Pauric Duffy

[Man Marker]

Why does a county player "need" to train 3/4 times a week, week in week out with a county panel?

International soccer teams are happy to train in short bursts ahead of matches and then the players go back to their clubs who look after them week in week out. I fail to see why (both from a financial and player welfare perspective), this shouldn't be the adopted format.

Skull I read your posts regularly and enjoy and agree with most. But I am disappointed that you don't see difference between the science and prep at county level compared to club explains why our model will not be the soccer model. Club soccer at at the top clubs leads in science and prep and the country benefit, we are the reverse.

[Old yeller]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

[deiseach]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

[johnneycool]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

[Syferus]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

It won't. Surely you can see everyone benefits from young players not being ran into the ground.

[johnneycool]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

It won't. Surely you can see everyone benefits from young players not being ran into the ground.

1% are being run into the ground, most aren't getting enough games.

[Syferus]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

It won't. Surely you can see everyone benefits from young players not being ran into the ground.

1% are being run into the ground, most aren't getting enough games.

Being ran into the ground is a far more critical concern rather than having nothing to do for a wile. It is absolutely correct to address the former first.

[oakleaflad]

- Lads at 17 years of age that all throughout GAA history have been old enough to play for their club are now deemed not old enough to play for their club. This is to protect the elite 17 year olds who are now training 3 times a week with development squads. What about a 17 year old who is not on a county minor or development squad and whose last game of club minor football is in May. What does he do until April 2017?

But if minors go to U17, and it means minors can't play adult football, it will allow for proper minor leagues and championships in every county, that won't end in May.

I think its a no brainer. And I think those saying it will leave 17 year olds with no football or that it will have a massive impact on the junior cert are being disingenuous.

Is this being discussed at congress? I know a few clubs who will struggle to field either a team or a reserve/seconds team due to the rule change.

[Rossfan]

Time to amalgamate then!

[johnneycool]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

It won't. Surely you can see everyone benefits from young players not being ran into the ground.

1% are being run into the ground, most aren't getting enough games.

Being ran into the ground is a far more critical concern rather than having nothing to do for a wile. It is absolutely correct to address the former first.

They are not mutually exclusive.

Its possible to stop the burnout of the top 1% by restricting the number of intercounty panels they can be part of, whilst not impacting on the club player already starved of fixtures.

[Syferus]

Reading the article on Pauric Duffy/Congress next weekend in Saturday's indo I was dismayed that the man who is supposed to save club football could only talk about looking after the elite underage player.........since going into office he seems to have realised that the elite players bring in the money and the next generation of those must be looked after. The other 90% odd can go to hell as long as the cream are protected. Can someone at Congress stand up for club footballers or are all the delegates only worried about the elite in their counties as well?

Elite young players are by far the ones being fúcked over by the system more than anyone else. A club player having to sit on his arse in the summer behind a bad club schedule pales in comparison to the suffering alot of young county level players go through in the meat grinder of half a dozen or more 'pay-masters' wanting their piece around the same time of the year.

Duffy is 100% correct here.

Its not the  Gulf War, get a grip ffs!

'suffering' might be slightly OTT. Maybe 'exertions' would be better. Otherwise, Syferus' post strikes me as being right on the money.

Its right on the money for the 1% of elite young players, so why bring in rules that may impact on the other 99% in a negative manner?

It won't. Surely you can see everyone benefits from young players not being ran into the ground.

1% are being run into the ground, most aren't getting enough games.

Being ran into the ground is a far more critical concern rather than having nothing to do for a wile. It is absolutely correct to address the former first.

They are not mutually exclusive.

Its possible to stop the burnout of the top 1% by restricting the number of intercounty panels they can be part of, whilst not impacting on the club player already starved of fixtures.

You're wrongly assuming this is the end-point of the changes. What this does is immediately address the dangerous situation these players find themselves in, whether clubs want to admit it or not, while farther reaching issues of schedules are being addressed. And we've already done exactly what you're suggesting at minor IC - in the last year or two no U16s are allowed play minor, indeed most panels would have had at least a few of those players in years past. Few players played minor and U21 in the same year in recent times so that's not an major overlap issue either. But U21s need to be allowed to be on the senior panel too because they are at the age where they're breaking through to that level anyways. It would make no sense at all to me to force a player to be a senior or an U21 player.

[Zulu]

Why not? No need for lads who can play senior to play U21 unless you're putting success above their welfare.

[Rossfan]

Quite simple - a very talented 20 or 21 year old gets on the Senior I C panel then he's not eligible for U20/21.

[Zulu]

Why is that a problem? If U21's couldn't play senior then you could play far more games than you do, thus giving those lads more games to develop. It would also give more lads IC football so a win win surely?

[Syferus]

There's 21 year-olds who are good enough at that age to win multiple All-Stars and compete for PotYs. It's a form of madness to restrict them from being on their senior team in cases like that, as is forcing them to choose between doing that or playing with the friends they've been playing with from U14 or U15 up.

The only reason you'd be doing it is because of a correctable scheduling malfunction too. There's plenty of time to parse these competitions through the year so you're looking at the trying to fix the problem with the laziest solution to it rather correcting the underlying mess.

Some of the thinking here really isn't going to help improve anything.