Down Club Hurling & Football

[Truth hurts]

Was there two leagues in those days? Down beat Louth in a final in 71.

[skat man]

down clubs vote to keep age structures as they are for this year . we are such a backward county

[thewobbler]

down clubs vote to keep age structures as they are for this year . we are such a backward county

Backward?

prudent is the correct description.

Whether you want to believe it or not, the lads who "graduated" into the adult ranks at the end of last season have already started going their separate ways.  Rearranging everyone and everybody at short notice, in the hope that this one yea's worth of players will all happily step into a bonus juvenile season, is a stretch of the imagination.

[skat man]

going their separate ways ? they've trained with a new group for 1-2 months maximum , very few clubs will be starting 17 yr old lads in senior teams so yes they should have got another years football to develop. short notice ? the underage competitions wont start for another 2 months , hardly short notice. also the lads that have graduated could still be part of the adult squad in option 3 . it was a win win , so much for the clubs caring about their players , the thought of a bit of extra leg work and they folded. disappointing from the clubs who voted against it

[johnnycool]

down clubs vote to keep age structures as they are for this year . we are such a backward county

No right decision available but probably the best thing overall to stay as is this year and move to U18, decoupling at 17 next year

[thewobbler]

First I'd be of the notion that there's more lads than anyone might think are happy enough to give up Gaelic Games, and when the flag went up last year their boots were burned shortly after.

Staying on u17/18. Let's presume last year was a normal enough year at juvenile football. Some clubs did well at this level. Some improved. Some went backwards. Some as good as folded. And they all know pretty much to a team that that won't change much this season if it is repeated. And those clubs and players that went backwards or nearly folded at the level, now have to do it all again. Except some of their eligible players are now focused on senior football, and some will never come back.

All I see here is DNF all over the results, and fines for clubs.

—-

Now roll it down to u15/16.

Last year they played with a size 4 at u15.

Should u16s follow suit? Or not? And why?

——

Now roll it down to u13/14

Last year at u13 this was 13-a-side with Go Games rules.

Should this continue? Or not. Remember half these guys will be seniors in school by the end of the summer. Or maybe don't consider that.

——

Now roll it down to u11.5/12

For the last 3 years we've played this as a primary school competition (u11.5). And it works really well. Classmates growing up in football together until they get to big school, when playing with lads from a year above is less daunting (and a bit fairer).

So should we continue with 11.5? Surely we can't as this would see 2.5 years of players squeezing into u14 football. That's all year 8s, all year 9s, and half of year 10. Or in other words, in most clubs, no football for all but the biggest year 8s.

Is there a compromise to be had? Maybe. But good luck finding it in 6 weeks.

——

We've now prudently got a year to work these things out.

It might seem backward to you. Bug only because you've a narrow agenda which is focused on getting u18s a campaign - even though they're served over the year by u19, reserves and u20.... Should they actually want to play football..

[stiffler]

First I'd be of the notion that there's more lads than anyone might think are happy enough to give up Gaelic Games, and when the flag went up last year their boots were burned shortly after.

Staying on u17/18. Let's presume last year was a normal enough year at juvenile football. Some clubs did well at this level. Some improved. Some went backwards. Some as good as folded. And they all know pretty much to a team that that won't change much this season if it is repeated. And those clubs and players that went backwards or nearly folded at the level, now have to do it all again. Except some of their eligible players are now focused on senior football, and some will never come back.

All I see here is DNF all over the results, and fines for clubs.

—-

Now roll it down to u15/16.

Last year they played with a size 4 at u15.

Should u16s follow suit? Or not? And why?

——

Now roll it down to u13/14

Last year at u13 this was 13-a-side with Go Games rules.

Should this continue? Or not. Remember half these guys will be seniors in school by the end of the summer. Or maybe don't consider that.

——

Now roll it down to u11.5/12

For the last 3 years we've played this as a primary school competition (u11.5). And it works really well. Classmates growing up in football together until they get to big school, when playing with lads from a year above is less daunting (and a bit fairer).

So should we continue with 11.5? Surely we can't as this would see 2.5 years of players squeezing into u14 football. That's all year 8s, all year 9s, and half of year 10. Or in other words, in most clubs, no football for all but the biggest year 8s.

Is there a compromise to be had? Maybe. But good luck finding it in 6 weeks.

——

We've now prudently got a year to work these things out.

It might seem backward to you. Bug only because you've a narrow agenda which is focused on getting u18s a campaign - even though they're served over the year by u19, reserves and u20.... Should they actually want to play football..

Good post.

[County Star]

65% voted in favour of retaining the status quo

The Féile this year remains at u15
U19s have already commenced
The Down fixtures calendar already passed
Then there is the potential for disillusionment in removing 18 year olds from the senior panel they have been working with since November

Next year we revert to the all Ireland wide model of even grades for competitive competitions

I still think we can have u12s then u10.5 u8.5 and u6.5

[johnnycool]

65% voted in favour of retaining the status quo

The Féile this year remains at u15
U19s have already commenced
The Down fixtures calendar already passed
Then there is the potential for disillusionment in removing 18 year olds from the senior panel they have been working with since November

Next year we revert to the all Ireland wide model of even grades for competitive competitions

I still think we can have u12s then u10.5 u8.5 and u6.5

65% voted for the status quo on the premise that we move to U18 (decoupling at 17) in 2024.

[Hard2Listen2]

Did the age grades change in hurling too or just football?

[Truth hurts]

First I'd be of the notion that there's more lads than anyone might think are happy enough to give up Gaelic Games, and when the flag went up last year their boots were burned shortly after.

Staying on u17/18. Let's presume last year was a normal enough year at juvenile football. Some clubs did well at this level. Some improved. Some went backwards. Some as good as folded. And they all know pretty much to a team that that won't change much this season if it is repeated. And those clubs and players that went backwards or nearly folded at the level, now have to do it all again. Except some of their eligible players are now focused on senior football, and some will never come back.

All I see here is DNF all over the results, and fines for clubs.

—-

Now roll it down to u15/16.

Last year they played with a size 4 at u15.

Should u16s follow suit? Or not? And why?

——

Now roll it down to u13/14

Last year at u13 this was 13-a-side with Go Games rules.

Should this continue? Or not. Remember half these guys will be seniors in school by the end of the summer. Or maybe don't consider that.

——

Now roll it down to u11.5/12

For the last 3 years we've played this as a primary school competition (u11.5). And it works really well. Classmates growing up in football together until they get to big school, when playing with lads from a year above is less daunting (and a bit fairer).

So should we continue with 11.5? Surely we can't as this would see 2.5 years of players squeezing into u14 football. That's all year 8s, all year 9s, and half of year 10. Or in other words, in most clubs, no football for all but the biggest year 8s.

Is there a compromise to be had? Maybe. But good luck finding it in 6 weeks.

——

We've now prudently got a year to work these things out.

It might seem backward to you. Bug only because you've a narrow agenda which is focused on getting u18s a campaign - even though they're served over the year by u19, reserves and u20.... Should they actually want to play football..

Excellent Post Wobbler, 
Administrators in the county have 9 months to develop a plan in action for 2024 which can be delivered before county convention.
This should never have been put to the counties to choose themselves and the counties who have made the jump already will have a lot of hiccups. I believe we will get a lot of learnings from them.

We could have changed and wee Johnny from Carryduff could have another year playing underage and his Daddy would have been so happy but overall for the bigger picture and to get things right it was right to postpone and to change in 10 months time.

[Truth hurts]

Also an interesting post from Ronan Sheehan on the matter about senior hurling which takes place on Monday nights, the same nights as u17 football. If it had changed then that would have messed up fixtures for a Monday night. A lot of things to think about for our Competitions Controls Committee.

[Truth hurts]

going their separate ways ? they've trained with a new group for 1-2 months maximum , very few clubs will be starting 17 yr old lads in senior teams so yes they should have got another years football to develop. short notice ? the underage competitions wont start for another 2 months , hardly short notice. also the lads that have graduated could still be part of the adult squad in option 3 . it was a win win , so much for the clubs caring about their players , the thought of a bit of extra leg work and they folded. disappointing from the clubs who voted against it

Who voted against it?

[skat man]

First I'd be of the notion that there's more lads than anyone might think are happy enough to give up Gaelic Games, and when the flag went up last year their boots were burned shortly after.

Staying on u17/18. Let's presume last year was a normal enough year at juvenile football. Some clubs did well at this level. Some improved. Some went backwards. Some as good as folded. And they all know pretty much to a team that that won't change much this season if it is repeated. And those clubs and players that went backwards or nearly folded at the level, now have to do it all again. Except some of their eligible players are now focused on senior football, and some will never come back.

All I see here is DNF all over the results, and fines for clubs.

—-

Now roll it down to u15/16.

Last year they played with a size 4 at u15.

Should u16s follow suit? Or not? And why?

——

Now roll it down to u13/14

Last year at u13 this was 13-a-side with Go Games rules.

Should this continue? Or not. Remember half these guys will be seniors in school by the end of the summer. Or maybe don't consider that.

——

Now roll it down to u11.5/12

For the last 3 years we've played this as a primary school competition (u11.5). And it works really well. Classmates growing up in football together until they get to big school, when playing with lads from a year above is less daunting (and a bit fairer).

So should we continue with 11.5? Surely we can't as this would see 2.5 years of players squeezing into u14 football. That's all year 8s, all year 9s, and half of year 10. Or in other words, in most clubs, no football for all but the biggest year 8s.

Is there a compromise to be had? Maybe. But good luck finding it in 6 weeks.

——

We've now prudently got a year to work these things out.

It might seem backward to you. Bug only because you've a narrow agenda which is focused on getting u18s a campaign - even though they're served over the year by u19, reserves and u20.... Should they actually want to play football..

I cant believe you wasted your time writing that up . People like you are the exact reason we went to different age grades making mountains out of molehills , it doesn't matter what size the ball is or if its go game rules or if at under 12 some lad is playing with kids a few years older , the key to underage is getting kids all playing . Thats the whole point to it, get kids playing .
Ive no vested interest in any minor but yes if it meant keeping any young lads playing longer its a success to me, thats what its about

Also its not something we have to discuss and chat about because ITS THE WAY IT USED TO BE , so just go back to the model that worked well and use whatever ball size was used then . the same as the other counties who stuck to their guns are going to do . What are you gonna spend the rest of the year discussing now ? Down voted for it two months ago and now some of the clubs balked over extra leg work . Shambolic

[Truth hurts]

First I'd be of the notion that there's more lads than anyone might think are happy enough to give up Gaelic Games, and when the flag went up last year their boots were burned shortly after.

Staying on u17/18. Let's presume last year was a normal enough year at juvenile football. Some clubs did well at this level. Some improved. Some went backwards. Some as good as folded. And they all know pretty much to a team that that won't change much this season if it is repeated. And those clubs and players that went backwards or nearly folded at the level, now have to do it all again. Except some of their eligible players are now focused on senior football, and some will never come back.

All I see here is DNF all over the results, and fines for clubs.

—-

Now roll it down to u15/16.

Last year they played with a size 4 at u15.

Should u16s follow suit? Or not? And why?

——

Now roll it down to u13/14

Last year at u13 this was 13-a-side with Go Games rules.

Should this continue? Or not. Remember half these guys will be seniors in school by the end of the summer. Or maybe don't consider that.

——

Now roll it down to u11.5/12

For the last 3 years we've played this as a primary school competition (u11.5). And it works really well. Classmates growing up in football together until they get to big school, when playing with lads from a year above is less daunting (and a bit fairer).

So should we continue with 11.5? Surely we can't as this would see 2.5 years of players squeezing into u14 football. That's all year 8s, all year 9s, and half of year 10. Or in other words, in most clubs, no football for all but the biggest year 8s.

Is there a compromise to be had? Maybe. But good luck finding it in 6 weeks.

——

We've now prudently got a year to work these things out.

It might seem backward to you. Bug only because you've a narrow agenda which is focused on getting u18s a campaign - even though they're served over the year by u19, reserves and u20.... Should they actually want to play football..

I cant believe you wasted your time writing that up . People like you are the exact reason we went to different age grades making mountains out of molehills , it doesn't matter what size the ball is or if its go game rules or if at under 12 some lad is playing with kids a few years older , the key to underage is getting kids all playing . Thats the whole point to it, get kids playing .
Ive no vested interest in any minor but yes if it meant keeping any young lads playing longer its a success to me, thats what its about

Also its not something we have to discuss and chat about because ITS THE WAY IT USED TO BE , so just go back to the model that worked well and use whatever ball size was used then . the same as the other counties who stuck to their guns are going to do . What are you gonna spend the rest of the year discussing now ? Down voted for it two months ago and now some of the clubs balked over extra leg work . Shambolic

Changing a whole calendar is not making a mountain out of a molehill, there are a lot of factors that would have came into play straight away and people would have been expecting answers straights away. The sensible matter was to postpone to next year and get the correct plans in place to ensure a smooth running.