Carbury v Monasterevin U21 B Shield Final Saturday 19 November 2011 2.30 pm

Folks

For whom it may concern , the above match will now take place in Clane and not Rathangan. I have just been informed by the Carbury Club Secretary.

Best of luck to both teams.

Thanks TC, Might go to that, not a lot else on. Who will be favs for this? have Carbury many of their seniors u21?

SeamusMurphy

None would you believe. Carbury will be underdogs but should give it a good rattle.

Majority of the Carbury team are U16 and minor I believe!

is the A shield final on this weekend

How do they (Carbury) do it?
They play most grades underage down in the lower divisions or B & C Championships. Yet they remain comfortable in Senior league div 1 and were in Senior Champ Final this Year.
Fair play to them.

From what I've seen of both teams, I'd give Carbury a real shout. In fact I thought they'd be favourites.

White Bridge wrote:

Majority of the Carbury team are U16 and minor I believe!

not suppose to be playing under 16 players

Both teams play u16 players, as a matter of fact I'm aware of several clubs who had to or not field at all

Your spot on there ballyboy.
There would probably have been no u21 B Champ if they didnt.
I know of at least 3 Clubs in the A Champ who also played u 16s.
Cant see Monasterevin being too strong from what I saw of their Intermediates this Year.

Was anyone at this match? I didnt manage to make it after.

Monasterevin 2-6 Carbury 2-5

I said here a few weeks ago IF UR GOOD ENOUGH, UR OLD ENOUGH.

But I was shot down by 'experts'. Simple fact of football, it happens. Get over it!

are the rules a bit cloudy on this. seems some clubs are getting exemptions and others not. this is the first i have heard of this and i might add there are one or two u 16s in my area who would have being plenty good enough to make our team or at least our squad but we obeyed the rules and didnt have them with the panel. i understand its for clubs struggling for numbers but every country club struggles to field teams at this level.

Was suprised to see Monasterevin won, fair play to them after what they went trough in the inter champ.
Was there many u 16s involved in the match on both sides? By the way im not stirring here, but its an interesting topic, and might lead to more clarity on the rules.
I know people will come on here and state some rule 007 or something, but we have to live in the real world, and maybe its time for an u 20 championship instead of the Aldridge cup etc?

the rule is black and white whether we agree with it or not. the big problem is that an u/16 won't be covered by insurance and if and when a club objects some innocent young lad will end up suspended for 6 months

lillyboy wrote:

the rule is black and white whether we agree with it or not. the big problem is that an u/16 won't be covered by insurance and if and when a club objects some innocent young lad will end up suspended for 6 months

Correct about the insurance, incorrect about the suspension - it's a two-week suspension for the player.

Like many rules in the GAA and indeed in the world, it is a rule to be seen to be addressing an issue but is not being applied because anecdotal evidence suggests that certainly more than 50% of teams are playing U16 players and even more than that in U21. I know that as someone that has been involved in teams at U16, minor, U21 and senior at management level, I would be mortified to object to a team playing a player too young and would consider any club that would do it a laughing stock.

Ogie wrote:

lillyboy wrote:

the rule is black and white whether we agree with it or not. the big problem is that an u/16 won't be covered by insurance and if and when a club objects some innocent young lad will end up suspended for 6 months

Correct about the insurance, incorrect about the suspension - it's a two-week suspension for the player.

Like many rules in the GAA and indeed in the world, it is a rule to be seen to be addressing an issue but is not being applied because anecdotal evidence suggests that certainly more than 50% of teams are playing U16 players and even more than that in U21. I know that as someone that has been involved in teams at U16, minor, U21 and senior at management level, I would be mortified to object to a team playing a player too young and would consider any club that would do it a laughing stock.

Ogie I find that hard to believe that more than 50% of teams (I presume you mean adult teams) are breaking this rule. I am aware of a couple of cases over the past few years but cannot believe it's as widespread as you say.

On the issue of objecting and being a laughing stock, consider the Club that has an exceptional u/16 but doesn't play him in order to be compliant with the rules. Why should they be put at a disadvantage because another Club decides they're going to play their u/16 guy because he's better than the alternative "legal" alternative that they have. In an instance like that I'd have no sympathy for the Club breaking the rule if the other Club decided to object.

Something just occured to me regarding the ruling..
The Monasterevin v Carbury match was played on the 19th of November, and all U 16 Players were NOT Legal / OR insured. Now correct me if I am wrong, but these same U 16 Players, in approx 6 weeks, or from 01/01/2012 can Legally and Insured play Senior / Inter / Junior Football with their Clubs?, Against Men of all ages. Yeah that seems like a flippin marvelous rule.

Cavan's Swanlibar have objected to the result of last Sunday's AIB Ulster junior club football final on the grounds that opponents Corduff fielded an ineligible player.

Swad, who lost the Kingspan/Breffni Park decider to the Monaghan champions on a 0-8 to 2-7 scoreline, claim that Corduff fielded a player who was not eligible to play in adult championship football as per Rule 6.18 of the Official Guide.



They contend that Corduff substitute Padraic Keenan, who was came on during the second half and scored a vital goal, breaches the rule as he is still an under 16 player. A player must be 17 or over to play adult championship football.
If the objection succeeds, Corduff could be stripped of the title and the game awarded to Swanlinbar





THIS WAS THE CASE IN LAST YEARS ULSTER JUNIOR CHAMPIONSHIP. CORDUFF WERE STRIPPED OF THEIR TITLE AND SWANLINBAR WENT ON TO REPRESENT ULSTER AND IN THE END WERE BEATEN IN THE ALL IRELAND FINAL . I DONT AGREE WITH THE OBJECTION BUT I SUPPOSE BLACK IS BLACK AND WHITE IS WHITE LADS