|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 10, 2006 10:58:10 GMT
I think every hurling fan realises the current format has to change, here’s one idea.
All-Ireland Championship to consist of the top 9 teams in the country with said 9 to be decided based on performance in the previous years championship i.e. for 2006 the teams would be Cork, Galway, Kilkenny, Clare, Tipperary, Wexford, Waterford, Limerick & Offaly. Including the likes of Dublin, Laois, Antrim in the top tier every year is pointless from their own perspective and for the competition itself as it just increases the number of severely one sided games and those teams will never improve while consistently getting beaten by 15-20 points. The bottom team each year will be relegated and the winner of the tier 2 competition will be promoted. Relegation from such a small group will also increase competitiveness as it would be a huge blow for teams such as Offaly, Wexford, Limerick to have to compete in tier 2 for a year.
The championship will be run as follows:-
The 9 teams will be seeded based on the previous years performance, for example this year we would have
1 Cork
2 Galway
3 Kilkenny
4 Clare
5 Waterford
6 Tipperary
7 Limerick
8 Wexford
9 Offaly
(The exact placings above may not be correct but will be decided based on % of games won in the championship and scoring average will be used where there are ties)
Three groups of three will be formed from the 9 teams by way of a draw. One team from seeds 1-3 will be drawn in each group along with one from seeds 4-6 and one from 7-9, so for example we could have:-
Group 1 – Cork, Waterford, Offaly
Group 2 – Galway, Clare, Wexford
Group 3 – Kilkenny, Tipperary, Limerick
Within each group teams will play eachother on a home and away basis, giving 4 games and more importantly we will see games being taken out of a half empty croke park and back to places like Wexford Park, Tullamore, Ennis etc where a full house is almost guaranteed. The logic for playing teams twice is that a bigger emphasis will be placed on consistency over the course of the championship and it benefits the weaker counties as teams such as Wexford & Offaly would fancy their chances of beating anybody on their home patch.
After the 4 group games have been played the top team in each group will enter the semi-finals while the two best 2nd placed teams (based on points then scoring differential) will playoff at a neutral venue for the 4th spot. A draw will then be made for the semis (with one condition that the winner of the playoff cannot meet the team they’ve already played. Then, naturally we have the final.
The bottom 3 teams will enter a relegation playoff, playing eachother once at neutral venues.
The tier 2 & 3 championships will be played on a similar basis with promotion & relegation as outlined.
Regarding the provincial championships, personally I’m not passionate about retaining them but I see no problem with them being run off in their existing format between the end of the league and beginning of the championship.
Positives of this format:-
We have the top 9 teams in the country, all of whom can compete to a reasonable degree, thereby mis-matches should be limited.
Each team is guaranteed 4 championship games – more games means more €€€ for the GAA.
Local venues get to experience championship hurling, thus ensuring large home crowds and a better atmosphere.
We are guaranteed to have the 4 best teams of the year competing in the semi finals
Negatives:-
Break with tradition in that the provincial c’ships no longer form a part of the All Ireland – big deal, it’s time we moved on.
Weaker counties excluded from competing for the All Ireland – currently Dublin, Laois, Antrim, Down etc contribute absolutely nothing to the All Ireland other than a being part of a catalogue of mis-matches. Let them play among their peers and the pick of the bunch will earn the right to compete in the top tier.
Less games in Croker - What do people prefer? a half empty stadium with no atmosphere or Nowlan Park packed to the rafters and boggers baying for blood?
Possiblity of too many games against the same opposition – if say Tipp & Cork drawn in same group, meet in munster c’ship, in league and in semi / final that would be 5 competitive meetings in one year. Above scenario is unlikely and regardless it may just add to the rivalry (Hasn’t done any harm to Rangers/Celtic, Liverpool/Chelsea)
|
|
|
|
Post by bandage on Jul 10, 2006 12:32:18 GMT
A good read. Sounds like a decent idea. Don't really have time now but I'll come back to this. You should email to Breheny in the Indo or McEvoy in the Tribune and see if they get back to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by therock67 on Jul 10, 2006 14:21:07 GMT
Interesting Mr Steam. Not trying to pick holes in your proposal because I think the SHC does need an overhaul but I do have the following concerns:
1. Continue the scenario of the groups you have outlined above. Everything goes to form and Offaly are relegated to be replaced by Dublin in year 2. In the second year (imagine the same groups) Cork and Waterford have a huge advantage - not only have they little danger of finishing third but they also are virtually guaranteed to have one of the 2 best runner up spots by scoring bucketloads against the weakest team. Is this fair?
I'm not sure what I would do to remedy this situation because I think the concept of relegation/promotion is crucial (see my comments on test cricket for same). However I think it is an inherent flaw in the structure of 3 groups of 3. (see point 2)
2. I think that the stucture of 3 groups of 3 is designed as a best fit for hurling's current status. However it is not flexible and it is cumbersome and awkward as a competition structure - relying on best runners-up etc. I believe it would be better to bite the bullet and go for 4 groups of 3 with seedings accordingly.
Seed 1
Cork
Galway
Kilkenny
Waterford
Seed 2
Wexford
Tipperary
Limerick
Clare
Seed 3
Offaly
Westmeath
Antrim
Dublin
In this instance you might have one group stronger than the rest at the moment (the group with Offaly in it) but I think that is preferable to having one group harder than all the rest. I'd rather have counties struggling to qualify than a county almost being given a bye.
It allows for easier sorting of the competition with 4 winners going into semi-finals and nothing else.
I think your home and away structure is a must.
Looking at my idea now I'm not sure I like it that much but there is a complexity about 3 groups of 3 and it is hard to regulate. As I say it's fine for the first season but it might be a mockery after that.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 10, 2006 15:30:48 GMT
Interesting Mr Steam. Not trying to pick holes in your proposal because I think the SHC does need an overhaul but I do have the following concerns: 1. Continue the scenario of the groups you have outlined above. Everything goes to form and Offaly are relegated to be replaced by Dublin in year 2. In the second year (imagine the same groups) Cork and Waterford have a huge advantage - not only have they little danger of finishing third but they also are virtually guaranteed to have one of the 2 best runner up spots by scoring bucketloads against the weakest team. Is this fair? I'm not sure what I would do to remedy this situation because I think the concept of relegation/promotion is crucial (see my comments on test cricket for same). However I think it is an inherent flaw in the structure of 3 groups of 3. (see point 2) 2. I think that the stucture of 3 groups of 3 is designed as a best fit for hurling's current status. However it is not flexible and it is cumbersome and awkward as a competition structure - relying on best runners-up etc. I believe it would be better to bite the bullet and go for 4 groups of 3 with seedings accordingly. Seed 1 Cork Galway Kilkenny Waterford Seed 2 Wexford Tipperary Limerick Clare Seed 3 Offaly Westmeath Antrim Dublin In this instance you might have one group stronger than the rest at the moment (the group with Offaly in it) but I think that is preferable to having one group harder than all the rest. I'd rather have counties struggling to qualify than a county almost being given a bye. It allows for easier sorting of the competition with 4 winners going into semi-finals and nothing else. I think your home and away structure is a must. Looking at my idea now I'm not sure I like it that much but there is a complexity about 3 groups of 3 and it is hard to regulate. As I say it's fine for the first season but it might be a mockery after that. i take your point and of couse given the disparity between the strongest and weakest and the small number of teams every format will have its weaknesses, however in year 2 with say Dublin replacing Offaly, it's still down to the luck of the draw which group they end up in - this element of "luck of the draw" exists in every sport and is part and parcel of sport. The reasoning behind 3 groups of 3 is that i can't honestly see any format working better than the current one if teams such as Westmeath & Dublin are included to make up the numbers - We still have the problem of horrendous mis-matches that do nothing for the game. Your counter proposal, which is a more logical competition format, merely means that all the stronger teams get to give a weaker team a good thumping (except Offaly but then the other teams in Offaly's group are at a disadvantage, especially seeing as Offaly could conceivably beat one of the higher seeds whereas Dublin, Laois, Antrim haven't a hope). In all probability, were Dublin to replace Offaly in year 2 the situation would be reversed in year 3 and perhaps Laois would come up in year 4 before returning in year 5 so it's only a problem we'd have to worry about every 2nd year! |
|
|
|
Post by therock67 on Jul 10, 2006 15:48:03 GMT
Interesting Mr Steam. Not trying to pick holes in your proposal because I think the SHC does need an overhaul but I do have the following concerns: 1. Continue the scenario of the groups you have outlined above. Everything goes to form and Offaly are relegated to be replaced by Dublin in year 2. In the second year (imagine the same groups) Cork and Waterford have a huge advantage - not only have they little danger of finishing third but they also are virtually guaranteed to have one of the 2 best runner up spots by scoring bucketloads against the weakest team. Is this fair? I'm not sure what I would do to remedy this situation because I think the concept of relegation/promotion is crucial (see my comments on test cricket for same). However I think it is an inherent flaw in the structure of 3 groups of 3. (see point 2) 2. I think that the stucture of 3 groups of 3 is designed as a best fit for hurling's current status. However it is not flexible and it is cumbersome and awkward as a competition structure - relying on best runners-up etc. I believe it would be better to bite the bullet and go for 4 groups of 3 with seedings accordingly. Seed 1 Cork Galway Kilkenny Waterford Seed 2 Wexford Tipperary Limerick Clare Seed 3 Offaly Westmeath Antrim Dublin In this instance you might have one group stronger than the rest at the moment (the group with Offaly in it) but I think that is preferable to having one group harder than all the rest. I'd rather have counties struggling to qualify than a county almost being given a bye. It allows for easier sorting of the competition with 4 winners going into semi-finals and nothing else. I think your home and away structure is a must. Looking at my idea now I'm not sure I like it that much but there is a complexity about 3 groups of 3 and it is hard to regulate. As I say it's fine for the first season but it might be a mockery after that. i take your point and of couse given the disparity between the strongest and weakest and the small number of teams every format will have its weaknesses, however in year 2 with say Dublin replacing Offaly, it's still down to the luck of the draw which group they end up in - this element of "luck of the draw" exists in every sport and is part and parcel of sport. The reasoning behind 3 groups of 3 is that i can't honestly see any format working better than the current one if teams such as Westmeath & Dublin are included to make up the numbers - We still have the problem of horrendous mis-matches that do nothing for the game. Your counter proposal, which is a more logical competition format, merely means that all the stronger teams get to give a weaker team a good thumping (except Offaly but then the other teams in Offaly's group are at a disadvantage, especially seeing as Offaly could conceivably beat one of the higher seeds whereas Dublin, Laois, Antrim haven't a hope). In all probability, were Dublin to replace Offaly in year 2 the situation would be reversed in year 3 and perhaps Laois would come up in year 4 before returning in year 5 so it's only a problem we'd have to worry about every 2nd year! Again, that's fair enough and I do see the probelm in having makeweights like Dublin and Antrim in the draw just to make up the numbers. However let me emphasise one point: Every second year one of your groups is guaranteed to produce two teams to emerge. They are only playing for "quarter final" v semi-final. That's a bit too much like the Waterford/Galway group in this year's qualifiers for my liking. The qualifiers are already known and Galway could lose to Waterford twice and still progress because they hammer Laois twice. At least if there are 4 groups and only the top team progresses then there are no groups where the outcome is not irrelevant. One group (with current standards) will be more difficult than others but nobody has an easy passage. I'd rather prevent easy routes than avoid groups of death. There is a luck of the draw in avoiding the group of death, but no luck of the draw that almost grants you a bye. Anyway I do think that the continued participation of weaker counties is important. Dublin have been producing the goods at underage level for a while now but cannot hope to persuade their minors to choose hurling over football if they're involved in a battle royale every second year to get the privilege of getting hammered every other year. They have far more of a chance if they have a crack for a few years in succession with only the weakest county out of the 12 suffering demotion. Finally it also allows for a competitive mini-tournament at the end with the 4 bottom ranked teams playing off to avoid the drop. |
|
|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 10, 2006 16:24:50 GMT
i think the main difference of opinion here centres around the fact that i chose a format to suit the number of teams who i think can realistically challenge for the All Ireland whereas you chose a format and then filled in the teams. I believe, regardless of the format, the continued participation of Laois, Dublin, Westmeath in the top tier of hurling will be detrimental to the game. Dublin have indeed been producing strong underage teams but they have been competing with the big teams for many a year and it has all culminated in what? a defeat to Westmeath this year. Westmeath are making progress at senior level yet Dublin are not. Westmeath have spent the last number of years competing with teams of similar, and slightly better ability which has allowed them to improve whereas Dublin come out and get whipped every single year, each time more demoralising than the last. Teams like Dublin need to take a step back and focus on dominating their peer group (the tier 2 counties) instead of trying to make the giant leap every year and beat a Wexford or a Limercick. Playing in the second tier will enable them to build a team and build confidence before stepping up to the next level and taking the scalp of Offaly, Limerick or, god forbid, Wexford. The same applies to Laois & Westmeath.
|
|
|
|
Post by therock67 on Jul 10, 2006 16:48:32 GMT
i think the main difference of opinion here centres around the fact that i chose a format to suit the number of teams who i think can realistically challenge for the All Ireland whereas you chose a format and then filled in the teams. I believe, regardless of the format, the continued participation of Laois, Dublin, Westmeath in the top tier of hurling will be detrimental to the game. Dublin have indeed been producing strong underage teams but they have been competing with the big teams for many a year and it has all culminated in what? a defeat to Westmeath this year. Westmeath are making progress at senior level yet Dublin are not. Westmeath have spent the last number of years competing with teams of similar, and slightly better ability which has allowed them to improve whereas Dublin come out and get whipped every single year, each time more demoralising than the last. Teams like Dublin need to take a step back and focus on dominating their peer group (the tier 2 counties) instead of trying to make the giant leap every year and beat a Wexford or a Limercick. Playing in the second tier will enable them to build a team and build confidence before stepping up to the next level and taking the scalp of Offaly, Limerick or, god forbid, Wexford. The same applies to Laois & Westmeath. I think you're reading way too much into one game in appalling conditions. Dublin performed reasonably in the qualifier section - took a bit of a beating from Clare but ran Offaly and Limerick close. I presume they now get a chance to avenge that earlier defeat. Also Dublin were in the second division of the NHL this year - they coasted it and played within themselves and won it handily. There was little value in it experience-wise and it probably explains why they were caught cold by Westmeath. They are generally a more experienced team team than the other "weak counties" and their championship credentials stand to them. Westmeath and Laois have little championship experience and it showed. A couple of their results were frankly embarrassing. No fault of theirs - but they simply haven't played enough games at a competitive level. |
|
|
|
Post by bandage on Jul 10, 2006 16:55:15 GMT
Interesting debate and I’ve been thinking about this for the last few hours. I’m going to go against both of you and suggest a league/championship format for the top 9 teams. Nobody really cares about the League and again this year we saw Limerick get to the final and then blow up horribly in the championship against Tipp and Clare when the stakes were raised to championship levels. It has become apparent that there’s always only about 2 or 3 teams ever taking it seriously so to lose those games from the calendar would not be a huge loss.
Instead teams would be guaranteed 16 games every year in the championship – 8 home and 8 away – with the top 4 qualifying for the semi finals and the bottom team being relegated and replaced by the winner of the second tier (to be run on a similar structure). The benefits are high intensity championship matches at home provincial grounds. Imagine the atmosphere with 20,000 people in Wexford Park on a Saturday night for a championship clash against near neighbours Waterford, a team we never get to play in such matches. Hopefully, crowds and interest would be high all around the country for these games.
The threat of relegation prevents teams who are out of the running for the top 4 going through the motions, maybe the relegation place could actually be decided by a play-off between 2nd last and last once all group games have been played. This would further ensure that all games are relatively committed and hard fought encounters throughout the campaign. There is of course the danger that there may be certain teams looking at who they will be likely to face in the last four and maybe contriving to lose a game at the end so as to come 4th rather than 3rd so as to avoid say Cork who had finished 2nd for example (say 1st plays 4th and 2nd plays 3rd in the semi finals).Maybe one way of guarding against this would actually be to have a League Trophy for the winner at the end of the group stages and they could be awarded the title ‘League Champions’. Then the overall championship winner would be decided by who comes out on top of the last 4 games.
There are also untold advatages for the club player. If the championship commenced in March the games in the initial group stage could be rattled off week by week to build up interest and momentum in the competition. Remember with the structure being League based there won’t be the problem of replays holding up things. With the odd 2 week break for players to recharge their batteries the championship can still be run off by mid August.
This then leaves counties to run off their club championships in a tight 2-3 month window between September and November. While the inter-county championship is ongoing in the summer months the club player can be playing his regular league and championship warm up games and at least he knows there is now a defined structure to his season. He won’t play a championship game in May and then have to wait until September for the next round due to delays caused by inter-county commitments. Hell, he can even plan for holidays and everything.
There will also be no more games played at a lifeless Croke Park until the semi finals where surely a packed house would be in attendance for a semi final double header. The games can be split over consecutive weekends should ticket demands be that high. What we lose is the prestige of the provincial finals but I think the benefits I have outlined above outweigh this loss – hard though it will be to accept for many traditionalists. As I was told today in work by my boss ‘change is the only constant in the world today’ (yes I nearly vomited too). In conclusion more games, 8 home competitive matches throughout the summer, a defined structure to the season for club and county player alike. I think it’s worth a shot.
|
|
|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 10, 2006 21:30:51 GMT
i think the main difference of opinion here centres around the fact that i chose a format to suit the number of teams who i think can realistically challenge for the All Ireland whereas you chose a format and then filled in the teams. I believe, regardless of the format, the continued participation of Laois, Dublin, Westmeath in the top tier of hurling will be detrimental to the game. Dublin have indeed been producing strong underage teams but they have been competing with the big teams for many a year and it has all culminated in what? a defeat to Westmeath this year. Westmeath are making progress at senior level yet Dublin are not. Westmeath have spent the last number of years competing with teams of similar, and slightly better ability which has allowed them to improve whereas Dublin come out and get whipped every single year, each time more demoralising than the last. Teams like Dublin need to take a step back and focus on dominating their peer group (the tier 2 counties) instead of trying to make the giant leap every year and beat a Wexford or a Limercick. Playing in the second tier will enable them to build a team and build confidence before stepping up to the next level and taking the scalp of Offaly, Limerick or, god forbid, Wexford. The same applies to Laois & Westmeath. I think you're reading way too much into one game in appalling conditions. Dublin performed reasonably in the qualifier section - took a bit of a beating from Clare but ran Offaly and Limerick close. I presume they now get a chance to avenge that earlier defeat. Also Dublin were in the second division of the NHL this year - they coasted it and played within themselves and won it handily. There was little value in it experience-wise and it probably explains why they were caught cold by Westmeath. They are generally a more experienced team team than the other "weak counties" and their championship credentials stand to them. Westmeath and Laois have little championship experience and it showed. A couple of their results were frankly embarrassing. No fault of theirs - but they simply haven't played enough games at a competitive level. i don't think that Dublin are going anywhere at present, it may well have been a one off result due to the conditions but the very fact that it happened must be a huge concern for anybody involved in developing hurling in Dublin. i wouldn't read too much into what happens in div2 of the NHL (or div1 for that matter), a lot of the teams there don't compete for the McCarthy cup and their motivation for seeking promotion to div1 to be trounced week in week out is questionable. That said, even in div2 there is a huge difference in standard between the top and bottom teams which further emphasises the gulf in quality among the various counties that must be taken into account in deciding upon any c'ship format. throughout my time as an underage player i was constantly told that hurling is a simple game, which it is - why the fook are so many counties shite at it then?! i don't think any amount of c'ship experience with the big teams will benefit Laois & Westmeath, they're just not good enough and never will be. They have a pretty small pool of players to pick from, which will always limit them regardless of how hurling is developed within the county. Offaly would be in the same boat only they had a freakish amount of quality players coming through in the late 90's with the Dooleys, Pilkingtons etc, something which is unlikely to be repeated. |
|
|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 10, 2006 21:58:41 GMT
Interesting debate and I’ve been thinking about this for the last few hours. I’m going to go against both of you and suggest a league/championship format for the top 9 teams. Nobody really cares about the League and again this year we saw Limerick get to the final and then blow up horribly in the championship against Tipp and Clare when the stakes were raised to championship levels. It has become apparent that there’s always only about 2 or 3 teams ever taking it seriously so to lose those games from the calendar would not be a huge loss. Instead teams would be guaranteed 16 games every year in the championship – 8 home and 8 away – with the top 4 qualifying for the semi finals and the bottom team being relegated and replaced by the winner of the second tier (to be run on a similar structure). The benefits are high intensity championship matches at home provincial grounds. Imagine the atmosphere with 20,000 people in Wexford Park on a Saturday night for a championship clash against near neighbours Waterford, a team we never get to play in such matches. Hopefully, crowds and interest would be high all around the country for these games. The threat of relegation prevents teams who are out of the running for the top 4 going through the motions, maybe the relegation place could actually be decided by a play-off between 2nd last and last once all group games have been played. This would further ensure that all games are relatively committed and hard fought encounters throughout the campaign. There is of course the danger that there may be certain teams looking at who they will be likely to face in the last four and maybe contriving to lose a game at the end so as to come 4th rather than 3rd so as to avoid say Cork who had finished 2nd for example (say 1st plays 4th and 2nd plays 3rd in the semi finals).Maybe one way of guarding against this would actually be to have a League Trophy for the winner at the end of the group stages and they could be awarded the title ‘League Champions’. Then the overall championship winner would be decided by who comes out on top of the last 4 games. There are also untold advatages for the club player. If the championship commenced in March the games in the initial group stage could be rattled off week by week to build up interest and momentum in the competition. Remember with the structure being League based there won’t be the problem of replays holding up things. With the odd 2 week break for players to recharge their batteries the championship can still be run off by mid August. This then leaves counties to run off their club championships in a tight 2-3 month window between September and November. While the inter-county championship is ongoing in the summer months the club player can be playing his regular league and championship warm up games and at least he knows there is now a defined structure to his season. He won’t play a championship game in May and then have to wait until September for the next round due to delays caused by inter-county commitments. Hell, he can even plan for holidays and everything. There will also be no more games played at a lifeless Croke Park until the semi finals where surely a packed house would be in attendance for a semi final double header. The games can be split over consecutive weekends should ticket demands be that high. What we lose is the prestige of the provincial finals but I think the benefits I have outlined above outweigh this loss – hard though it will be to accept for many traditionalists. As I was told today in work by my boss ‘change is the only constant in the world today’ (yes I nearly vomited too). In conclusion more games, 8 home competitive matches throughout the summer, a defined structure to the season for club and county player alike. I think it’s worth a shot. i think 16 games is too much, i can't see the crowds being as big and you would probably see a lot of bandwagoners wait until the last few games when things hot up to come out and support, particularly for away games. i also think you need two competitions so i wouldn't do away with the league - it may not be taken too seriously but at least it gives counties a chance to try out players and build a settled team. what are your thoughts on the provincial c'ships? i would strongly disagree with the club competitons being put back to a window at the end of the summer. i think this would be hugely detrimental to the grassroots GAA. i think it's incumbent upon every county to play the club competitons during the summer months when hurling should be played. it never hurt kilkenny or cork playing club games in between rounds of the all ireland and i think every other county should follow suit. league games (without the club's county players) and challenge games are no substitute for championship fare and with players training from jan/feb to have to wait until september to start the real competiton it would be no suprise to see them becomming disillusioned. that's one of the reasons i walked away from club hurling - being a junior hurler in a club with senior status meant we played a game in May then waited until Wexford were knocked out in late August, then waited a couple of weeks for the senior team to play, then finally a week later we got our chance. Then between subsequent rounds and postponed league games we played every week until november. i remember sitting on the bench for a county final in late november - pissing rain, waterlogged pitch, dour game in conditions never meant for hurling and even though we won a few days later i thought fook this, club players get ridden sideways. i think i'll grow a beer belly. |
|
|
|
Post by bandage on Jul 11, 2006 12:31:40 GMT
i think 16 games is too much, i can't see the crowds being as big and you would probably see a lot of bandwagoners wait until the last few games when things hot up to come out and support, particularly for away games. i also think you need two competitions so i wouldn't do away with the league - it may not be taken too seriously but at least it gives counties a chance to try out players and build a settled team. what are your thoughts on the provincial c'ships? i would strongly disagree with the club competitons being put back to a window at the end of the summer. i think this would be hugely detrimental to the grassroots GAA. i think it's incumbent upon every county to play the club competitons during the summer months when hurling should be played. it never hurt kilkenny or cork playing club games in between rounds of the all ireland and i think every other county should follow suit. league games (without the club's county players) and challenge games are no substitute for championship fare and with players training from jan/feb to have to wait until september to start the real competiton it would be no suprise to see them becomming disillusioned. that's one of the reasons i walked away from club hurling - being a junior hurler in a club with senior status meant we played a game in May then waited until Wexford were knocked out in late August, then waited a couple of weeks for the senior team to play, then finally a week later we got our chance. Then between subsequent rounds and postponed league games we played every week until november. i remember sitting on the bench for a county final in late november - pissing rain, waterlogged pitch, dour game in conditions never meant for hurling and even though we won a few days later i thought fook this, club players get ridden sideways. i think i'll grow a beer belly. I think 16 games is ideal and it's about time we had this amount of games too. One of the main reasons why there are so many kids wearing English soccer shirts is the affinity they build up with a Liverpool, ManU etc through the amount of exposure they get by being all over the TV every week. If marketed properly (the GAA are terrible at this) I think a format with all these regular games would drive interest and crowds rather than have a negative impact on them. Instead the majority of counties experience 2 or 3 games in summer and pointless League games in crap consitions in February and March. I think a summer of regular, high quality games would be excellent. It's surely worth a try? Remember also crowds haven't been that great for the past few years what with the straight knock having gone and there no longer being that do or die element until the latter stages of the championship. It is apparent that something has to be done to the structure of the championship and soon and I'd go with either of your or therock's formats ahead of the current one too. Re the provincial championships I think their time is largely gone. If you want to retain a provincial focus to my format then you can do what happens in US sports. By that I mean as well as the overall table to decide the top 4 to advance to the semi finals you could keep separate Munster and Leinster conference tables and keep track of the results of games played between teams against others from their own province. The winner of this separate table would be awarded the provincial title with the results also counting towards the overall table if you get me. You would lose the traditional Munster Final in Thurles but equally there could be an occasion where Cork have to travel to Ennis as part of the League Championship knowing that a win against Clare would seal the Munster title and qualify them for the final 4. Equally there would be 25,000 crazy Clare fooks waiting to ambush their chances in Ennis. Re the club player, that's not ideal I agree and I have to think about that more. Maybe if clubs chose their senior squad of say 24 at the start of the season leaving all the other players to be available to play intermediate and junior during the summer while the county team takes precedence for those in the senior ranks. Then from late August on the senior club championship starts in earnest but before this the regular senior club player can be playing his usual league games for the club minus the county players. Again, need to consider the club situation more so don't take the last para as definitive. |
|
|
|
Post by steamboatsam on Jul 11, 2006 15:51:36 GMT
i think an overhaul of the all-ireland, provincial championships and league in the one go would be a bit too radical for les imbeciles in the GAA.
i would worry that 16 games plus relegation/semis/final etc along with a possible minor tournament like walsh cup etc as a form of preseason would make it almost impossible for players to maintain club commitments, thereby leading to a situation similar to when the heineken cup started in rugby whereby it became unfeasible for players to continue playing club games. this scenario would naturally be hugely detrimental to club hurling and would broaden the gap between the intercounty player and the average club player as the quality of hurling on the club scene would suffer due to the absence of the strongest players.
such a "super league" could also be the first step towards semi pro hurling.
|
|
|
|
Post by bandage on Jul 11, 2006 16:13:22 GMT
Semi-pro is the way it'll go eventually. Players are putting in too big a commitment for the amount of games they're playing. It'll get to the stage where pay for play will be on the agenda. I love some of the traditions of the GAA but I'm not going to lose any sleep if the players get paid especially the really skilled and committed ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by timofte on Jul 11, 2006 16:19:26 GMT
Very interesting suggestions by all. An overhaul is probably required but with all the history associated with it is hard to see anything radical being done in the near future.
I think bandages suggestion of 16 games is probably too much and people would only really gain interest in the last number of games in the season.
The increase in the number of games would also be a huge advantage to the stronger counties who have a large number of players to choose from and would be able to rotate players and injured players would be easily replaced. Weaker counties with limited resources would not have this ability.
An 8 game league run off like bandage suggested might be a better option. Teams could play home and away in alternative years.
The provisional championships are especially important in Munster and as bandage suggested these cames could coincide with the league games although I would suggest that the top two placed munster teams play off in a munster final.
Another option would be to extend the number of teams in the league from Bandages 9 to 12 including Dublin, Westmeath and Antrim. This way you would have 11 competitive games followed by semi-finals and final. 13 games is a lot alright but would be more managable than the 18 suggested by bandage. Draws are only an issue at semi/final stage.
The benefit of having 12 teams is that the weaker counties will have a lot more cometitive matches against strong opposition. While these teams may get hokied on occasion this can only be of benefit to them and they are bound to get an occasional scalp during the season. After a number of years in this format a weaker team may come through to make a semi-final or win an All Ireland.
Relegation in this format should also be a play-off to prevent middle table sides, with no hope of qualifying for semi's or threat of relegation, from fielding weak teams or not properly competing in games.
DT
|
|
