GAA Clubs need a Voice

Some think that Of One Belief lost at Congress, others believe the GAA did. No matter.

No, wait! Before you depart, I'm not going to get into grants, or expenses, or whatever we should call it.

Of One Belief may be no more, but their brief existence taught us an important lesson. Although vilified and pillorised by some, with Martin Breheny leading the lynch mob, Mark Conway and Of One Belief were a critical counterbalance to the money-driven and elitist GPA in the "grants" "debate".

Without Of One Belief there was no other point of view than the GPA's. Croke Park and the GAA hierarchy were easily cowed by the GPA threats and did their utmost to whisper through an agreement with them. Nicky and the suits certainly made no effort to inform the GAA members of the details of the agreement and what the potential consequences were. wasn't until Of One Belief was formed that some semblance of a debate began and the pro's and con's of the agreement were properly aired. 

Now that the GPA have got what they wanted they have firmly established themselves as an important and acknowledged constituency within the GAA, the next step will be to recognise them as the inter-county (always important to make that distinction) players official union. Talks to do so are already under way. Not before its time, some would say, and that's a fair point. 

Official recognition will give the GPA a place at the top table and an even greater influence on the future direction of the GAA. Ordinary GAA members, in contrast, who make up the vast majority of the GAA's numbers, are increasingly disenfranchised from GAA decision-making. The GAA prides itself on being a democratic organisation, but the clubs are too far removed from decision-making at Congress and Central Council to have any real say. With the exception of the "important questions" like the Ban, Rule 42 etc., the clubs are not consulted on the running of the GAA and have little, if no, impact. The Club Forum is a good start, but it's not enough.

With the GPA's emergence as a force in GAA decision-making we can expect that the frequency of occasions when what's good for the GPA is not necessarily good for the rest of the association to increase. The problem is that there will be no voice for the majority of the GAA's members to put their point of view across. If the media wants a quote it needs someone to go to. Without a spokesperson or focal point for the majority of the GAA's members the GPA will once again have free reign in the national media for their bullyboy tactics.

But, the clubs don't have direct representation, despite desperately needing it. There's a whole range of problems, from fixtures (some go weeks and even months without matches during the summer freeze) to volunteering, which are neglected because Croke Park and the County Boards' give more weighting to the inter-county scene. 

The weight of representation is against the clubs. With so many diverse interests in the game the GAA cannot continue to speak for them all. That needs to change.

The grant that never was is approved

The "grants" rigmarole finally come to a close yesterday when the GAA Annual Congress rubber stamped the deal. 

As Peter Quinn said on TV a few weeks ago, the decision-making machinery of the GAA Congress replicates that of the National Congress of the Communist Party of China -- the important decisions are decided before the meeting, so the outcome was no great surprise. Also like the GAA the Chinese also use the occasion to decide leadership changes; review and change, if necessary, the Party's Constitution; and select the Central Council, a powerful decision making body, the authority of which, according to its spokesperson Danny "Sum Ting Wong?" Lynch, should never be questioned. 

Trying to get an accurate account in the GAA annals of how this decision was brought about is going to be very difficult because of the Rashomon effect. Rashomon is a Japanese film which has become "a byword for any situation in which the truth of an event is difficult to verify due to the conflicting accounts of different witnesses". We've seen this time and time again during this debate with many blinkered views [Martin Breheny wins the overall prize for his perverse and twisted interpretation] of what was happening.

In general there are two versions of how the GAA bungled from "grants" to "eligible expenses":

The hey presto, Nicky Brennan, Croke Park and GPA version, which would have you  believe that they knew what they were doing all along-- that it was "rubbish" and "farcical" to argue that the grant was a threat to the GAA's amateur status -- despite the radically rehashed deal emerging from the depths of the GAA's "open and transparent" hierarchy. "Didn't we tell you all along that we wouldn't sign up to any deal with the GPA that would harm the GAA's amateur status?" Then why are all the poor journalists so confused that they still refer to it as a grant?

The other is Joe Brolly's analysis, subsequently endorsed by the DRA:

1. GAA announces grants deal with GPA

2. Of One Belief launch legal challenge to grants/pay for play warning of dangers of EU law

3. GAA retain Alex Schuster, law lecturer at Trinity College and recognized authority on European community law, who  clearly advised them that grants would mean the players were involved in economic activity, which would mean that community law applied 

4. GAA buys time at DRA through technicalities and unavailability of key witnesses

5. GAA junks the original "Grants" scheme and develops the elaborate, complicated, wholly incomprehensible bureaucratic nightmare that is the "eligible expenses" scheme.

Despite the calls that it's time to move on the amateur, shamateur, professional debate is not going to go away. 

DRA endorses Of One Belief Action

Although the final decision of the DRA went against Of One Belief, they can take some consolation that their role in playing the devil's advocate met with the approval of the DRA Tribunal.

The real GAA men making up the DRA's Tribunal that heard the case-- Chairman, Michael O'Connell, son of the legendary Mick O'Connell, Mick Loftus, former GAA President, and Damian Maguire--all but praised "the bona fide attempts [by Of One Belief] to ensure that no inroads have been made on the amateur ethos."Can the same be said of Born Again Amateur Dessie Farrell? Is he being honest and sincere when he says that he now subscribes to the amateur ethos of the GAA? How long will his renewed commitment to these values and beliefs last?

The DRA Tribunal didn't feel that Mark Conway and Of One Belief were talking nonsense or that this debate was unnecessary. Quite the contrary, they consider that Of One Belief's actions have assisted in "the multilateral effort that produced" the final scheme--"the finely crafted document." The Stalinist attitude shown by some, like Martin Breheny, in describing Of One Belief as anti-player, is pathetic. Is everyone who campaigns against the Lisbon Treaty in the upcoming referendum in Ireland being anti-European? I think not. Try telling that to Martin et al though.

GAA: Unanswered Questions on the "Eligible Expenses" scheme

Of One Belief also asks some pertinent questions about the "Eligible Expenses" scheme...

"The new “Eligible Expenses” scheme is very long on the “How” (ie we get chapter and verse on the mechanics of the thing) but totally and worryingly short on the “What” (i.e. just what is going to be included in these mysterious “Eligible Expenses”). In plain GAA language it’s not good enough. GAA people at Congress in a fortnight’s time are being asked to sign a blank cheque. We were last asked to do this on 8 December last year: we all now know the narrow escape the GAA had then. There’s an old Irish saying that goes: “Fool me once, shame on you … Fool me twice, shame on me!” It seems fairly relevant here!

Let’s look at the new “scheme”. At first glance alone here are some of the problems with it:

• Just what are “Eligible Expenses”? It’s time to show us the beef! Give us a list of what’s in and make it clear what’s out. If that fairly simple exercise can’t be done … well, why can’t it be done?


• On whose authority is the GPA to be unilaterally introduced to important decision-making roles within the GAA?


• Why is the GPA the only party to all this not defined in the document?


• What are the legal liabilities for the GAA in involving a non-constituted body like the GPA in its corporate governance?


• Will team mentors/back-room people be eligible for these “enhanced expenses”? If not, why not?


• Ditto re people involved in inter-County Under 21 and Minor teams


• Ditto re referees, in many ways among the most important GAA people of all


• And what about the driver who brings County Players to training etc in his/her car: does the inter-County player then revert back to being a 50-cents-a-mile as opposed to a €1.27-a-mile burden?


• Who’s going to handle the administrative nightmare this will introduce at County level?


• What kind of expenses regime is it that’s performance-based? Expenses are expenses are expenses: if they’re tied in to some sort of performance-related arrangement they’re not bona fide expenses. Are we seeing a major GAA Trojan Horse here?


• Any encouragement of pooled player travel (and another stated government policy) now goes out the window


• Most seriously of all, after all the honeyed words about player burnout we’re now about to lever even more training/performance demands onto inter-County players: that’s simply not what we should be doing"

GAA & Grants: Who Was Right and Who Was Wrong?

The latest update from Of One Belief rightly draws attention to the utter incompetence Croke Park has demonstrated throughout this sorry affair. [My emphasis in bold].

"Now everybody knows why those promoting player grants/awards/whatever ran scared of the DRA - they knew that what they had attempted to foist on the GAA back on 8 December hadn’t a legal, let alone an ethical leg to stand on. The panicky mantra this time around about compliance with EU law shows just how close to disaster the GAA had been brought last November/December. Serious questions have to be asked about the levels of competence shown right the way through here. And those questions remain about the latest offering to an increasingly sceptical GAA membership.

If there was any doubt that "Of One Belief" and those of like mind got it exactly right late last year and Central Council got it frighteningly wrong, then the frankly embarrassing expenses denouement of 17/18 March spells it out loud and clear. Last December we were told we were scare-mongering, that we were dinosaurs/backwoodsmen/The Taliban, that all the bases had been covered, that the amateur status was "copper-fastened" by the deal. Now the "copper-fastening" scheme is in the bin (a bin we’re confident is firmly copper-fastened!) and we’re presented with a whole new scheme and a whole new language. The last batch of very nervous assurances turned out to be as worthless as the grants they applied to.

In one of Irish sport’s great ongoing turnarounds, the cash-for-elite-GAA-players terminology has been changed yet again. We’ve so far waded our way from "grants" through "awards" to "eligible expenses" (can the term "dig-out" now be all that far away?) But the outcome remains tellingly the same: inter-County GAA players will be given sizeable amounts of cash simply because they’re inter-County GAA players. That’s the one sad, unchanging fact in all of this mess.

As the morass deepens we’ve been told by our President ("Off The Ball", Newstalk, 18 March) that inter-County players, having had their GAA mileage rates already paid by their County Boards (at 50 cents a mile), can apply to have their rates topped up to Civil Service levels (at ?1.27 a mile). It’s simply unbelievable.

In one of the GAA’s most ironic twists ever, we now have the GPA -which originally rightly railed at the fact that some elite GAA officials got better mileage rates than elite GAA players - endorsing exactly the same sort of grubby discrimination they said they came forward to oppose. Principle . where are you! But then maybe part of the GPA’s well-versed "plight-of-the-inter-County-player" is being cursed with cars that are, just as a fact of life, much more expensive to run than those driven by anybody else involved in the GAA. Maybe, to steal a phrase from another person; another time; and another place, the rest of us want to try it sometime!

Sunday Tribune: Some balance

Unfortunately, I only came across this article - The buck stops here - today. It was written by Kieran Shannon and appeared in the Sunday Tribune last Sunday week.

[Dear Sunday Tribune - not that I expect anyone from the Sunday Tribune to read this blog - Please update your website with the most recent articles sooner! You may also want to think about revamping your website, 'cos right now it's brutal.]

The reason why I would like to draw attention to this piece, even at this late stage (late, not only because it is over a week old, but also, as Eugene McGee points out, the "grants debate" is now effectively dead), is because it's an evenhanded look at the issue, which makes two main points.

Firstly, that the crux of the whole debate comes down to struggle or balance between "collectivism v. individualism" and so the GPA and Of One Belief both have valid points of view which should be listened to. This attitude contrasts starkly with the invective directed at Mark Conway and Of One Belief, principally in the Irish Independent. I find it hard to understand the level of scorn directed personally at Conway, rather than making any effort to understand where Of One Belief was coming from.

Secondly, that the issue was a "big one" and should, therefore, be properly debated, as other big issues, like the Ban and the opening of Croke Park, were. Alas, we have been denied that opportunity. That's something else which I fail to understand--Did Croke Park not consult the lawyers properly and so fail to understand that a "grant" was detrimental to the GAA's amateur status, or did they deliberately muddle it up so as to ensure the "grants" safe passage?

Either way, Croke Park, Nicky Brennan and Paric Duffy have let GAA members down badly.

Why the GAA must remain amateur

Bonanza!

No, not the American western/cowboy TV series set at the Ponderosa Ranch, but the most popular word used in headlines to describe GAA finances in recent years. Whether announcing rental income from Croke Park, TV rights money or a new sponsorship deal, “Bonanza” is the word of choice for journalists, evoking images of a GAA treasure chest as deep and as rich as Aladdin's Cave.

Just like Aladdin’s Cave, however, it is a myth that the GAA is overflowing with riches. While it is true that the popularity of Gaelic Games ensures that the GAA generates substantial income for an amateur organization each year, reports rarely tell the full story of the GAA's finances. The false impression created leads many to the lazy conclusion that “with all the money floating around why shouldn’t the players get paid for their efforts?”

The untold story leads to a radically different judgement. For a start, the media seldom reports on the enormous costs involved with running an Association of the size and nature of the GAA. The cost of staging the games alone is considerable. In 2002 the GAA spent almost €4.5 million on match related costs (over 27% of total gate receipts). Nearly half of this money went straight back to the various grounds as rent, to be used for ground maintenance, development and to assist with recurring running costs. Another 25% was accounted for by sundry expenses such as Gardai and security, printing and promotional expenses, stewards and catering, medals and trophies.

Then there’s the money directly related to the needs of the panels involved. In 2001 up to €10 million was spent by county boards on preparation of their county teams alone. Croke Park contributes most of this both directly and indirectly subsidisng activities at County level with €8.7m in 2006. This money is spent by county boards on players to cover expenses such as travel and accommodation, meals, equipment, playing gear, and other general expenses incurred by county boards during the preparation of teams during a Championship season. The enormity of the expense involved can be gauged from the fact that the increase in the minimum mileage allowance for players costs county committees an average of €1.25m per annum (that was the cost in 2002). A further 6% of gross gate receipts are used to finance the players Injury Scheme which is available to players at all levels of the Association.

The alarming expenses of training inter-county teams have to be added to the increased expenses associated with county teams administration of internal club competitions and other general running costs. The number of games played at all levels of the GAA gives a clearer indication of just how much money is needed to fund the Association. For instance, the Leinster Council estimate that up to 1,800 games are played throughout the province in second level school competitions alone in any given year. Only a tiny proportion of these games would even collect a gate—even then it would hardly be worth counting—and thus the cost of running such competitions has to be financed from more central funds.

Aside from match related costs, grants to the Association’s club and County board units, and administration expenses, plans for the development of the games have all to be financed from central funds. To date all surplus revenues from previous years have been used to fund the redevelopment of Croke Park or loan schemes for clubs. The GAA’s commitment to coaching and games development is an investment in the future, designed to protect the Association’s longer term ambitions. €5 million was spent on Games development in 2002 to finance a network of coaching officers and administrators, summer camps, schools of excellence, grants to primary, second and third level schools and colleges, subsidies for hurleys and helmets, Feile competitions etc. The Provinces similarly reinvest the revenues they earn. In 2001 Leinster Council alone had a coaching and games development budget of well over €1.25 million.

In total upwards of 75% of the revenues generated by Central Council in 2006 were ploughed back into the Association. (See the 2007 Annual Report) This resourcing is intended to benefit players, clubs and counties alike. Contrast this with professional soccer where the wages to turnover ratio for Italian clubs was 76% in 2002-03, Spain (72%), France (68%) and England (61%) according to Deloitte Football Finance. Or look at it another way, the Premier League redistributes just 7½% a year to the Football Foundation, the body responsible for grass roots and community football development.

The GAA’s income and re-investment is an unbroken virtuous circle (see diagram above) whereby the commitment to investment in the future will guarantee the survival and continued development of Gaelic games. This outstanding contribution—propelled by voluntary input—depends on the money staying in the game.

Show me the money!

"Kevin Keegan has offered me more money. I am definitely leaving Spurs. It's all about the money, I don't care about the [Carling Cup] final".

Apparently Pascal Chimbonda made this remark-brazenly exposing his mercenary motivation-when questioned about rumours in the media that he was looking to leave Tottenham Hotspur. Paul Wilson, a respected football journalist for the Guardian, applauded Chimbonda for his honesty, as he's sadly resigned to the reality of what really inspires professional footballers today. He was also critical of fans for their continued, naive adherence to the sentimental belief that players measure their careers in cups and medals, rather than pounds and pay cheques. "Football may have been like that once", he writes "but no longer".

Unlike GAA. We (GAA members) don't have to worry about accusations of being over-romantic about Gaelic games because that situation doesn't exist in our sport. Right?

Not quite. As Martin Breheny points out today, the player-County Board dispute in Cork, is part of a bigger battle -- a battle for the "GAA's soul and identity". The inter-county players regard themselves as the "wealth generators" of Gaelic games, and their philosophy (essentially that they are the sun around which the rest of us should revolve--my interpretation not Martin's) is putting them on course for a critical pay-for-play showdown.

The idealistic view that Gaelic games should be all about participation, and the medals and the glory too, of course, is being rapidly eroded by the GPA on their blinkered march to reimbursement. As Dessie says, the players no longer "really buy into the traditional GAA line, certainly not the one that highlighted our ethereal rewards - honour, adulation, camaraderie, recognition". They want something "more tangible". They want what Rod Tidwell (Cuba Gooding Jr.) in the movie Jerry Maguire, called "the Kwan".

"Kwan means love, respect, community... and the dollars too".

But footballers in England didn't always have this Rod Tidwell mentality. Wilson describes the situation when fifty years ago all First Division fooballers were on more or less than same wages as a result of the maximum-wage system. The crucial difference today is the difference in earnings which means that players are no longer loyal to the club that formed them. The only values the players deem important are those in pay packets. Do we want a similar situation to develop in GAA? The categorical response from most GAA members would appear-from the debates that have taken place on the proposed grant in counties like Tyrone and Dublin- to be no.

Under EU law, however, there is no middle road. If accepted, the grants system will establish an economic link between players and Gaelic games, meaning that the players can appeal to the European Commission, and ultimately the European Courts, to move counties freely. The players may be happy to divvy up their prospective grant money now. But it won't always be like that. Self-interest and the free market will eventually win out, just like it did in English football. It will only take one disgruntled player- and there are enough of them already- to tear the county structure down. And then, it really will be all about the money.

The grants agreement that never was

“There was no grants agreement; there is no grants agreement; and there will be no grants agreement unless it gets full and proper support at Congress.”

This is the conclusion drawn from the DRA hearing on Friday night. Solicitors for the GAA's Central Council argued at the hearing that an agreement had not been reached at its meeting on 8 December. At the time, however, the Central Council was interpreted as having rubber-stamped the grants agreement and the perception was that the deal had been done. Instead, we now understand the situation to be very different. A letter sent to the DRA by the GAA's solicitors last week instructed that: 

Discussions between the GPA and Government bodies on the structure and content of a possible  agreement have already begun and will continue over the coming weeks.

When that agreement has been negotiated and is in final form, it will be submitted to Ard Comhairle for approval.

"Agreement will not be finally approved or implemented unless the agreement in final form is presented to Congress and approved. Accordingly, if Ard Comhairle approves the agreement, it will be on condition that the agreement is approved by Congress."

This means there is no fait accompli. More significantly, there must be a debate. That’s what Of one Belief have been campaigning for since 29 November last, because that’s the way the GAA should do its business. 

This also means that the battle has just begun. All gaels who believe in the Association's amateur ethos need to make sure their views are represented at Congress. That’s the challenge before the meeting of GAA's Annual Congress in Sligo on 11 and 12 April to make the decision.

Everyone associated with “Of One Belief” remains firm in their belief, backed by legal advice, that any grants/awards scheme for GAA players breaks Rule 11 of the Association. 

If you do too, join www.ofonebelief.org. Make your voice heard.

The grants, the GAA's amateur status, and EU law

Jean-Marc Bosman was catapulted into the headlines in 1995 by a "landmark" ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The Bosman case transformed the player transfer system and changed the make-up of club sides throughout Europe by effectively ending limits on "foreign" players in clubs in Europe. Nearly every GAA fan knows that the consequences for soccer have been far-reaching and all would agree that a Bosman scenario would be catastrophic for Gaelic games. No one wants to see a transfer system in place because the county is fundamental to Gaelic games. But how professional or amateur do our games have to be for the Bosman ruling to apply? And where does the grant leave us on that question?

The GAA Central Council claims that "nothing in this agreement shall be allowed to undermine the amateur status of Gaelic games". The Bosman ruling would apper to validate this claim: the essential difference between an amateur and a professional or-semi-professional is that the professional earns a salary under contract and is thus regarded as an employee, and that his activity as a player is not to be regarded as purely marginal. Therefore, it would seem the grant would have little or no effect. But, it's not just the Bosman ruling we need to be concerned about.

In a less-celebrated case five years after Bosman, Christelle Deliège*, a Belgian judoka (a practitioner of judo is known as a judoka) who practised judo at an international level, challenged the Belgian Judo League's (BJKL) federation-based system of selection of competitors for international competitions. The importance of this case for the GAA and the grants system is not the decision on the dispute itself, which concerned the authority of the BJKL to determine selection for participation in the Olympic Games, but rather the court's conclusion in relation to Ms Deliège's status.

Although the case concerned the participation of Ms Deliège in an international tournament for which she would not be paid, Ms Deliège claimed that she practiced judo professionally or semi-professionally. The BJKL disagreed, arguing that judo is a sport which, in Europe and in Belgium in particular, is practised by amateurs. It is the court's analysis and determination of this question-where the distinction between amateur and professional lies- that is of interest to the GAA.

The GAA and the GPA that all parties involved "state their absolute commitment to the maintenance of the amateur status" is worthless. 

Notably, the BKJL claimed that judo was an activity that is not pursued for profit, but which aims to satisfy social and cultural aspirations. No doubt, the GAA would too. The amendment added to the agreement with the GPA that all parties "state their absolute commitment to the maintenance of the amateur status" tends to suggest that the GAA thinks a claim, or affirmation, of amateur status by those involved-both the players and the Association itself-offers some sort of legal protection. It doesn't: the court noted that, although relevant, the mere fact that a sports association or federation unilaterally classifies its members as amateur athletes does not in itself mean that those members do not engage in economic activity.

The factors that determine whether members engage in economic activity were then analysed by Cosmas, the Advocate General (the AG advises the court on the legal matters ahead of the final decision) in the case. Cosmas' analysis of Ms Deliège's activities and conclusion that her practice of judo constituted an economic activity should alarm the GAA, as it undermines the assertion that the grants agreement does not harm the GAA's amateur status. 

Firstly, Cosmas pointed out that the Ms Deliège the size of the grants Ms Deliège received from the federation were irrelevant. It was the legal nature of the 'contributions' that she recieved that mattered. Contributions or grants to athletes "were analysed from the point of view of the possibility it gives to the advanced level sportsman, who receives the contributions to devote himself to the sport as would a professional sportsman." Although it is arguable the sums of money which the grant will involve will not permit GAA players to pursue their sporting career in the same way and under the same conditions as a professional, they are a start down that road. According to the agreement between the GAA, the GPA and the government the grant is designed "to meet additional costs associated with elite team performance and to encourage aspiring teams and players to reach the highest levels of sporting endeavour". The grants will be awarded on the basis of "standards and performance-based criteria". 

Secondly, although the Advocate General distinguished amateur athletes from others who "carry out their activity on a continual basis and receive financial support the objective of which exceeds the mere improvement of their performance." Critically for the GAA, the Advocate General concluded that the regular payment of aid by federations to their champions often extends beyond the context of performance enhancement. High-level athletes provide an important service to the sport's governing bodies-their success makes them idols helping attract young people to the federation, they are a magnet for sponsors and provide an argument for sports organisations to rely on when seeking a larger share of publicly-funded subsidies. In certain cases these non-amateur athletes provide to the governing bodies, of a so-called amateur sport, services in return for which it receives various forms of material or financial aid on a regular basis. These athletes pursue an economic activity which falls within the scope of EU law. 

The Advocate General's reasoning would tend to suggest that it does not matter whether the players receive the grant directly from the federation or from elsewhere; what matters is that the grants are paid to them consistently over a period of time and are dependent on their participation in the sport. The hullabaloo over whether it is the GAA or the Sports Council that pays the grant would then be irrelevant. Paying a grant for participating in a sport establishes an economic link under EU law.

Thirdly, the Advocate General also considered it necessary to look at whether the sporting activities themselves have an economic dimension. If the organiser of a sporting competition offers athletes an opportunity to compete with others, and, at the same time, the athletes, by participating in the competition, enable the organiser to put on a sports event which the public pays to attend, which generates television broadcasting rights, and which, may be of interest to advertisers and sponsors, then it constitutes an economic event. That is already the case in GAA today.

Finally, Ms Deliège's individual sponsorship contracts were also taken into condisderation. Cosmas determined that it was wrong to separate completely an athlete's performance and sporting activity from the advertising service provided to the sponsors as sporting performance and advertising services are so closely linked. Advertising through sponsorship requires high-level athletes who are known to the general public precisely because of their participation in major sporting events. Products as diverse as Ivomec 20 (Joe Cooney) and Club Energise (the GPA) have capitalised on the profile of the players and the GAA to capture their markets for many years now.

From the combination of the various factors outlined above the Advocate General concluded that Ms Deliège was in principle protected by EU law and in particular by the rules on freedom to provide services. In other words, she had the same protection under EU law as Bosman did.

Although Gaelic players may not yet qualify under these conditions as non-amateur athletes-like Ms Deliège did-and therefore be protected by EU law, it is clear that the closer the link between sport and economic activity the more relevant the rules of EU law. Paying a grant to players strengthens this link. Paying a grant to players harms the GAA's amateur status.  


*Christelle Deliège V Ligue Francophone de Judo et Disciplines ASBL (Joined cases C-51/96 and C-191/97)

Dublin club delegates against pay-for-play

The latest news from Ofonebelief.org informs us that 35 club delegates spoke out against the grants proposal at the Dublin County Board meeting on Monday night. According to the update Dublin’s Clubs were very clear about two things. They don’t want the scheme and they were bitterly disappointed that the whole thing had been handled as a “done deal” at a high level and they had not been consulted.

The Hoganstand confirms that a majority of Dublin club delegates are against the scheme. But, strangely, no vote was taken and it has been left to Dublin's Central Council delegate "to take all the views expressed at the meeting into consideration".

A sizeable rump there.

Secret footage of GAA Ruling Elite quelling GPA Strike

Liam Horan, former Irish Independent GAA correspondent, and now author of the Horan Stand column, which appears in many regional newspapers, has unearthed "Secret footage of the GAA Ruling Elite quelling the GPA Strike" and has posted it to his blog.

Ok, so I've been a bit slow spotting it - it dates from 12 November. But, it's still amusing.

Liam is also behind The Coach, a weekly colum in the Galway Independent, which provides some great tips on training and coaching for Gaelic games. For those still playing or involved with teams it's well worth subscribing to the RSS feed to recieve it each week.

This week, The Coach looks at how backs can defend against players like Kieran Donaghy under a high ball.

Grassroots GAA Meeting in Cavan tonight!

Don’t Forget Cavan!

The meeting in Cavan organised by gaels from Longford and north Leinster goes ahead tonight (Wednesday) night as follows;

Wednesday 19 December

7.30pm

Cavan Crystal Hotel

We know the week that’s in it … and the demands that’s on people’s time. But pay-for-play is the agenda item for GAA people … so if you can, come along tonight.

You’ll be out the door by 9.00pm. Can you give 90 minutes to defend a core GAA principle?

DRA … Drastic Action?
When we set out to oppose pay-for-play we agreed to do it through the GAA system … and to all the while play the ball, not the man.

The DRA is part of the GAA system so we’re using it.

The appeal has been lodged and is being supported/developed by a number of true GAA “legal-eagles” … all on that real GAA basis, ie “No Charge!”

As of now there’s been no feedback from the DRA but we’ll keep you informed re developments.

A Flowing Tide?
As of Monday night, the pay-for-play arrangements approved by Central Council have been either directly opposed or seriously questioned at or by the Clare; Cork; Derry; Down; Fermanagh; Mayo; Tipperary; and Tyrone Conventions or County Committee meetings.

This story isn’t over yet!

Opposition to the grant grows

Your Chance to Make Another Statement!

Fellow gaels in north Leinster have arranged a public meeting on the pay-for-play arrangements as follows:

Wednesday 19 December
7.30 pm
Cavan Crystal Hotel, Cavan Town

Let’s see what the south Ulster/north Leinster/north Connacht view on all this stuff is. If you’re from there, then turn up at the Cavan Crystal next Wednesday night. Bring others with you … and tell even more people about it. This is one of the most important things you’ll be asked to do to help reverse the pay-for-play agenda … so let’s have a turnout that makes a statement!

If you’re getting this email you’re a believer. If you’re a believer, be there!
(If anyone sees a bearded gentlemen in a red suit … invite him along!)

After Last Saturday …
After the approval of the pay-for-play arrangements last Saturday - by Central Council only, remember (and in my official guide Central Council is just one of five levels of “jurisdiction” within the GAA, the other four being Clubs; Counties; Provinces; and Congress) - what’s now to stop this scenario:

• Millionaire A offers County A’s Senior Football Panel members €/£20,000 a man to win the All-Ireland


• He offers Player B from County B €/£50,000 to come on board … and gives him a job/address in County A


• All parties sign an agreement stating that they “recognise that the GAA is an Amateur Association and state their absolute commitment to the maintenance of the amateur status of the Association. They state that nothing in this agreement shall be allowed to undermine the amateur status of Gaelic games”. (Does that last bit sound familiar?)

In the new post-8 December world how can the GAA legally or morally oppose such a scenario? It’s performance-based; County panel-specifc; isn’t “our” money; and will be paid/distributed by a third party. And there’s a paper guaranteeing the amateur status. So it clearly isn’t pay for play! (It’s definitely time for that bearded gentleman in the red suit!)

Up Down! Up Tyrone!
Tyrone and Down will meet in next year’s Ulster SFC (GPA strikes etc permitting of course!). Whatever the outcome, we’ll know we have two true GAA counties going head-to-head.

On Sunday Down voted unanimously to reject last Saturday’s pay-for-play deal. On Tuesday night Tyrone voted 152:1 to reject any meddling with Rule 11 via grants or any other sleight-of-hand. Tyrone’s mathematics are interesting in that they almost certainly reflect the proper proportions involved in this whole issue. Don’t let’s pretend there isn’t a “GPA view”. There is. And it has a right to be heard. But for every GAA person holding that view we’d be very confident there’d be 150 who don’t hold it.

To its shame last Saturday made no attempt to reflect or seek the views of the 150.

You’re Growing … and Growing … and Growing!
As of last night, 12 December, there’s 521 of you out there. Thank you for supporting the opposition to pay-for-play.

We believe this is now on the agenda for Congress 2008. And we intend to keep the debate rolling right up until then. To do that we need your help.

Stay with us!

Keep raising this issue!

Don’t accept that the fat lady has sung (she hasn’t even warmed up yet!)

Keep reinforcing what the GAA’s really about!

And come to the Cavan Crystal Hotel next Wednesday night!

Latest from Oppposition to Grants Campaign

Black Saturday
Despite the clear opportunity to defer and go out for consultation, Central Council went ahead and approved pay-for-play on Saturday. Having just driven a horse and cart through Rule 11, it was a wee bit rich of them to then tell the rest of us to go away and examine our consciences about breaches of amateur status at club and county level. Nonetheless there’s something in what they say. This cancer has been eating away at the insides of the GAA for a while. But just because you’ve a cancer in one place is no reason to start injecting yourself with botulism somewhere else!

Doire Abu!
Derry’s County Convention today unanimously passed a motion opposing grants/pay-for-play. They join Mayo as counties fully opposed to where the GAA is being brought to. Conventions are now coming thick and fast. Try to go to yours and make the case against the implementation of what Central Council passed on Saturday.

“Questions and Answers”There may be a bit of coverage of pay-for-play on RTE’s Q&A tonight (Monday). Watch it and see … and get others to do likewise!

Not Our Style
Some of today’s media coverage was not good for our President, Nickey Brennan. We took no pleasure in it. Nickey’s our President, put there by us. In opposing pay-for-play we’re not about rubbishing anybody. What we are about is upholding a core GAA value.

What’s Next?
Some “malcontents” (by the way as of 10.00pm last night there’s 407 of you registered here) in the midlands and south of the country want to hold meetings along the lines of the Elk/Toome event. It’s not yet clear if the meetings will be held before or after Christmas … but as soon as anything’s organised we’ll let you know.

Someone is Shouting "Stop!" (the grant)

Over 400 Ulster gaels met in The Elk near Toome on Wednesday 5 December.

The meeting was called to see what the views of grass-roots GAA people were following the announcement days earlier of an inter-County GAA pay-per-play package agreed by some people in the GAA; the GPA; the Irish Sports Council; and the Irish Government.

Prior to the meeting email and telephone support had been received from concerned gaels in 28 different Counties across Ireland. Almost thirty different people, GAA men and women from across Ulster spoke from the floor on the night. The consistent threads across the contributions were:

1. The GAA is being presented with pay-for-play, however it's being dressed up
2. The Association's amateur status must be sacrosanct
3. Planned decisions on the proposals at this weekend's meeting of Central Council should be deferred
4. A full consultation on the proposals across all levels and units of the GAA needs to be facilitated.
5. It was also made clear that GAA players are respected for the honourable place and central role they have in the Association: proper player representation needs to be urgently looked at. Similar respect was voiced for the GAA as an organisation; for its structures and systems; and for its President.

At the end of the meeting there was unanimous support for the following resolutions:

1. There must be no change (other than properly mandated via Congress) to the GAA's amateur status as presented in its Rule 11: the current proposals fly in the face of that amateur status and Rule 11
2. The discussion of the current proposals planned for the forthcoming Management and Central Council meetings should be deferred
3. A full and proper discussion of these issues should take place across the GAA

Those present would proceed to use their own Club and County channels to voice their opposition to the current proposals.

Finally, the clear consensus was that should the current proposals be approved before a proper consultation with the membership is carried out, then a further meeting would be called to again gauge opinion.

Confusion over the grants agreement continues

Micky Harte wants us to learn from this sordid experience and "to try to understand each other's position".

If only it were that simple. There's been such a racket made about player welfare and the grants issue that we don't quite know how it became such a divisive issue within the organisation and came to the point of a strike. We're all confused about what has happened. We're just as confused about the deal that has been done.

Cliona Foley, in today's Irish Independent, criticizes the deal, blaming the GAA (nothing new in that) for not diverting its considerable resources towards the players. According to her analysis thanks should go to the government for cleaning up the GAA's mess. If the GAA had "increased player expenses, funded a centralised hardship fund (especially for long-term injured) and employed a 'players' ombudsman' in Croke Park" everything would have been hunky-dory. Such action would have averted this rigmarole and not taken funds from other, more needy, sports.

But, read the GPA's statement, surely you at least did that Cliona?, and the GPA sums up this sorry episode in the following way: "The GPA has campaigned vigorously for over five years for the introduction of state funding for inter-county GAA players in an effort to achieve parity of esteem for these players in the world of Irish sport." Parity of esteem, coequality, consistency - call it what you will - with other sports, that's what the GPA claim to have achieved through this deal. "The inequality that existed within Irish sport needed to be addressed." according to Kieran McGeeney. The GPA felt that the government discriminated against intercounty players with Charlie McCreevey's tax breaks, which they could not take advantage of because of their amateur status, so they felt it was up to the government to make that right. And, in their view, with this deal it has.

That doesn't correspond with Cliona's analysis. It's also not consistent with what has happened.

To get their money from the government the GPA needed the GAA's support. But, alas they didn't have it, the GAA didn't, and still doesn't, recognise the GPA. So to coerce the GAA, and use the power of the organisation as leverage against the government, the GPA kicked up a stink about player welfare and threatened to strike against the very organisation the players claim they love so dearly. On agreeing the deal with the government and the GAA, Dessie Farrell, the GPA Chief Executive, said "The GPA has brought the welfare of players to the top of the priority list and underpinning our drive to improve welfare has been the campaign for state funding".

It was all about player welfare. So, maybe Cliona iss right. But, and it's a big but, if one reads the terms and conditions of the landmark deal, condition number 8, clearly states:

"Player welfare is a separate issue for which the GAA takes full responsibility."

What is going on?

It seems the GPA has played both parties off and in Paul Galvin's words they've "nailed it". Not only have they played a Machiavellian hand - "the ends justifying the means" - but it seems they can continue legitimately lobbying Croke Park for improvements in player welfare.

It is also not clear why the GAA, i.e. Croke Park has acquiesced to this deal. The GAA originally agreed to the grant and then backtracked quickly when it was pointed out that if their fingerprints were found on the notes it would essentially be the same as "pay for play". Nicky Brennan declared "that our amateur status was paramount and non-negotiable, and we are satisfied now that this scheme does not impact on that." However, it seems that the Irish Sports Council (ISC) will not be directly involved in administering the GAA player grants. It will be Croke Park and county boards who will have to distribute the money. So what's the difference now?

It's hard to believe, as both sides would like you to, that deal struck makes all the commotion in the newspaper, on the radio and on the television over the past six months just been a hoo-ha about nothing.

The vague statements made by both sides don't address the fundamental question. How is amateurism protected through the establishment of the principle that inter-county players get renumerated because they are inter-county players? How, as Kieran McGeeney claims, does the grant system "copper-fasten" amateurism?

The grants scheme sets a precedent from which there is no turning back. The scheme will run on a three-year basis. So, now that the country is set to slip into deficit for the first time since 2002, are we going to go through this brinkmanship again in three years time if the money from the government is not forthcoming and the GAA has to pay up?

One thing is clear there has been no consultation with the membership of the GAA. The deal is being rushed through by Croke Park without a proper communication of the detail. There's no understanding of what's going on.

The Hoganstand informs readers that there will be a ’Grassroots’ meeting to discuss opposition to grants at the at the The Elk Entertainment Complex, Toome, Co. Antrim on Wednesday night, December 5. Former Armagh player Barry O’Hagan, who now works as Sports Development Officer for Derry City Council, will chair the meeting , while it’s understood that former GAA president Peter Quinn and former GAA Trustee Jimmy Treacy may also attend. They have a lot to discuss.

Why you should oppose the GPA strike - Reason No. 4

Playing for your county is a choice. It requires dedication and commitment above the norm. Nobody is denying that. But, why try to equate this commitment, as the GPA do, in financial terms? Inter-county players, though admittedly not all of them, already "profit" from their talents. As this letter to the Indo points out, "the very ones who are calling for strike action are the ones who are, ironically, reaping the greatest rewards from the sport". There are huge perks for the modern-day GAA player, jobs, endorsements, training camps abroad, holidays in exotic locations (with their wives/girlfriends paid for!), etc.

Comments from Kilkenny hurler Eddie Brennan, are revealing of the GPA's true thinking. He's resentful that his participation in Gaelic games has curbed his earning potential in the Celtic Tiger economy, as he's unable to do 'nixers' in the evening to supplement his income. Eddie's values, and those of the GPA, are clearly socio-economic. Davy Fitz today, confirms this assessment. A former GPA member, he quit because, in his words, "they are all about money". Contrast their attitude with that of Colm McCullagh, who chose to quit paid football with Omagh Town when Mickey Harte selected him for the Tyrone team in 2004. Explaining his decision, he talked about the dreams and emotions of winning and All-Ireland, not money and compensation.

Playing for your county is voluntary in both meanings of the word - optional and unpaid. Let's keep it that way.

Why you should oppose the GPA strike - Reason No. 3

Playing for your county is an honour and a privilege. By striking the players are demonstrating that their loyalty is conditional - conditional on reimbursement. Once they fumble in the greasy till there's no turning back. They're soiled, and from now on, it's just a question of how dirty they can get.

Last year, in a little publicised move, England's footballers pledged to donate all of their match fees - win, lose or draw - to charitable causes. It was suggested that playing for their country should be an honour, rather than a pay packet. Every one of the players agreed. Ok, so they are millionaires, but the point is they wanted to demonstrate their commitment, dedication and their loyalty, by breaking the financial link. They wanted to establish a principle.

Dessie Farrell and the Greedy Players' Association want the opposite to happen. They want that link established once and for all. They want to formalise the connection between representing their county and compensation. They suffer from an inferiority complex and lack respect because they don't get financially rewarded for their commitment. Dessie Farrell claims that the players' assertion of their rights in this manner is just another initiative in the history of the GAA which has moved the organisation closer to professionalism. But, paid administrators, paid coaches, paid support staff for teams, corporate boxes, the advent of sponsorship logos on jerseys, ticket prices, hospitality and broadcasting rights have done what paying the players won't do, advanced the game and the oassociation at all levels. How else could the GAA have competed over the last twenty years with other sports and other leisure activities for the interest of Ireland's youth? What Dessie Farrell and the GPA's supporters are too shortsighted to see, or simply don't want to see, is the Pandora's box of pain that paying compensation to players is going to open up. What was good for the GAA as a whole is now only good for a small minority.

In the 1950s, when the Dublin hurling team enjoyed a period of success, there were many complaints that the Dublin team was full of "culchies", who worked with the Civil Service and lived in Dublin. In years to come, when the born and bred Dubs can't get a place in the Dublin teams because of culchie imports, attracted by the bigger crowds and better wages, we'll look back on this point, and wish we could turn the years again.

Why you should oppose the GAA strike - Reason No. 2

The amateur ethic of the GAA doubles as a community ethic. Compensation to players will create a divide between the elite and the grassroots. The most fundamental unit of GAA competition is the club side. The local roots feed up to the counties, creating a unity of purpose that makes the association great. The people that make the tea and sandwiches, cut the grass, line the pitch and coach the kids on a Saturday morning have a direct connection to the players that play in Croke Park in front of 80,000 in an All-Ireland. They're one and the same. That's where the strength of the Association lies. Why ruin it?

Compensation to players would break the "virtuous circle" upon which the GAA is built. What do I mean by virtuous circle? Well, think about the cycle of development in the GAA. Coaches, volunteers and supporters play and support their teams at club level. The success of the clubs and the development of talent is taken to the next level by the county teams, where the best players from clubs are invited to display their talents on a bigger stage. The people from the clubs who facilitated their development are happy to pay their hard earned money to attend these games because they played a part in making the players, supporting them and putting in place the stadia. There's a direct link, whether or not you come from the same club as the "Gooch" or any other inter-county player, you played a part in their development. Most importantly, you know that the money you pay to see the inter-county games will be re-invested in all levels of the game, thereby allowing the cycle of development to start anew. It's an unbroken circle. Compensation for players will break the cycle. Compensation for players will mean that the money generated at the top will no longer find its way back to the bottom.

Look what has happened with since rugby turned professional in Ireland. Supposedly, it has produced a "golden generation" of players making the best international team ever, not to mention successful provincial sides, Leinster and Munster. Scrape this veneer (as the performance at the Rugby World Cup demonstrated) and what has professionalism done for the game in Ireland? As Tom McGurk (Rugby pays price of professionalism) writes, rugby in Ireland is now in a terrible state. "The paucity of playing members and the incessant cost demands has hit the clubs hard in the last decade. Many of Ireland's once most famous rugby clubs are a mere shadow of their former selves. Still largely surviving on the goodwill of the golden oldies, many that once put our five or six junior 15s out on a Saturday, can now barely scrape two or three teams together."

Look at the gap between the players and the rest of the community in soccer. Take the Premier League for example. The Premier League works very hard through the Football Foundation to ensure that they are seen to be part of the community and that everyone is benefitting from the team. Why do they do this? Because the natural link between the Premier League's and the communities where they are based has been broken. The money and the benefits of the big clubs don't find their way down to the lower level of the game to the people who support the clubs. It has to be artificially created through a form of corporate social responsibility.

Professional sport creates a dynamic whereby most of the money generated goes toward the professional code of the game which caters for less than 1% of the players. We do not want a situation where a significant and ever-increasing proportion of GAA income goes not to grass roots, clubs, underage support and development, but to pay players. The GAA supports the game at all levels.

There's a difference between the GAA and the sports entertainment business. It's not a business. It's not set up as a business. That's what distinguishes it from other sports. Let's fight to keep it that way.