Is there a touch of irony in Skye Camanachd winning promotion to shinty's new National League Division Two without having to meet Ballachulish in the play-off?
After all it was the island club which led the opposition to the recent reconstruction of the shinty leagues, and in particular the creation of the new National Division Two. One of their main arguments was that too many of the smaller clubs, who were happy competing in north and south divisions, would have to travel long distances if they gained entry to the second national tier.
Skye as North Division One winners were due to meet Ballachulish as their southern counterparts at Drumnadrochit for the right to play in the very division they opposed. But Ballachulish conceded with 48 hours to go.
It had been an open secret that the Loch Leven men had no real interest in promotion, largely because of the travel it would involve. So it is the Skyemen who now go up. As it happens they fully deserve to do so given they haven't dropped a league point all season.
But what a wonderful statement from Ballachulish Shinty Club members explaining their thinking. True to the spirit of the game, the first thing they did was to pay tribute to their now 'not to be' opponents.
"We would firstly apologise to Skye Camanachd and wish them every success in their endeavours next season. They are a credit to North shinty, have done their island proud this year and will undoubtedly continue to do so in the future. We had a great game against them in the Balliemore Cup Final, had hoped to run them close again but sadly, this is not now going to be possible."
Then Ballachulish listed eight reasons for not competing, some fairly lengthy, some more persuasive than others.
There was: "Our club is not willing to enter into our most important fixture for many years, on the back of a three week lay-off. "
And then: "With this being a holiday weekend, and originally a Saturday outwith the season, several of our players have made arrangements to be elsewhere and we would have to field what is effectively a junior side. That would normally be something we would accept and get on with, but as alternative dates are available we cannot accept it on this occasion."
On this theme there was also: "Our club arranged our annual dinner dance for the Saturday and had requested this Saturday to be kept clear to allow everyone to be here on the day..."
Not to mention "Many months ago, several of our players including our club captain and one other player will be attending the Ryder Cup at Gleneagles and, whilst we would rather have them playing shinty, we feel that we cannot refuse their requests to attend what could be a once in a lifetime golfing occasion. This was, after all, a Saturday with no shinty scheduled. Furthermore, considering Sportscotland's support of shinty and golf, surely shinty players should not be discouraged from attending major occasions like the Ryder Cup undoubtedly will be."
Errrrr!!!!!!
In short Ballachulish hadn't even finished their league fixtures and understandably thought play-offs should wait till the league programme was finished.
They said they had repeatedly requested a change in the date but to no avail. The Camanachd Association was determined it should be played this Saturday.
Ballachulish say the reason they given by the association was that players from both teams being involved in 'International Training' for the shinty/ hurling internationals next month
Ballachulish disagreed with the Scotland/Ireland internationals taking priority over important league fixtures.
The statement concluded "So, in summary, we are disappointed that we are giving up our opportunity to compete to play shinty at the level our club aspires to, but feel we have little alternative on this occasion, due mainly to the intransigence of the decision makers at the Camanachd Association. We do, however, look forward to mounting a further challenge next season to return to National Leagues, and the continued improvement of Ballachulish shinty."
Certainly sounds better than: "Actually we are not that fussed. We would prefer to watch the golf."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article