Re-Instatement rule

[le boss]

I know many people have discussed the merits of the re-instaement rule and I think most would like to see it abolished, but has anybody thought about notifying the CCFA that clubs would like discussed/abolished. I would imagine it would have to wait till the AGM but formal notification for a lobby for a rule change has to be submitted and does anyone know when notification has to be in by.

Do enough clubs want the re-instatement rule changed/abolished?

[Dave Marks]

I do it s a rip off and has cost me loads over the years . Le boss lead us into battle with the powers that be? :)

[Guest BenTheYeti]

Agreed with both... for clubs that have two teams close together, say in Combo and Trelawny 1 (if there is or not I don't know?), I'd imagine reinstatements are going to happen quite often, so you're perhaps looking at £60 a season for playing a player who is registered to his chosen club

Maybe a system similar to the 7 day transfer approach would be better.. whereas you give notice of intent to reinstate a player(s), and if there is any contention, it gives it time to be resolved

[Pitty]

The Camborne jungle drums are saying that it may be resolved by the powers that be sooner then you think

[paulo bestiniho]

Would that mean players could sign for a junior team and a senior team? Or even two separate clubs? Then any time a senior team doesn't have a game the junior side can fill the side with as many senior players as they like. I agree in terms of transfers but the amount clubs I have seen pay to have good players in there side at the end of the season! I remeber turning up a couple of years ago against a good robartes side to see they had also reinstated Tom Hogarth and Gary bell to play for them! If they do change the rules they can't leave any grey areas as otherwise there will be cans of worms everywhere!

[le boss]

The Camborne jungle drums are saying that it may be resolved by the powers that be sooner then you think

You can't leave us hanging like that Pitty lol

[le boss]

Would that mean players could sign for a junior team and a senior team? Or even two separate clubs? Then any time a senior team doesn't have a game the junior side can fill the side with as many senior players as they like. I agree in terms of transfers but the amount clubs I have seen pay to have good players in there side at the end of the season! I remeber turning up a couple of years ago against a good robartes side to see they had also reinstated Tom Hogarth and Gary bell to play for them! If they do change the rules they can't leave any grey areas as otherwise there will be cans of worms everywhere!

As a manager who has a senior team at our club, I for one would like to see rules implemented to prevent a team being loaded, especially with players who have not been at the club all season - maybe a senior player can only re-instate for a junior side if he has played for the senior side in the previous weeks but not sure how this could be managed at the start of a season?

[paulo bestiniho]

It's a difficult one isn't it. I I can totally see your reasons for it le boss it must be difficult having to change players between your firsts and seconds! And having played your team I know your not one of the managers who does load there team! Not to mention any other names but storm last year had a hard time and when we got to the end of the season we played a few teams that had dropped senior first teamers or reinstated senior players from another club! Like you said a rule needs to be brought in to prevent this I feel!

[simmo147]

I have been told that Cornwall is one of a few if not the only County that use re-instatement, If this is true how do other Counties manage what is a difficult situation. I personally would like to see it gone, but replaced with something well thoughtout and workable.

[Dan Inch]

The rule does need to be discussed/ changed and if it goes to the CCFA I would back the change.

In my opinion the main issue is players loading teams with senior players, especially at the end of the season in mid week games, which judging by this winter there will be a lot of mid week games come April.

My suggestion would be that a player signs for a club for the duration of the season, Aug to May, players cannot sign for a different senior and junior team, the player can freely move between teams within that club with possibly a limit of 3/4 per game so teams cannot throw everyone in to a one off game, if a player wishes to play for another club they have to transfer as normal.

[Pitty]

Would that mean players could sign for a junior team and a senior team? Or even two separate clubs? Then any time a senior team doesn't have a game the junior side can fill the side with as many senior players as they like. I agree in terms of transfers but the amount clubs I have seen pay to have good players in there side at the end of the season! I remeber turning up a couple of years ago against a good robartes side to see they had also reinstated Tom Hogarth and Gary bell to play for them! If they do change the rules they can't leave any grey areas as otherwise there will be cans of worms everywhere!

As a manager who has a senior team at our club, I for one would like to see rules implemented to prevent a team being loaded, especially with players who have not been at the club all season - maybe a senior player can only re-instate for a junior side if he has played for the senior side in the previous weeks but not sure how this could be managed at the start of a season?

Bash

I believe meetings at county HQ have taken place regarding the pros and mainly cons of reinstatement. Fingers crossed something may manifest itself towards the end of the season along the same sort of lines that the SWPL/combo use which is to limit the number of players who have played in a higher league within a certain timeframe (currently 8 days but would suggest 22 would be better). In other words if your 1st team played a week before you could play a max of 2 in your reserves a week later. People may groan at that but the advantage is if you've lost a player to your first team for a couple of weeks it would be much easier to drop them back into your side as long as you either don't exceed the max allowable players or a period of 22 days has elapsed since they played.

I have to say I think the current Ccfa administration appear to be a quite forward thinking bunch at the moment with a number of changes recently (ie county cup registrations/rolling subs/discipline days rather then matches) so hopefully this antiquated reinstatement rule will change for something much more robust and user friendly

[Nathan Hugh]

i reckon u should only be able to reinstate players from your first team not from a different senior team

[le boss]

Cheers Pitty - let's hope something does happen. I am in agreement that there should be a rule against players from other clubs being re-instated to play for a junior team - it's about time there was a "one club" ethos

[the waterboy]

Agree, if you sign for a club you should be able to play for any of the teams junior or senior without all the messing about

[Pitty]

I think a lot of people me included made the very same comment about a year ago that one of the best things that could happen to local football would be a 1 club 1 signature policy. For one thing it may encourage players to get involved behind the scenes and take a bit more pride in the team they play for and secondly and probably more importantly will prevent some clubs 'loading' up at the end of the season making things a bit more of a level playing field (excuse the pun) when it gets down to the crucial business end of the season (transfer embargo at end of march would be a necessity)

[Guest BenTheYeti]

I think a lot of people me included made the very same comment about a year ago that one of the best things that could happen to local football would be a 1 club 1 signature policy. For one thing it may encourage players to get involved behind the scenes and take a bit more pride in the team they play for and secondly and probably more importantly will prevent some clubs 'loading' up at the end of the season making things a bit more of a level playing field (excuse the pun) when it gets down to the crucial business end of the season (transfer embargo at end of march would be a necessity)

That's already in place isn't it? No more signings after the 31st..

[Pitty]

I think it came in this season in the combo Ben. Before it used to be just transfers were not allowed after 31st but you could still register players.....hence lots of SWPL players signed for combo clubs when their SWPL side finished all its fixtures......back to the one club one signature argument again!

[Guest BenTheYeti]

I think it came in this season in the combo Ben. Before it used to be just transfers were not allowed after 31st but you could still register players.....hence lots of SWPL players signed for combo clubs when their SWPL side finished all its fixtures......back to the one club one signature argument again!

It makes sense.. otherwise clubs that are in the larger footballing areas can literally have the pick of who they want when the SWPL finishes.

[Biggreengiant]

I would like to say re-instatments need to be looked at in a better way but dont forget many bigger clubs could use this to an advantage like u say if there isent a limit i mean if u have 4 teams 2 juniour and 2 seniour thouse tht have a tough game in a cup competion ie there league cup or juniour cup say if u could drop players from seniour sides without having a restriction a bigger club that wasent in the shout of winning the league could drop players to win a trophy like the juniour cup for there club or other domestic cups like the arthur pearce and so forth i dont see nothing wrong with the system of only allowing the 2 seniour players till after 5 games are played but jut scrap the cost....

[Kash]

I think it has to be one club one signature with groundrules regarding how many can be dropped down at any one time, thats the best thing that can come from this debate!

[Biggreengiant]

I dont think one club one signature works to be fair byt you would have to allow players to still leave that club and sign for another club as if u fall out of order with that club and are not playing u should be allowed to leave clubs to go where u want when u want

[Biggreengiant]

Does not dont

[Martin Eddy]

the other problem is the carry over from the previous season.when a senior side has an influx of players for the new season.then players who stay with the club but drop down are restricted to two players reinstating.i remember one season when holmans had to reinstate 8 players but could only play two until they had played 5 games,meaning 6 players had to miss out on football because they stayed loyal?

[Dave Marks]

Titans had that problem pre season with one player we thought there previous club had reinstated him seeing as he played half the season on the team sheet for the seconds only to find he wasn't reinstated at all. So we were left with 4 players to keep happy and only 2 allowed at once.

[Kash]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Biggreengiant" data-cid="227660" data-time="1358276222"><p>

I dont think one club one signature works to be fair byt you would have to allow players to still leave that club and sign for another club as if u fall out of order with that club and are not playing u should be allowed to leave clubs to go where u want when u want</p></blockquote>

If ppl need to leave to get games then a transfers still the same, I meant that if you sign for a club, hayle for example, you are eligable to play for every team in that club! Cricket uses this sort of rule, but you sign for life unless you choose to transfer, in the lower leagues it allows you to borrow players from teams if your a couple short one week!

[stokefan1]

re instatement is a waste of time in my opinion, not just the cost, because players only playing senior football have to be re-instated there should be a rule made for all leages else bigger clubs always going to prevail in most cups or leagues because when end of season comes and certain team in the running just gonna get loaded up not right but happens and will keep happening until something done to stop it, my opinion if a player drops down at team having palyed 5 games for the above team then he should have play 5 games before going back up this will stop clubs just cherry picking for certain games

[fenman]

The problem of clubs bolstering their lower level teams has been going on all over the country for years . I think most teams find it unethical and almost regard it as a form of cheating . In the NEN league in Norfolk , which is football of junior and primary level teams , we have reserve and A level teams from senior level teams ie. from the larger towns . At the beginning of the season these clubs sign on all their players to all the relevant leagues that their club plays in .Their argument is that there are no first or reserve team players at that time as the teams haven't been selected , so all players are eligble for any team .A logical point , but later in the season if the more senior team has,nt got a fixture they bolster the lower teams up .You could argue that it's no different to a lower level player being promoted to the higher team when they are short .

In order to discourage this we have a rule that states " A team shall not include more than 2 players who have taken part in 6 or more Senior competitions during the current season unless a period of 30 days or more has elapsed since they last played " there is a definition of what is regarded as Senior football . In addition there is another rule that forbids any transfers after 1st March in a season as well as a ban on any signings after 1st March unless the players has not signed for any other club in the County . The rules arn't perfect but have helped erradicate the problem .

We don't have a re instament rule ' unless I'm confusing it with the contract player rule .This is where a player signs a written contract to play for a club for payment , but this only lasts for a season .

[cb_fc]

i personally am in favor for the re-instation of players basicly because there are too many clubs around with senior and junior team so for an example likes of illogan, st day, troon and hayle all have senior clubs now suppose you are in the same league as 1 of there clubs and like my own team we are just 1 side not 3 so if we was battling 1 of these teams for the title or a cup and thier 1st team doesnt have a game then they play senior players as there game is called off it can sway the course of the season in thier favor rather than the club in the same league/cup now im not saying that the clubs i mentioned have, do or will do this its merly an example... this is why i believe the re-instation rule should stick.

[St Darren]

Reinstating is fine, paying 6quid each time is shocking

[Biggreengiant]

To be fair i think re-instating is fine and the £6 is spot on if the player us re-insated to play for a team tht is not his club so if u play for hayle first team y should the club pay £6 to re-instate for him to play for the 3rd or 4th team but if he wa say playing for illogan combo amd wanted to be re-instated to play for hayle 3rd or 4th team they should charge and clearly the player have to pay the re-instatement not the club that wants to re-instate them

[paulo bestiniho]

I think once a player has played a certain number of games for senior football they should be classed as a senior footballer. The only three ways they should be allowed to play junior football is if they completely transfer to a junior club, have not played the number of games for the senior team required, or keeping to rules already set you are allowed to drop two players from any team each week. This would allow for people filling in to aid sides as two could be dropped without reinstatement and junior players could play and help there senior teams as long as they don't go over the number of games for a club. Also prevents players signing for Seperate senior an junior sides so they can be big fishes when they don't have a fixture

[S Abbo]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Biggreengiant" data-cid="227721" data-time="1358356399"><p>

To be fair i think re-instating is fine and the £6 is spot on if the player us re-insated to play for a team tht is not his club so if u play for hayle first team y should the club pay £6 to re-instate for him to play for the 3rd or 4th team but if he wa say playing for illogan combo amd wanted to be re-instated to play for hayle 3rd or 4th team they should charge and clearly the player have to pay the re-instatement not the club that wants to re-instate them</p></blockquote>

Yea agree with this.

[pointers]

i personally am in favor for the re-instation of players basicly because there are too many clubs around with senior and junior team so for an example likes of illogan, st day, troon and hayle all have senior clubs now suppose you are in the same league as 1 of there clubs and like my own team we are just 1 side not 3 so if we was battling 1 of these teams for the title or a cup and thier 1st team doesnt have a game then they play senior players as there game is called off it can sway the course of the season in thier favor rather than the club in the same league/cup now im not saying that the clubs i mentioned have, do or will do this its merly an example... this is why i believe the re-instation rule should stick.

as if you'd ever be in this position.........!! lol

[cb_fc]

I think once a player has played a certain number of games for senior football they should be classed as a senior footballer. The only three ways they should be allowed to play junior football is if they completely transfer to a junior club, have not played the number of games for the senior team required, or keeping to rules already set you are allowed to drop two players from any team each week. This would allow for people filling in to aid sides as two could be dropped without reinstatement and junior players could play and help there senior teams as long as they don't go over the number of games for a club. Also prevents players signing for Seperate senior an junior sides so they can be big fishes when they don't have a fixture

if ur saying bout re-instating senior players to help a junior team then surly that gives an unfair advantage to new teams that are starting a new season with a single team. these r the clubs that have to make do with who they signed so if a single sided club can raise a bare 11 then there op team has 2 or more players dropping down even if they are used as subs still gives an unfair advantage. i think it should be if u r goin to be re-instated then u must play a min of 4 or more games for the lower team i.e if u play for illogan 1st team and wanty to be re-instated to play for res team then u must play res for a min of 4 games this would stop the players dropping down to play 1 game or important league classes ie top 2 teams etc.

[cb_fc]

i personally am in favor for the re-instation of players basicly because there are too many clubs around with senior and junior team so for an example likes of illogan, st day, troon and hayle all have senior clubs now suppose you are in the same league as 1 of there clubs and like my own team we are just 1 side not 3 so if we was

battling 1 of these teams for the title or a cup

and thier 1st team doesnt have a game then they play senior players as there game is called off it can sway the course of the season in thier favor rather than the club in the same league/cup now im not saying that the clubs i mentioned have, do or will do this its merly an example... this is why i believe the re-instation rule should stick.

as if you'd ever be in this position.........!! lol

duno who u r but wudnt laugh to hard u never know what might happen nxt season and we r also still in the div 5 cup so cheers.............lol

[Kash]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="cb_fc" data-cid="227743" data-time="1358366865"><p>

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="pointers" data-cid="227732" data-time="1358361144"><p><blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="cb_fc" data-cid="227703" data-time="1358343851"><p>i personally am in favor for the re-instation of players basicly because there are too many clubs around with senior and junior team so for an example likes of illogan, st day, troon and hayle all have senior clubs now suppose you are in the same league as 1 of there clubs and like my own team we are just 1 side not 3 so if we was <span style='color: rgb(255,0,0)'>battling 1 of these teams for the title or a cup </span>and thier 1st team doesnt have a game then they play senior players as there game is called off it can sway the course of the season in thier favor rather than the club in the same league/cup now im not saying that the clubs i mentioned have, do or will do this its merly an example... this is why i believe the re-instation rule should stick.</p></blockquote>

<br />

as if you'd ever be in this position.........!! lol</p></blockquote>

duno who u r but wudnt laugh to hard u never know what might happen nxt season and we r also still in the div 5 cup so cheers.............lol</p></blockquote>

I dont know who it is either but dont think clipper should be getting too much stick right now, after a shocking start to the season have now got a competitive team and have started to get some respectable scorelines in recent weeks! Goodluck to you Dave and the team!

[moley1]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="cb_fc" data-cid="227703" data-time="1358343851"><p>

i personally am in favor for the re-instation of players basicly because there are too many clubs around with senior and junior team so for an example likes of illogan, st day, troon and hayle all have senior clubs now suppose you are in the same league as 1 of there clubs and like my own team we are just 1 side not 3 so if we was battling 1 of these teams for the title or a cup and thier 1st team doesnt have a game then they play senior players as there game is called off it can sway the course of the season in thier favor rather than the club in the same league/cup now im not saying that the clubs i mentioned have, do or will do this its merly an example... this is why i believe the re-instation rule should stick.</p></blockquote>

[moley1]

i think its a leveller tho for every game u reinstate someone u lose four five playets to the other two teams. .

[moley1]

what i mean is for every game that u do reinstate a player theirs a game where ur 3 4 short

[simmo147]

It would appear everyone is so wrapped about rolling subs, that re-instatement has been put too one side. County & Leagues will soon be arranging AGMs and this will be the time to address the re-instatement rule. Rolling subs seem to be a coming no matter what. I do not know if there is a better way than the present re-instatement situation but hope CCFA, Leagues & Clubs explore alturnitives. What do others think?.

[Willser !]

Simmo, I thought the reinstatement proposal has already been put forward to all league secretary's in Duchy football. Just a case of a simple yes or no at the next AGM.

Which I think is a no brainer for all clubs involved!

[simmo147]

Simmo, I thought the reinstatement proposal has already been put forward to all league secretary's in Duchy football. Just a case of a simple yes or no at the next AGM.

Which I think is a no brainer for all clubs involved!

Good, I was just wondering if the debate was still alive.

Simmo, I thought the reinstatement proposal has already been put forward to all league secretary's in Duchy football. Just a case of a simple yes or no at the next AGM.

Which I think is a no brainer for all clubs involved!

[New Forest]

Simmo, I thought the reinstatement proposal has already been put forward to all league secretary's in Duchy football. Just a case of a simple yes or no at the next AGM.

Which I think is a no brainer for all clubs involved!

I have checked this out with our secretary and he has not received any information regarding this as yet?

[Willser !]

Simmo, I thought the reinstatement proposal has already been put forward to all league secretary's in Duchy football. Just a case of a simple yes or no at the next AGM.

Which I think is a no brainer for all clubs involved!

I have checked this out with our secretary and he has not received any information regarding this as yet?

I'll copy and paste the email I received on here when I'm back at work on the 18th (if I remember!)

[stokefan1]

all these people saying this junior clubs if your manager gets chance of signing swpl players he,ll take it, do it why you can!

[MattP]

No, the proposal to the CCFA didn't get through, so, I believe, the rule still stands. The Duchy League may well have a proposal at their AGM this summer though.