Forum

Re- Danny

My post wasn't about your facilities which I am aware are excellent, nor where they about Templepatrick's, however since you bring it up we are getting four artificial bays installed this June- the best (well on a par with Warringstown)practice facilities in the NCU I'm told, and all without the help of a sugar daddy! I think we do pretty well on a low budget and have a youth setup that would be the envy of most clubs within the NCU and certainly hiring a professional (let alone 6!) is way down our priority list after buying new covers and improving the playing surface. You may have a growing youth section and I'm glad to hear it, especially given the problems some of the other Belfast clubs have had in recent years- but again this wasn't the point of my post.

I am simply saying that I don't see how the 'real' CIYMS players can be happy when they are either bowling the odd over or batting 8 as a specialist batman behind players who are being payed. I take great pleasure from watching my team mates score runs and take wickets (it's pretty rare that I do either :)) but do your guys really gain any satisfaction from these players winning you games while the clubmen field or play in the 2nds- I know I wouldn't!

Is it just me or is anyone else disappointed by the coverage (or lack of it) by Radio Ulster's results service. All we get is a brief summary-and I mean brief just after the 11:00p.m. news. To hear that "in Section such and such there were wins for so and so" isn't really much use - and no coverage at all on Sunday evenings - especially when comapred to other sports where every hole in the hedge team gets their details published. Can the powers tat be not make a few noises here?

Re Chris

Two things you failed to mention. The growing youth section at CIYMS, and the fact that we have gone from 2 teams 3 years ago to being able to get 4 teams out on any given Saturday.

I do also believe that we have top class facilities- something templepatrick can't boast about!

Ps. Jeff no bankers are giving money out at the minute so you might be waiting a while!

Re Wayne

I don't feel that I am jumping on any bandwagon- just posing the question which I suppose is the point of a forum and to be honest I completely agree with you! I would reckon that those players would be 'sipping the pints' and having a hell of a lot more fun up at Belmont if they actually got to do something except field, whether that be in Section 1/2/3- at the minute their success is artificial and doesn't show the actual strength of their club but just the size of their hefty bank balance.

It wasn't that long ago that we where paying CI in Section 3 before they started paying players increasing numbers of players to push them up the leagues!

Re Chris - I would be interested to see your comments if you did want to jump on the CI bandwagon. I am sure if 5 or 6 players were to leave Hughesy and his motley crew would still be supping their pints at Belmont having fun. And maybe, just maybe if they were to drop down a few leagues you might get a chance to play against them!

Re Ryan McCarter

I don't want to jump on the CIYMS bandwagon, but I can't help but wonder what the 'real clubmen' think of the current situation at a club where almost all the overs (40 of the overs were bowled by Hewitt, Heasley,Fourie, Gelson and Coverdale) and the entire top six batsmen (all of the above plus Barry Cooper)from Saturdays game against North Down are 'mercenaries' with the rest of the 'CI based' players seemingly making up the numbers?

I know there is an argument for pushing a club on to be the best that it can be but personally I would take absolutely no satisfaction from this artificial success if my team (Templepatrick)took this approach- where are the long term benefits- if the money went you can be damm sure so will those players and then what will be left?

P Coverdale playing for CIYMS yesterday, is that the guy came to Carrick from Northants? How many outsiders is that now!?

TAYTO PUT 10£ EACH ON EMPOWERED 540 DONCASTER & FARNCOMBE 515 GOODWOOD & 1O£ DOUBLE U MIGHT WIN ENUFF TOO PAY ME 40£/ PS CANT BELIEVE U WORK IN A BANK & DONT PAY YUR DEBTS GREAT PUBLICITY FOR THE HALIFAX .LOL

hughesy, that was a slip of the tongue i meant to type the money that jeff thinks i owe him

Taito, I think that is the first time I ever heard you admit you do actually owe money!!!

J rock working hard as usual then? no doubt it is a good rule, i think the time alloted mght be the issue just.

I was just thinking this is the first time i have started a sensible debate on here, its usually me and jeff talking rubbish about the money i owe him.

OFF 2 PUNCHESTOWN At 1PM, ANDY . 4PADDYDEPLASTERER VERY GOOD JUST HAD BAD DAY JUMPING . NAP SOLWIT 530, NB COPPER BLEU 640, EWAY ROBERTO GOLDBACK605 / HOLD THE PIN 420 / RAVENS RUN 455 . GL JARLATH 3 05 IS PLENTY TIME I WILL PAY ARE TEAMS FINE IF WE OVER ( BUT NOT WEN RODNEY CAPT)

ps i feel that this is an excellent rule. they may be a debate about 3hours 5 or 3 hours 15 but the positive bit is that teams are penalised there and then instead of at a meeting some weeks later - and removes the situation of appeal and counter appeal

i personally am using a stopwatch - so anything that occurs that is not in the natural playing remit eg injury / lost ball / a runner being requested etc i stop the watch. This will nulify any batting team from purposely trying to take up time, not that any batsman would dream of doing that.

Big Davy, i can assure you that there was no delaying tactics by us batting first against laurelvale , we were as surprised as they were when they got penalised.

It will not only apply to the team fielding first, the same rule applies to the side fielding second too. The other thing is that even although we were bowled out in 47.3 overs laurelvale were still penalised as they had gone over the alloted time