The GAA’s Croke of Gold
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:06 am
(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.
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.