(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post
|
He is!!!
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 15669 - 16/08/2023 10:12:44 2500728 Link 1 |
|
LGFA have zero infrastructure they rely completely and totally on GAA good will. If Camogie go ahead and integrate as it looks like they are going to do, club juvenile and adult games will be centrally controlled by GAA the LGFA will loose out. Currently you have the ridiculous arrangement where uneven days are LGFA fixtures and Even days are Camogie. Yet with GAA Hurling/Football its alternate weeks. Its not good for duel players so I cannot see the benefit long tern in current arrangements. I am an administrator in Na Fianna in Dublin and all four codes are equally catered for. In terms of benefits for the GAA I would have thought the sheer dynamic of so many kids/famillies able to access and be part of same organisation is a superb win/win.
arock (Dublin) - Posts: 4953 - 16/08/2023 11:25:02 2500748 Link 1 |
|
Zinny, you're still barking up a wrong tree here, and accusing me of something I never said or suggested. I've never said I'm against integration, and I'm not looking for reasons to oppose it. The discussion I started was simply to question the narrative of "integration will bring benefits for all three associations". There are clear and obvious potential benefits for two of them, but not so many clear and obvious benefits for the other. Questioning that narrative does not mean I'm against the principle of integration, or looking for reasons for it not to happen. It just means I'm thinking in depth about what exactly it would mean for all three associations. Discussion has since moved on to some of the challenges that integration will bring. But again, pointing out there would be difficulties in certain elements of a new coordinated Rule Book is not the same thing as saying "ah, it would be too hard, so we shouldn't even try." By the way, your proposed solution to the one being discussed right now is another that seems logical and straightforward on the face of it, but it goes against the ethos of any "parish rule" to protect small clubs. For example: - A club in a small area has 18 players in let's say its U14 squad. For whatever reason, they decide to enter only a hurling team that year. Five of their players go off to play football with a neighbouring club under the "isolated player" rule. - Two years later, when they have the same numbers for U16, they decide to enter football after all. Under your proposal, the five who went to the neighbouring club would be entitled to stay there. This means the other 13 still couldn't play football, even though their own club has 18 players who should be available to it. - And for how long would those five be allowed to continue to play football for the other club, on the grounds that their own club wasn't offering them football at the time they made the move? All the way up through their adult career - i.e. up to maybe 25 years? Again, just an example of the difficulties that an apparently straightforward solution would face when you dig into the details and possible consequences. But not a reason to not even try to do it. Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2854 - 16/08/2023 12:28:52 2500770 Link 0 |
|
Okay, I see what you mean. Semantics really, over difference between "grace period" and "staggered implementation".
Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2854 - 16/08/2023 12:32:34 2500772 Link 0 |
|
Yes, the same rule would eventually apply across the board all right. But the potential difficulty would still remain in the intervening years, when there would still be different membership rules based solely on gender in the same organisation. And again - pointing out there would be potential difficulties does not mean I'm against it in the first place. Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2854 - 16/08/2023 12:38:14 2500773 Link 0 |
|
I think so too. But I'm not an administrator I'm primarily considering the bigger picture and the longterm future.
Viking66 (Wexford) - Posts: 15669 - 16/08/2023 17:09:54 2500862 Link 0 |