Procurement of Young Talent: Are the GAA's Transfer Regulations too lax?

[David McKeown]

Im from a small club myself and the way I see it is as follows.  Firstly a great many place a devotion to their home club that means that even if transferring was easy they would have no intention of moving on simply to win things.  Consequently I can't see more lax transfer regulations resulting in an exodus of players from smaller clubs.  Moreover even if players did move from smaller clubs because they place a greater emphasis on winning things than on playing for their club, then theres an equal opportunity imo for players to move the other way in hunt for regular football which has the chance of balancing out teams throughout the leagues.

The arguments I have though for a more lax transfer system are as follows.  Firstly we are an amateur association and as such people should be free to come and go as they like they should not be tied to one particular club.  In addition people shouldnt be forced to play for a club they dont wish and arent prepared to give 100% for.  Likewise no club should want players who dont want to play for them.  Furthermore the fact that kids who decide on a club because their school friends player there or their parents find it most convenient can be tied to a club for life (even though the kids didnt know that at the time) is both unfair and to me far more detrimental to the association as it can result in kids leaving.  Likewise the fact that an obtuse committee can refuse transfers for personal reasons hidden behind this idea that granting the transfer would harm the club (as has happened a friend of mine who now no longer plays) is disgusting and as I saw potentially more harmful to the assoication.

To me a lot of this oh we need strict transfer regulations to protect the smaller clubs is either simply scare mongering or misinformed opinion based on the status quo alas without a relaxation of the rules we will never know for sure

[haranguerer]

I agree that its a lazy and un-thought out view that if players were allowed to transfer more easily it would kill off small clubs. As is seen in other topics debated on here, it seems many have no faith in the popularity of our national games, and their ability to endure.

As stated above, local transfers are unlikely ever to become en-masse, because a lot of boys will be playing with their friends, and have no desire to transfer. On top of this, its my experience that an awful lot of players turn away from football because they're not getting games. in the smaller clubs, there often isnt the ability to put out enough teams to cater for everyone, and you're left with those who dont get playing in competitive matches. Were transfers more easily obtained, and players did move on to bigger clubs if that was their desire, then these players currently not making teams would get football, and would stick around.
You certainly would have clear tiers, but these already exist anyway - by the very defining of a smaller or bigger club. The only difference is that the playing field is more level throughout the leagues, with players of a similar standard playing against each other, rather than what happens at the minute, whereby a county player can be playing junior football and destroying teams on his own: at the end of the day this isn't doing much to bring himself, his team mates, or the other team, on at all.

Also, wouldnt it work both ways, whereby those players who are from a big club, but not getting regular football because they cant make teams, would feasibly transfer to a smaller club?

[DownFanatic]

Im from a small club myself and the way I see it is as follows.  Firstly a great many place a devotion to their home club that means that even if transferring was easy they would have no intention of moving on simply to win things.  Consequently I can't see more lax transfer regulations resulting in an exodus of players from smaller clubs.  Moreover even if players did move from smaller clubs because they place a greater emphasis on winning things than on playing for their club, then theres an equal opportunity imo for players to move the other way in hunt for regular football which has the chance of balancing out teams throughout the leagues.

The arguments I have though for a more lax transfer system are as follows.  Firstly we are an amateur association and as such people should be free to come and go as they like they should not be tied to one particular club.  In addition people shouldnt be forced to play for a club they dont wish and arent prepared to give 100% for.  Likewise no club should want players who dont want to play for them.  Furthermore the fact that kids who decide on a club because their school friends player there or their parents find it most convenient can be tied to a club for life (even though the kids didnt know that at the time) is both unfair and to me far more detrimental to the association as it can result in kids leaving.  Likewise the fact that an obtuse committee can refuse transfers for personal reasons hidden behind this idea that granting the transfer would harm the club (as has happened a friend of mine who now no longer plays) is disgusting and as I saw potentially more harmful to the assoication.

To me a lot of this oh we need strict transfer regulations to protect the smaller clubs is either simply scare mongering or misinformed opinion based on the status quo alas without a relaxation of the rules we will never know for sure

I agree that its a lazy and un-thought out view that if players were allowed to transfer more easily it would kill off small clubs. As is seen in other topics debated on here, it seems many have no faith in the popularity of our national games, and their ability to endure.

As stated above, local transfers are unlikely ever to become en-masse, because a lot of boys will be playing with their friends, and have no desire to transfer. On top of this, its my experience that an awful lot of players turn away from football because they're not getting games. in the smaller clubs, there often isnt the ability to put out enough teams to cater for everyone, and you're left with those who dont get playing in competitive matches. Were transfers more easily obtained, and players did move on to bigger clubs if that was their desire, then these players currently not making teams would get football, and would stick around.
You certainly would have clear tiers, but these already exist anyway - by the very defining of a smaller or bigger club. The only difference is that the playing field is more level throughout the leagues, with players of a similar standard playing against each other, rather than what happens at the minute, whereby a county player can be playing junior football and destroying teams on his own: at the end of the day this isn't doing much to bring himself, his team mates, or the other team, on at all.

Also, wouldnt it work both ways, whereby those players who are from a big club, but not getting regular football because they cant make teams, would feasibly transfer to a smaller club?

Consequently I can't see more lax transfer regulations resulting in an exodus of players from smaller clubs.

Disagree. If transfer regulations were made more lax then this would only serve to encourage two things. Firstly, larger predatory clubs would become even more proactive in tapping up the better players from smaller clubs as they would now know that the barriers to acquiring the player have receded to a degree. Secondly, it could create a domino effect in that once one player leaves a smaller club, others would follow suit as there would be very little to stand in their way.


Moreover even if players did move from smaller clubs because they place a greater emphasis on winning things than on playing for their club, then theres an equal opportunity imo for players to move the other way in hunt for regular football which has the chance of balancing out teams throughout the leagues

Completely unrealistic scenario. In my experience the volume of players leaving bigger clubs to go to smaller clubs for regular football is nearly non existent. Bigger clubs generally cater for most abilities and tend to satisfy player's competitive desires. Thats why the majority of big clubs have 3 Senior teams (eg - Senior, Premier Reserve, Reserve).

For example, why would a player in Down who is playing Premier Reserve football want to transfer to a Division 4 Senior team which is playing at lesser standard? He is getting regular football at a decent enough standard in his own club. Therefore there would be absolutely no point in transferring to a smaller Division 4 club who are playing at a lesser standard.

You talk about the fact that if a player leaves a so called bigger club and transfers to a smaller club then this would balance out the teams throughout the Leagues. Now, laying the facts bare here, if a player from a bigger club cant get a regular game of football with his club's 2nd's or 3rd's team then how the hell is he going to make a seismic impact for the smaller club that he transfers to? If he isnt good enough to make his club's third string, he is hardly going to set the world alight when he moves to a smaller club.


Firstly we are an amateur association and as such people should be free to come and go as they like they should not be tied to one particular club.  In addition people shouldnt be forced to play for a club they dont wish and arent prepared to give 100% for.  Likewise no club should want players who dont want to play for them

If people are free to come and go as they like then we are doomed to go down the same road as the local soccer scene. Our club ethos is based on the Parish. To erase that ethos we would be giving up a very valuable part of our GAA heritage.

Here's an example that I came across in a local soccer club this week in my area. They transfered in four players from another club and these players made their debuts on Saturday. Incidentally this club that they have transferred too are struggling badly in their League.

No tell me this. What affiliation or belonging do these players have for their new club? Will it be the case that they will just transfer on again when their new team gets relegated in the next few weeks? What sense of Parochialism and pride in the local club do these players have?

By creating an lax transfer system, it will only serve to breed more and more glory hunters within clubs. It will totally devalue the want and the heart to represent the Parish and ultimately will cause more than enough arguments and ructions within the clubs themselves.


Furthermore the fact that kids who decide on a club because their school friends player there or their parents find it most convenient can be tied to a club for life (even though the kids didnt know that at the time) is both unfair and to me far more detrimental to the association as it can result in kids leaving.

How is this unfair? What are you on about kids leaving? Explain


Likewise the fact that an obtuse committee can refuse transfers for personal reasons hidden behind this idea that granting the transfer would harm the club (as has happened a friend of mine who now no longer plays) is disgusting and as I saw potentially more harmful to the assoication.

Of course the transfer of a talented young player is going to hurt the club that he intends to leave. This club have provided facilities for the young player, has trained him in the skills of the sport, has provided him with gear and has lifted and laid him over the years. Why should the club just let him go without a fight? Again, why should smaller clubs just lie down and let the bigger clubs roll over them?


To me a lot of this oh we need strict transfer regulations to protect the smaller clubs is either simply scare mongering or misinformed opinion based on the status quo alas without a relaxation of the rules we will never know for sure

If the rules were relaxed any further we would be heading for a type of anarchy with players transferring willy nilly every year. This would destroy the small clubs who already struggle to field teams and it would only serve to heighten the gap between the big clubs and the small clubs.

Most importantly though, it would destroy our parochial ethos. We would have a host of players with absolutely no desire to represent their Parishes or their families. Their only aim would be the acquisition of trophies and this is not a road we would want to go down.


On top of this, its my experience that an awful lot of players turn away from football because they're not getting games. in the smaller clubs, there often isnt the ability to put out enough teams to cater for everyone, and you're left with those who dont get playing in competitive matches. Were transfers more easily obtained, and players did move on to bigger clubs if that was their desire, then these players currently not making teams would get football, and would stick around.

There are very few of the smaller clubs at the moment who have players that arent getting regular football. Take most Junior teams. They would generally have a panel of around twenty players and you can be rest assured that everyone within this panel would be getting a sizeable amount of football over the course of a season.

Also, any small club I know that cant field at a particular age group on its own, gets proactive and amalgamates with a club in a similar dilemna and fields a team to ensure football for players from both clubs so as no one misses out.


whereby a county player can be playing junior football and destroying teams on his own: at the end of the day this isn't doing much to bring himself, his team mates, or the other team, on at all.

Take my own club as an example. Our Senior team are currently in Division 3 in Down. I dont see any reasoning whatsoever why my Senior team is at a disadvantage having Paul McComiskey within its ranks.

Now taking in to account Paul was playing Division 4 football only four years ago, I hardly think it has harmed him in the long run judging by his current medal haul and performances in a Down jersey.

[haranguerer]

I dont wish to cast any aspersions on the quality of your club or its training, but do you think that there are other players there who may have reached the same level as McComiskey if they were training and playing at a higher intensity, with all their clubmates having equivalent ability?

Theres no doubt that McComiskey is a brilliant addition to your club. That is, in terms of winning games, which isn't the key issue in this thread - that is whether your club and others like it would survive if McComiskey and others of his ability transferred to bigger clubs. You say allow transfers and glory hunters would be encouraged; clubs are right to hold onto their talented young players. Isn't that just clubmen hunting glory for their own clubs, and probably being detrimental to the players development in the process?

Your argument about a player not able to get on a teams third string team being unlikely to set anywhere else on fire isnt thought out either. The players being referred to who arent getting football regularly arent those unable to make any of the big clubs teams, its those who fall between teams, and there are many in bigger clubs. That is, they are on the first team panel for example, and aren't allowed to turn out for the seconds, but dont get much game time for the first team. Players like these could have a big impact elsewhere.

To quote you: There are very few of the smaller clubs at the moment who have players that arent getting regular football. Take most Junior teams. They would generally have a panel of around twenty players and you can be rest assured that everyone within this panel would be getting a sizeable amount of football over the course of a season.

I dont see how you can have such a good working knowledge of all smaller clubs, but even so, the players I refer to who dont turn out are those who arent even part of a panel. I know at least ten boys off hand who would love to play gaelic, but because they wouldn't get a game for their local small team, dont turn out.

Its my experience that the GAA, by having the parochial club, is trying to cater for the person who is just there for fun, and also the person who is on the county squad, in the same training session. In smaller clubs, it isnt possible to split it down into panels, and ineveitably the training is attempted at the higher level; those with lesser skill levels feel like idiots when they fumble the ball constantly, and dont come back. If there were clubs which catered for different abilities, and those with different aims in playing, then there would be more people, not less playing the game.

To give an eg, I would wager that your third division team has at least some year, if not every, had a trainer who decided that if yis were the fittest team in the division yis would be the best, and ran the shite out of yis up and down hills in January. I'd also wager there were a few souls there, who'd decided to dust off the boots and give football another rattle, that didnt come back in february.

[David McKeown]

Ill try as far as I can to go through point for point here but I think I must state at the outset that the set up in Armagh seems very different from that in Down.  To the best of my knowledge only Cross have a seconds team that plays on an all county level.  After this a lot but not all teams would have a B team which would play on a Wednesday night (mostly not on all county level)

1. I dont see this domino effect your talking about actually happening for the reasons put forward earlier by both myself and haranguerer.  Yes some players may move on to bigger clubs but i can't see it ever being that many.  Even if a player is willing to move on surely that shows that they dont have the pride in the parish that you try to impose on them by forcing them to remain with their clubs.

2.  You talk about players making seismic impacts thats not what we are talking about in relation to players moving from bigger clubs to smaller clubs (which I have to state also imo wouldn't happen in large numbers) in order to play games at their level.  If and lets take this at an arguably unrealistic level, all the division 1 and 2 standard players moved from division 4 teams because they were poached or in order to glory hunt at bigger clubs.  A division 4 standard player from one of those bigger clubs suddenly would have a lot more competition in order to play on a sunday.  Presumably he would then be able to make the team at the bigger club however if he were to easily join a division 4 club he would be able to play regularly at his level and not against teams who have players better than him.  Alternatively he could continue playing for his parish team because he has such as desire to do so

3.  I can show you a counter example from the local soccer scene.  The under 11 team I coach is currently bottom of the league (im the assistant before we suggest sacking the manager) and have been resoundingly beaten in most games this season.  Despite that the entire squad turns up to training and matches every week with a smile on their face.  None have ever asked for a transfer (in two seasons) because we have made them feel attached to the club, they feel part of the club and they enjoy playing with their friends.  Our current senior team started out the same way and 14 of that 22 man squad started out together at under 11.  They are currently top of their league but didnt win a single match at under 11. They have a loyalty to the club which has been fostered by the club not imposed by unfair and drachonia transfer regulations.  I would suggest that relaxing the transfer rules would actually help strengthen the parish ethos of clubs as you could be sure that those playing for a club (with the possible exception of the really big clubs) were doing so because they wanted to play for that club.

4.  Its unfair because at 12, 13 or 14 kids often arent thinking about what club they wish to play for, for the rest of their lives, instead (if they get the choice which many dont as their parents schedules limit their choice of club) many kids are thinking of play with their friends.  From the second they kick a ball at under 14 level according the DRA case they are potentially tied to that club for life and are relaying on either a club committee or a county board if they want to move on.  To me thats unfair and i would suggest if kids were able to move around (during off seasons) and play with their friends, more would remain within the association.  Again its just an assertion as like the dominioes theroy it cant be proven.

5.  Im not just talking about talented players, i know of players who have tried to move on because of family feuds, however they have been prevented from doing so as the person they are feuding with holds a prominent position within their club and will oppose the transfer request, often hiding behind the excuse that granting the request will harm the club.  The friend of mine who this has happened to no longer plays football which to me harms the club at least as much.

6. Again I dont see transfers happening willy nilly every year, yes some may move in order to find teams that suit them and their lifestyle but again it is at best a theroy to suggest players will move every year.

Also the idea that this would destroy the parochial ethos is as I say in my humble opinion not likely to happen, you say  we would have a host of players with absolutely no desire to represent their Parishes or their families I disagree.  Strict transfer regulations have not created this desire that currently exists within the association, likewise relaxing those regulations would not suddenly mean that players who did have such a desire would overnight lose these desires

[tyrone86]

I dont wish to cast any aspersions on the quality of your club or its training, but do you think that there are other players there who may have reached the same level as McComiskey if they were training and playing at a higher intensity, with all their clubmates having equivalent ability?

Theres no doubt that McComiskey is a brilliant addition to your club. That is, in terms of winning games, which isn't the key issue in this thread - that is whether your club and others like it would survive if McComiskey and others of his ability transferred to bigger clubs. You say allow transfers and glory hunters would be encouraged; clubs are right to hold onto their talented young players. Isn't that just clubmen hunting glory for their own clubs, and probably being detrimental to the players development in the process?

Your argument about a player not able to get on a teams third string team being unlikely to set anywhere else on fire isnt thought out either. The players being referred to who arent getting football regularly arent those unable to make any of the big clubs teams, its those who fall between teams, and there are many in bigger clubs. That is, they are on the first team panel for example, and aren't allowed to turn out for the seconds, but dont get much game time for the first team. Players like these could have a big impact elsewhere.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but essentially what you're saying is to sort the wheat from the chaff and let the big clubs get on with the business of being big clubs because small clubs can't develop their talent properly and let the mediocre man from the big club go to a small club because that's their level?

[haranguerer]

I dont wish to cast any aspersions on the quality of your club or its training, but do you think that there are other players there who may have reached the same level as McComiskey if they were training and playing at a higher intensity, with all their clubmates having equivalent ability?

Theres no doubt that McComiskey is a brilliant addition to your club. That is, in terms of winning games, which isn't the key issue in this thread - that is whether your club and others like it would survive if McComiskey and others of his ability transferred to bigger clubs. You say allow transfers and glory hunters would be encouraged; clubs are right to hold onto their talented young players. Isn't that just clubmen hunting glory for their own clubs, and probably being detrimental to the players development in the process?

Your argument about a player not able to get on a teams third string team being unlikely to set anywhere else on fire isnt thought out either. The players being referred to who arent getting football regularly arent those unable to make any of the big clubs teams, its those who fall between teams, and there are many in bigger clubs. That is, they are on the first team panel for example, and aren't allowed to turn out for the seconds, but dont get much game time for the first team. Players like these could have a big impact elsewhere.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but essentially what you're saying is to sort the wheat from the chaff and let the big clubs get on with the business of being big clubs because small clubs can't develop their talent properly and let the mediocre man from the big club go to a small club because that's their level?

What I'm saying is that relaxing transfer regulations would not cause the demise of the small club, as is the standard argument. For one, most players wont choose to transfer, and if there were others who did want to play at a higher level, then what right has anyone to tell them that they must partake their recreational activity of choice at a particular club.

Say what you want, but at the minute there certainly can be pettiness when it comes to transfers, which does more harm than good. I know of one player (who played county football for a while) who tried to transfer to another (small, incidentally) club. It was blocked, he half heartedly turned out for a few games for his old club, then drifted away from football altogether. I think he finally got his transfer 2 yrs ago, 7 yrs after requesting it, and that was only because they realised he wasnt going to play any football otherwise. I've no doubt that if he had been let transfer and play football regularly, he'd have been an integral part of the county team for the last 5/6 years, and with another few to come. As it is,he lost his best years to the pettiness. If you're honest you probably know of similar cases. Thats the current system, I hardly think its a good one.

[The Worker]

How many years must an underage player not play for any club before he is free to join a club outside his original county?

[trileacman]

I agree that its a lazy and un-thought out view that if players were allowed to transfer more easily it would kill off small clubs. As is seen in other topics debated on here, it seems many have no faith in the popularity of our national games, and their ability to endure.

As stated above, local transfers are unlikely ever to become en-masse, because a lot of boys will be playing with their friends, and have no desire to transfer. On top of this, its my experience that an awful lot of players turn away from football because they're not getting games. in the smaller clubs, there often isnt the ability to put out enough teams to cater for everyone, and you're left with those who dont get playing in competitive matches. Were transfers more easily obtained, and players did move on to bigger clubs if that was their desire, then these players currently not making teams would get football, and would stick around.
You certainly would have clear tiers, but these already exist anyway - by the very defining of a smaller or bigger club. The only difference is that the playing field is more level throughout the leagues, with players of a similar standard playing against each other, rather than what happens at the minute, whereby a county player can be playing junior football and destroying teams on his own: at the end of the day this isn't doing much to bring himself, his team mates, or the other team, on at all.

Also, wouldnt it work both ways, whereby those players who are from a big club, but not getting regular football because they cant make teams, would feasibly transfer to a smaller club?

That's a load of bollix.

If our best player at youth level had fucked off to a club where he was going win stuff we would have endured alot more hammerings and the next best player would have thought "what the f**k am I doing here?" and fucked off too.

The lads at the bottom, like meself, would have said, f**k it I not staying around to get hammered by all the other sides and we'd have fucked off too. The reasons why we dropped out of the panels would still have existed (the drink, work, shite fitness, being shite with a football, laziness) and the "bonus" of getting more game time would not have changed a thing. We'd still have dropped out.

Tyrone86 is right, your opinion is lets have a free for all and f**k the little sides.

[AZOffaly]

Jaysus, that's what I call holding a grudge Haranguerer's post is from 2009. 4 years ago!

[Hardy]

Still, due consideration is better than knee-jerk reaction.

[JUst retired]

The worker, the number of years will not  matter. If he has moved to a different county,he just needs an intercounty transfer.

[qubdub]

The worker, the number of years will not  matter. If he has moved to a different county,he just needs an intercounty transfer.

What about transfers within a county, does it just go to each individual county's bye-laws? I thought if you didn't play for a certain length of time at underage, you were free to play for another club

[JUst retired]

qubdub,that is not the case.It does not matter how long you dont play,should it be 10 years you still need a transfer.

the OG does not have an offical stance on transfers,it seems to rely on county bye-laws. One of these committees would have been better looking at this problem,rather than the "black card nonsense"

[magpie seanie]

I agree. Some county bye-laws (like the Down one earlier on this thread) might be fit for purpose but we have a total joke bye law in Sligo. It hasn't lead to many major issues so far but it's a shoddy piece of work.