Down Club Hurling & Football

[thewobbler]

DaddyLongLegs - if my memory serves me correctly, only 4 clubs didn't subscribe to the Pairc Esler project. One of those clubs, who I won't name, refused to pay because as a hurling club they didn't see the point in funding a ground that none of their members would ever visit.

The direct debit issue caused a fair amount of acrimony between the clubs and the board, and I can well remember our own committee describing it as a waste of money. We still paid it though. As far as we were concerned, every club had to pay it.

As it turns out, the money was very well spent, and it's 1-0 to the county board on this occasion.

There were a number of discussions at county board level during the process over what sanctions could be placed on non-paying clubs, but nothing was agreed. I'm glad to see that something is actually is being put in place. It's not really a punishment for the clubs who didn't partake, as all they are really losing out on is something they never had anyway, but at least it sends out a fair warning to the clubs that in the future 100% participation means 100% participation.

[goldenyears]

whats the view of the posters on site here re revamping the leagues: would b v interested in hearing opinions

idea would be to extend div1 to 16, div2 to 16 and remaining teams in div 3

3 up, 3 down on annual basis, 15 game total league season with extended championship

ie 16 teams in groups of 4, round robin play 3 champ games, then either top 2 in each group into q finals, or winner of each group into semi finals.

i understand concern of clubs losing gate money for league games but this would be offset with share of gate for the champmatches they are involved in.

i think our leagues need some sort of revamp and the play off system has served its purpose.....

[Maiden1]

i understand concern of clubs losing gate money for league games but this would be offset with share of gate for the champmatches they are involved in.

Is any club worrired about gate receipts?  Seen plenty of games where it costs more to run the showers than they make at the gate.

Is there still going to be playoffs at the end of the season?

Are teams to play matches without there county players?

[Blue Island]

whats the view of the posters on site here re revamping the leagues: would b v interested in hearing opinions

idea would be to extend div1 to 16, div2 to 16 and remaining teams in div 3

3 up, 3 down on annual basis, 15 game total league season with extended championship

ie 16 teams in groups of 4, round robin play 3 champ games, then either top 2 in each group into q finals, or winner of each group into semi finals.

i understand concern of clubs losing gate money for league games but this would be offset with share of gate for the champmatches they are involved in.

i think our leagues need some sort of revamp and the play off system has served its purpose.....

Goldenyears if you look at 4 or 5 pages back in the thread there is along discussion on just this point. The upshot of this discussion is there does not appear to be any concensus among posters, so god help the powers that be in the county board when they look at the issue.

Just to show you how varied the views are, I would prefer a ten team division and whilst I am not a keen supporter of the play off system, I do believe it is required for the good of our county players. However, in a ten team league I would have the bottom three and top three play off, instead of four. By my reckoning, if you were involved in a play off you would play 20 matches a year as opposed to the 24 that we now play (unless of course teams are tied in the playoffs). The advantages as I see it, are we would be unlikely to be playing until November.

I do realise the advantage of your system is that we would play less matches as well, but I do feel that the lack of intensity in a 16 team division would detract from our county teams. Too many matches would be dead rubbers and if you are going to play in the 1st or 2nd divsion it is best for the standard of football in the county if you are forced to fight for that right in a competitive division.

I recall the old ten team divsion in Down that was done away with after Downs success in 94 and I am firmly of the view that we killed the goose that laid the golden egg. I would advocate a return to that intensity, but with three way play offs in place, because I also recall the leagues were a fiasco then without the playoffs when Down was going well.

[Blue Island]

I forgot to add reply about championship format. Can see merit in your proposals Goldenyears and have to say I have leaned that way also. I am not so sure now as I was reading about Derry's prospects in next years all Ireland in the Irish news recently. It was suggested that in Derry the format was detracting from the County squad as it only fuelled the already bitter intensity that existed. I realise making a better county team is not perhaps the primary consideration, but it is of some importance.

In a perfect world if we could find a position somewhere between our own and Derry's that would suit me.

[DaddyLongLegs]

Wobbler, I agree that the money raised was very well spent - no issue with that & a job very well done.

But I question the decision to deprive some clubs of development money which after all isnt coming from the DCB but from Central Council (probably indirectly from rugby & soccer). Some of the 4? clubs may simply have not been in a position moneywise to commit to what the Cty Board were asking at that time  - some clubs exist in difficult surroundings and survival is a constant struggle & it could be argued that it is these clubs which should benefit most from grants of this kind - the big clubs are fit to look after themselves without dipping into funds like these. It seems to me that there wasn't a lot of thought given to this decision other than to mete out some form of sanction to those who didnt pay.

Also anyone know what full participation in the Pairc Esler project actually involved. I know there was a direct debit to be paid (is this still being paid?) but was there some other requirements. I believe this development fund is only going to be available to those who "fully" particiipated.

[thewobbler]

Regarding the leagues, my own preference would be 10 team divisons, which should ensure a more competitive standard.

I've a "solution" to the starred game problem, the basic tenets are:

- Divisions I-III would be 10 team leagues.
- Division IV would be split into two even sections (about 7 teams each), across abritrary lines drawn up each year (not just plain old east and south), in order to minimise travel times for all teams.
- Each team would play each other home and away (18 games) on 18 Friday nights between mid-April and late August. This time period gives us about 21 weeks. Allowing one week for the Championship round one, and two weeks for the July break, this would be manageable, but to ease possible congestion I'd suggest having a couple of weeks in May/June with 2 fixtures in them (Monday and Friday).
- Starting from the last weekend in August, Championship games and League play-offs would take place on alternate weeks. In the event of Down reaching an AI final, all activity in September would be postponed to October.
- The play-offs would consist of the top 5 teams playing each other for promotion/the title, and the bottom 5 teams playing each other for relegation.
- Play-offs would be on a round-robin basis and the winners/losers would be decided in exactly the same way as the normal league, i.e. by points, then by scoring difference.
- Home advantage in the play-offs would be decided entirely by final normal season placings. So the team finishing top in the normal league would have (all) four home games, the team finishing second would have three home games, etc, the team finishing last would have no home games.
- The order of play-off games would continue as is, with the highest ranking team playing the lowest ranking team in the first game, then working their way up the tree.
- Gate reciepts for play-off games would be split evenly between the competing clubs.  
- In the event of a play-off field being unplayable, the fixture would be reversed.
- Promotion and relegation would remain on a two-up/two-down basis.
- The County teams could withdraw panellists from club action for up to 7 days before an intercounty championship game. Therefore only one fixture series should be affected by each county match.
- For Division IV, the top four teams in each section would enter a new league, playing each other on a round robin basis. Higher ranking teams in the normal league would have home advantage. When two team have the same rank (i.e. 1st in D IV Bann vs 1st in D IV Mourne), a coin toss would decide the venue.
- The bottom 3-4 teams in each Division IV tier would play in a shield tournament to wrap up their season.

The single biggest advantage of this system is that just about every game of the season would matter, and that each team would have to work its bollocks off just to stay alive in their division.

It would also ensure that teams without county players would have the chance to retain/regain their rightful status at the business end of the season with a full team availble.  

[Maiden1]

10 team divisions like the good old days.  The league actually meant something then.  Burren, Downpatrick, Loughinisland .. where up there with the best in Ulster.  I remember Mayobridge and Downpatrick going for the league title in 1993 where every match was important and 1 slip up could cost you the league.  Now Mayobridge/Kilcoo can play without much intensity all year, when they do play each other it doesn't really matter much who wins.  I don't think it helps the county or the top club teams having this system.

[Down Gael]

I would agree with most of what thewobbler has to say, but I dont see why we have to have play-offs to decide who gets relegated and who wins the league. If you want to make every game meaningful then do away with the play-offs. The most consistent team wins the league then, not the team that finishes fourth. Just my 2 cents worth.

[thewobbler]

Downgael - the play-off system allow the leagues to progress throughout the intercounty system without clubs kicksing up a fuss about player availability. The other thing about play-offs is that it keeps interest levels higher towards the tail end of the season, as most clubs have something genuinely worth fighting for until the end.

[T O Hare]

FAO Wobbler-are you playing on Sunday?

[Blue Island]

Downgael - the play-off system allow the leagues to progress throughout the intercounty system without clubs kicksing up a fuss about player availability. The other thing about play-offs is that it keeps interest levels higher towards the tail end of the season, as most clubs have something genuinely worth fighting for until the end.

Have to agree with nearly all you say and particularly like your idea about division four being split into two groups of seven with top teams joining to play for promotion. It seems like nit picking, but I don't think the bottom teams in divsion four would play for shield at the end of the season, but your general idea is sound and one of the best proposals I have heard.

I have read other posters in the past suggesting weaker teams in divsion 4 should play in the reserve leagues and I believe that is totally unacceptable.

The one point I would disagree with, is the top 5 bottom 5 playoffs. I agree with the idea that playoffs in some form are a necessary evil ,but top 5 bottom 5 playoffs could result in the team placed 5 winning the league and the team in 6th being demoted with the team placed 5th in divsion 2 gaining promotion.

[mournerambler]

Division 3 promotion play-off result,

Glasdrumman 1:11 - Bredagh 0:04

[bridgegael]

'bridge won the ACPRL1 today with a six point victory over neighbours clonduff!  thats a premier reserve double for us.

[T O Hare]

'bridge won the ACPRL1 today with a six point victory over neighbours clonduff!  thats a premier reserve double for us.

the trophy cabinet is getting full