Author Topic: Row in Mayo LGFA  (Read 35219 times)

nrico2006

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6186
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #45 on: August 23, 2018, 10:48:28 AM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

spuds

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2018, 11:11:36 AM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.
"As I get older I notice the years less and the seasons more."
 John Hubbard

nrico2006

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6186
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2018, 11:36:41 AM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.

I know that but surely the 'member' in 288 is individual specific at not aimed at a club?  Additionally, if it can be applied to a club then why are the clubs of the others who left the panel not being subjected to the same punishment?
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

spuds

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2018, 11:41:06 AM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.

I know that but surely the 'member' in 288 is individual specific at not aimed at a club?  Additionally, if it can be applied to a club then why are the clubs of the others who left the panel not being subjected to the same punishment?
You quoted my post on rule 193. Think this will run and run.
"As I get older I notice the years less and the seasons more."
 John Hubbard

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2018, 12:15:14 PM »
Refusing to play for the county is not bringing the game into disrepute. Refusing to play for the county for any reason cannot be punished.
You cannot be forced to play football ffs. Players should be able to choose what level of commitment they give to the game. If players are unhappy with the county set up, they should be able to opt out.
This is completely baffling.


shark

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1086
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2018, 12:16:26 PM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.

I know that but surely the 'member' in 288 is individual specific at not aimed at a club?  Additionally, if it can be applied to a club then why are the clubs of the others who left the panel not being subjected to the same punishment?
You quoted my post on rule 193. Think this will run and run.

I doubt it will run too far. I expect the Connacht Council to overturn it once appeal is heard. The idea that you can compel club players to play county is legally bankrupt. The Carnacon players who left the county panel could have been 100% in the wrong and this decision would still be nonsense.

spuds

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2018, 12:22:09 PM »
Refusing to play for the county is not bringing the game into disrepute. Refusing to play for the county for any reason cannot be punished.
You cannot be forced to play football ffs. Players should be able to choose what level of commitment they give to the game. If players are unhappy with the county set up, they should be able to opt out.
This is completely baffling.

Good man. Don't bother reading what is posted.
"As I get older I notice the years less and the seasons more."
 John Hubbard

AQMP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3401
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2018, 12:23:45 PM »
Refusing to play for the county is not bringing the game into disrepute. Refusing to play for the county for any reason cannot be punished.
You cannot be forced to play football ffs. Players should be able to choose what level of commitment they give to the game. If players are unhappy with the county set up, they should be able to opt out.
This is completely baffling.

Completely nuts.  Surely "forcing" a player to play for the county team under threat of suspension goes full square against the amateur ethos of the GAA (or the LGFA in this case)??

Jinxy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12333
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2018, 12:24:01 PM »
Why would such a rule (193) even exist?
Just trying to get my head around someone proposing it, and the reasoning that was used to support it at the time.
If you were any use you'd be playing.

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2018, 12:41:13 PM »
Refusing to play for the county is not bringing the game into disrepute. Refusing to play for the county for any reason cannot be punished.
You cannot be forced to play football ffs. Players should be able to choose what level of commitment they give to the game. If players are unhappy with the county set up, they should be able to opt out.
This is completely baffling.

Good man. Don't bother reading what is posted.
What are you going on about?
The 193 rule is the biggest pile of ballix Iíve ever seen.
The 288 rule is fine but is not applicable in this case.


hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2018, 12:46:14 PM »
Why would such a rule (193) even exist?
Just trying to get my head around someone proposing it, and the reasoning that was used to support it at the time.
Exactly. What good is it for a county team to have a pile of players who donít want to be there?


Kickham csc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #56 on: August 23, 2018, 12:55:30 PM »
Why would such a rule (193) even exist?
Just trying to get my head around someone proposing it, and the reasoning that was used to support it at the time.

What I understand about this rule, it was put into place to prevent clubs holding the county team to ramson , i.e. prevent a club pulling their players from a squad for an upcoming game, either to influence the county boards on a decision or to gain competitive advantage for an upcoming game.

So basically, once your in a squad and committed, you can leave the squad on a personal reason, but a club can't organize to pull a group of players for an upcoming game

hardstation

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25282
  • On a cold and misty morning on the Anagaire bridge
    • View Profile
    • gaaboard.com
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #57 on: August 23, 2018, 12:58:00 PM »
Thatís silly. The players from that club then just turn up and donít try an inch until they are dropped.
Thatís a crazy rule.


RadioGAAGAA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #58 on: August 23, 2018, 01:16:49 PM »
The 288 rule is fine but is not applicable in this case.

How on earth do you figure that?

A third of the panel walking off for false reasons (which would reflect poorly on the county setup) in the week leading up to a big game is not bringing the game into disrepute?

i usse an speelchekor

thebackbar1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Re: Row in Mayo LGFA
« Reply #59 on: August 23, 2018, 01:18:34 PM »
Whatever about their reasons for leaving the county set up, they are amateur players and are under absolutely no obligation to play for the county team.

Throwing their club out of the championship is up there with one of the most ridiculous decisions Iíve ever heard and will surely be overturned. It strikes me that people were sick of them winning and decided that this was an opportunity to fcuk them out. Thatís pretty pathetic.
Apparently they are obliged to play county if chosen. Was mentioned on Off the Ball earlier by Mayo journalist Edwin McGreal.
Not sure how he works that one out tbh.

Go to 13:30

Carnacon thrown out of Mayo championship - GAA on Off The Ball - Off The Ball - http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/GAA_on_Off_The_Ball/231883/Carnacon_thrown_out_of_Mayo_championship

Rule 193 ladies football. County boards have power to suspend for 6 months a player who refuses to travel or play for their county.

Surely that rule can be challenged.  Especially given the fact that the punishment doesn't seem to correlate with the rule, i.e. they haven't seemingly suspended any players but have kicked a team out.  Plus, there were non-Carnacon players who refused to play and they or their club haven't been punished.  Seems very unethical.
Rule 193 is not the rule that kicks Carnacon to touch, the rule the Mayo ladies football board used was rule 288 as quoted previously by From the Bunker which is  bringing the game into disrepute.

I know that but surely the 'member' in 288 is individual specific at not aimed at a club?  Additionally, if it can be applied to a club then why are the clubs of the others who left the panel not being subjected to the same punishment?
You quoted my post on rule 193. Think this will run and run.

I doubt it will run too far. I expect the Connacht Council to overturn it once appeal is heard. The idea that you can compel club players to play county is legally bankrupt. The Carnacon players who left the county panel could have been 100% in the wrong and this decision would still be nonsense.

The connacht council that is headed by john prenty have no jurisdiction over this matter