ConnachtCows wrote: Does anyone else think that there should be something like a 3 year gap after a player leaves Connacht, before their eligible

Why? I'd vote for Ray every year if he wasn't already inducted. Absolute hero. You need 3 years to decide?

Does anyone else think that there should be something like a 3 year gap after a player leaves Connacht, before their eligible, or is it just me?

We seem to just vote for whatever player retires each season at the moment

Ofisa
O'Connor
Wilkinson

If we were voting next season, I wonder how many people would pick Ofisa

I agree with Diom. And there should be no reason Wilko couldn't be inducted this year.

Well personally I don't think that we should be too worried about having the players be available to us. It's to honour them, and so really I think we should be of the view that them being around to accept is only a bonus. I don't want to end up in the situation where that plays a part in who we vote in.

The main sticking point left on this topic is the question of eligibility.

One school of thought is that only players who have left Connacht or retired at least one season previously should be considered for induction. The other is that players due to retire at the end of the season, along with former players, should be eligible. Having the player attend, while preferable, is not a prerequisite for induction in either case.

The main reasoning behind the first proposal is to bring in a cooling off period which ensures that only true Connacht legends are inducted. The idea behind the second proposal is that we have a much better chance of having the player attend a trophy ceremony in the Clan Bar before they leave/retire.

So what do you guys think? Let us know, as we want to get this finalised sooner rather than later. I think it can be summed up pretty well by the case of Brett Wilkinson. Would people rather we induct him before the end of the season, a la Eric and Johnny, or should the Hall of Fame be more of a long term project, like the NFL HoF?

Evening all!

Up to date for the voting on the Hall of Fame. Will be finalizing voting in a week or so, provided there are no strong objections.

Should the Clan always induct two people to the Hall of Fame?

Yes 1 14%
No 6 86%

Do you think the Clan should have a 'Senior' Hall of Fame

Yes 5 71%
No 2 29%

If you think the Clan should have a Senior Hall of Fame, what should be the criteria?

Player or Coach who has been retired for 5 years 4 57%
Player who has been retired for 5 years 0 0%
Player or Coach who has been retired for 15 years 2 29%
Player who has been retired for 15 years 0 0%
Player or Coach who has been retired for 25 years 1 14%
Player who has been retired for 25 years 0 0%

Do you have to retire in Connacht to be eligible for Hall of Fame?

Yes for all inductees 0 0%
Yes for 'current' (i.e. not 'Senior) inductees 1 14%
Yes for 'Senior' Inductees only 0 0%
No 6 86%
No for 'current' (i.e. not 'Senior) inductees 0 0%
No for 'Senior' Players only 0 0%

ummm, wrote: I think one thing the clan needs to forget about is whether or not the player will be available to receive the award, otherwise it will only ever be a prize handed out to whoever's around. So what if they're not available, if the fans believe they're good enough for the HOF that's good enough for me.

sparking wrote: II also agree that recipients may be inducted without their presence.

For me it's more about honouring someone who's made an outstanding contribution to Connacht Rugby, it's hard to honour them if they don't know about it! If they're not there to accept the trophy and the acclaim from supporters it becomes kind of meaningless IMO, just another list we came up with.

It's a fancy one: works both ways.

Sol_ie wrote:

ummm, wrote: What's the point of having a clan president if he doesn't go off on a megalomaniacal spree of decision making that ignores the democratic process? I'm disappointed.

To be fair, he does get his own door to the Bar.

Is that the door in or the door out...

ummm, wrote: What's the point of having a clan president if he doesn't go off on a megalomaniacal spree of decision making that ignores the democratic process? I'm disappointed.

To be fair, he does get his own door to the Bar.

What's the point of having a clan president if he doesn't go off on a megalomaniacal spree of decision making that ignores the democratic process? I'm disappointed.

As the Clan Hall Of Fame is relatively new, I see no harm in the current committee inducting 'Legends' without the need for a poll of every member. For the next couple of years anyway. Do we really need to vote on whether the likes of Eric Elwood or Ciaran Fitzgerald should be inducted? Beyond that I think some guidelines should be put in place for future committees.

The committee may change, the fans are less likely to. All Clan members should be able to vote on everything, where practical, in my opinion. I also agree that recipients may be inducted without their presence.

Decadence wrote: I don't really see the point in drawing a line in the sand and differentiating between players who played before or after a certain time. They all go into the same hall of fame whether they finished up 40 years ago or 4.

Same thing in the NFL, it's all the same hall. The point of the senior vote is it's separate to give older guys a shot instead of being constantly dropped from the list in favour of someone who's just become eligible. It's also because the hall wasn't set up when many of them were playing.

The way it works is the selectors come up with a list of players and the senior committee can add up to two (but could be zero) seniors to the list. Everyone then votes. Anyone with 80% of the votes gets in.

That probably wouldn't work here, because the more recent players are more likely to rank higher. Instead I'd suggest adding a single senior HOF inductee, with maybe some form of criteria (like number of votes) being used to decide if they go in or not. If they don't make it, then there's no senior inductee that year.

I think one thing the clan needs to forget about is whether or not the player will be available to receive the award, otherwise it will only ever be a prize handed out to whoever's around. So what if they're not available, if the fans believe they're good enough for the HOF that's good enough for me.

Decadence wrote: Is there also a chance that restricting it to two entrants a year will be a problem? Let's say for arguments sake that Duffy, Swift and Muldoon all retire this year. Who do we leave out?

I think that we should never see this as an automatic thing for fan-favourites. If a player feels disappointed that they didn't get in then (with all due respect to the lad) tough. If they are really worthy they will get in the next year.
As for who to leave out... that's what the polls here are for.

Decadence wrote: I don't really see the point in drawing a line in the sand and differentiating between players who played before or after a certain time. They all go into the same hall of fame whether they finished up 40 years ago or 4. The only reason these guys would be different to players currently playing is that they will be harder to get a hold of and honour in the same way. As I've said above, I think we will either have to let the committee make the decisions as the opportunities to do this arise or else draw up a list of nominations, let everyone vote and then let the committee try to get a hold of the successful nominees over the next few years.

Is there also a chance that restricting it to two entrants a year will be a problem? Let's say for arguments sake that Duffy, Swift and Muldoon all retire this year. Who do we leave out?

So that'd be Swifty and ...