Ulster Bank League 2018-2019 Talk/Gossip/Rumours

Chico Flores

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Are we excluding Academy/Contracted players?

The Clontarf team that won the league in 2016 were an outstanding squad and probably the best year Darcy had in red and blue. Mick McGrath in his prime, Soroka, Sam Cronin, Tony Ryan.

Scott Deasy would be up there as well for me.

Some of that 5 in a row Shannon squad too would be in the conversation.

Mc Love

Andrew Thompson for me was one of the best AIL players! Has 9 League winner medals and kicked an enormous amount of points from the kicking tee.

young munsters man

Greatest player to Play Ail , (assuming its skewed toward guys who played more ail than professional football,
Ger Earls, Ger Slattery, Mick McGrath, Lotta shannon players axle, gallimh thompson dave quinlan colm mcmahon 
 Some great foreign players played AIL - brent anderson, john mitchell, stephen backup mike brewer, pieter muller
For me Ger Earls

The Lost Sheep

Stainalert wrote: »

The club Scene Podcast asking the question this week "Who is the best player you have played against/seen playing in the AIL?"

Interesting question And should you disregard the pros playing AIL etc.

Chico Flores wrote: »

Before my time but my father saw him play.

Ger Earls was always one he thought was incredible.

Leo Auva'a had a season where he was a pure wrecking ball, no more than Joey Carberry I suppose.

Probably Matt Darcy, although he has stagnated a little bit.

Cant recall seeing ger earls playing but Trevor Brennan for me would be one

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Are we excluding Academy/Contracted players?

The Clontarf team that won the league in 2016 were an outstanding squad and probably the best year Darcy had in red and blue. Mick McGrath in his prime, Soroka, Sam Cronin, Tony Ryan.

Scott Deasy would be up there as well for me.

Probably should exclude contracted players tbf.

Chico Flores wrote: »

Some of that 5 in a row Shannon squad too would be in the conversation.

Definitely even guys who would have benched with that set up were top class players like Colm McMahon though Shannon did only win 4 in a row

Mc Love

young munsters man wrote: »

Greatest player to Play Ail , (assuming its skewed toward guys who played more ail than professional football,
Ger Earls, Ger Slattery, Mick McGrath, Lotta shannon players axle, gallimh thompson dave quinlan colm mcmahon 
 Some great foreign players played AIL - brent anderson, john mitchell, stephen backup mike brewer, pieter muller
For me Ger Earls

Rhys Ellison was a great foreign player

guapos

Loved watching Matt Smith and Damien O'Brien for Clontarf in mid 90s.

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Clubs dont want regionalised leagues and it isnt about ticket allocation which wouldnt change...

Clubs dont want to have regional leagues by and large. It doesnt make sense to have regional leagues where we have sides competing for promotion to 1B challenging against sides who're bottom/near bottom of 2C. It would reduce playing standards in the league.

This change would reduce overall playing standards so why would it be better. You might see more people attend games for a while with more local games but standards of play would drop.

Why would reducing playing standards be better than what exists? Will attendances get much better for games and for what other reasons other than small reduction of costs be for clubs?

Just to summarise, the AIL should not be restructured because
1. Standards will drop. I refute this, I think the standards will rise,
2. The clubs by and large don't want it restructured. Why don't they want it restructured. Is it because they will feel inferior; although they would still be senior, they would now be competing in regional leagues and there is a mistrust of the IRFU, so lets keep the status quo.
If clubs do not evolve and embrace change they will be left behind.

Stainalert

guapos wrote: »

Loved watching Matt Smith and Damien O'Brien for Clontarf in mid 90s.

guapos wrote: »

Loved watching Matt Smith and Damien O'Brien for Clontarf in mid 90s.

Andrew Melville for Carlow was a brilliant ball carrier.

Stainalert

guapos wrote: »

Loved watching Matt Smith and Damien O'Brien for Clontarf in mid 90s.

guapos wrote: »

Loved watching Matt Smith and Damien O'Brien for Clontarf in mid 90s.

Andrew Melville for Carlow was a brilliant ball carrier.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

Just to summarise, the AIL should not be restructured because
1. Standards will drop. I refute this, I think the standards will rise,
2. The clubs by and large don't want it restructured. Why don't they want it restructured. Is it because they will feel inferior; although they would still be senior, they would now be competing in regional leagues and there is a mistrust of the IRFU, so lets keep the status quo.
If clubs do not evolve and embrace change they will be left behind.

Changing the leagues to be more regionalised will not increase standards. How will sides who happen to be in same province playing each other make the standards increase?
You would be asking division 2A sides to play 2C sides. How does that increase standards?

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

Just to summarise, the AIL should not be restructured because
1. Standards will drop. I refute this, I think the standards will rise,
2. The clubs by and large don't want it restructured. Why don't they want it restructured. Is it because they will feel inferior; although they would still be senior, they would now be competing in regional leagues and there is a mistrust of the IRFU, so lets keep the status quo.
If clubs do not evolve and embrace change they will be left behind.

Changing the leagues to be more regionalised will not increase standards. How will sides who happen to be in same province playing each other make the standards increase?
You would be asking division 2A sides to play 2C sides. How does that increase standards?

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Changing the leagues to be more regionalised will not increase standards. How will sides who happen to be in same province playing each other make the standards increase?
You would be asking division 2A sides to play 2C sides. How does that increase standards?

You have less travel costs, therefore that money can go towards better facilities such as S&C's coaches, physios, gyms etc. You have more local derbies which will increase supporter awareness and interest. You will have stronger junior players being attracted to the senior clubs as they see the natural progression.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

You have less travel costs, therefore that money can go towards better facilities such as S&C's coaches, physios, gyms etc. You have more local derbies which will increase supporter awareness and interest. You will have stronger junior players being attracted to the senior clubs as they see the natural progression.

Yes there is less travel costs and it might see more people going to games but that wont make stronger junior players more likely to go to senior clubs as they'll be attracted to go to senior clubs already and that change will not make them more likely to move.
Playing division2A teams against 2C sides doesnt improve standards which is the key part of the change. What benefit is there for clubs pushing to be promoted to 1B playing new senior clubs just up to 2C or for mid ranking 2C sides or sides struggling in 2C playing sides 2 divisions above them?

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Yes there is less travel costs and it might see more people going to games but that wont make stronger junior players more likely to go to senior clubs as they'll be attracted to go to senior clubs already and that change will not make them more likely to move.
Playing division2A teams against 2C sides doesnt improve standards which is the key part of the change. What benefit is there for clubs pushing to be promoted to 1B playing new senior clubs just up to 2C or for mid ranking 2C sides or sides struggling in 2C playing sides 2 divisions above them?

I agree that 2A teams would be the big loser, you will never keep every team happy, and that is the big problem, each club has its own vested interest. It may be time for some teams to look at themselves and decide would they be better competing at junior level.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

I agree that 2A teams would be the big loser, you will never keep every team happy, and that is the big problem, each club has its own vested interest. It may be time for some teams to look at themselves and decide would they be better competing at junior level.

Weaker 2C clubs would also be big losers. There is no benefit on a playing side and that doesnt help these clubs retain players. It may help get more supporters in short term with more local clubs but that isnt for definite.
And how does saying oh clubs should just go junior make things better. Your argument doesnt add up.

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Weaker 2C clubs would also be big losers. There is no benefit on a playing side and that doesnt help these clubs retain players. It may help get more supporters in short term with more local clubs but that isnt for definite.
And how does saying oh clubs should just go junior make things better. Your argument doesnt add up.

These teams are operating in a false vacuum. Have a look at some recent Senior 2nds results, absolutely shocking. You will see that certain clubs are putting enormous resources into one team for fear of losing their senior status. As a result there is nothing below the 1st team. Playing numbers are dropping, clubs cannot fulfil fixtures and we are only in October. Take that dreaded fear of relegation from AIL from them and let them rebuild as either a senior cub in a regional league or at some other level.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

These teams are operating in a false vacuum. Have a look at some recent Senior 2nds results, absolutely shocking. You will see that certain clubs are putting enormous resources into one team for fear of losing their senior status. As a result there is nothing below the 1st team. Playing numbers are dropping, clubs cannot fulfil fixtures and we are only in October. Take that dreaded fear of relegation from AIL from them and let them rebuild as either a senior cub in a regional league or at some other level.

Yes senior 2nds results can often have little to no relevance to a 1st XVs teams results.
Changing the status of the 1st teams within these clubs wont change anything about their 2nds or 3rds.
Clubs dont want regional leagues as it will not aid them like the all ireland league does and what other level are you referring to? Junior?

D14Rugby

They were talking about the 2xv thing on the club scene podcast. Seems a huge problem in Munster. It's done pretty well in Leinster. How's the rest of the country?

The Lost Sheep

D14Rugby wrote: »

They were talking about the 2xv thing on the club scene podcast. Seems a huge problem in Munster. It's done pretty well in Leinster. How's the rest of the country?

Because of the number of clubs and number of teams within the clubs it works well in Leinster.
There isnt the number of clubs or depth for the number of clubs. Majority of clubs in Dublin, senior anyway, field 3/4/5 teams. No clubs in North Munster field more than a Senior XV, J1 and J2 side and only a few in South Munster do. Maybe Con and 1/2 others and many struggle with their 2nds these days. They have people who want to play social rugby and j1s isnt social rugby

D14Rugby

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Because of the number of clubs and number of teams within the clubs it works well in Leinster.
There isnt the number of clubs or depth for the number of clubs. Majority of clubs in Dublin, senior anyway, field 3/4/5 teams. No clubs in North Munster field more than a Senior XV, J1 and J2 side and only a few in South Munster do. Maybe Con and 1/2 others and many struggle with their 2nds these days. They have people who want to play social rugby and j1s isnt social rugby

I know the reasons (no matter how soft I think they are) for Munsters mess. I was asking what the situation is elsewhere.

The Lost Sheep

D14Rugby wrote: »

I know the reasons (no matter how soft I think they are) for Munsters mess. I was asking what the situation is elsewhere.

They arent soft reasons at all. You havent real experience of many clubs
beyond Dublin considering nearly all senior clubs in capital fielding 4 adult teams as well as a 20s
Connacht senior clubs field 2 or 3 adult sides and some field 20s in the Leinster league while others compete in a connacht u20 blitz series.
There isnt any real form of u20 rugby in Ulster and clubs field 3/4 teams but not many field more with Ballynahinch probably the biggest club with 6 teams. Shame as so many Ulster clubs used to field so many more sides even recently enough

Stainalert

1A 
Lansdowne v Cork Con
Garryowen V UCD
Shannon v Clontarf
Trinity v Young Munster
UCC v Terenure
1B
Ballynahinch v Buccaneers
Banbridge v Ballymena
Malone v Old Belvedere
St Marys v City of Armagh

Stainalert

1A 
Lansdowne v Cork Con
Garryowen V UCD
Shannon v Clontarf
Trinity v Young Munster
UCC v Terenure
1B
Ballynahinch v Buccaneers
Banbridge v Ballymena
Malone v Old Belvedere
St Marys v City of Armagh

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Yes senior 2nds results can often have little to no relevance to a 1st XVs teams results.
Changing the status of the 1st teams within these clubs wont change anything about their 2nds or 3rds.
Clubs dont want regional leagues as it will not aid them like the all ireland league does and what other level are you referring to? Junior?

D14Rugby wrote: »

They were talking about the 2xv thing on the club scene podcast. Seems a huge problem in Munster. It's done pretty well in Leinster. How's the rest of the country?

2nds rugby in Munster is a disaster. Clubs are operating with skeleton squads. How can one say that 2nds results can often have little or no relevance to a 1st team results. To operate a first team you probably need a minimum of 25-30 players to get you through the season. If your 2nds are giving walk overs then your subs / replacements are not getting meaningful rugby. Clubs especially in Munster are fearful of change because they feel they will lose their status, and as a result are hiding behind this veil of AIL provides more meaningful rugby than provincial /regional rugby.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

2nds rugby in Munster is a disaster. Clubs are operating with skeleton squads. How can one say that 2nds results can often have little or no relevance to a 1st team results. To operate a first team you probably need a minimum of 25-30 players to get you through the season. If your 2nds are giving walk overs then your subs / replacements are not getting meaningful rugby. Clubs especially in Munster are fearful of change because they feel they will lose their status, and as a result are hiding behind this veil of AIL provides more meaningful rugby than provincial /regional rugby.

2nds is different each season. Some seasons its ok some its not.
You can easily say 2nds results has no relevance on 1sts team reslts.
There is plenty of clubs beyond Munster fearful of change. Changing to regional rugby/provincial rugby wont changes 2nds/3rds for a lot of clubs anyway
And 2nds has changed this season and has seen less walkovers so far this season compared to previous seasons at this time

D14Rugby

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

They arent soft reasons at all. You havent real experience of many clubs
beyond Dublin considering nearly all senior clubs in capital fielding 4 adult teams as well as a 20s
Connacht senior clubs field 2 or 3 adult sides and some field 20s in the Leinster league while others compete in a connacht u20 blitz series.
There isnt any real form of u20 rugby in Ulster and clubs field 3/4 teams but not many field more with Ballynahinch probably the biggest club with 6 teams. Shame as so many Ulster clubs used to field so many more sides even recently enough

So what you're saying is every single club in Munster just has a 1stXV team and not a panel, sounds like nobody's fault but their own. considering the amount of schools and clubs in Munster playing youth/schools rugby the not enough players is a load of rubbish too or at the very least the clubs are doing an awful job at transitioning players from underage to adult rugby.

The Lost Sheep

D14Rugby wrote: »

So what you're saying is every single club in Munster just has a 1stXV team and not a panel, sounds like nobody's fault but their own. considering the amount of schools and clubs in Munster playing youth/schools rugby the not enough players is a load of rubbish too or at the very least the clubs are doing an awful job at transitioning players from underage to adult rugby.

I didnt say that at all. Go read my post again.
They all field 2nds and many field 3rds. Its not their fault that they have issues with fielding 2nds. Have you seen the number of rugby players from Munster playing in Dublin these days and then playing abroad?
Clubs do as well a job as Dublin clubs in transitioning players to adult level but sheer population will mean Dub clubs field much more.

The Lost Sheep

scores from tonight
2A: Highfield 29 Dolphin 12 and in 2B Greystones beat Skerries 55-19

Limerick 37.5

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

I didnt say that at all. Go read my post again.
They all field 2nds and many field 3rds. Its not their fault that they have issues with fielding 2nds. Have you seen the number of rugby players from Munster playing in Dublin these days and then playing abroad?
Clubs do as well a job as Dublin clubs in transitioning players to adult level but sheer population will mean Dub clubs field much more.

Oh come on, look at the recent 2nds results, you would be appalled by cricket scores or no shows, this is ridiculous, why is it not the clubs fault if they cannot field a 2nds team. Why do you put the blame at every other doorstep except the clubs. There are teams playing in the AIL which cannot fulfil 2nds fixtures, and others who are fielding such poor 2nds teams that it is a health & safety concern. But for some reason you will argue that these clubs are getting meaningful rugby through the AIL. I find that very hard to understand.

The Lost Sheep

Limerick 37.5 wrote: »

Oh come on, look at the recent 2nds results, you would be appalled by cricket scores or no shows, this is ridiculous, why is it not the clubs fault if they cannot field a 2nds team. Why do you put the blame at every other doorstep except the clubs. There are teams playing in the AIL which cannot fulfil 2nds fixtures, and others who are fielding such poor 2nds teams that it is a health & safety concern. But for some reason you will argue that these clubs are getting meaningful rugby through the AIL. I find that very hard to understand.

The clubs can still get meaningful rugby through the AIL. with 2nds not always fielding. if theyve 3rds even more so. Look at Corinthians. Their 2nds didnt field for a few seasons essentially but their 1sts were competitive and 3rds even more competitive/successful.
Im looking at the systems that are in place because they as much as what the clubs do themselves are why the clubs are not fielding.
That isnt that difficult to grasp