Delegates against move to strengthen bigger clubs

The Rosemount club called for players to be allowed to play two championship games at senior or intermediate level before they can be prevented from playing in the junior championship.

They raised the issue by way of a motion to the recent county convention, but failed to secure enough support, with weaker clubs stressing they would face unfair competition. And in general it was accepted that senior clubs are already of sufficient strength to cope and the onus is on them to manage player participation better.

Jim Whelan, Rosemount, said smaller senior clubs with small panels should be allowed to play two games rather than one. The feeling was that these clubs can struggle to field a team when it comes to the latter stages of the junior championship, where their second string side are operating.

“We were near enough in the situation this year, but we had just 16 players to play junior because players had to go with the intermediate team,” he said.

Seamus Ennis (St Malachy’s) pointed out that senior clubs with small panel who have to contend with injuries can suffer. They would support it on the basis of the smaller club mentality.

Ballycomoyle spoke against it, however, pointing out that sole junior clubs have to contend with injuries also. Aidan Keogh said it would be very unfair on the junior clubs for the senior clubs to be allowed such a luxury.

Frank Mescall, chairman, felt it would be beneficial only for the bigger clubs with superior player numbers. He appreciated the Rosemount view, but urged caution.

Delvin’s Sean O’Brien strongly opposed the motion. He said the junior 2 championship, set up to help junior clubs which are struggling, has been dominated by second teams of senior clubs.

“We were delighted to be in the final this year; we played a senior team in the final (Coralstown/Kinnegad). They were worthy winners, but had they been able to call on one or two extra players to help them out, because some had played in senior, it would really have tipped the balance strongly in their favour," he remarked.

"I would ask that the motion be opposed by all here for the benefit of the smaller junior clubs who are doing their best to promote the game."

Nollaig McEntegart, St Mary’s Rochfortbridge, said if the motion was successful, the first two rounds of the junior championship would be very unbalanced.

“I don’t know how it would work; I don’t think it’s practical,” he added.

The motion could go to congress with an addition to Rule 10.7, Mr Mescall explained, but changing it to two players would strengthen the hand of the senior clubs.

Tony Robinson, St Loman’s Mullingar, felt there needs to be some compromise. He said the club had a player who came on as a blood sub in senior and got no more junior championship games. He played no football as a result for the rest of the season.

“Managers nowadays, they don’t care. He brought on a player with three minutes left in a championship game and he got no more football either that same year. So, we are trying our best to provide football and there needs to be something looked at where a player is blood-subbed, or subbed up in a championship game, who cannot play any more (at junior). We have to think of those players.

“I think if a player is subbed up he should be allowed to play,” he said.

Frank Mescall advised that a player used as blood sub in senior can play at junior level again. “He is an exception to the rule already. He is looked after,” the chairman explained.

Sean Carroll (The Downs) objected to the motion, saying it would be unfair on the weaker clubs and he felt managers need to be curtailed if they are leaving players without games as a result of making substitutions for the sake of it.

“If you play in the senior championship, that’s (down to) their own management in the club. But I would totally agree with Delvin: you could play in the senior championship and junior championship for two rounds (if this was introduced),” he added.

Following a vote, it was soundly defeated.