in players and there are clubs who can easily stand alone and be competitive who are being allowed to enter amalgamations.

Dont disagree with this.

Clubs who can field a team should not be in amalgamations end of. Acceptance is a Coach's ego boost.    It needs to be 2 or 3 clubs who cannot field that need to be merged together. 

Not disagreeing here, but would be keen to know what would the number be for a team nowadays? Are we talking 22 for likes of availability over the year to allow for the injuries exams and the other reasons young ones give?

As entering a team because you have 15 won't cut it when teams that waiting on a game don't get one as someone is unavailable and two teams then lose out..

expect 17 or 18 would be enough. plenty of clubs with that. isn't there a rule you can line out with 13 players which many do around exam time which helps.     

Not sure if you have taken juvenile teams but I'm personally not taking a team with 17 of a squad.. That's just me, I've taken many teams and if at the start of the year that's all I had that SAY they are playing, come league or championship is different.. 2 subs (if you are lucky) isn't fair either as some players may be expected to play injured and so on..

Yes the rule is in place and every time I've spoken to the managers of the team with all their players there is usually a good aul rant, its not perfect but there are winners and losers all round when you have just 17 to call on.

Long gone are the days when you could have bigger squads as first year under 16's could play minor

You've been spoiled MR2 if you have never taken a team with low squad numbers.  wont say you'll win a trophy with a squad of 17 or 18 but you will at least keep them playing that season.   nothing perfect but that 13 rule gets a game

Its not brilliant but i figure in my case, even if im a useless coach, getting matches will help the kids more than just sitting on a bench at an older age group.

I coach girls football u14. I had 15 u14s and 3 u12s came up to play with us too so total panel of 18. Ladies football allows 11 a side minimum. Think the lowest we went to a game with was 12 but we lost both games when we were down to 12/13 and the opposition had a rake of subs. One probably would have beat us anyway but i think the other we would have beat as we were well ahead but one of our best players got hurt and went into nets.

Ultimately, i do think trying to get games will benefit the kids but as Spike says, if trophies are important to you, its going to be very difficult.

I never brought trophies into the conversation, its about fielding, because if you can't field every week as the squad is short of bodies then its a knock on effect with the team that you can't field against.. Its not about winning.

That team of mine for many years won nowt till they got senior and took huge hammerings along the way.

Winning is participating 

[Round or stuffed]

Can we fill in a definitive list of club managers for the coming year, most clubs should have their business done if they hope to get a good start next year? or is there at least a list of clubs that are on the look out

Clann na hÉireann Carraigin - Devlin,Carlin Jackman, Doyle
Kickhams GAC Creggan -  Joe Cassidy
Naomh Bríd - Cahal Murray Gerard McNulty
All Saints Ballymena - Baker Bradley
Roger Casements Portglenone - mattie mcgleenan
Naomh Gall -
Lamh Dhearg -
Naomh Séamas - John Rafferty
Cuchullains Dun Lathaí -
Naomh Eoin - Paddy Nugent
Naomh Pól CLG -
Conn Mag Aoidh -
St. Mary's Aghagallon - Kevin McKernan
Tír na nÓg Randalstown - Colin Toal   
O`Donovan Rossa - Hugh McG
Naomh Muire Achadh Eochaille -
Pádraig Sáirseil CLG -    
Naomh Eargnait, Muine Glás -
Naomh Seosamh/St Joseph's -
Naomh Treasa CLG /St Teresa's GAC -
Naomh Padraig -
Naomh Éanna -
Gort na Móna CLG -
Naomh Comhghall CLG -
CLG MacDaibhéid -
St Mary's Rasharkin -
Naomh Úna CLG/St Agnes' GAC -
Laochra Loch Lao -
St Malachy's -
Ciceam Ard Eoin -
Na Piarsaigh -
Éire Óg -
CLG Uí Dhonaill -
Wolfe Tones GAC -

[HTownlad]

Clann na hÉireann Carraigin - Devlin,Carlin Jackman, Doyle
Kickhams GAC Creggan -  Joe Cassidy
Naomh Bríd - Cahal Murray Gerard McNulty
All Saints Ballymena - Baker Bradley
Roger Casements Portglenone - mattie mcgleenan
Naomh Gall - No Chnage
Lamh Dhearg - Frank Fitz
Naomh Séamas - John Rafferty
Cuchullains Dun Lathaí -
Naomh Eoin - Paddy Nugent- Wrong Mr Douglas still managing
Naomh Pól CLG - No Appointment
Conn Mag Aoidh - Two club men
St. Mary's Aghagallon - Kevin McKernan
Tír na nÓg Randalstown - Colin Toal   
O`Donovan Rossa - Hugh McG -Wrong he's gone
Naomh Muire Achadh Eochaille -
Pádraig Sáirseil CLG -    None
Naomh Eargnait, Muine Glás -
Naomh Seosamh/St Joseph's - No appointment
Naomh Treasa CLG /St Teresa's GAC -
Naomh Padraig - Kevin Murray
Naomh Éanna - no change
Gort na Móna CLG - No change
Naomh Comhghall CLG -
CLG MacDaibhéid - no change
St Mary's Rasharkin - no change
Naomh Úna CLG/St Agnes' GAC -
Laochra Loch Lao - No Change
St Malachy's -
Ciceam Ard Eoin - No Change
Na Piarsaigh - No Change
Éire Óg - Not went out yet
CLG Uí Dhonaill -
Wolfe Tones GAC -

[Round or stuffed]

Apologies that was based off a previous post, who are the men who are the no changes? seems to be a real lack of knowledge around who are the managers in the county