Letters to the Editor: Shortened hurling season not respectful
Tackled Chaoimh Boylan League Match Allianz In Picture: Páirc Moran/sportsfile Blanchfield Supervalu Is Division Limerick's Of 1 Hurling Uí Final Brendan Conor Kevin The Semi At Cork During Kilkenny By
Having listened to Clare’s John Conlon and the Waterford manager Davy Fitzgerald ( , RTÉ Radio 1) after the round of league matches on March 10, and having read Eoghan Cormican and Paul Keane’s articles ( , March 20), it is clear that the hurling season hasn’t really begun yet, nor will it until the start of the championship on April 21.
This — with the GAA in recent years having already shortened the season so that it ends by mid- to late July — is not reasonable from a supporters point of view, nor is it respectful of our national game.
The time has come to run the Liam MacCarthy Cup, the Joe McDonagh Cup etc on a league basis, similar in principle to many field games such as rugby, Australian Rules, and American football.
Focusing on the senior hurling championship, it is my view that the current hurling league competition should be left to history.
The five Munster “hurling” counties and the four “best” Leinster counties (along with Galway) should be “pooled” so that they play each other on a home and away basis, thus giving each team 16 “regular season” championship games.
At the end of the “regular season”, in addition to teams being ranked one to nine, Leinster finalists and Munster finalists would be determined on the basis of results of games between teams in their respective provinces.
The first “play-off” games would, therefore, be the provincial finals.
If the provincial winners are already amongst the top four teams from the “regular season”, the All-Ireland semi-finalists are thereby decided. If one or both provincial winners are not amongst this top four, one quarter final — or two, if necessary — would be played between the provincial winner(s) and the fourth (and third) placed teams.
The winner(s) of each would then progress to the All-Ireland semi-finals.
The bottom two “regular season” teams would play-off against the top two teams from the next lower section (Joe McDonagh Cup) to determine who stays in, is promoted to, or drops down from McCarthy Cup level.
The normal season openers, the Munster league, and the Walsh Cup should be run from mid-January alongside the Fitzgibbon Cup.
However, the “serious” hurling season should commence on the second last weekend of February and run over 25 weeks, until the All-Ireland Senior Hurling final on the August bank holiday weekend.
Critically, this “plan” would give all teams at all levels plenty of games in hurling weather.
While one must acknowledge that Simon Harris’ elevation was always to be, one hopes he can deliver some real change of major social stagnation across the everyday community templates of discontent.
Talking won’t be a problem for him for sure, given his prowess at the plinth, but talk doesn’t ease the pains and aches for the many under pressure across the range.
Given the perennial sludge and smudge of so many public service hierarchies, who eternally operate a foot-dragging tempo of inefficiency, there is one thing he might put near the top of his to-do list.
That would be galvanising, restructuring, and energising the echelons and graded rank-in-filers of the all public service units, so that change can actually happen with some degree of dedicated denouement.
The pervasive institutional torpidity, which ravages the public service tapestry of administrative ennui, has beleaguered all and any true sense of dynamic direction and prompt delivery for so many crucial needs. While there was no John the Baptist around to clue us in to an unexpected “messianic” arrival, maybe Simon of the serene might offer his “shoulder-to-wheel” approach to help the citizenry bear better their heavy incumbent burdens as they trod wearily along the way of the dross.
I referred to recent commentary on the possibility the Irish public will slip down the slippery slope on assisted dying legislation, similarly to countries such as Canada, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
The Irish electorate recently gave a very clear signal and reprimand to politicians that asking for their opinion on constitutional matters, when there was no pressing public discourse, will result in failure.
However, in the converse, if the Government expects they can pass legislation on assisted dying — without asking the opinion of the Irish people via a referendum — I believe there will be considerable public outrage and disorder.
Irish politicians would better serve their public if they concentrated on providing greater assisted living support for people with care needs, rather than legislating in absence of their opinion for assisted dying.
While the dust may have settled on the recent referendums, listening to discussions by supporters of the yes-yes vote, it seems to me they have not learned from their “failure”.
First of all, our ministers are well educated.
Then we take into account the number of well paid advisers employed by the Government, in addition to the highly paid senior civil servants employed in each Government department.
It amazes me that between them they apparently do not have the basic common sense to put together an amendment to the Constitution that is concise, to the point, and understood by all.
It seems they are either unaware or choose to ignore the Kiss principle — keep it short and simple.
So, was it arrogance or laziness that prevented the Government from presenting an amendment that could be clearly understood by all?
Some yes-yes supporters mentioned any clarification needed could be provided by the courts.
These are all highly paid individuals, but where do they think the “average” person can get the funds needed to take a case to the High Court?
This demonstrates just how out of touch Government politicians are with reality.
Those selected to present the case on behalf of the Government failed to impress the electorate.
I must add that during a TV debate, the Government representative made reference to those who voted no in previous referendums.
We are told this is a democracy (I will deal with this another time), so why should an experienced politician — in my opinion — give the impression he was critical of those who exercised their democratic right to vote no?
I suggest the Government lost support at that moment — their spokesperson seems to have overlooked the fact a large percentage of the population voted no in those referendums.
Regarding Caroline Hurley’s critical reaction to my letter on Ireland’s energy policy (March 14), I would say she misunderstood my point that nuclear energy should at least be considered when a suitable modal is available.
It was a pleasure to read John Hurley’s straight-forward and clear reasons for the need for consideration of a small portion of nuclear energy on the grid in reply to her criticism. He makes the point that our present renewable energy approach comes nowhere near producing enough energy to satisfy our daily power demand from the national grid.
While about one quarter of our electricity is now wind-generated, Ireland is next to bottom of the EU table when it comes to lowering our carbon emissions.
It looks increasingly obvious that we should also be considering a small portion of nuclear energy to support this widening, but unreliable, renewable energy base.
I wish Leo Varadkar the best, every thing good in his personal life and his professional work life, whether he continues in politics, or whatever is his choice.
He deserves the best. He was a good doctor prior to going in to political life. I think his medical knowledge and experience was an additional strength, advantage, and help, in handling the covid-19 crisis.
It was of real benefit to all Irish citizens and all on the island of Ireland. So, like every one else, I wish him happiness, fulfillment, and success in all the years ahead.