Skorts.

They campaign to the delegates before the next Congress, if that doesn't work then they start refusing to play, have they taken any action before today and have they made their views known in the last few years, if they have then I suppose they have to up the anty at some stage

@elperello Who knows, but as I've said there's protocols for dealing with this, theyll have to wait until 27 again for a vote on this, but in reality I think they should bow to pressure and let them wear shorts if they want

It's really hard to get your head around it. It's a democratic organisation, so the way of changing it is bringing a motion to congress and the delegates vote it through. It's not complicated. The thing that's impossible to understand is that they did that and the delegates voted against it. I don't know anyone in favour of banning shorts. My wife played camogie up until a couple of years ago and she doesn't know anyone in favour of it. Who the hell are these clubs sending to congress who are voting against this change?

I also don't understand how they're more revealing or less suitable for concealing period leaks. They're shorts with extra material around them. But what does that matter? The girls overwhelmingly don't want them, why would anyone vote to keep them in them?

I don't square it, they'll have to campaign their delegates for 27 to have a change, they've played long enough and the first the vast majority of the world has heard about it was today, I'm thinking they'll be fine for the extra few months until the next vote and hopefully they'll get a change in the rules

Men would be told to shut the fck up and stop moaning.

What planet are you living on?

You are making a very common error that people who don't understand surveys often make. It's not the sample size that is the issue, it is the sample selection that is the issue.

Your MRBI example is 1,200 people but they are a representative sample of the entire voting population of Ireland. They would be representative by sex, age, geography and social class. 1,200 of a sample, if selected correctly, is adequate to draw inferences for a population of 3m+. There will be a margin of error of about +/- 3% in the inferences drawn.

The Camogie survey you are citing is *not* representative of the 100,000 registered players in the country. It even states it in the research that 650 intercounty players were asked. It doesn't go any further as to how those 650 players were selected so it's possible that this survey isn't even representative of intercounty Camogie players.

Your final paragraph is factually incorrect. This survey is not 15 times more representative than the MRBI survey.

Surveys don't just use a "cross section". They use a representative sample of the population that they are surveying.

Using a specifically targeted group of 650 camogie players is not representative of 100,000 registered members.

If you asked 50,000 Liverpool fans about who the greatest club in England was, there would be an obvious answer. If you asked a representative sample of 50,000 English people the same question, you might get a different answer.