In fairness longford could actually come out and say that then people would stop asking.
In fairness longford could actually come out and say that then people would stop asking.
Probably don't want to step on the FAI's toes with anymore statements. Surely the fact the club are advertising the game should be enough clue for people?
Looking unlikely we'll have a game anyway, pitch is currently unplayable and a flood warning in place for the county.
BetweenTheStripes.net - Home of Between the Stripes LOI podcast.
Statement issuing tomorrow morning apparently.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
Johnny Ward on Twitter this evening saying he's heard rumblings of a third tier from next season with Rovers B, other LOI B teams and I can only assume a few junior clubs stepping up!
Presumably. I genuinely have no idea but Daire Doyle was on the Between The Stripes podcast this week and was preparing for the game as normal and encouraging everyone to come out. There will probably be some sort of "we're doing this under protest" element to the statement.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
Neil O'Riordan in The Sun yesterday suggested that Longford said they will not be fulfilling the fixture, though I would have thought if there is a joint boycott between the 9 teams it wouldn't be just one club announcing it
The Leinster Senior League needs a strong Bohemians
Maybe the statement will be on behalf of the First Division Alliance. I seem to recall LTFC being the first to post their original statement. The weather may intervene anyway as outspoken pointed out.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
Neil O'Riordan tweeted this..
First Division clubs will issue a statement tomorrow confirming they will play Shamrock Rovers II under protest this season and for this season only.Rovers will be allowed field one outfield and one keeper from their A squad in addition to stated u21 squad.
This is a joke and makes an absoulte mockery of both competitions.
Why do Rovers have an advantage over every team in the Premier to keep players match fit?
Does this mean u21 players can play for both throughout the year?
How is it fair that different First Division teams will face different squads (Alan Mannus and Jack Byrne may play against one team for one game and deny them the title for example).
If you are going to II teams, do it right, players should only be able to move between squads in Transfer windows, end of.
The First Division clubs should have had some balls then instead of just making idle threats. They were always going to play Rovers.
What if 7 of them do, But one or two dont , and it ends up deciding the play off spots ??
The clubs, who are also in competition with each other, simply should not be put into this position. Thats why you have an indpendent organisation (The Fai ) to create and enforce (fair )rules.
Rovers II are not a second team, but a reserve team. Reserve teams should not be in the first, especially against the other clubs wishes. This is a Senior league and should be treated as such.
Also, shows Rovers arrogence to the rest of the league to just power on through with this. Why are the fai trying to keep them happy ?
Some big European leagues have reserve teams playing within their national league system. Not sure what the fuss with Rovers B is. 10 team league with the fixture layout is far better then what the first division suggested. A 9 part time team league needing 36 games weeks to complete the regular season was never going to work.
Anyhow by all accounts the FAI are exploring the idea of reintroducing the A Championship from next season onwards.
Can everyone not grow the **** up already.
A 9 team league would be ridiculous. Rovers II is the only realistic way to make it a 10 team league.
Rovers aren't going to be playing ****ing Mannus and Byrne so that ****ing Longford don't win the division or some ****e if you think that's going to happen give your head a shake. And **** off with this "to keep rovers happy ****e" Rovers were the ones that offered to keep the team as an u21 team as a compromise, not the other way round.
It may be a senior league but what's the alternative? A 9 team league with the possibility of teams going weeks with no home game? Aka no income? Rovers II will bring crowds as big as any other, play good football, provide good facilities, and wont cause any unwanted headlines. The same cannot be said for the majority of first division clubs.
Anyone who has a problem with Rovers II needs a ****ing reality check cause there's absolutely no problem with it.
As for suggestion of Rovers arrogance, **** off with that, if there was a single reasonable argument against Rovers II you might have a point but there isn't so you dont
100%.
This unfairness BS and whinging about rovers being allowed play first team players is hilarious.
the b team rules are in the particpation agreement that every club signs up to and haven't changed since 2013.
Any club that wanted to could avail of them.
Rovers putting a pathway in for the academy players should be applauded.
Based on last time they won't bring any crowds but in fairness away support isn't generally a significant factor in the First overall. From a selfish point of view another Dublin fixture suits me.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
Just sit down and do what you're told.🧐
Whatever about the merits of the argument, the arrogance of some Rovers fans here is telling. Seems to me that everyone should eff off and let Rovers do whatever they want.
I have no problem with a Rovers academy team (or any other) playing in the first division so that there is an even number of teams. The only issue I have is that it should be a set squad for the season with no movement between the first and second teams outside of the transfer window. And just because Rovers may not be planning to play Byrne or Mannus, the option is there for them to play either of them or any other player if they wish.
Bookmarks