Hurling needs a seperate ruling body from Football

KevIRL

Hurling and Football while falling under the broad umbrella of the GAA should no longer fall under the same decision makers. Hurling for too long has suffered by being forced to take decisions from football centric decision makers. The latest of which is the crazt decision to reduce the hurling league season to just 5 games per county. Its high time for hurling to have a seperate ruling body from football, one which has the interest of our true national game at heart.

adrian522

KevIRL wrote: »

Hurling and Football while falling under the broad umbrella of the GAA should no longer fall under the same decision makers. Hurling for too long has suffered by being forced to take decisions from football centric decision makers. The latest of which is the crazt decision to reduce the hurling league season to just 5 games per county. Its high time for hurling to have a seperate ruling body from football, one which has the interest of our true national game at heart.

Agreed completely...

Tucker.Tim

KevIRL wrote: »

Hurling and Football while falling under the broad umbrella of the GAA should no longer fall under the same decision makers. Hurling for too long has suffered by being forced to take decisions from football centric decision makers. The latest of which is the crazt decision to reduce the hurling league season to just 5 games per county. Its high time for hurling to have a seperate ruling body from football, one which has the interest of our true national game at heart.

The last line stinks of the idiocy of point scoring between our two most prized national games and it's hard not to escape the sense you're trying to blame a fantastic sport, one that easily is the far more popular overall of the two, for failings (in your opinion) on a administrative level.

No thanks, come back with a better attitude and I'll hear you out.

run_Forrest_run

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

The last line stinks of the idiocy of point scoring between our two most prized national games and it's hard not to escape the sense you're trying to blame a fantastic sport, one that easily is the far more popular overall of the two, for failings (in your opinion) on a administrative level.

No thanks, come back with a better attitude and I'll hear you out.

attitude aside, I think the OP has a point.

Live4Ever

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

The last line stinks of the idiocy of point scoring between our two most prized national games and it's hard not to escape the sense you're trying to blame a fantastic sport, one that easily is the far more popular overall of the two, for failings (in your opinion) on a administrative level.

No thanks, come back with a better attitude and I'll hear you out.

Fair point, I hate that hurling v football argument, it's a pain to listen to.

At the same time I agree with the OP. While both games share similar traits, they are completely different.

I think it's unfair for primarily football people to be involved with hurling decisions on a administrative level.

For example, I am a referee. I decided AGAINST refing football games, as I never played the game or took much interest in it. In my opinion this decison benefited both games. At intercounty level, refs are made choose a game, so they can focus completely on their chosen game. I think ghigh level admins and rule makers should also be forced into this decision.

adrian522

Martin Brehney had an article on this subject a while back:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/hurling/martin-breheny-spot-the-difference-2856019.html

SO then, another bad deal for hurling. Last Saturday, the GAA decided to increase the number of senior inter-county football games while reducing the hurling equivalent. Granted, the football addition is minimal (two semi-finals in Division 1 of the Allianz League) but the hurling reduction is considerable, with the top 16 counties having their league schedule cut from a guaranteed minimum of seven to five games from next year.

And since there will be no semi-finals in Division 1 of the NHL, the title will be won off six games, compared with nine in football, a 50pc differential between the two codes.

For illustrative purposes, let's personalise it. Colm Cooper, Bernard Brogan, Michael Murphy and dozens of other leading footballers can look forward to as many as nine league games, while Lar Corbett, Tommy Walsh, Joe Canning and colleagues must make do with a maximum of six (five if they don't reach the final or aren't in a relegation play-off).

In fairness to all players, not to mention the public who like to see the top stars in both codes as often as possible, the official fixtures schedule should not discriminate in favour of either code. Yet it does, because that's what counties voted for last Saturday.

Central Council is comprised mainly of county delegates so it was their choice. What's more, they had three options for the NHL -- one which proposed running it on broadly similar terms as football, a second which involved reducing the number of group games but adding quarter and semi-finals and a third (this was accepted), which went for the lowest possible number of games.

So before anybody blames "that crowd up in Croke Park" for the change, let them check how their county delegate voted. The adjustment was made by the counties so they must take responsibility, not those charged with implementing the Central Council decision.

Already, there are dark mutterings of discontent among some of the leading hurling counties. The change will be especially hard on Limerick and Wexford, both of whom would have been in Division 1 (top eight) under the old system but lost out because of the two-way split of six each under the new format.

It means that neither can win the Division 1 title outright. Wexford were delighted that their late flourish kept them in the top flight this year, while Limerick carefully plotted their way out of Division 2 and into contention to win the Division 1 title next year. That can't happen now since Division 1B counties aren't eligible for the top prize.

If 1A and 1B were to be restored in two groups of six, there was a clear logic in adding quarter and semi-final finals, thereby increasing the number of games for some teams towards the levels enjoyed by the footballers. It would also offer the top two in 1B the chance to win the title outright.

Of course, the big question is why Central Council voted to reduce the number of games in the NHL. Is it another example of a football-dominated organisation asserting big-ball interests, not as matter of general policy but at localised level? Quite probably.

As a rough guide, football is dominant in 20 of the 32 counties, hurling is No 1 in five, with the remaining seven broadly equal across the codes. With the exception of Antrim, the counties north of a line from Dublin to Galway are football-dominated, yet they have an equal say in how hurling is structured.

proposals

Cavan won't have a team in next year's NHL yet their Central Council delegate was entitled to vote on the proposals. And with respect to several other counties where hurling represents a tiny percentage of their GAA activities, is it right that they have as much of an input in deciding on the Division 1 NHL format as those who are directly involved?

The GAA has always prided itself on being democratic but that's taking it to unsustainable levels. Reducing games in the NHL means it can start later and take up fewer weekends.

How convenient for football, where Division 1 will take nine weekends to complete, compared with six in hurling. How convenient too that hurling's reduced programme will create more space for the provincial U-21 football championships, which are run off in spring.

Three options were on the Central Council agenda for the NHL and, in my view, the least progressive one was chosen. It will probably only last a year before there's another change.

After all, it's already under attack, which is not a good sign.

- Martin Breheny

CiaranMT

Live4Ever wrote: »

For example, I am a referee. I decided AGAINST refing football games, as I never played the game or took much interest in it. In my opinion this decison benefited both games. At intercounty level, refs are made choose a game, so they can focus completely on their chosen game. I think ghigh level admins and rule makers should also be forced into this decision.

This is a very good point, but I can see a potential problem with it, in that it could cause splits in the upper echelons if it weren't managed properly.

rebel girl 15

Live4Ever wrote: »

For example, I am a referee. I decided AGAINST refing football games, as I never played the game or took much interest in it. In my opinion this decison benefited both games. At intercounty level, refs are made choose a game, so they can focus completely on their chosen game. I think ghigh level admins and rule makers should also be forced into this decision.

Refereeing a game and making decisions on games are two competely different things - no way should they be forced to choose! You could deprive one sport of a person that has their head screwed on, or turn people away from taking on the job! And before you start slating the high level people about it - they put it forward and it was the delegates from the counties that voted it through, no one else! I also think the vote should have been restricted to those who it would directly affect and see how it would play out. The fact is that less intercounty league games gives more time for club games to be played, which is why it may have been voted through. It would be interesting to see exactly what way those teams directly affected by the change voted

KevIRL

Yeah, apologies for the attitude in my OP. I was after having a few ales and just watched the replay of the Dublin-Donegal match and made a dig that wasnt needed. So apologies again.

rebel girl 15

KevIRL wrote: »

Yeah, apologies for the attitude in my OP. I was after having a few ales and just watched the replay of the Dublin-Donegal match and made a dig that wasnt needed. So apologies again.

Fair play to you for posting that

Live4Ever

I think its a joke that delegates from the likes of Cavan get to vote on hurling. Sure they wouldn't know a hurl from a cattle prod (no offence to any Cavan men but it's the truth)!!

munchkin_utd

Live4Ever wrote: »

I think its a joke that delegates from the likes of Cavan get to vote on hurling. Sure they wouldn't know a hurl from a cattle prod (no offence to any Cavan men but it's the truth)!!

Its bloody simple to fix such administrative disparitys.

Weight the number of votes on hurling decisions based on the number of clubs, or players in a county.
Then those with a greater vested interest have a larger say than others.

That said, it would show up the fact that certain counties who are reasonable at inter county like Galway or Antrim still have a low level of number of hurling clubs compared to say Cork or Kilkenny.

In general though, for BOTH codes the rule changes and admin procedures arent fit for purpose.
Football had a square ball rule modification through the league that worked very well, yet the congress was out of touch and ruled against it on seemingly a whim.

In both codes the playing rules and organisational matters need to be shifted away from the unwieldy congress towards a model where those on the ground playing the game also have a say (which in turn means "hurlers" are in control of the game).

adrian522

munchkin_utd wrote: »

Its bloody simple to fix such administrative disparitys.

Weight the number of votes on hurling decisions based on the number of clubs, or players in a county.
Then those with a greater vested interest have a larger say than others.

That said, it would show up the fact that certain counties who are reasonable at inter county like Galway or Antrim still have a low level of number of hurling clubs compared to say Cork or Kilkenny.

In general though, for BOTH codes the rule changes and admin procedures arent fit for purpose.
Football had a square ball rule modification through the league that worked very well, yet the congress was out of touch and ruled against it on seemingly a whim.

In both codes the playing rules and organisational matters need to be shifted away from the unwieldy congress towards a model where those on the ground playing the game also have a say (which in turn means "hurlers" are in control of the game).

Ha ha, how many senior clubs are there in Tipp now, must be edging towards 100

Are we talking overall clubs or just senior clubs, if overall Dublin have absolotley shedloads, about 10 divisions I think.

Live4Ever

I've been listening to aul lads for years about this.

It's nothing less than a disgrace that the NHL was cut to 6 games per team.

Mountainlad

Live4Ever wrote: »

I've been listening to aul lads for years about this.

It's nothing less than a disgrace that the NHL was cut to 6 games per team.

5 for most.