Just reading the text there, seems that aidan walsh has been excluded from representing his uni due to him doing two courses this year. This has been implemented by the the gaa higher education board.
How on earth can this be beneficial for unis? Why is such a rule enforced? It's got me!!
Its his 3rd different course, did 2 course's in CIT and dropped out both of both of then, Studying in DCU now. Probaly unfair for him, some other players are just in them collegs to play some ball and get a scholorship.
Should it matter if it his third different course - jim mcguinness comes to mind- the reason he is not allowed to particapte is because he is doing two courses within the one year. Cant find the logic why he is not allowed to play.
He has enough teams to be playing for - he should be glad of the excuse.
Jim Mc progressed from Tralee to Jordanstown for a Masters and then did further study in Liverpool on Sports Phychology.
Didn't drop out. Still probaly is unfair on Aidan Walsh
But if yer there on scholarship surly yer there doing one degree, not two.
The only thing I can think of is that maybe the gaa uni counil believe that they would not have time to concentrate on studies if he plays football. Maybe there is a clause on the council stating that studies have to come first or something.
Yes you are right AFS - it says on rte text here 'the gaas higher education board have enforced a rule that stops players who have enrolled in more than two college courses from playing for a third level side' I assumed from reading that it meant two collrge courses in same year.
I still feel that rule is unfair.
Quote from: AFS on December 05, 2012, 08:52:38 PM
Quote from: theticklemister on December 05, 2012, 08:27:49 PM
Should it matter if it his third different course - jim mcguinness comes to mind- the reason he is not allowed to particapte is because he is doing two courses within the one year. Cant find the logic why he is not allowed to play.
Where are you reading this? From what I can make out here (http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/football/2012/1205/356893-counihan-criticial-of-rule-barring-walsh/), he has been barred from playing because it's his third different course. The rules have been changed to limit lads to two courses or six years at third level, which is fair enough I think. Boys togging out for colleges well into their mid twenties is only robbing younger fellas of the experience of third level football.
Dead right. College footballs is becoming a shambles no more than a journeyman competition. This rule was introduced to stamp it out. He can't call foul when he knew the rules before he began dropping out of courses.
Aidan Walsh is still 23 so hardly a veteran for Sigerson Football, ,like Paul Galvin when he was going to play with DIT last year only for injury ruled him out. Its the fact that his third course, I could be wrong on him dropping out of 2 course's but he definitely dropped out of the second course in CIT. Think the first course was for 3 years.
He wouldn't have played a full six years college football which is the rule so your eligible for Sigerson. Its his third different course.
Peadar Gardiner was playing with NUI a few years ago as a mature studant when he was around 31/32. Walsh is still 23 so probaly unlucky, but the rule of being his third course goes against him,
My bad, Aidan Walsh is actually 22. Sounds worse now when you look at the lads who are 27/28 or lads in the 30+ mark playing Sigerson.
Quote from: rodney trotter on December 06, 2012, 10:17:59 AM
My bad, Aidan Walsh is actually 22. Sounds worse now when you look at the lads who are 27/28 or lads in the 30+ mark playing Sigerson.
They are going to be bringing in a rule that you have to be under 24 to play college football, not sure when its going to happen but it has being talked about as well as getting rid of minor and playing a U-17 competition.
If there's a rule preventing him from playing.... then he has to abide by the rules.
I think he's being harshly treated. I know 2 lads that are in their 2nd course this year and are being allowed play, but as they aren't big intercounty names and the colleges involved aren't big Sigerson Cup strongholds like CIT or DCU, nobody's kicking up a fuss about their eligibility.
The rule should either apply to everyone or nobody, not just marquee names.
Quote from: blanketattack on December 06, 2012, 11:39:57 AM
I think he's being harshly treated. I know 2 lads that are in their 2nd course this year and are being allowed play, but as they aren't big intercounty names and the colleges involved aren't big Sigerson Cup strongholds like CIT or DCU, nobody's kicking up a fuss about their eligibility.
The rule should either apply to everyone or nobody, not just marquee names.
It does apply to all. The rules are there for a reason. At Sligo IT this year we have a player who is in his 3rd course. He not allowed to play and he would be a starter for sure but not a county player. There are heaps of players like this around the country but the media only pick up on the high profile ones. Yee lads wouldnt give a damn if it was a lesser player.
The rule was brought in to stop the likes of DCU 'recruiting' players. Not sure if it has worked though
Quote from: blanketattack on December 06, 2012, 11:39:57 AM
I think he's being harshly treated. I know 2 lads that are in their 2nd course this year and are being allowed play, but as they aren't big intercounty names and the colleges involved aren't big Sigerson Cup strongholds like CIT or DCU, nobody's kicking up a fuss about their eligibility.
The rule should either apply to everyone or nobody, not just marquee names.
Boo feckin hoo! The lad playes Club Hurling/Football and County Football. Why should the Sigerson be important to him?
Thats a pile of shite screen. Maye just maybe he loves to play football, or would that just be daft??????????
Im doing my third course in uni at the minute and played football in first two years, what happens if I wamt to play this year. Im useless so no one is gonna give a shit thays why.
Quote from: screenexile on December 06, 2012, 12:07:31 PM
Quote from: blanketattack on December 06, 2012, 11:39:57 AM
I think he's being harshly treated. I know 2 lads that are in their 2nd course this year and are being allowed play, but as they aren't big intercounty names and the colleges involved aren't big Sigerson Cup strongholds like CIT or DCU, nobody's kicking up a fuss about their eligibility.
The rule should either apply to everyone or nobody, not just marquee names.
Boo feckin hoo! The lad playes Club Hurling/Football and County Football. Why should the Sigerson be important to him?
At a guess ;) there would be no funding for an athlete who is not able to represent the college? So the living costs/ course costs would not be covered.
I don't know about an under 24s rule. It's a bit punitive on people who take up college a few years late, and also brings in the horrible (but necessary) line in the sand that if you're born on one day, you're not eligible, but if born the next day, you are.
I'd introduce the system that applies US Colleges, where you can play up to four seasons of inter-collegiate sport.
These don't have to be consecutive seasons - and if you opt out for a year, or injury rules you out for a year, it doesn't count against your four year allowance.
But kick a ball for any college, at any level, in any season, and that's one of your seasons used up.
I know full well there are courses in medicine and architecture that go beyond four years, and when combined with masters degrees and doctorates, can extend you as long a decade in college. But really, if you're good enough to be in demand for longer than four years, you really should be concentrating your sporting efforts on county football - and actually using the rest of your time for study.
Quote from: thewobbler on December 06, 2012, 01:23:51 PM
I don't know about an under 24s rule. It's a bit punitive on people who take up college a few years late, and also brings in the horrible (but necessary) line in the sand that if you're born on one day, you're not eligible, but if born the next day, you are.
I'd introduce the system that applies US Colleges, where you can play up to four seasons of inter-collegiate sport.
These don't have to be consecutive seasons - and if you opt out for a year, or injury rules you out for a year, it doesn't count against your four year allowance.
But kick a ball for any college, at any level, in any season, and that's one of your seasons used up.
I know full well there are courses in medicine and architecture that go beyond four years, and when combined with masters degrees and doctorates, can extend you as long a decade in college. But really, if you're good enough to be in demand for longer than four years, you really should be concentrating your sporting efforts on county football - and actually using the rest of your time for study.
All very reasonable, but you can be sure if they introduced such a rule someone would complain when their Johnny fell foul of it. It only applies to other people, you see.
Agreed Deiseach.
But it's a very simple rule to understand, and a very simple rule to police. There's no ambiguity, no need for adjudication or appeals. If you play 1 minute of an official colleges game at any level, it counts as a season. Snapping a cruciate in that 1 minute is unfortunate, but competition rules are created to serve the majority, not to cater for exceptional cases.
With it in place, you wouldn't need any other eligibility criteria in place, other than you must be registered with the College who you play for.
The move to limiting the years you can play is a good thing. Colleges should be able turnover and new players (whatever their ages) getting a chance. After six years you should have plenty of Sigerson/third-level experience to do you a lifetime, it is only ever going to be the second, third or fourth tier of football for players after all.
Particularly an inter-county player should be very glad not being ran into the ground mid-week with college games on top of club and county commitments. That is unless he's getting a sports scholarship dependent on playing but if a college was trying to get away with that then more's the fool them.