Waterford GAA Discussion Thread 3 ***Updated Mod Note Post 1***

Top drawer wrote: »

It was only a couple months ago that alot of ppl were calling for an 8 team championship including well known journalists in the county, mostly directed at the likes of cappaquin, tallow and roanmore, well here we are 3 games into 2015, tallow 3 wins from 3 and top the group, roanmore 2 wins from 3 and second in group, cappaquin beat lismore. Never see anything wrote about their previous ambitions of an overhaul these days.

Tallow have 2 wins and a draw but you're point is a very valid one. Smaller clubs like Tallow and Cappoquin do not have an endless conveyer belt of talent and will have cyclical periods due to a number of reasons such as retirements, injuries and emigration. Tallow were missing 3 players last night from their previous game for a combination of these reasons. A lot of people who only look at results and not the reasons behind it think that these teams are poor and should not be senior. But this year has shown that these clubs are capable of putting a good year together and being strong performers in the Senior championship. Even big clubs like Ballygunner can suffer from injuries that affect their team but no one comes on here claiming that they should not be senior.

Played for Tourin at the weekend.

Ropaire wrote: »

County board are considering not entering junior football and intermediate hurling teams into the munster championship; http://m.hoganstand.com/Home/Details/239805?county=National

I wouldn't be broke up at the thoughts of it to be honest!

One thing which irritates me is the crassness of the language used by Ryan and O'Keeffe here - "taking second rate players, giving them jerseys, and sending them out to play Cork". That's really disrespectful to those involved.

Successful counties who've won All Irelands in hurling and football in recent years have used this competition as a launch pad for players with potential, but for whatever reason aren't quite making the cut at senior level. Exactly how a good club team would use their second side.

Any senior intercounty panel these days will use 35 players or therabouts between the panel itself and training games. There will be other lads showing form from club teams, and maybe others would didn't quite make the transition yet from U21 to senior.

This competition needs a rebranding rather than a scrapping. It has potential.

Dublin footballers play all their championship games in Croke Park and while its an advantage to them if the opposition is good enough to beat them they will as Donegal proved last year. Semple Stadium suits us so lets get on with it. They won't like playing against our system and its up to them to come up with a strategy to break us down no matter where its played.

Top drawer wrote: »

It was only a couple months ago that alot of ppl were calling for an 8 team championship including well known journalists in the county, mostly directed at the likes of cappaquin, tallow and roanmore, well here we are 3 games into 2015, tallow 3 wins from 3 and top the group, roanmore 2 wins from 3 and second in group, cappaquin beat lismore. Never see anything wrote about their previous ambitions of an overhaul these days.

Yeh, there was some awful stupid stuff wrote back in the silly season. I suppose journalists have to fill the column inches somehow when there is nothing to report on, so they write all sorts of gibberish, and that’s exactly what it’s proven to be.

At the time I couldn’t understand the sense of alarm being expressed, and reading back through posts it appears some of this rubbish found a few willing messengers on here also. The facts are that in Waterford we currently have, probably the most competitive championship in the country. In the last decade there have been 5 different winners with 9 different clubs making it to the final. In the previous decade there was 2 winners with 5 different teams competing in the final. If the flawed logic espoused this year had been applied to this period then we would just have had Mount Sion and Ballygunner playing against each other year on year, as let’s be honest they were miles ahead of the pack.

But thankfully we didn’t take such a regressive step and consequently it actually forced the other clubs to address their shortcomings in a positive way. In my own club, Abbeyside/Ballinacourty, we completely overhauled our underage structures, put coaches into the local schools and basically developed a system whereby player and skills development were paramount. Similar programmes were implemented in a number of other clubs up and down the county and the result has been that clubs who were also rans 10 years ago are now seriously competing for county titles.

Of course the ultimate benefactors of all this work are our intercounty teams. In my lifetime this is the strongest Waterford hurling has been, the 80’s were a disaster, the 90’s not much better, (92 and 94 apart) and the 00 team whilst full of unbelievably talented individuals just didn’t have the depth required to get over the line. That we now have a seriously strong senior panel and are challenging at underage is a testament to the work put in at club level.

If we were to create an elite then what would be the motivation for clubs to put in this effort?
Do people honestly believe that an 8 team senior championship would be to the benefit of Waterford hurling as a whole? If so I’d be very interested to hear their arguments for same.

Ok rant over.

The blue blaa wrote: »

The Championship is like you said fine doesn't need to be touched, one thing i would like to see is an all County Intermediate Championship as mentioned many a time here before. Even if it was just for 2-3 yrs (first year will always throw out a few minor tweaks maybe regrading seeding of teams) we have the clubs more then able to make it as appealing as our senior competition

I agree with the above entirely. There are currently 22 intermediate clubs in Waterford. Take the top 3 from each group over the eastern and western championships and form a 12 team premier intermediate championship. The remaining 10 teams are joined by the winners of the Junior east and west championships to form a 12 team intermediate championship.

Same thing should be done for the Junior championships and just have junior a, b and so on.

People were suggesting that a Senior B might be appropriate as there were some awful hammerings in the senior championship, and the awful record of our intermediate teams in Munster competitions.

Tallow have beaten Abbeyside and Ballyduff Upper. Teams who people would consider for a senior B in the morning. They drew with DLS in fairness to them, but they'd be very unlikely to do so in a knockout game in the business end of the championship.

Roanmore have beaten a team come up from intermediate, and Mount Sion in fairness to them in a local derby.

I still believe that two extremely competitive competitions would be better than one which is reasonably competitive. I still expect some hammerings to be dished out at the quarter final stages.

Deise_2012 wrote: »

Cappaquin didn't do so bad last year?

Correct, and everyone was delighted. However, I think they were the first Waterford team to win a game at that level for many a year.

Maybe it's worth keeping an eye on for a couple of years more. We're seeing a greater spread of players coming through from junior and intermediate clubs. I think the schools system played a massive part in that, but it might make the overall level a bit more competitive.

MUFC91CS wrote: »

That won't really fix the problem at all though. With a 12 team championship a team down the lower end will play a few teams around their own level and few teams at a higher level. Playing better teams regularly is the only way they will get better.

By having two championships a team will play teams at their own level for a year, then step up a level the following year and will likely be sent back down. It would increase competitiveness for the most part but would do nothing to increase the overall standard of hurling.

A county intermediate championship would increase the overall standard of intermediate hurling which should make the intermediate champions more competitive at senior level.

I disagree. I think the problem was that teams were coming up from an intermediate championship which wasn't up to scratch, and then being faced against the likes of the DLS teams which were challenging for All Irelands or Ballygunner. We were seeing 30 point wins in county semi finals a few years back.

I proposed an all county intermediate, and also an all county intermediate premier/senior b. I think a lot of people saw sense in it, not all.

I would turn the 12 team senior into 8. The bottom four going into the senior b with the four east and west intermediate finalists into another 8. The remainder of teams play in an intermediate all county.

Seven games. Top four move to semi finals. Bottom four into relegation semi finals. Two promoted up and two down from each competition from then on.

I think you'd have three brilliant competitions there now that I think of it. Each game could be vital. At the moment the likes of BG and DLS can probably coast until August.

MUFC91CS wrote: »

I think our sentiments are pretty much the same we just differ on the application of it. The above just pushes the problem imo. The four senior teams sent down will get worse due to playing at a lower level and eventually, over time, the exact same thing will happen where the winners of the senior b championship just get trounced by the stronger senior teams in the senior championship.

Possibly similar sentiments. I think that the senior b is a bridge for teams coming up, and they'll be better for coming through fierce competition.

Both championships will have teams off the pace each year. The more teams you have in a competition the more risk you have of that occuring.

I played on a team one year which was in a transitional period in a really tough competition, and was beaten in all our games as our squad wasn't quite good enough. By the end of the year it was demoralising. The next year we went down and were able to win games, gained promotion, gained confidence, and had a brilliant couple of years afterwards. That reflects the situation Waterford found themselves this year in Div 1b.

I'm all for trying things. One thing for sure is that the current system needs work.

hardybuck wrote: »

Possibly similar sentiments. I think that the senior b is a bridge for teams coming up, and they'll be better for coming through fierce competition.

Both championships will have teams off the pace each year. The more teams you have in a competition the more risk you have of that occuring.

I played on a team one year which was in a transitional period in a really tough competition, and was beaten in all our games as our squad wasn't quite good enough. By the end of the year it was demoralising. The next year we went down and were able to win games, gained promotion, gained confidence, and had a brilliant couple of years afterwards. That reflects the situation Waterford found themselves this year in Div 1b.

I'm all for trying things. One thing for sure is that the current system needs work.

The exact same thing would happen to a team in transition in an eight team championship or a twelve team championship. If a team is not on a level to compete with the other teams in the same competition as them they will inevitably lose regardless of the number of teams.

The more teams a championship has the more chance a weaker team has of having competitive games while still having the benefit of competing against the best. Obviously this has to be done with in reason.

The purpose of the quarter final stage of the league is to give to the division 1b teams a chance to play teams at, or around, their own level but then give them a game against a 1a team. Outside of that it would make no sense that the top four teams in 1b are rewarded the same as the top four teams in 1a despite the quality of opposition they face. Teams still wanna be in 1a for the standard of the opposition even if the chances of reaching a qf are reduced.

MUFC91CS wrote: »

The exact same thing would happen to a team in transition in an eight team championship or a twelve team championship. If a team is not on a level to compete with the other teams in the same competition as them they will inevitably lose regardless of the number of teams.

The more teams a championship has the more chance a weaker team has of having competitive games while still having the benefit of competing against the best. Obviously this has to be done with in reason.

The purpose of the quarter final stage of the league is to give to the division 1b teams a chance to play teams at, or around, their own level but then give them a game against a 1a team. Outside of that it would make no sense that the top four teams in 1b are rewarded the same as the top four teams in 1a despite the quality of opposition they face. Teams still wanna be in 1a for the standard of the opposition even if the chances of reaching a qf are reduced.

Again, I'd disagree. No team benefits from a big scoreline.

The purpose of the quarter final stages of the NHL was political. It was to smooth over some of the teams like Clare and Cork and Limerick getting relegated, and offering them the possibility of a payday.

MUFC91CS wrote: »

There's no doubt your offering your a more competitive structure. Your just doing nothing to increase the overall quality of the competitions. The four teams sent down would play more competitive games but would eventually get worse.

If eight team championship was implemented I would not think one single senior team would offer to be placed in it.

Not if they went back up.

And once again, I think the likes of Ballyduff Upper would get more out of tight games, maybe winning a good few of them, than being beaten by an average of 9 points per game (or 15 v Ballygunner), which they are currently.

Ì agree that no team would volunteer for it. Many clubs don't want all county either. The most simplistic ideas can't be progressed properly in this county.

hardybuck wrote: »

People were suggesting that a Senior B might be appropriate as there were some awful hammerings in the senior championship, and the awful record of our intermediate teams in Munster competitions.

Tallow have beaten Abbeyside and Ballyduff Upper. Teams who people would consider for a senior B in the morning. They drew with DLS in fairness to them, but they'd be very unlikely to do so in a knockout game in the business end of the championship.

Roanmore have beaten a team come up from intermediate, and Mount Sion in fairness to them in a local derby.

I still believe that two extremely competitive competitions would be better than one which is reasonably competitive. I still expect some hammerings to be dished out at the quarter final stages.

Contradictory opinions in that post. You say Tallow ONLY beat Abbeyside and Ballyduff. Yet if Tallow lost to Abbeyside it would be used as proof that Tallow should not be senior. When Abbeyside beat DLS reports were claiming that Abbeyside could be dark horses in this years championship.

As for writing off Roanmore's defeat of Mt. Sion as a local derby result is both unfair to Roanmore and goes against your suggestion of 8 team senior championship. Local derbies are the life and blood of the championship in such a small county. The more local derbies the better as far as I'm concerned. The way it stands at the moment it could be Lismore v Ballyduff in the relegation play off. This could draw a huge crowd possibly only beaten by the county final itself. Roanmore are deserving of their position in the group at the moment and have gotten their by getting the best out of their players through coaching and tactics. Not by going out and signing a player from another club to solve problem positions.

You claim that Abbeyside and Ballyduff would be involved in most peoples picks for Senior B grade. But why? Ballyduff won county in 2007 and Abbeyside got to county final in 2008. These teams deserve their place in Senior championship because they fight tooth and nail during their lean years to retain their status. At the start of the year Lismore beat Mt. Sion to win Sergent Cup. No one would suggest Lismore should be Senior B but look at their results this year!! The are in a transition period and will learn from struggles of this year.

deiseach wrote: »

The best thing about the current NHL format is that the team promoted from Division 2 - they should be promoted automatically in my opinion, but that's another debate - doesn't run into a perfect storm of opponents in Division 1. I recall back in the late 90's how counties like Derry and Down were being asked to play in a six-team division full of All-Ireland contenders. Kerry will look at 1B next season and think they have a chance of survival and carrying on with their upward curve. Might such a setup not work better for the Intermediate county champions?

I agree with that absolutely. The goal of the Kerry hurlers will be to avoid relegation and they'll probably target the games against Laois and Offally to try and achieve this. This does not mean that the more than certain loses against Limerick and Clare will not stand to them either. You keep playing teams at a certain level and eventually you will end up on that level. The Kerry hurlers are still likely to ship beatings in division 1b which was the above posters reasoning for wanting to change the structure of the senior hurling championship.

I'm personally of the opinion that they are better off playing in a six team 1b while playing superior teams than, say, playing in a three team 1b2 (where teams play each other twice) with only Laois and Offaly even though they would be more competitive.

hardybuck wrote: »

As with all change, it needs to be communicated properly and an implementation plan put around it.

You're not telling teams that they're not good enough, you're offering a more competitive structure.

By limiting the number of teams to 8 I think you’re in massive danger of creating an elite that would become increasingly more difficult to break into.

For any club coming up from intermediate the first year or two in the top level is about consolidation. I know from experience with my own club the year following promotion we had a few tough outings and were involved in the relegation play off. Thankfully we got through it and went on to contest the final 3 years later. Under an 8 team system we probably wouldn't have survived.

The step up between grades is massive at all levels of the game, as we've seen brutally demonstrated in the intercounty championship this week.
Would you envisage some kind of grace period for teams coming up?

Roy Coates wrote: »

Well I think he has a point in relation to your condescending tone towards his club.

I think this is better approached by responding on a factual basis, rather than inferring and reading between the lines.

I think when Tallow are good they've been very good. When they've been bad they've been very bad. Overall a mid ranking senior side and I'm sure making quite good use of limited resources. I don't think you are in the shake up for a title, you're probably not going to be in danger of relegation either.

If you feel that is condescending then I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm calling it as I see it.

hardybuck wrote: »

I think this is better approached by responding on a factual basis, rather than inferring and reading between the lines.

I think when Tallow are good they've been very good. When they've been bad they've been very bad. Overall a mid ranking senior side and I'm sure making quite good use of limited resources. I don't think you are in the shake up for a title, you're probably not going to be in danger of relegation either.

If you feel that is condescending then I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm calling it as I see it.

I'm from Abbeyside mate, so here are a few facts for you.

We won the intermediate in 2003. Since then we have contested 1 county final, 3 semi finals and 9 quarter finals. However in your utopian vision of the senior championship we would be considered a B team in the morning. Can you please outline the exact criteria that must be met to be a real senior team?

Roy Coates wrote: »

Can you please outline the exact criteria that must be met to be a real senior team?

Don't finish in the bottom 2-4 of the senior championship, as per my proposal.

hardybuck wrote: »

Don't finish in the bottom 2-4 of the senior championship, as per my proposal.

We haven't done so in the last 5 or 6 years. So micktallow was correct, you were contradicting yourself in your initial post this morning.

mickotallow wrote: »

So why are you suggesting Tallow or Abbeyside would be people's choice for Senior B?

Well played on Tuesday by the way Mick. I didn't make it down myself (who's idea was it to play championship games in the middle of the week ffs) but from what I've heard ye were well worth the win.

Hopefully we'll get another cut off ye later on and if not shur we'll meet in the B championshp next year

Roy Coates wrote: »

Well played on Tuesday by the way Mick. I didn't make it down myself (who's idea was it to play championship games in the middle of the week ffs) but from what I've heard ye were well worth the win.

Hopefully we'll get another cut off ye later on and if not shur we'll meet in the B championshp next year

Haha nice one. Thanks. I know for a fact our management team tried in vain to get this game changed from the Tuesday night but the county board were not for turning. They knew there was a distinct possibility that the Waterford footballers could be playing qualifiers that weekend yet they still fixed a round of hurling for that weekend. Basic planning f**k up.

mickotallow wrote:

Haha nice one. Thanks. I know for a fact our management team tried in vain to get this game changed from the Tuesday night but the county board were not for turning. They knew there was a distinct possibility that the Waterford footballers could be playing qualifiers that weekend yet they still fixed a round of hurling for that weekend. Basic planning f**k up.

It's like our showcase competition is an inconvenience to our esteemed county board.