FAIR play to the Monasterevin GAA club in Kildare , who'll be brining a motion to Congress seeking the overturning of the ban on 17-year-olds playing adult matches which was brought in last year . Club secretary Dominic Stapleton says the motion "has had a detrimental effect on small/rural clubs throughout the country. I have engaged with numerous club administrators and members in a lot of counties and everyone agreed that this made the survival of the rural GAA club even more challenging than it had traditionally been. Some see it as potentially being the straw to break the camel's back." He's right.
Monasterevin's motion was passed unanimously at the Kildare Convention and a similar motion by the Courtwood club in Laois met with the same result at the Laois Convention.
Anyone with any interest in the plight of the GAA's smaller clubs should get behind these motions and make sure they're passed at Congress. The original ban was a classic piece of Politically Correct piety, and if the motion is passed it will be a declaration that these clubs, rather than the Croke Park hierarchy know what is best for their future. Who could disagree with that?

Breffnisbest (Cavan) - Posts: 471 - 08/02/2017 13:25:53    1953616

The original law was grand if you were Kilmacud Crokes or some other super club in Dublin but it was the death knell for a number of second teams in rural Ireland last year....like something Fine Gael would come up with to finish off rural Ireland!

hurler32 (Limerick) - Posts: 867 - 08/02/2017 14:20:39    1953637

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 08/02/2017 14:45:18    1953649

neverright (Roscommon) - Posts: 1648 - 08/02/2017 15:28:50    1953667

I don't agree with the consensus here.

If a club can't field teams with players out of u17 then you know what maybe it just shouldn't have a team.

I think the well being of young players is more important than the limping on of some clubs.

A line has to be drawn at some point. A lot of under 17s are capable of playing adult but a lot aren't. I've seen plenty of instances in the past of players being fielded to make up numbers who simply should not having been on the pitch. I know the precise age is arbitrary but it has to be drawn somewhere. With minor now being under 17 it makes sense that's the age.

More consolidation of clubs might be a good thing in rural counties. Would increase the average standard.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4207 - 08/02/2017 16:40:19    1953699

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 08/02/2017 17:38:34    1953719

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 08/02/2017 18:20:31    1953732

It's a tough one. I was 15 when I first togged senior out of necessity for numbers, I was big for my age, following year I was bigger again and a regular in the junior team, I was pole axed by an oul lad to " slow me down" So no matter how big or good a 17 year old is there's still that chance of being physically hurt or indeed done!

That's the only slight negative I'd have on it, other than that no problem if they are up to the speed of the game

Brianmac78 (Dublin) - Posts: 1168 - 08/02/2017 18:37:56    1953740

A line every old thug gives a young lads on the opposite team when he clatteres you 'welcome to senior/inter/junior football'. Still can feel and hear my teeth rattling today when I think of the hefty shoulder he gave me years ago

riverboys (Mayo) - Posts: 1389 - 08/02/2017 20:33:17    1953801

I wasn't in favour of the rule first but I've come around to accepting it. Going back on it now would hardly be a positive step.

keeper7 (Longford) - Posts: 4088 - 08/02/2017 21:17:57    1953813

Have to agree with Whammo86 Like realistically how many u-17's would be on your adult team? It's a great rule and i fully support it & i come from a club with about 190 adult members.

lasertech (UK) - Posts: 129 - 08/02/2017 21:45:26    1953824

No, To much stress , Most likely to retire young , Definite injury problems , Should play with people in there own age group , issues with club fixtures. should be left to 19 or 20 . all you would need is a real hard shoulder from somebody much stronger and bigger than you or be completely humiliated by a more skilful and experienced player . Minor is fine for that age .

oakleafersir (Derry) - Posts: 808 - 08/02/2017 21:51:57    1953826

I originally opposed the rule change on the grounds of that it had to do with been PC. However on reflection, I think it's a good idea as i know from recent experience that clubs over play these youngsters. It happened in our club 2 years ago. The same player is considering not playing this year as a 19 year old.

downtheroad (Laois) - Posts: 21 - 08/02/2017 22:37:58    1953841

It was a crazy rule brought in from the northern counties,hopefully common sense will return

cityman73 (Limerick) - Posts: 775 - 08/02/2017 22:38:03    1953842

FAIR play to the Monasterevin GAA club in Kildare, who'll be brining a motion to Congress seeking the overturning of the ban on 17-year-olds playing adult matches which was brought in last year. Club secretary Dominic Stapleton says the motion "has had a detrimental effect on small/rural clubs throughout the country. I have engaged with numerous club administrators and members in a lot of counties and everyone agreed that this made the survival of the rural GAA club even more challenging than it had traditionally been. Some see it as potentially being the straw to break the camel's back." He's right. Monasterevin's motion was passed unanimously at the Kildare Convention and a similar motion by the Courtwood club in Laois met with the same result at the Laois Convention. Anyone with any interest in the plight of the GAA's smaller clubs should get behind these motions and make sure they're passed at Congress. The original ban was a classic piece of Politically Correct piety, and if the motion is passed it will be a declaration that these clubs, rather than the Croke Park hierarchy know what is best for their future. Who could disagree with that? Breffnisbest (Cavan) - Posts:289 - 08/02/2017 13:25:53Why is this motion needed. If clubs cant field open age adult teams without 17 year olds then they have a lot of issues within their own club they need to sort out not any change to regulations that exist to prevent burnout amongst many players at this age. What age should you be playing adult level then?
We already have too many 17/18 year olds playing minor/u21/junior or senior and the same again in hurling. Then they may be on school teams by 2 and if theyre a county player another team... when is enough enough?

The original law was grand if you were Kilmacud Crokes or some other super club in Dublin but it was the death knell for a number of second teams in rural Ireland last year....like something Fine Gael would come up with to finish off rural Ireland!
hurler32 (Limerick) - Posts:759 - 08/02/2017 14:20:39 Every club bar maybe 1 or 2 in North Tipp fields 2 teams and this ruling wont change that and most clubs field 3 and some field 4. This ruling wont change that and helps protect some younger players from playing too high a level too early.

Totally agree, I know some clubs in Dublin that don't have super club status and this did affect them, god only knows how hard it was felt in rural areas
Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts:3661 - 08/02/2017 14:45:18Whats the alternative? And what would you do otherwise?

It is a ridiculous rule. Even a 16 year old can play soccer in the English Premiership.
neverright (Roscommon) - Posts:624 - 08/02/2017 15:28:50But thats completely different. A 17 year not playing adult hurling/gaelic will also be in school and possibly on county teams and playing u21. A 16 year kid can premiership soccer will be a pro first of all which is very different and wont be playing on 6/7 different teams.

I don't agree with the consensus here. If a club can't field teams with players out of u17 then you know what maybe it just shouldn't have a team.
I think the well being of young players is more important than the limping on of some clubs.
A line has to be drawn at some point. A lot of under 17s are capable of playing adult but a lot aren't. I've seen plenty of instances in the past of players being fielded to make up numbers who simply should not having been on the pitch. I know the precise age is arbitrary but it has to be drawn somewhere. With minor now being under 17 it makes sense that's the age.
More consolidation of clubs might be a good thing in rural counties. Would increase the average standard.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts:1282 - 08/02/2017 16:40:19spot on

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 08/02/2017 22:41:58    1953844

Have to agree with the ruling, 17 is not classed as an adult even in legal terms. Nothing to do with northern counties bringing in silly rules but an attempt to try to protect younger players who are being pulled from pillar to post if they are a skilful player and even more so if a dual player. If clubs are worried about fielding senior teams then I would suggest that getting the rule on team numbers would be a better way to go and if clubs can't field 13 players then it's time to pull the team and look about temporary adult team amalgamation until sufficient numbers are available. Plenty of clubs up and down the country amalgamate at youth level to get lads games.

bulmccabe (Tyrone) - Posts: 361 - 09/02/2017 02:36:23    1953869

downtheroad (Laois) - Posts: 21 - 09/02/2017 20:56:58    1954190

I love to be involved with some of your clubs loads of players but I live in the real world where the gaa is on its last legs and we are trying to keep it going but the big clubs say you can't play a 17 player so your logic says Its the clubs fault the other 14 lads should go off and not play big thanks,but I'm I have faith the gaa will make the right call

cityman73 (Limerick) - Posts: 775 - 10/02/2017 14:40:18    1954405

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4207 - 10/02/2017 15:19:23    1954423

Most 17 year olds don't get enough games!

Most went into a junior B team and got a few league games

I hope this is passed at congress

valley84 (Westmeath) - Posts: 1890 - 10/02/2017 20:18:37    1954515