From Aussie Rules back to GAA

After the recent ballyhoo over AFL recruitment in Ireland and the dark prophesies of a mass exodus of the GAA's best young players to Australia it's interesting to see that Tadhg Kennelly has confirmed his plans to return to Ireland next year with the intention of winning an All-Ireland with Kerry.

Setanta declares this a sensational revelation. In any Tadhg Kennelly interview I've ever read he's always expressed his desire to return to Ireland win an All-Ireland with Kerry, as his father Tim did, so the extent of their scoop is a little exaggerated.

Tadhg's sacrifice for the glory of an All-Ireland medal is to be admired. He's going to give-up the successful career he's built with the Syndey Swans--along with the glorious sunshine and the quality lifestyle downunder.

A brave move and one we should admire. I can't help thinking though that it it is Kerry he is returning to, so the odds of doing a celebratory jig in the Kingdom's colours are not exactly stacked against him. Returning and winning Sam with Mayo, now that would be heroic.

Still, fair play to Tadhg.

GAA goes back to the future

The GAA has gone back to the future with its new brand identity, which was revealed yesterday and will be officially launched at this year’s Congress in April.

The new logo (bottom right), we are told, embraces the future, while being mindful of the rich culture and heritage of the Association’s past. First impressions are that the traditional logo has had a Trinny & Susannah type makeover, if you like: the outcome isn't radically different (it can't be) than what was there before, it's just dressed-up to look more modern and appealing. I find the extreme makeovers repugnant so am happy that it's still the same, with a touch of old, GAA.

The GAA has indicated that all other marks, logos and symbols are now redundant. So this means goodbye to the traditional logo of the GAA. Out too, goes the corporate logo, introduced in the 1990s (anyone know in which year?) for branding and merchandise. I never liked that one, so won’t be sad to see it go, although I liked the cameleon quality it had to match each team's colours. The Royal's are proudly displayed here.

Most intriguing though yesterday's announcement hinted that the new identity reflects the future direction of the association, which will be outlined in the forthcoming GAA Strategic Plan. Given the current climate, that will be interesting to read.

The GAA will never let it happen

Across all the views of the pro- and the anti- grants camps a strong point of agreement would appear to be that professionalism would be bad, if not ruinous, for the GAA. The consequences of professionalism don't have to be explained: GAA members appear to be well-informed of what they are already. But, what they don't agree on is the proximity and the degree of danger. Those for the grant, but against professionalism, are not worried because, they say, the GAA and its members will never let that happen. 

It doesn't matter if Dessie and the GPA see the grant as an interim measure--as just a "battle" in the "war" for professionalism. It doesn't matter if the next generation of GPA members are reared in an Association with diluted ideals and principles regarding payments for players, because, as the logic seems to go, when the GAA is faced with the clear and present danger of professionalism, the members will rise-up to defeat it.  

That's why the players can be appeased with with a few bob. The GAA will ultimately decide; they are, afterall in charge, or at least should be. That's why the anti-grants movement can be dismissed with a sneer by Messrs. O'Rourke and Breheny as a bunch of non-sensical anarchists. The GAA should be the only arbitrator of its own affairs and appeals to courts and non-GAA bodies by upstarts should be eradicated. 

Yes they should. That's exactly the point the anti-grant group is trying to make! 

"Who is running the show?", indeed. 

With the grant  in place, the answer will not be the GAA, as some, if not most, naively believe. 

By introducing the grant the GAA will no longer control its own destiny. It's hands will be tied. Just like UEFA's, just like FIFA's, and just like every other sporting organisation that has been ensarled by the four freedoms of the European Union (free movement of goods, services, labour and capital). It is the European Commission and the European Court of Justice that will now decide the GAA's fate. The precedents are there --Walrave, Donà, Bosman, Deliège (the one GAA members and grant advocates should fear) Kolpak, Meca-Medina etc.-; that's what Of One Belief is desperately trying to point out. 

UEFA and FIFA would like to protect football. They would like to be able to regulate their own sport. They would like to tackle the number of foreigner players playing in domestic competitions. They can't. Freedom of movement. They would like to address the competitive imbalance in and between leagues. They can't. EU Competition law.  They've been lobbying to get the principle of the "specificity" of sport enshrined in the EU treaties to balance the influence of the EU on the game and regain some control, but have so far failed. And, while the EU has stopped short of treating sport as "just another business" there is no mistaking that it is the forces of the free market that reign supreme in football. While some, like the Premier League, are happy to exploit this to their advantage, not everyone thinks that greed is good.

 

So while the danger is not yet clear for some, it is present. Don't think that the GAA will be cocooned away from the implications of the EU law. The grant establishes the link with the EU legal framework and all it will take is one disgruntled party from inside our own ranks to exploit it.

And, sadly, we never seem to be short of them. 

GPA: Donal and Dessie

An insider reveals who the real genius is...

Self-righteous GPA

The self-righteousness of the GPA knows no bounds.

Less than a week ago Dessie Farrell lashed out at the Of One Belief group for insinuating  that Farrell and the GPA privately harbour long-term aims to create professional Gaelic games. Dessie took umbrage at these remarks claiming that the GPA's "bona fides" on preserving the amateur status are recognised by the GAA. How dare that "rump of malcontents" cast suspicions over the GPA's good word!

Although he later admitted he "probably" did make the comments referred to by Of One Belief in 2002, he insisted the remarks were written in a much different climate of relations. He neglected, however, to disclaim the sections of his book, written in 2005,  that advocate semi-professionalism, and, where- in a fit of egalitarianism rarely seen in peak Celtic Tiger Ireland- he put forward the concept of every player receiving the same amount of money. That didn't last long either, then, did it?

I dislike the label "flip flopper" and don't believe that a change of mind should handicap anyone. But, reacting with such pique and indignation, as if question marks over the GPA's commitment to amateur status were some slur on Dessie's and the GPA's character is downright petulant. Even worse, it's sanctimonious. 

 

It seems, however, the GPA doesn't know any other way. Their support today for Antrim's request to change in throw-in time for Sunday's Allianz Hurling League tie against Waterford in Dungarvan betrays this characteristic again. Bringing forward the throw-in time so that the Antrim players could make their way back to north Antrim - over 450 km and 6 hours drive - is perfectly reasonable, justifying additional GPA pressure on the GAA to accede to Antrim's petition. But, in doing so, why do they always have to be so prickly?

Why do they need "point out just how (my emphasis) accommodating players have been in recent years where fixture scheduling has taken place to facilitate television, Saturday ties and midweek games". Is there an implicit threat that they may not be so accommodating in the future? Even if not, their haste to always claim the moral high ground is priggish, and, more often than not, unfounded. Remember the GPA player's hankering to get on television with their Club Energise drinks in 2005? The GPA needs television as much as the GAA, if not more, especially if their ambitions to get their grubby hands on some of the TV revenue are fulfilled. So why bring that into it?

It's time for the GPA to stop thinking its above the GAA. We've had enough of the holier-than-thou attitude.  

Too much GAA on TV? YES, says Delaney

Leinster Council chief executive Michael Delaney has called for a restriction on the number of live games screened on Sunday afternoons according to today's Indo.

"Two live games, followed by the 'Sunday Game' is overkill."

"When you have two games shown live on a Sunday, it takes over the whole day so it's very difficult to get people out to watch club games later on."

"As things stand, the club scene is being seriously damaged by too much TV coverage on Sundays," said Delaney.

No to AFL Compensation for GAA recruitment

While no shock, this morning's headline in the Irish Independent "GAA clubs in line for compensation over AFL recruitment", is still disturbing. What's more alarming is Nicky Brennan's apparent willingness to explore this possibility.

Compensation for what? The young GAA players that the AFL are recruiting are members of the GAA. Look it up Nicky. Membership means participation by choice. The clubs don't own these players. The counties don't own these players. The GAA doesn't own these players. They are playing GAA because they want to. It's a choice. They sign up, they pay a membership subscription (which I might add is very good value when compared to lots of other sports memberships) to play.

While it is hard to stomach, there is not a lot that can be done. Great GAA players like Setanta O hAilpin, Colm Begley and Martin Clarke, who prefer to go to Australia to become professional athletes in a different code, should be free to leave with no "benefits" in return, if they choose to do so. How many young players who play soccer or rugby and Gaelic games have given up Gaelic football or hurling to try to play either of those codes? 

As Martin Breheny points out "Of far more concern to the GAA should be the drop off in the number of youngsters playing the games once they pass minor level". I'd go further. What about making GAA more appealing to a broader audience by cutting out the frequent violence in the game and creating a culture where there is more respect for the referee and for one's opponents? How many young people give up or, indeed, never take up, Gaelic games because of the perceived lack of respect for rules and because of the violence that frequents even underage games?

And what about the players that give up before they reach minor level because they never got a fair chance to play the game? How many kids depart disgruntled because certain mentors choose to ignore their lesser talents, which may develop at a later age but are never given the chance to do so, in pursuit of short-term success. A much sought after U-14 Division III title, for example. It's more widespread than you think. Shouldn't that be more of a concern?

The similarities between Gaelic football and Aussie rules and the age at which these players are recruited, just as they are appearing on the inter-county scene, makes their decision all the harder for the GAA to take. But, it is their decision. The GAA has no 'rights' over a player, unlike in soccer. UEFA have rules for compensating clubs in Europe for each transfer for any player up to the age of 23. That's because players are considered "assets" in a purely financial sense and UEFA wants clubs to have the necessary financial and sporting incentives to invest in training and educating young players. Introducing similar rules in GAA and accepting compensation for players from the AFL would be another huge step towards professionalisation. If the GAA really wants itself to be considered primarily a "sporting and cultural" organisation then the idea of compensation should be dismissed immediately and categorically. 

And that silly International Rules circus should be rejected along with it.