Ulster Minor Football Club Championship 2014 (at Saint Pauls)

[Throw ball]

As a member of the losing panel yesterday I think Down Fanatic needs to wise up. If an amalgamation has to be done, it has to be done. Congratulations to Southern Gaels and best of luck in the final.

Fair play.

On a more general note amalgamations are needed in many areas to enable players to get games. The problem is if these get manipulated for the win at all costs ideal.( I know nothing about Southern Gaels so am not saying anything against them). I feel the GAA should be able to put rules in place to counter this e.g. restricting amalgamations based on the number of registered players at that age group.

[armaghniac]

A club in an area with 16000 people is admired as a strong club, but if two clubs with 800 to pick from combine their minor team they are undermining the spirit of the GAA!

[imtommygunn]

Amalgamations are sometimes necessary and highly unlikely that most commenting on southern gaels know anything about their needs...

Sean stinsons won four in a row minors in antrim and few batted an eyelid. Funny enough the smaller of the two clubs in the amalgamation has currently benefited most. (Though generally portglenone have benefited more). The clubs would barely be fit to field a team of their own at underage.

[DownFanatic]

The St Paul's tournament is in essence a "club" tournament. Southern Gaels are not a club. They are an amalgamation and therefore I believe that amalgamations should not be allowed to enter a club tournament.

In Down there are 9-a-side and 13-a-side underage league and championships. This allows clubs with smaller picks to field on their own without having to join up with neighbouring clubs in order to get a 15-a-side team. Do Cavan provide for smaller sided leagues and championships within their competition structures?

The whole amalgamation route is open to abuse. What's to stop a couple of clubs in Cavan getting together next year with the sole aim of winning their county MFC and then making a go at the St Paul's tournament?

[ONeill]

St Paul's are free to run their tournament any way they want. If they stipulate that all keepers must be lesbians then so be it.

[DownFanatic]

St Paul's are free to run their tournament any way they want. If they stipulate that all keepers must be lesbians then so be it.

Superb retaliation there.

[ONeill]

I played on an amalgamation for 4 years. If we didn't amalgamate one of the teams wouldn't have fielded at underage for a decade whilst the other would have been hammered in every game in the lowest grade.

They are now 2 independent small strong clubs.

[bannside]

I'm all for amalgamations as long as it's within the spirit of the rules - the top criteria being  whether or not a club could reasonably field on their own. Now if this amalgamation gave a clearly unfair advantage to a team then maybe it should be reviewed.

The reality is that even the combined player base of  both clubs still leave it hard enough to get 17/18 players for matches, and some of the teams we play have far more players available.

In our case Portglenone and Ahoghill join at underage level as Sean Stinsons, and the experiment has been a resounding success.

It's not that Stinsons are a major force all of a sudden. We win no more titles than most other clubs at underage level. It's at senior that the results are seen. Both Portglenone and Ahoghill play Division 1 next year, and before the amalgamation twenty years ago both clubs would be fluctuating between divisions two and four!

[DownFanatic]

I played on an amalgamation for 4 years. If we didn't amalgamate one of the teams wouldn't have fielded at underage for a decade whilst the other would have been hammered in every game in the lowest grade.

They are now 2 independent small strong clubs.

I've nothing against amalgamations. My own club was amalgamated with our parish neighbours for 11 years at underage level.
I'm against amalgamations entering prestigious provincial "club" tournaments.

[ONeill]

Then I go back to the lesbian comment. St Paul's had the hindsight to run a tournament years back for minor county champions. Now people are telling the club how to run it.

So, punish SG for having a decent side this year? Sure why don't we go through all the sides and see if anyone was poached/encouraged to change to the club a bit down the road.

[DownFanatic]

Then I go back to the lesbian comment. St Paul's had the hindsight to run a tournament years back for minor county champions. Now people are telling the club how to run it.

So, punish SG for having a decent side this year? Sure why don't we go through all the sides and see if anyone was poached/encouraged to change to the club a bit down the road.

To reiterate my point: I think the tournament should be for clubs only as allowing amalgamations into the fold devalues it.

[orangeman]

Surely imalgamations are born out of sheer necessity ?. I'd be confident that in most cases, clubs don't want to join up with other clubs, who are usually bitter rivals.

[DownFanatic]

Surely imalgamations are born out of sheer necessity ?. I'd be confident that in most cases, clubs don't want to join up with other clubs, who are usually bitter rivals.

They are but it can be open to abuse.

[ONeill]

Surely imalgamations are born out of sheer necessity ?. I'd be confident that in most cases, clubs don't want to join up with other clubs, who are usually bitter rivals.

They are but it can be open to abuse.

Can you give an example?

[bigball]

Surely imalgamations are born out of sheer necessity ?. I'd be confident that in most cases, clubs don't want to join up with other clubs, who are usually bitter rivals.

They are but it can be open to abuse.

Can you give an example?

3 or 4 years ago an amalgamation won the Cavan minor championship. One of the amalgamated clubs won the league on their own before joining up with another to win the championship. Good enough example??