The GAA’s Croke of Gold

A forum to air your views on Offaly GAA matters and beyond.
User avatar
Lone Shark
All Star
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
Club: Ferbane
Location: Roscommon
Contact:

The GAA’s Croke of Gold

Post by Lone Shark »

(As posted on the site under my columns - any thoughts?)

The recent US election, as well as showing us that the electorate of the US views GW Bush somewhat differently to the rest of us, has been widely recognised as an illustration of the deep divisions that run down the core of the American nation. Two widely different candidates put themselves forward, and both ran a campaign involving ground level volunteers on a scale hitherto unheard of in the country. The high turnout figures show how eager the voters were to register their opinion, and the sheer elation and despair witnessed on a huge scale were illustrative of how polarised the country is.

Irish politics is somewhat of a different beast. We have a political system which puts forth choices where ideologies are often quite similar. Candidates and parties win and lose elections on the strength of how well the man on the doorstep can satisfy the “What’s in it for me?” attitude that has pervaded the Irish electorate down the years. The greater good is not really an issue that tends to mobilise us to the same extent as the medical card that can be extracted for an elderly relative, or planning permission for that nice two story house on a hill, or indeed objecting to planning permission for or indeed the very notion of any form of waste disposal whatsoever, while at the same time demanding that refuse collection be efficient and free. The very idea of the Irish electorate attending rallies, or waving placards at passing motorists, or queuing for hours to register their vote is fanciful in the extreme.

And yet we are as polarised as our American cousins in our own way. Not about politics, or ethics, but about what games are played on a patch of grass in Dublin 3. When the discussion rears its head in the pub, as it invariably does irrespective of where you go for your jar of a Friday evening, everyone has a view, everyone is on one side or the other, and largely speaking, everyone feels very passionately about that view. Lone Shark, having been engaged in more than his fair share of such debates, has become tired of taking part as invariably they involve whatever logic and reason employed to be discarded about halfway through, and the discussion inevitably descends into farce as accusations of “backwoodsman” and “West Brit” get fired across the table, with the scramble for the moral high ground taking precedence over all attempts to come to any consensus on the matter.

Lone Shark is about to take a new tack on this debate and in doing so is removing any possibility of ever being invited onto the Chris Barry or Adrian Kennedy phone show debacles on Dublin Radio. In a what seems to amount for a first for anyone discussing this matter, Lone Shark can actually see both sides of the argument, because two sides there most certainly are. Lone Shark has his own view, and that will follow later, but in the interim we will try to separate the relevant points worthy of consideration from the empty rhetoric, and thus give the readers of Uibhfhaili.com a basis to form their own views which we would hope they would air at the AGMs which will soon be taking place in clubhouses across Offaly and beyond.

Firstly we will be very clear about what Rule 42 states – it reads:
(a) “All property including grounds, Club Houses, Halls, Dressing Rooms and Handball Alleys owned or controlled by units of the Association shall be used only for the purpose of or in connection with the playing of the Games controlled by the Association, and for such other purposes not in conflict with the Aims and Objects of the Association, that may be sanctioned from time to time by the Central Council.”
(b) “Grounds controlled by Association units shall not be used or permitted to be used for Horse Racing, Greyhound Racing, or for Field Games other than those sanctioned by Central Council”
So in essence the only problem is the section stating “for such other purposes not in conflict with the Aims and Objects of the Association”. Due to the fact that soccer, rugby etc. are considered to be in competition with the GAA for participation and audience, these sports are thus deemed to be in conflict with the GAA’s aims and objects. Removing this line would allow Central Council to take things on a case by case basis, and I don’t think any GAA member seeks to have Croke Park any more open than that. While this consideration may not be viewed as a fair and reasonable assumption by some, as long as players give up Gaelic Games in order to pursue other sports, this will remain the attitude.

Whether people decide to support or oppose the opening of Croke Park should be based on how much of an obstacle to the GAA aims they consider these sports to be, whether that effect will be amplified or reduced by giving Croke Park to other sports as a stage, and how much are these factors offset or are they indeed wiped out completely when we factor in the potential gains from such a move.

Such an analysis starts by estimating how much our Association continues to be adversely affected by other games, if at all. Although the health of the nation is hugely benefited by people of all ages participating in sport of any kind, this is a GAA matter, so we will look at the health of our sports, and our sports alone. However even in this regard, Lone Shark struggles to find coherent reasons to believe that soccer and rugby (since to all intents and purposes these are the games we are referring to) impact negatively on playing numbers for Gaelic Games. These games are primarily winter sports, and as such usually can be played side by side with football/hurling/camogie etc., and indeed often are by our intercounty stars. Such a co-existence leads to Gaelic players having a physical outlet away from the pressure cooker environment of club/county championship buildup and matches, a chance to play for the sake of playing rather than “pride in the jersey” etc., and a chance to develop friendships away from the local GAA club, where often the backslapping and hype surrounding a talented young player has led to otherwise well adjusted teenagers becoming arrogant, and losing their way in life and in sport because of their “superstar” status. There are those who worry about the potential for a professional sporting life drawing young players away from our games, and it is true that this is a concern. However if the lure is a big day in Croke Park, then that’s much more likely to entice kids to join their local GAA team than rugby club, seeing as over 1000 different players play Gaelic Games in Croke Park every year, and even if it was in watching Brian O’Driscoll that he or she got the notion, only maybe 20 Irish Rugby players will feature in the 6 nations at home in any calendar year, and they’re the only rugby games that would need the extra capacity Croke Park offers. If the lure is money, then the GAA has nothing to offer, at least at the moment, and Croke Park would be an irrelevance. The GAA offers something different to monetary reward - the pride in the parish jersey, the dream of pulling on a county shirt, emulating the hero in your own village who brought the Dowling, Robbins or maybe even Maguire or McCarthy cup back to your national school on a glorious Monday, all abstract but still powerful pull factors that other games cannot match.

In respect of attendance however, there is a more justifiable reluctance to open up Croker. The GAA has long enjoyed the advantage of having a culture of attendance. Disregarding provincial and All-Ireland finals, which invariably attract corporate hangers on and assorted big day visitors, our association has been bankrolled heavily by the willingness of people to turn out in droves to games at all levels. This also sustains interest in the Games as people get to appreciate it first hand. The FAI’s flagship domestic event is the FAI cup final, which this year attracted just over 10,000 souls. The IRFU’s is the All Ireland League final, which attracted considerably less. The Cork senior hurling final brought in more than both of these combined. Very few AIL clubs have an average attendance of over 500 people for their league games. Lone Shark was privileged to attend the replay of the Offaly U-16 B football final, played between two village clubs, which brought in roughly that on a Sunday morning in October. At the moment Gaelic Games is operating in a different world to its competitors. Opening up Croke Park allows more people to attend live international soccer and rugby who as things stand cannot get tickets due to not being in the blazer/sheepskin inner circle. In opening up new markets for these sports, it can’t be ruled out that potential GAA followers will appreciate the benefits of live action, and thus take to following a local soccer or rugby team instead. This seems like a small consideration, but it is a real one nonetheless.

Since we have started with the potential drawbacks to altering Rule 42, we will continue on that road. Lone Shark visualises the following situation as being all too plausible:
As we have learned, the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road is likely to be a long drawn out process, with no doubt countless planning objections and other obstacles all in the pipeline before a wrecking ball is swung. As things stand it can take crowds of up to 30,000 odd seated, and nearly 50,000 for rugby where standing is allowed and restrictions are not as severe. Should Rule 42 be repealed before the modification gets underway, this opens the door for work on Lansdowne to be reconsidered, and possibly abandoned. In this situation soccer would become completely dependent on Croke Park to host all internationals, which would lead to considerable posturing and scrambling around September and June, when the GAA season is in full swing, and being used every weekend, but the Irish soccer team usually have weeks where they have two international qualification matches, with FIFA/UEFA usually requiring you to play one at home and one away. The national expectancy for the GAA to back down in such a situation would leave us in a no-win situation.
Similarly, the Club Finals on St. Patrick’s day have become immensely popular occasions, with attendances likely to push 50,000 over the next few years. They also represent the holy grail for the bedrock of the association, the club player. It would greatly go against the ethos of the association and indeed the will of Lone Shark to see such games moved out of HQ to accommodate a six Nations match against England where Dublin 4 is united, aghast at the notion of 30,000 less tickets being in circulation for such a game. Again in the absence of a viable Lansdowne Road option, the IRFU would undoubtedly seek assurance that all their home games could be played at Croker, and we would lose what has become the fastest growing GAA event of the calendar.

Now let’s envisage another potential scenario:
Rule 42 is repealed, and Central Council is given the power to lease out Croke Park where it sees fit. Central Council commissions a report to decide the fair and economic rent – which for argument’s sake we’ll say is €1,000,000 – in Lone Shark’s eyes the bare minimum that should be charged. The FAI realise that the extra revenue they will accrue from having 60,000 in attendance as opposed to 30,000 is not all that much, particularly when extra costs incurred are factored in. The FAI then decide to resort to what they’re best at – whining and feeling sorry for themselves. They appear all over the media about how they’re being “blackmailed”, and how the GAA is trying to set a prohibitive price so as to deny the “ordinary fan” a chance to sing olé and wave an inflatable green hammer with like minded souls. The Indo, Star, Sun etc. go for the easy headlines and all of a sudden the GAA is more demonised than it is now for its stance. With a Government seeking re-election and eager to pander to the masses in any way it can, Central Council is pressurised into charging an uneconomic rent, and thus the GAA loses out and soccer’s PR people award themselves a six figure bonus.

Lone Shark accepts that the above situations are both completely avoidable with the correct stipulations and safeguards, but would want to see the contingencies provided for before supporting any notion to open up Croke Park.

Whether through coincidence or otherwise, the unsung heroes of the GAA, club administrators and volunteers tend to be split just as equally as ordinary club members, players and the supporting public. Many of those administrators who are opposed to reform tend to ask the question – what about our club? If Croke Park is available, how does this affect our situation? This is a very valid concern, since there is the possibility that if Croke Park is available for Irish international soccer or rugby matches, it becomes very difficult to find a tenable reason to oppose leasing out the Gaelic Grounds, or Páirc uí Chaoimh to the Munster rugby team for Heineken Cup ties, for example. Lone Shark for one would have no theoretical objection to such an arrangement. But what then if this step by step erosion of barriers continues? If we are embarking down a road that eventually leads to all club and county grounds being available for leasing, that certainly hands a serious competitive advantage to other sports at grassroots level.
In theory you would say that if, for example Banagher Soccer club wishes to use St. Rynagh’s facilities throughout the winter, Rynaghs can at committee level decide if (a) they’re happy for the pitch to take extra use, and (b) what constitutes a fair and economic rent that rewards them for the years of hard work put into putting their infrastructure into place. A figure is arrived at, and presented to the Soccer club, who can then take it or leave it. No negotiation is entered into. This scenario does not see the GAA at a competitive disadvantage, and indeed could be a blessing to overworked and overstressed treasurers everywhere. Unfortunately however, theoretically often fails to apply in real Irish life. The above situation could indeed be the case in urban areas, but in small villages across Ireland a large pitfall awaits – invariably, in these communities, it tends to be the same handful of people who undertake all voluntary work. This could often lead to the same people being on several different committees, or if not the same people, close friends and neighbours. So what happens when the soccer club pleads inability to pay, and thereby puts pressure on existing relationships to get a preferential deal? Several Offaly villages, such as Walsh Island, Cloneyhurke, Clonmore, and countless others all have active soccer clubs, and offhand Lone Shark can only think of Tullamore, Birr and Gallen Utd in Ferbane among Offaly soccer clubs who would have comparable facilities to what is now par for the course among GAA clubs. All of these villages could easily see themselves under pressure to give up their facilities for considerably less than what would be a fair rent – and as a potential direct consequence of Rule 42 amendment, this is an outcome the GAA needs to be prepared for.
Lone Shark suggests the following solution – should Rule 42 be amended, clearly in the long run Central Council will have to delegate the power to lease out facilities back to club level. The potential hurdle outlined above could be cleared if; power is delegated down to county/club level, with a clear minimum rent for certain basic levels of facilities that cannot be undercut under any circumstances without Central Council clearance. (To allow some leeway for Charity events etc.) A minimum rent of €100 per training session/match for use of a basic club standard ground and changing room, with a percentage of any gate revenue should such revenue accrue, should be enough to ensure that if their facilities are used once a week while there’s an R in the month, the club has an extra €3000 to use in the summer. With this system in place, Club Secretaries could happily tell their counterparts in the local soccer/rugby/tug’o’war club that they’d happily allow use for less rent, but their hands are tied! Most clubs would have enough anti-soccer busybodies keeping an eye out and reporting to the county board if anything underhand was taking place to ensure that the system would self-police nicely.

Before proceeding to the arguments in favour of change, there are several other points raised by those in favour of retaining Rule 42 in its current format. By and large, Lone Shark considers all these arguments to be spurious at best.
(i) “It raises the possibility of an Ireland vs England soccer or rugby match in Croke Park, with the ghastly spectre of St. George’s Cross and God save the Queen on our sacred soil”. Surely to even the most republican among us, the idea that England as a nation and her icons would be treated no differently to France, and the accompanying Tricolere and Marseillaise, is merely a sign of our complete and total independence from England, and that we are now secure enough in our independence to no longer feel threatened by the big bad rival across the water.
(ii) “What about what happened in the soccer friendly at Lansdowne road? – Combat 18 etc. would surely love to get into Croke Park and cause mayhem.” What happened on that fateful March evening was a failure on the part of both Irish soccer and Irish policing. More than enough intelligence was provided by UK authorities in advance, and was handled with the impotence we now associate with the FAI. Equally the indiscriminate manner in which it was policed when known instigators were involved exacerbated the situation. To put this into a Croke Park context, UK intelligence is better than ever, and when allied to organisational skills of the GAA, and all round respect towards the potential for trouble, this area shouldn’t be a concern.
(iii) “What about the memory of all those people who died on Bloody Sunday at the hands of the Black and Tans in this very stadium? Surely allowing games of an English origin to be played there is an affront to their memory?” This is still a sensitive issue almost a century on, but the truth of the matter is that on that Sunday in 1920, there was a war on. No war is pleasant, but it was nationwide, and we don’t bar soccer from taking place in every town and village where atrocities occurred.
(iv) “The GAA is doing fine – debt on Croke Park is down to roughly €50m – we don’t need the money.” That we don’t need the money is true. Qualifier revenues have ensured that the GAA continues to make ends meet and meet all its’ commitments. However at a roughly economic rent of €1.5million per event about 5 times a year, that equates to €7.5m, or more accurately €3000 for each and every club in Ireland every year. None of these clubs will go to the wall without that money – but improvements would be made and appreciated at every level if it was available.
(v) “Between all the games in both codes, added to club, camogie, and women’s football finals, the usage of Croke Park is on a par with or more than its equivalents – the Twickenhams, Murrayfields and Stades des France of this world. Surely it’s being used enough as it is.” This is all true, and would be a very valid argument if we deciding whether or not to give the FAI and IRFU the right to hold international fixtures and more in Croke whenever they liked as long as they pay the rent. This is not the case – we are debating whether or not to allow Central Council to lease out the stadium as often as they see fit. Central Council would have football, hurling and camogie first and foremost in their minds at all times, and in this respect can surely be trusted to ensure that the playing surface is always at it’s best for the games that matter – ours.

So we know why not to amend Rule 42 – but why would you change it?

First up, obviously, has to be financial considerations. As outlined above, debt on Croke Park is down to under €50 million after the latest tranche of government aid. This is quite serviceable, and could easily be looked after within a decade if necessary. However Gaelic Games are a living, breathing organisms, with constant support and development needed. The money might not be necessary, but it would be useful. Getting mathematical for a while, let’s work on what rent could feasibly be charged for a once off use of the stadium. Seán Kelly has suggested €2m as an opening gambit, however how much of this is actuarial valuation and how much is merely the start of negotiations remains to be seen. Again, using soccer as the example – under FIFA regulations, with standing not permitted, Croke Park could seat 68,000 people approximately – 35,000 in excess of Lansdowne Road. Disregarding corporate boxes etc. seeing as Lone Shark can’t claim any knowledge as too how many of them there are in Dublin 4, and assuming the ground would only be taken in the event of a certain sell out, that suggests approximately €2.1m extra revenue @ €60 per ticket. (If not the price now, certainly what they would charge with the better facilities on offer) With the additional administrative and management costs included, it’s safe to say that Seán Kelly’s figure is probably beyond what the FAI would pay. However at €1.5m, it still leaves the GAA benefiting substantially, but it would require immense stubborn-ness from Merrion Square not to see an extra half million as worth the effort. They would no doubt go down the whinging route outlined above, but if the GAA has provided for that and has all its PR people in place and ready for the offensive, at the end of the day you would expect they would still go for the deal. (For one example, that would cover almost two full CEO payoffs, bringing them up to at least 2008.) As we covered above, with on average five paying events per year, that represents €3000 per club per annum. Anyone with any involvement in a GAA club will vouch for the amount of difference this could make.

The second point, which Lone Shark finds often goes unmentioned, is the potential ancillary benefits. This isn’t meant in the Ryanair ancillary sense, i.e. extra burgers sold and whatnot, but the leverage it gives in obtaining extra benefits for Croke Park to be used by the GAA.
Suppose the GAA and the FAI come to an agreement, to the immense joy of both John O’Donoghue and Bertie Ahern, who revel in the feelgood factor set to be created by France playing at Croke Park. The game is set for a Wednesday evening – but hold on! The GAA as things stand do not have planning permission for floodlighting, although they do have the capacity to put it in promptly. If they were to go through the correct channels, planning could take years with the inevitable residents’ objections. Now ask yourself if the Ireland v France match was in four weeks, how long would planning take to get through …..
A similar argument could apply to the restrictions which currently apply to the number of Non-GAA events allowed in Croke Park per year, currently set at three. These are usually used as revenue generators, although the sections of the media known for being quick to highlight any perceived “Grab-All-Association” activity were nowhere to be seen when two of these were foregone for no monetary return in order to facilitate the opening and closing ceremonies of the Special Olympics in 2003. In 2005 two of these events are already accounted for by U2 concerts. Again, if the proverbial doors were opened, one suspects that residents’ concerns would be trampled on in no time in the rush to cut ribbons and proclaim a “historic occasion” and whatnot.

Most of us can remember the day when the GAA comprised of 32 Irish counties, plus the obvious emigrant centres in America and the UK. A quick look at gaa.ie will give some indication of how global the game is becoming, with GAA tournaments taking place in mainland Europe, Asia and the middle East regularly. This is a wonderful development, which both spreads the gospel of the games, as well as providing a familiar root point for exiles abroad. However this growth has become a factor in the Rule 42 debate on two counts.
Firstly, the games are played on greater scale than ever before by foreigners who go to their local club anywhere in the globe and take up the game. This is a wonderful thing, and the fact that it happens with little or no promotion is a testament to the playability of our sports. Imagine the potential benefit if more non-Irish realised the amazing secret that is one of the finest stadia in the world was built and is owned by the players and administrators of these games. Imagine the increased tourism to GAA grounds across Ireland and to Croke Park in particular on foot of the increased exposure that our hallowed turf would get. Without question this could lead to exponential growth in GAA clubs abroad, and strengthen our association immeasurably.
Secondly, the fact that so many of our playing exiles across the globe use playing facilities given/lent/leased to them by sports that by our rulebook we cannot return the favour to is something that plays heavily on the conscience of the Lone Shark. Strictly in the spirit of “do unto others”, this is a glaring hypocrisy in our rulebook which really should be addressed one way or another. And nobody wishes to close Hong Kong GAA club, so really Rule 42 looks the more palatable adjustment in that light.

In a debate where both sides are relatively evenly matched, obviously there are some pro-amendment myths which need to be dealt with as well.

(i) While Lansdowne is being done up, if Croke Park was not available, the national soccer team would have to play its games abroad. Surely this would reflect terribly on the GAA? Only in Ireland would the inadequacy of the IRFU and FAI be seen to reflect badly on the GAA. The GAA’s job is to look after Gaelic Games in Ireland. Personally Lone Shark feels that that job is being done very well, and thus the GAA can pat itself on the back, irrespective of where Ireland v France takes place.
(ii) Croke Park has received a lot of exchequer assistance during its revamp. Does this not place an onus on it to act in the National interest? This is the most detestable argument of all. Aside from the fact that when all indirect taxes and wage taxes on those employed in the renovation are factored in the exchequer ended up in the black on the deal, even if this were not the case it no more obliges the GAA to house the homeless sports of this country than it does oblige the recipient of a FÁS or enterprise Ireland grant to employ any lost soul that knocks on the door looking for a job. Or the recipient of Children’s Allowance to buy school books for a whole class. We’ve all had Government assistance by times, and we’ve all known what the conditions were before we received it. Imagine the uproar if extra conditions were added after the cheque was cashed in other situations?
(iii) Wouldn’t it be wonderful to be able to go and cheer on Duff and Keane/O’Driscoll and D’Arcy in Croker? Lone Shark has been known to enjoy watching American Football, with quite a fondness for the Green Bay Packers. Watching Brett Favre throwing touchdown passes into the Canal End would be fantastic, an experience to be treasured. That’s just a dream, not a logical argument for making it happen, much like the Duff/O’Driscoll thing.
(iv) It would give many soccer and rugby fans the chance to follow the national team who don’t otherwise get the chance to get tickets. Since to reiterate that this is not the GAA’s responsibility would by now be repetitive if no less true, we’ll take a different tack here. These are not fans that deserve tickets. These are the supporters that are the big day out fans, the guys that in many cases couldn’t name what teams played in the previous FAI Cup/AIL final. If you gave a ticket for Ireland’s next soccer match to every supporter that attended their club’s last Eircom League game, you’d have a lot of tickets left to sell before the 33,000 seats in Lansdowne Road would be full. Rugby used to have the honourable exception that was the Munster followers, but then a look at Munster’s Celtic League attendances this year don’t paint the same image of a thick-and-thin following. Lone Shark accepts that no doubt some deserving supporters miss out, just the same as several loyal Kerry and Mayo supporters who were there throughout the year, league and championship couldn’t get a ticket for the big day. This is unfortunate, but still not a justification for such a sea change.
(v) The GAA is anti-democratic, and only a few old fogies are holding back the will of the masses within the membership. Lone Shark is not an advocate of rule 42, and as you will read below, would vote in favour of amending the rule if a referendum among the membership were to take place. However until the rule is changed, by whatever mandate, Lone Shark will continue to defend fiercely the democratic procedures of the GAA, and the rulebook which has evolved from those procedures. The truth is that most GAA members avoid the club AGM like the plague, and many mix up not being asked face to face their opinion with not having a voice. All GAA members have this opportunity to voice their concerns on any matter, and while the GAA is a huge organisation, and can often be quite unwieldy as a result, their democratic nature is above question.
(vi) Media and public opinion pressure is considerable. Surely for PR reasons alone it would benefit the GAA to amend the rule, and make life easier for all of us. Of all the factors at play in this argument, it’s fair to say the editorial views of the Star and its ilk, or the rantings of a soccer fan in a pub in Finglas, or Athlone, or Longford are hardly those we should be most concerned about. We’re all proud of our association – when confronted by such diatribes, stand up and say so.

Overall, with all the above factored in, Lone Shark would support an amendment to rule 42 allowing Central Council the right to use our equipment as they see fit, provided the necessary provisions are put in place to safeguard local clubs and the potential for excessive use by other sports in the absence of the Lansdowne redevelopment proceeding. Several county boards and their members have done great work in trying to push this through, especially people like Tommy Kenoy in Roscommon. These people are trying to exercise change which they see as being for the benefit of the GAA as a whole, and are doing so within the democratic framework that exists. In this regard, this article would not be complete without expressing disappointment at the actions of the council of Past Presidents, who last year sought not just to resist change, but to stifle debate on the matter, and even allowing for problems with the motions as they were tabled last year, could have done so much more to ensure at least one of the seven motions tabled made it to Congress. With any luck this winter will see an open and frank discussion at all levels of GAA administration to truly ascertain the will of the membership on this matter, and with that mandate on one side or another, at least the rights and wrongs of the matter will be lot clearer, to this one reader of the situation even if not to any one else.

User avatar
Percy Sledgehammer
Senior
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:14 am
Location: Tubber
Contact:

Rule 42

Post by Percy Sledgehammer »

Hard to argue with that. Make sure they pay through the nose for it though. We've all paid for that stadium down the years, with our memberships, tickets and fundraisers. If a reasonable return on our investment comes in I won't mind, but otherwise let them sort out their own mess.

Mise
Junior A
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:47 pm

Post by Mise »

Lone Shark,
The most important thing you said in that article is that "The GAA’s job is to look after Gaelic Games in Ireland. " Exactly. If you read back over your own piece you will see that the disadvantages you've outlined far outnumber the advantages so i fail to see how, having looked at both sides, you are still pro admendment. the only 2 benefits you have mentioned are 1)financial and 2) ancillary. number 1 by your own admission is not a huge concern, croke park debt is down to 50 million which is quite manageable if we keep going the way we are. we dont need their money which wouldnt amount to all that much anyway - number 2 is some very vague notion that we might get floodlights and an extra concert a year if we're good boys and do what bertie tells us.
what happens to the irfu/fai, where they end up playin their games etc is not our concern, as you say yourself only here would what happens to them be seen as reflectling badly on the gaa. Allowing other codes in, under any circumstances, means we are changing our rules to suit them, not to suit ourselves, and we will have set a precedence that it will be very hard to go back on. forget them having croker for a few years until their landsdownes redeveloped - its like sitting down on a comfy sofa - one is not very inclined to get back up again, - let the fai/irfu get comfortable in croke park, not only will they not want to leave but they'll get their usual cocky notions of thinking they're inherently entitled to be there.
the gaa funded, managed, built the achievement that is the current croker stadium by running themselves like a professional, well organised outfit that it is. And managed to keep the stadium in use all the while. We need to stop lettin the media/govt/d4 set guilt us into thinkin we owe them something, we dont. IRFU/FAI should follow our example of how its done and get their own shambles of organistions in order before tellin us how to run ours.

User avatar
Lone Shark
All Star
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
Club: Ferbane
Location: Roscommon
Contact:

Rule 42

Post by Lone Shark »

"Allowing other codes in, under any circumstances, means we are changing our rules to suit them, not to suit ourselves, and we will have set a precedence that it will be very hard to go back on. "

If we get a decent economic rent in, then I would contend that it does suit ourselves.

I'd be wary of falling into the trap that what's good for the FAI/IRFU is by default bad for the GAA. I couldn't care less really - the point is would we be better off by €3k per club per annum. If we gain by that much, then I suggest if the others wind up better off as well then happy days.

As for the precedence, it wouldn't be hard to go back on it as long as we have a reason for going back on it. As things stand we'd be making Croker available for when we don't need it. If the time comes when we want it in December, then it's ours to hold. I wouldn't be in favour of any long term lease contracts or anything.

Mise
Junior A
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:47 pm

Post by Mise »

From the nenagh guardian:

Money at the root of GAA evil


By Gerry Slevin
A former GAA President has this week emphasised the need to heed the warnings that are out there in regard to where the Association is going and top of the list in this regard he sees as being over-concentration on money.

Wicklow man Jack Boothman, who was President between 1994 and ’97, was in Bru Boru, Cashel on Sunday to present certificates to GAA personnel from throughout the county, honoured by Cumann na Sean Ghael for service in a lifetime of dedication to the Association. (See page 32).

He said that in recent times, the GAA had become an association that thinks about money first. This was never part of the association to which the award recipients belonged in their day.

“You built fields, stadia and everything else and you never had any money. But you always did the job and you always paid your debts because you knew you had the support of the people around you,” he said.

“Now, the first question we asked was – where will the money come from? Was money coming from Europe, from the government?

“This”, he continued, “was the wrong attitude. It never built Casement Park, Semple Stadium or any other stadium. People did their work, they paid for it as they went along. If they got grants, fair enough, but it was their work and their grounds.

“Today we have people telling us that we are under an obligation to the government because they gave us a measly a60-70 million. Croke Park would have been built if we never got a shilling from the government. It mightn’t have been done last year, this year or next year but it would have been built because we have the men at the top and at the grass roots to do it for us,” said the former President.

The GAA owed an obligation to no one and no apologies to anybody for what had been achieved. The people being honoured that night had seen the association at its best, had participated in and made decisions at high and low levels when the GAA was coming to its pinnacle.

“It may not be there for very much longer because of the way we are going on about money,” he warned.

He recalled recent weeks when some team managers were criticising the fact that players weren’t giving the required dedication to training. This, he said, was in the month of October when the season should be winding down.

“These players are not getting paid, they don’t want to be paid but it won’t be too long before they are looking for money if they see county team managers putting thousands in their own pockets. Unless we get a grip on the whole affair of county training, we can look forward to very stiff times ahead,” said Mr Boothman.

Also at Sunday night’s function, Munster Council chairman Sean Fogarty said that GAA facilities stood out in every parish in the country, making the Association the envy of every other sports organisation in the land.

“We are moving ahead of the posse with facilities that are way above what our competitors have to offer and that will stand us in good stead when we try to capture the minds of the youth of Ireland,” he added.

The Moyne man, a former County Board chairman said it was the time of year when sceptics tried to place emphasis on some of the negative aspects of the GAA. There were times when GAA people were inclined to take that on the chin and when confronted with some of the GAA’s perceived weaknesses, to respond with ‘maybe so’. In the GAA, Mr Fogarty said, there should be no room for the word ‘maybe’.

“We are what we are and without a shadow of doubt we can stand up and say that we have contributed more as an organisation to the development of this country than any of the political parties or statutory bodies. We shouldn’t be ashamed, we shouldn‘t be hiding anywhere or yielding an inch to anybody, when they question where we are. We are there on our merits and that proud tradition, that people like those we are honouring here tonight are handing on to us, makes it essential that we sustain it and build on it,” he said.

User avatar
Lone Shark
All Star
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
Club: Ferbane
Location: Roscommon
Contact:

That is utter madness.

Post by Lone Shark »

Hardship for hardship's sake. Clearly the way forward.

When all these stadia were being "built", safety standards were minimal or non-existant, and fire regulations wouldn't even have been thought of.

Most clubs played one game from the GAA's selection only, starting at under 12 level.

Public Liability insurance was a tiny fraction of a clubs expenses, and player medical costs were minimal because lads trained once a week from March.

Girls playing GAA was an afterthought in most clubs, and barely thought of.

Buying gear and generally looking after players was something rugby did.

:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

Good God above, I've never argued we needed the money, just that expenses and making ends meet is a huge issue for most Treasurers in clubs across Ireland, and when the collateral cost is quite low, it's an issue we can't ignore.

Equally clubs you would hope will always have the support of the community, but the day when a club that wanted a new dressing room could call on the labour of the members is a thing of the past.

Players train in October because that's what most of they, and the clubs they play for, are willing to do to bring a county championship to the parish. That such dedication is given freely is a wonderful part of our association, and while the jury may be out on how beneficial it is, wistfully hoping for the day when we revert to training a few weeks before the big day will not cut it any more. General fitness levels are much higher, which is beneficial for the player, the spectator, and the health of the whole nation. To seek a reversion of this is pointless and introverted, and not to go a few extra yards to accomodate those who are putting the effort into bringing glory to their community is a deplorable thought.

Money should not be the only factor - granted. To say it should not be a factor at all is naive.

User avatar
The Biff
All Star
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:23 pm
Location: Kildare (ex Daingean)

Time

Post by The Biff »

I suspect that there might well be some good logic posted above. Someday I hope to find an hour or two to spare so that I might manage to read it all and take it all in. :?

User avatar
Bord na Mona man
All Star
Posts: 4022
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
Club: Clara

Post by Bord na Mona man »

I await the "Biff report" on the article's content.
If previous form holds, you'll have exploded all the arguments made and leave the author a quivering wreck

User avatar
Lone Shark
All Star
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
Club: Ferbane
Location: Roscommon
Contact:

Re:

Post by Lone Shark »

Still nothing. I guess I get to bask for another while ....

User avatar
The Biff
All Star
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:23 pm
Location: Kildare (ex Daingean)

Ahem

Post by The Biff »

Does that make you a Basking Shark then?

http://www.worldshark.com/species/basking/basking.html

That pun is so bad, I'm almost embarrassed by it now. I should delete it before anyone else reads it.

Must resist ...... the urge to ........... click the ....... Submit button ......
.
.
.
.
resistance
.
.
.
.
slipping

.
.
.
.
.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

User avatar
Bord na Mona man
All Star
Posts: 4022
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:34 am
Club: Clara

Post by Bord na Mona man »

You destroyed him Biff!

User avatar
Lone Shark
All Star
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:21 pm
Club: Ferbane
Location: Roscommon
Contact:

Basking Shark

Post by Lone Shark »

On reading that, the basking shark seems harmless. Not my type at all.

I like the sound of that Megamouth Shark though.

http://www.worldshark.com/species/megam ... mouth.html

Now all I need is another trip to Coppers to meet a mate, probably one of these ....

http://www.worldshark.com/species/nurse/nurse.html

User avatar
The Biff
All Star
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:23 pm
Location: Kildare (ex Daingean)

Sorry to disappoint you BnMm

Post by The Biff »

I actually agree with virtually all of what Lone Shark said above. Like him, I can also see both sides of the argument and I can accept many of the concerns voiced by the "Keep Rule 42" side.

Despite this, I too think that Croke Park (in particular) should be made available to other codes, but firmly on the GAA's terms. I feel no sympathy for the state that the FAI and IRFU find themselves, playing in a run-down stadium that truly reflects their own neglect.

But I like watching Rugby and Soccer, particularly our own National teams. I want them to play in a venue that reflects well on our country. As professional sports, I fundamentally disagree that our Government must feel compelled to put up most of the funds for building a new stadium for these two sports. There are many other more deserving needs for those funds.

This must not be seen as hypocritical in the face of the funds given to the GAA as part of the Croke Park project. In that case, the absolute and relative portion covered by Govt. grants was much less than that proposed for the new Landsdowne. Also, it is accepted that the GAA has already managed to more than re-imburse the Govt for all of those grants, by way of VAT and other taxes from the GAA's superior attendance records. What payback is expected from the new Landsdowne? I've never even heard of it being quantified or estimated.

I say: Amend Rule 42.
Last edited by The Biff on Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Biff
All Star
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:23 pm
Location: Kildare (ex Daingean)

D'Oh

Post by The Biff »

The above posting actually appeared twice (after telling me that it had failed the firdst time). Damn computers. :roll:

Mise
Junior A
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 1:47 pm

Post by Mise »

Lone Shark and Biff

Yous have both declared that you've looked at both sides of the argument and come down in favour of amending rule 42. Fair enough. Yous are entitled to your opinion and I am not here to knock anyone on a personal basis, I am only here because i believe such a move would be to the detriment of the gaa.
That is why i am baffled by the fact that there are more concerns/worries/negatives outlined here than there are positive reasons for changing the rule, so I fail to see why you are swayed towards changing it? If it aint broke, dont fix it is the maxim that comes to mind here.
Correct me if I am wrong but the following are the only benefits to the GAA from opening Croke Park that you have outlined:

1) Your main argument is the financial benefit to the Gaa. You state early in your piece that we should only change the rule if the benefits offset the disadvantages and you reckon that 3grand extra a year to each club around the country will do that. For starters, this is a farily spurious figure - you base it on charging the "economic" rent of 1.5 million for five events a year. Be realistic - there is no way you are going to get that kind of money - the GAA says that they need to fill croker to 55,000 people just to break even - factor in irfu/fai trying to finance their new stadium as well - the most you can hope for is 500,000 3 to four times a year for the few years that landsdowne is being redeveloped. So what you say, its still extra cash. Yeah it is but not that much that we need to let flashing dollar signs before our eyes distort our objectivity. To me the problem here seems to be that people are looking it from a "backways" perspective. The Gaa did not wake up with huge financial problems and conclude that maybe opening up croker was a way to solve it. That is not what sparked the debate - it was the other way around, opening up croker was suggested by outside interests and now gaa people are trying to find ways/excuses to accomodate that and convince themselves that their motivation for doing so was purely from their love of the GAA. That is why i included the article from the guardian - not because i believe in hardship for hardships sake but because money never has nor needs to be the sole driving force behind decisions that could affect the future of our games.

2)Biffs only reason (that he mentioned) was because he likes looking at rugby and soccer, and wants to see them played in a grounds that reflects well on Ireland. Not being smart but go fundraise for irfu/fai so. Its what the Gaa has done for years (got up and done things for themselves that is) so why cant other organisations do the same? follow the gaa's lead, they are supposed to be the professional organisations after all. Also, your interest in soccer/rugby (which youre perfectly entitled to have) means that you have vested outside interests. you are not therefore going to be motivated solely by what you think is good for the gaa. consciously or not, you are naturally slightly biased and it is like what i said above, working backways to find the gaa problem that opening corker is the solution to rather that admitting that opening croker is mostly a solution for fai/irfu's problems

3) Extra exposure for Croker as a grounds. Big deal, this extra exposure will be in the form of as a rugby/soccer grounds - not as the centre of gaelic games. We're not trying to make croke park into a tourism hotspot - we trying to make it a suitable venue for our great sportsmen to play our great national games.

4) Bertie & government will like us, so we can get them to browbeat the residents into accepting floodlights. well i am a resident, and i think you'll find that there will be plenty of opposition to it and quite frankly i dont find anything very honourable in that argument.

Also, a few other things i'd like to mention:

- When croke park was originally bought (by a very wise man called Frank Dineen) irfu and fai had the chance to buy it but didnt want it. they just want it now when the gaa has done all the work.
- The history of croke park, bloody sunday etc has to be a factor in my opinion - the hogan stand is named after a man who was shot in bloody sunday, the grounds are named after the man who brought in the ban in the first place, the cusack stand is named after one of the founders of the gaa who decided to set it up because he saw how gaelic games were dying off and being replaced by foreign games. to me to change the rules is akin to dancing on their graves. the simple fact is the gaa exists because it was created to counteract the replacement of our games by foreign ones - lets be very wary about doing anything that works against that.
- gaa brought in a rule in 1930s to give a certain percentage of gate receipts towards purchasing local grounds and provincial councils gave grants to help out this process. thats why we have the numerous grounds arond the country that we have today - another example of gaa showign irfu/fai how its done. if you change rule 42 it opens the way for all of those grounds to be allowed have soccer/rugby in them too because you will have lost the theoretical argumetn for them not too.
- Think of all the people you know who openly sneer at the gaa, look on it as backward, knock it when they get a chance - moslty those involved in rugby and soccer. admit it, theyd never do anything for us and once in they'd think they owned the place.
- anyone who opposes opening croker using any kind of "traditionalist" arguments immediately gets labelled as some sort of fascist, hard liner blah blah blah fact is there would be no gaa if it wasnt for tradinalists/nationalists. gaa has always been about more than jsut the games - about irish culture, language etc - even sean og - hurler of the year- said so in post award speeches. its these sentiments that created the gaa and what it feeds off. players play for pride in their jersey, not for monetary reward so you cant just dismiss anything you feel is intangible.
- if people want to see roy keane, brian o driscoll play in croke park then tell them to play hurling or football. seriously that is what the dream of playing in croke park is, turning it inot a soccer /rugby mecca takes away from that - young fellas wont feel their losing out on the dream of playing croker by turning to other codes.
-soccer and rugby are our competition. simple fact. you wouldnt see coca cola helping out pepsi with the loan fo their premises for a while. the gaas job and sean kellys job is to look after gaelic games in ireland. dont get distracted from that.

I could go into more but think this is long enough as it is.....and its not that im trying to get one up on anyone on these boards. what im mainly concerned about is how the vote on it will go at the convention. We have had no feelers from irfu/fai about what they would expect to pay or expect from gaa in return if they had the chance to play there, no guarantees that the safeguards you talk about lone shark will be in place (who knows what sort of deals sean kelly's already done with the govt)-apart from anything else i think it would be very naive and dangerous for us to vote changing the rule and then hope for the best...do we really want Offaly as a county to be seen as partly responsible for overturning a rule that protects our gamesfor a few measly bucks that we dont absolutely need.
People need to be brave enough to withstand media pressure and the fear of being seen as politically incorrect or whatever and speak out against opening croker to competing sports. its absolutely nothing to be ashamed of and that the gaa have to spend so much time feeling they have to defend or excuse it is the biggest disgrace in my opinion.

Post Reply