J4/5 (Social Rugby) Season 2014/2015

stephen_n

cloneslad wrote: »

I really hope teams abide by that. Last year nobody won the cup because of a team playing bangers and we had some serious injuries out of playing against a team who did.

Hopefully the sanctions against the clubs will deter a repeat of that.

jamesbondings

cloneslad wrote: »

I really hope teams abide by that. Last year nobody won the cup because of a team playing bangers and we had some serious injuries out of playing against a team who did.

was that the one where the scrumhalf done me?

.ak

Clip from Clontarf's div6 league final win over Naas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apGt4Vc81GI

Tim Robbins

.ak wrote: »

Clip from Clontarf's div6 league final win over Naas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apGt4Vc81GI

The Ref left the Naas for dead. Fair play to him.

jamesbondings

judging by camera height i assume this was fully recorded?wouldnt mind having a look at it if you know who has it ak??

feel bad i couldnt be there with both little and bigger (or vice versa) jamesbondings there taking part!

.ak

jamesbondings wrote: »

judging by camera height i assume this was fully recorded?wouldnt mind having a look at it if you know who has it ak??

feel bad i couldnt be there with both little and bigger (or vice versa) jamesbondings there taking part!

Not sure, I'll find out tho. Don't think the whole thing was recorded. Couldn't make it myself as I was away but looked like good craic!

That step from KC on the right wing... :eek: that's why I hate trying to tackle him...

cloneslad

there was a guy up there recording it, but I have no idea who he was. He seemed to be recording the entire game and a little hand held.

stephen_n

cloneslad wrote: »

there was a guy up there recording it, but I have no idea who he was. He seemed to be recording the entire game and a little hand held.

Big Brother

ArmchairQB

The Naas team looked way off the pace some big tired boys there!

gaius c

ArmchairQB wrote: »

The Naas team looked way off the pace some big tired boys there!

They are a fairly enormous team for that level and most sides struggle to live with that power and play their own rugby.

gaius c

Also, three conceded games in the O'Connor cup is very disappointing.

shoutman

gaius c wrote: »

Also, three conceded games in the O'Connor cup is very disappointing.

Make that four!

I don't see how this could happen when I assume clubs had to actively put forward their teams into the cup?

Dubh_Ghaill

Played all season uncontested yet there was confusion right up to the first scrum with the opposition saying it was contested since it was cup rugby. They may have been correct but if so a strange decision by branch to suddenly change mid season. The ref called uncontested and from a safety point of view I think he made the right call in the absence of clarification.

Squidgy Black

Dubh_Ghaill wrote: »

Played all season uncontested yet there was confusion right up to the first scrum with the opposition saying it was contested since it was cup rugby. They may have been correct but if so a strange decision by branch to suddenly change mid season. The ref called uncontested and from a safety point of view I think he made the right call in the absence of clarification.

Bit of confusion in our game as well, but the ref and both teams agreed to go uncontested from the start. We were told we would have to contest or else forfeit but apparently the ref was fine with not contesting once both teams agreed.

stephen_n

What level is the O'Connor cup (lose track of which is which)


J5 has the option to go uncontested, there's no difference between the cup or league AFAIK

Pudsy33

O'Connor is J5 I think. We have been uncontested all season bar one game.

The Lost Sheep

Dubh_Ghaill wrote: »

Played all season uncontested yet there was confusion right up to the first scrum with the opposition saying it was contested since it was cup rugby. They may have been correct but if so a strange decision by branch to suddenly change mid season. The ref called uncontested and from a safety point of view I think he made the right call in the absence of clarification.

Opposition were wrong. Referee was spot on in calling uncontested as dangerous to play contested in the circumstances

stephen_n wrote: »

What level is the O'Connor cup (lose track of which is which)
J5 has the option to go uncontested, there's no difference between the cup or league AFAIK

OConnor is j5, division 10/11.
There shouldn't be any difference between league and cup and if there is that needs to change tbh

stephen_n

It would be insane to expect teams who haven't had to contest all season long, to contest in a cup, would be asking for trouble.

Dubh_Ghaill

That's what I thought, illogical to play all season uncontested and then just before kickoff to discover it was contested.

However we did hear the same story about contested from our side so the opposition wasn't imagining it. We just didn't think it made sense at all.

J5 Cup is Metro 9/10/11

4 games conceded was a real pity.

stephen_n

I'd assume the rule of having to play 4 league games to be eligible affected teams ability to field. It used to be the extras and a few older players looking for a cup run would make up the lower cup teams in many clubs. I played a J8 cup game in the early 90's with Paul McNaughton, Johhny Murphy and Tony Doyle, 3 ex internationals (well retired), bit of a bizzare team to play with.

eoferrall

Dubh_Ghaill wrote: »

Played all season uncontested yet there was confusion right up to the first scrum with the opposition saying it was contested since it was cup rugby. They may have been correct but if so a strange decision by branch to suddenly change mid season. The ref called uncontested and from a safety point of view I think he made the right call in the absence of clarification.

_Tyrrell_ wrote: »

Bit of confusion in our game as well, but the ref and both teams agreed to go uncontested from the start. We were told we would have to contest or else forfeit but apparently the ref was fine with not contesting once both teams agreed.

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Opposition were wrong. Referee was spot on in calling uncontested as dangerous to play contested in the circumstances

OConnor is j5, division 10/11.
There shouldn't be any difference between league and cup and if there is that needs to change tbh

rules are in the J5 cup the scrums are contested, the league isn't uncontested. By default it is contested but if a full front row can not be fielded then it goes uncontested.

In the Cup both teams are supposed to field front row to contest. if a team has been playing the same player as prop all season and not coached them to prop then that is the bigger issue. the team is just not bothering and therefore avoiding a key area of the game, and probably because they are weaker and thus nullifying a teams strength.

Squidgy Black

eoferrall wrote: »

In the Cup both teams are supposed to field front row to contest. if a team has been playing the same player as prop all season and not coached them to prop then that is the bigger issue. the team is just not bothering and therefore avoiding a key area of the game, and probably because they are weaker and thus nullifying a teams strength.

We're a J6 team, it's a J5 cup. Chances are most of the players aren't exactly regulars to training, and they aren't looking for individual training for front rows, hence why they'd be playing that level.

gaius c

shoutman wrote: »

Make that four!

I don't see how this could happen when I assume clubs had to actively put forward their teams into the cup?

It's a bit mad because clubs have to pay money to enter the competition and then they concede in the first round.

Cup rugby always has contested scrums. The rationale being that divisions 10 and 11 are beginner leagues but by April, you no longer have total beginners in the team.

Besides, the O'Connor cup now includes most division 9 teams and they contest scrums all year round. Why deprive them of a possible significant advantage?

I see that some of the J5 teams were busy regrading players for the cup. Fairly disappointing to have teams being stacked like this, even if it is technically legal.

gaius c

stephen_n wrote: »

I'd assume the rule of having to play 4 league games to be eligible affected teams ability to field. It used to be the extras and a few older players looking for a cup run would make up the lower cup teams in many clubs. I played a J8 cup game in the early 90's with Paul McNaughton, Johhny Murphy and Tony Doyle, 3 ex internationals (well retired), bit of a bizzare team to play with.

I think this rule is getting "conveniently" ignored. I did a spot check and none of the 4 teams I looked at adhered to it.

eoferrall

_Tyrrell_ wrote: »

We're a J6 team, it's a J5 cup. Chances are most of the players aren't exactly regulars to training, and they aren't looking for individual training for front rows, hence why they'd be playing that level.

Apologies if I picked you up wrong, yes J6 isn't in the O'Connor Cup as it is only for divisions 9-11. Fairly sure the old J5 is divisions 10 and 11.

Isn't the "j6" cup only a cup with no metro league? and designed for pure beginners and therefore is not the O'Connor cup which is for divisions 9-11. In that case yes I would agree it should be uncontested, I thought someone was talking about O'Connor cup.

Not sure of the "J6" cup, but I would say the confusion arises in the belief cup rugby is contested scrums. but if you entered the "J5" cup then why give out about the rules?

Squidgy Black

eoferrall wrote: »

Apologies if I picked you up wrong, yes J6 isn't in the O'Connor Cup as it is only for divisions 9-11. Fairly sure the old J5 is divisions 10 and 11.

Isn't the "j6" cup only a cup with no metro league? and designed for pure beginners and therefore is not the O'Connor cup which is for divisions 9-11. In that case yes I would agree it should be uncontested, I thought someone was talking about O'Connor cup.

Not sure of the "J6" cup, but I would say the confusion arises in the belief cup rugby is contested scrums. but if you entered the "J5" cup then why give out about the rules?

Wasn't giving out about the rules. But very few if any of the teams that are J5 contest, Terenure haven't contested all year, our J5s rarely do either.

eoferrall

_Tyrrell_ wrote: »

Wasn't giving out about the rules. But very few if any of the teams that are J5 contest, Terenure haven't contested all year, our J5s rarely do either.

pretty sure we contested against Terenure, but I wasn't in the pack so I may have forgotten.

We have definitely contested matches if not most, and definitely start off trying to contest, but may have no subs if one comes off.

Probably just a bit Irked because the Ref would not let the teams contest on Saturday, despite being requested to. Unfortunately for him, the assessor said after it should have been contested!

stephen_n

It seems stupid to me to force teams who don't have front row players to contest scrums, j5 is development rugby but you can't just manufacture props. The contesting rule is unenforceable anyway, all you have to do is start a player who goes off injured before the first scrum and the rule is bypassed anyway. There is no advantage to rugby as a whole putting players off the game by forcing them into dangerous positions.

cloneslad

stephen_n wrote: »

It seems stupid to me to force teams who don't have front row players to contest scrums, j5 is development rugby but you can't just manufacture props. The contesting rule is unenforceable anyway, all you have to do is start a player who goes off injured before the first scrum and the rule is bypassed anyway. There is no advantage to rugby as a whole putting players off the game by forcing them into dangerous positions.

The rule for divisions above 10 and 11 is that you need to have a sub prop and a sub hooker. Should you have to go uncontested at any stage of the game you have to drop a player and do down to 14, but you still must keep 8 in the scrum.

I think this rule then applies to teams in the O'Connor Cup.

Teferi

So on Friday night I competed in my second final of the season and for the second time this season I competed in a final against a team that was bangered up to its eyeballs.

It was the final of the Moran Cup and Mary's fielded a team that would compete easily at J1 level and above.

Their team played no less than 7 players who have played on their AIL team in the very recent past. Those 7 players include 3 players who captained their AIL side (including one who captained them to their league victory a few years ago) and who is capped at club international level.

This is the same Mary's team who came second last in their Division, winning a mere 4 games throughout the season and narrowly avoiding relegation. Oh, and they also conceded no less than two games throughout the year.



Serious turnaround for a team like that.

I know nothing will be done by the Branch but it was an absolute jokeshop of a match.

I appreciate Mary's are in a poor place at the moment and must be absolutely desperate for silverware but to field a team like that at J3 level is just embarrassing for them to be quite honest.

I'm so salty about this it is unreal.

gaius c

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!

gaius c

cloneslad wrote: »

The rule for divisions above 10 and 11 is that you need to have a sub prop and a sub hooker. Should you have to go uncontested at any stage of the game you have to drop a player and do down to 14, but you still must keep 8 in the scrum.

I think this rule then applies to teams in the O'Connor Cup.

That isn't strictly correct. If your sub prop or hooker gets injured, having already replaced an injured starter, you can go uncontested with no penalty.

Teferi

:rolleyes:

Blizzards

How very Terenure of them!!

jamesbondings

disappointing if true from marys, tbf to them, the last few seasons they have put a huge effort into bringing in new players AND playing development squads in the j5 and j6 leagues. But you do always expect it from nure!

*this are just my opinions do not lambaste me for them lol

shoutman

Regardless of who the game was against, you hate to see this happening.
In the O'Connor cup we (clontarf) played three games, and I think we can safely say that we didn't come up against a team that was out and out bangered up. It makes a huge change form previous years, and actually made the cup run enjoyable (despite losing in the semis.)

If these acquisitions are true, I hope that Mary's get penalised for it.

Teferi

Blizzards wrote: »

How very Terenure of them!!

:rolleyes:

So instead of countering my points or replying to my comment in any way you just attacked a club mindlessly?

If you haven't got anything useful to contribute best to not say anything at all lest you look like a fool.

jamesbondings wrote: »

disappointing if true from marys, tbf to them, the last few seasons they have put a huge effort into bringing in new players AND playing development squads in the j5 and j6 leagues. But you do always expect it from nure!

*this are just my opinions do not lambaste me for them lol

There's no "if" about it. It's true.

I've been playing at all sorts of Junior levels for many years now and never has half an AIL squad joined me for a game. Would have been useful for some games let me tell you.

shoutman wrote: »

Regardless of who the game was against, you hate to see this happening.
In the O'Connor cup we (clontarf) played three games, and I think we can safely say that we didn't come up against a team that was out and out bangered up. It makes a huge change form previous years, and actually made the cup run enjoyable (despite losing in the semis.)

If these acquisitions are true, I hope that Mary's get penalised for it.

Again, no "if" about it. The Mary's team was in black and white on the match program, have a picture of it and happy to show it to anyone who wants to see for themselves.

stephen_n

Teferi wrote: »

:rolleyes:

So instead of countering my points or replying to my comment in any way you just attacked a club mindlessly?

If you haven't got anything useful to contribute best to not say anything at all lest you look like a fool.



There's no "if" about it. It's true.

I've been playing at all sorts of Junior levels for many years now and never has half an AIL squad joined me for a game. Would have been useful for some games let me tell you.



Again, no "if" about it. The Mary's team was in black and white on the match program, have a picture of it and happy to show it to anyone who wants to see for themselves.

Hopefully then Marys will be punished at all levels next year.

gaius c

stephen_n wrote: »

Hopefully then Marys will be punished at all levels next year.

More than likely the players were actually legal. I've seen the teamsheet and the likes of H and L haven't played rugby at all this year so in all likelihood, they are probably legal at this level for the cup. "Retired" superstars coming back for the cups is a regular feature of the cups and always has been. It's part of what makes the cups so frustrating but they can only be punished if they break an actual rule. The only restriction on retired players in the junior leagues and cups is if they are ex-pros.

Poor form for Marys doing it but it's happening across the cups in fact. In the Winters cup, all the division 6 teams have been knocked out. Only 1 of the 5 division 6 teams made it to the quarters and only 1 of the 5 was knocked out by another div 6 team.

Being privy to the going-ons at committee level, there have been a lot of players regraded for the cups. In retrospect, once the committee sit down and have a look at the number of regraded players who subsequently played at their original level after they "helped" the lower level team, they might accept that they got played somewhat.

Teferi
The only reason you're getting the response you have is your club's previous attitude to playing high level players in lower level leagues. I'm thinking primarily of the J5 league that basically had to be scrapped because Terenure refused to move into a league more suited for their ability level.
Two wrongs don't make a right but what goes around, comes around.

Teferi

gaius c wrote: »

Teferi
The only reason you're getting the response you have is your club's previous attitude to playing high level players in lower level leagues. I'm thinking primarily of the J5 league that basically had to be scrapped because Terenure refused to move into a league more suited for their ability level.
Two wrongs don't make a right but what goes around, comes around.

I'm aware of that team, about 6 - 7 years ago now. Time for people to get over it.

As I said, I've never played with half an AIL team.

Based on the attitudes here nothing will change. Hopefully if I compete in finals next year we can get a few retired AIL players down and win the cups. If you can't beat them, join them.

Teferi

Teferi wrote: »

I'm aware of that team, about 6 - 7 years ago now. Time for people to get over it.

Hilariously, at the time the Branch made lots of noise and threw their weight around about not letting that happen again.

Good to see they've followed through.

:rolleyes:

gaius c

6-7 years?
Try 3 years.
http://www.leinsterrugbydomestic.com/league/27403/j5_league
That was the last year of the J5 league in it's old format. They refused to move up to J4D for the 4th year running and due to protests from all the other clubs sick of getting beaten out the gate, the league had to be changed to a different format (which didn't work) and laid the way for the current 11 division setup.

P.S. Why are you responding to yourself?

Teferi

gaius c wrote: »

P.S. Why are you responding to yourself?

To make a point about my point.

Obviously.

Teferi

gaius c wrote: »

6-7 years?
Try 3 years.
http://www.leinsterrugbydomestic.com/league/27403/j5_league
That was the last year of the J5 league in it's old format. They refused to move up to J4D for the 4th year running and due to protests from all the other clubs sick of getting beaten out the gate, the league had to be changed to a different format (which didn't work) and laid the way for the current 11 division setup.

...looking at those results it seems like it was a fairly competitive league, especially amongst the top 3/4.

shoutman

Teferi wrote: »

...looking at those results it seems like it was a fairly competitive league, especially amongst the top 3/4.

What are you on about? 'Nures lowest margin of victory was seven points.... Points difference of 289 in 12 played games...

.ak

Lads no more accusations of loading teams.
I suggest that anyone who has proof of this happening should be going to the branch. If a team/club is officially reprimanded then it can be discussed after.

stephen_n

gaius c wrote: »

More than likely the players were actually legal. I've seen the teamsheet and the likes of H and L haven't played rugby at all this year so in all likelihood, they are probably legal at this level for the cup. "Retired" superstars coming back for the cups is a regular feature of the cups and always has been. It's part of what makes the cups so frustrating but they can only be punished if they break an actual rule. The only restriction on retired players in the junior leagues and cups is if they are ex-pros.

Poor form for Marys doing it but it's happening across the cups in fact. In the Winters cup, all the division 6 teams have been knocked out. Only 1 of the 5 division 6 teams made it to the quarters and only 1 of the 5 was knocked out by another div 6 team.

Being privy to the going-ons at committee level, there have been a lot of players regraded for the cups. In retrospect, once the committee sit down and have a look at the number of regraded players who subsequently played at their original level after they "helped" the lower level team, they might accept that they got played somewhat.

Teferi
The only reason you're getting the response you have is your club's previous attitude to playing high level players in lower level leagues. I'm thinking primarily of the J5 league that basically had to be scrapped because Terenure refused to move into a league more suited for their ability level.
Two wrongs don't make a right but what goes around, comes around.

Was the rule not changed this year to stop this, I thought you had to have played 4 league games to be eligible for a cup team?

gaius c

stephen_n wrote: »

Was the rule not changed this year to stop this, I thought you had to have played 4 league games to be eligible for a cup team?

Think it was only for O'Connor cup but... http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94892722&postcount=575

Blizzards

Teferi wrote: »

:rolleyes:

So instead of countering my points or replying to my comment in any way you just attacked a club mindlessly?

If you haven't got anything useful to contribute best to not say anything at all lest you look like a fool.


And why do i need to counter your points??I am allowed to have an opinion and point out why it is very hard to have sympathy for your club.
I am sure the players were completely legal and it seems to be the same team that started the cup.I know of 3 players that played at a higher level but i also know of at least five that have moved up from J5 in the last few years.

stephen_n

gaius c wrote: »

Think it was only for O'Connor cup but... http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94892722&postcount=575

Not much point in making rules that's aren't enforced. Didn't realise it was only the O'Connor cup. It would be a good rule at all levels, from a player perspective it's a pain in the ass playing all the league games and losing your place to a glory hunter cup specialist.