Rule42

[Seán Boyle Ó Rathallaigh]

I always believed that Irish Soccer was a joke, I think as a nation we let ourseleves down by our frenzied support for a team of mostly mercenaries from across the water.

A story which i though was an urban legend about Tony Casscariono (can't spell his name and i don't care because it was found out after he had no irish links) not knowning who C.J. Haughey was in Rome in 1990 is infact true and is included in a documentry about Jack Charlton on RTE this week. It is meant to be a funny part of the documentry!!!!!!!!!! I don't find it very funny, I happen to value my citizenship and I don't appreciate the FAI devaluing it and making a joke about it.

Another incident I remember was Clinton Morrision joking and laughing cos only half the team knew how to play Gaelic football at a training session in Japan......tut tut not knowing their national game

I would take what was on offer today in Croke Park every day of the week over those overpaid pre madonna uncultured mercenaries

PS. they can't make the England squad so they declare for the Oirish team and use the fact that they are international players as a lever to agree a better contract at their clubs! They don't have any semblence of pride in Ireland

[yokohama deise]

Tony Cascarino came to play for Ireland when we were rubbish at football so he can hardly be a mercenary!

Other than Clinton Morrison ..all the Irish team at the moment were Irish born or have Irish parents ... so are certainly not mercenaries.

Players like Duff and Keane played Gaelic games in their youth and Niall Quinns and Kevin Morans g.a.a roots are well known ....

but you are right to say they are overpaid but is that the fault of the fai,

perhaps if the gaa looked after players better they might stay in gaelic games and not move to afl or soccer or rugby ...

I love Hurling and Association Football and i see no problem with that and i don't see why it has to be one against the other .... Gaelic Games are as popular as ever in Ireland ... Soccer has tripled in popularity over the last 20 years and Rugby is more popular that ever (at least in munster) i don't know about in Leinster ...and who is suffering?

the country is doing better and all the big sports are doing better and i think we'd be better off getting more people playing all our sports instead of knocking each other .... there is plenty of room to promote GAA globaly (just look at the asian games in Shanghai this weekend ... a large % of the players are not even Irish) http://www.japangaa.com


by the way ... the asian games will be held on a rugby pitch

[Lone Shark]

I've no interest in Irish soccer, to the point where the best thing about the Ireland France game lately for me was that it would take cars off the road and make my run from Dublin down home that night easier.

I'd have slightly more in Rugby, because rugby has slightly more interest in where I grew up - forming a proper team, encouraging the game in the school etc. Lads from my school have played representative rugby at various levels, so that makes me interested in it, and Connacht too.

All that said, though I wouldn't go to an Irish soccer match myself in Croke park if the ticket was free, I'm glad the GAA has taken the rent money, and that's the be-all and end-all of it. Our games are more than strong enough to stand up to competition, so that side of it doesn't concern me - clubs trying to make ends meet does. Five games a year at 1.5m rent per game is €2500 per club per annum. If you can find me a club treasurer who's busting their behind trying to make ends meet and doesn't think that's a good deal then I might be convinced.

To Jim10's point, there were several delegates willing to vote yes to a permanent proposal - over 50% in fact. But the temporary derogation was a happy compromise, so in order to carry the necessary 67% majority, they went with that particular motion, which was the Sligo motion if memory serves. So your assertion that the delegates who voted yes would also like the rule to stay is incorrect.

[jim10]

50% in fact is not actually fact but yeah obviously i dont think all the delegates were against the abolition of rule 42 but it is interesting, i mean what reasons would delegates who voted yes have to vote no against the complete abolition of the rule,agree with the rule or dont, maybe the pressure of the media who brand everyone in the no camp as racist and narrowminded.

[The Biff]

Just to toss another pebble in the puddle and make a few more ripples, I was reading about Thomond Park and how the Munster Rugby officials are starting to plan its redo. They've had some hassle from local residents so building a new stadium on a new site is under consideration. This gives the same question as per Landsdowne - where to play while Thomond was a building site?

With a revamped Gaelic Grounds just around the corner, and a shed load of money gone into it too, is it any different for the GAA to make IT available on the same lines as Croke Park?

I know that the new Rule 42 wording specifies Croke Park by name. Why did this have to be so?

[yokohama deise]

i imagine the Munster RFU will just play all the games in Cork if Thomond park closed ....

[turk]

Just to toss another pebble in the puddle and make a few more ripples, I was reading about Thomond Park and how the Munster Rugby officials are starting to plan its redo. They've had some hassle from local residents so building a new stadium on a new site is under consideration. This gives the same question as per Landsdowne - where to play while Thomond was a building site?

With a revamped Gaelic Grounds just around the corner, and a shed load of money gone into it too, is it any different for the GAA to make IT available on the same lines as Croke Park?

I know that the new Rule 42 wording specifies Croke Park by name. Why did this have to be so?

Spot on biff. as you remember i was against the rule 42 debate. i think if the irfu or the fai are looking for a stadium, the gaa should also be happy to accomodate them in castlebar, killarney etc. i didn't like the way it was specifically centred on croke park. but there you go

[Lone Shark]

....maybe the pressure of the media who brand everyone in the no camp as racist ....

Steady on there...... I'm as opposed to the stance of the Tony O'reilly's empire as anyone on this board, but I'm pretty sure racism was never an issue. Anyway, 50% is a rough approximation of course since delegates weren't going to expressly state what way they were voting in advance of a ballot - however based on county board votes which were public, it's hardly unreasonable. And that's not even counting the likes of the chicanery which went on in Cork - hardly condusive to democracy.

Regarding Thomond and Limerick, I would like to see the GAA set a fixed rent depending on the size of the stadium - and make it quite costly - and then let the controlling authority, whoever that may be, make the decision within that parameter. It means that the Munster Council/Limerick County Board can get a few bob in if they see fit, but if the rent is set from on high, then it rules out any pressure coming on board from so and so's brother to do a "favour". This would be even more prevalent at club level, where small soccer clubs might get to use GAA facilities at cheap cost because the same lads run both clubs.

That's a long way down the road though.

[Seán Boyle Ó Rathallaigh]

Completely disagree with you there LS on small soccer clubs using local GAA grounds and if there are the same people running the GAA club as the soccer club then they are the wrong people for the job.

I refer you to the GAA's Comhairle programme 2002, in its guidelines to its officers it states under the heading "Desirble Quailities of a Member of the Club Management team":-

Dedication : - "The GAA must come high on his/her list of priorities"

Knowledge : - "He/She must have a good working knowledge of the Association, the ethos, and the rules and procedures for running a club"

One of the keys words being ETHOS

[The Biff]

I was a firm proponent of changing Rule 42, but I would never advocate clearing the way for an "open all gates" policy. Rather, I would fully support the restriction that Central Council still holds the final say on the renting of ALL GAA grounds to other sports, whether the prospective tenant is the IRFU or Shamrock Rovers or The Village Old Folks Lawn Bowls Club.

After the showpiece game last Sunday, this should reinforce the view that Gaelic Games has little to fear about competition from other sports. However, this does not mean that where a significant local effort has been made to build good facilities, that they may be "colonized" by the competition.

Despite that, where there is a greater good (i.e. saving the country millions of taxpayers Euro) or a means to short-term gain (i.e. rent our pitches while the opposition tries to play catch-up), then I think we can make hay while the sun shines. This would apply to any redevelopment of Thomond Park as much as to Landsdowne. However, it would not apply to the likes of Shamrock Rovers or many other Irish Soccer Clubs who just seem to have perfected the art of squandering resources.

Such a distinction could not be documented easily in formal Rules. It could only be handled properly on a case-by-case basis by a trusted committee who have our own interests at heart. Such a committee would be the GAA's Central Council. That's why I would have preferred the new Rule to have placed control of these decisions in their hands.

[yokohama deise]

BIFF ... I agree with every word you typed on that last e-mail.

renting Croke Park will have no disavantagous aspect for the GAA and will bring in revenue which clubs up and down the country will gladly use to promote the games in their areas!

[yokohama deise]

BIFF ... I agree with every word you typed on that last e-mail.

renting Croke Park will have no disavantagous aspect for the GAA and will bring in revenue which clubs up and down the country will gladly use to promote the games in their areas!

[Lone Shark]

Completely disagree with you there LS on small soccer clubs using local GAA grounds and if there are the same people running the GAA club as the soccer club then they are the wrong people for the job.

I refer you to the GAA's Comhairle programme 2002, in its guidelines to its officers it states under the heading "Desirable Quailities of a Member of the Club Management team":-

Dedication : - "The GAA must come high on his/her list of priorities"

Knowledge : - "He/She must have a good working knowledge of the Association, the ethos, and the rules and procedures for running a club"

One of the keys words being ETHOS

I'm not sure I necessarily agree that those qualities are mutually exclusive with being involved in two different sporting organisations in a small village area. It's just that in these areas invariably there are lots of grousers, and a handful of people who try to get things done. The local GAA club is integral to almost all small communities, and so it should be - and where there's a conflict of interest I'd assume anyone on this board and would hope that any club official would look after the CLG first and other bodies second - however - it is possible to do a good job as club secretary/treasurer/PRO/whatever and perform similar functions for the local Pitch and Putt club, or OWL soccer club, bridge club or whatever. Soccer per se is not bad for the GAA. Our games are more than strong enough to take the competition, given good management and direction within the communities. All too often those giving out about players choosing soccer or rugby over GAA are just papering over the cracks because the GAA club is failing to cater for those players adequately, be that in providing playing time, cover in case of injury, or enough training to adequately satisfy the player involved. If the player just doesn't want to kick an O'Neills and only wants to play another game, then there's nothing to cry about - nothing will change that.

[Lone Shark]

I was a firm proponent of changing Rule 42, but I would never advocate clearing the way for an "open all gates" policy.

Not what I meant either - but I still think that if, for example, Ferbane GAA club think it's in their interests to rent out facilities to Gallen Utd. or West Offaly Lions, in order to finance improved floodlighting or whatever, then they should be allowed to explore that avenue.

The reason I'd like Central council to set fixed rates is that that precludes the possibility of local influence being used to try and secure a preferential deal - lads in the local pub badgering and saying sure isn't any rent at all more than nothing? The rent should be high enough to ensure that the GAA club will always be the one getting the better end of the deal, and any resultant improvements will help keep the GAA as the number one sport and improve the experience for all involved.

[The Biff]

I think we are actually on the same train of thought here.

MY point was that I did NOT want Rule 42 simply erased from the GAA Constitution so that there was no restriction on the sharing/renting of GAA grounds. I would have been happy to place all control of these decisions in the hands of a high-level GAA committee, e.g. Central Council. Any and all requests from throughout the country would have to go before that committee.

YOUR point of Central Council setting "standard" rents for local grounds is also a good one, as it would take THAT part of the issue off the local table. Of course, in a case where the local Rugby/Soccer Club has a very generous Abromovich-type benefactor so that the rent is not a problem, other considerations could still be quite vaildly used BY Central Council to veto the ground usage, possibly on the advice of some of the local GAA officials.

The main point remains - the usage of all GAA grounds (from Croke Park down to the field in Tubber) doesn't have to be controlled by wordy rules that can only be changed, reviewed or (mis)interpreted once a year.