Opening up Croke Park

Keano_sli

With the motions committee deciding tonight on weather any on the 11 motions proposing the opening up of Croke Park will make the Agenda at congress, how will you feel if the Association does not at least get the change to vote on the proposition?

Pal

forget it

krinpit

It would be scandalous of course.

It's something which should at least be discussed by the head honchos rather than just b*tched and moaned about by people who don't matter (ie: us )

I reckon they'll decide to discuss it, but there's little chance of it opening up this year.

I'd love to get into a rant about all the reasons that they should open it up for business, but that's not what this thread is about.

por

The counties will be notified this morning whether or not their motions will be debated. The media is mentioning that a couple of the 11 will make it through, there is no mention however of where they are getting this info from.

Personally I think that CP should be opened initally for the duration of the Lansdowne re-development only. However after that if a soccer or rugby fixture appears that will attract a crowd of grater than 50k, a comittee of the GAA should have the power to decided if they will faciliate the fixture at the request of either the FAI or the IRFU.

Does anyone know exactly what the motions submitted actually contained, where they 'abolish rule 42' or where they 'take the decision on ammending rule 42 out of the hands of Congress and give it to Central Council' ?

The Rooster

The papers all reckon that at least one motion has made it way through. It will be very interesting to see what it/they contain.

Then the debate *fight* will really start.

Let's hear your "rant" krinpit - its the obvious next step, but please nobody mention any of the following as reasons for opening/not opening Croker - as they are totally irrelevant to this debate:

- taxpayers money help paid for Croke Park
- 800 years of oppression
- soccer is played by a 26 county Ireland
- Ulster rugby has little or no catholics
- the GAA have a moral obligation to open it up

There have been hundreds, perhaps thousands, of threads on the internet debating opening up Croker. Lets be the first to have a proper reasoned debate, without the emotive nonsense that usually runs these debates into vicious dead-ends.

Imposter

I hope they decide to abolish Rule 42 and leave it to a commitee to decide individual cases. That by no means, means that soccer will get the go ahead to play but it leaves the GAA in control of the situation moreso than if the rule were still in place.

The problem i've had on these boards to all previous debates on this issue has been irish soccer fans who in trying to get their point across accuse the GAA of being bigots while not realising that they are very bigoted in their own attitude towards the GAA. Hopefully any further debates here won't have this happening again.

The Rooster

Correct imposter. Most soccer/rugby fans have next to nothing to add to this debate, and when they speak on it, its generally based in ignorance of the real issues.

It is a GAA matter.

Keano_sli

No News from the Motions committee yet but it looks like a motion will at least get disscussed this year, I don't thin however that it will get passed this time around.
I'm not sure what you mean by the real issues Rooster perhaps you can expand on that for us.

Imposter

The Rooster wrote:

Correct imposter. Most soccer/rugby fans have next to nothing to add to this debate, and when they speak on it, its generally based in ignorance of the real issues.

It is a GAA matter.

I don't agree with that either. I think soccer and rugby fans do have something to add to the debate but coming out with emotionally charged bullsh1t and calling the GAA every name under the sun does not help. Yes it is a GAA matter but there is no reason why fans of other games can't have an opinion and can't add to the discussion. Similarly the FAI actually talking to the GAA might see more cooperation than constantly whinging through the media about the matter.

The Rooster

I certainly didnt mean to insult soccer or rugby fans - but I can see that I probably did!

Of course they can have their opinions, but they are often very biased - either "open it up" or "fcuk them and their stadium". Do they really add to the debate? I have doubts, but I suppose it is up to us GAA people to educate them on what the GAA concerns are. And then they can give valuable reaction/comment to this, instead of reacting to the nonsense spouted on TV and radio phone-ins. (Note, there is also nonsense spouted by a minority on the hardcore "keep it closed" side within the GAA - and these idiots also get far more airtime than their numbers deserve.)

At the end of the day, the decision is a decision to be made by the GAA, and only the GAA. And its not as simple as "open it up".

The GAA needs to carefully consider whether allowing games of soccer and rugby to be played in front of 80,000 people will serve to promote the GAA's biggest competitors at the expense of the GAA. And whether the GAA will get sufficient consideration for this in terms of cash and good public reaction.

- By the way, news in from the GAA:- More than half of the motions on Rule 42 have made it through (therefore min. of 6), so at least there will be a debate at Annual Congress this year.

por

Well it's offilcal Rule 42 will be debated

http://www.rte.ie/sport/2005/0216/rule42.html

Sorry Rooster, only read the bottom of your post just now

Milkman

Im not necessarily in favour of opening CP up for soccer, purely as a resident in the area, and having lived near a large soccer stadium before, there is a huge difference in the crowd associated with both games. Yes this is a huge generalisation. But nowhere in any of the arguments do the residents come into this debate. If it was to be opened then the residents would have to get a say in how many games were played there, as it is concerts have to apply for planning permission for each night.

One bad point about opening it up to internationals is that at present CP is an open stadium with no cages and bars, no segregation of the crowd..... how long would that last if soccer was played there on a regular basis.

I don't want to seem like a pain in the a$$ resident, but there would have to be changes to the stadium, how games are policed, more co-operation and communication with residents. If these issues were addressed then.. hey why not open her up!

M.

Danno

Milkman, very well said.

There are big implcations on opening up for other sports such as those outlined above. However, if it is kept to National teams, then I think that there will be little or no crowd trouble as GAA games are also trouble-free.

However, a ban on Ireland versus England soccer after the hooliganism in Lansdowne in 1995, should be deeply stitched into the terms and condiditons book.

Pal

Imposter wrote:

The problem i've had on these boards to all previous debates on this issue has been irish soccer fans who in trying to get their point across accuse the GAA of being bigots while not realising that they are very bigoted in their own attitude towards the GAA. Hopefully any further debates here won't have this happening again.

I cannot agree sir. I feel such irish soccer fans have a somewhat valid point of view there. The only one I have noted on the GAA side who seems to emerge from this sham with any dignity is Charlie the Dublin football player (don't know his surname) who admitted the equality of Irishness amonst all sportspeople on tv the other day. They must have squirmed down Jones Road at that one.

Chris P Duck

I totally agree with what is being said about Croke Park been opened up, but in a situation that each event that takes place in it is decided by a comittee first.

I dont agree with the way many of you have put soccer fans, rugby fans and GAA fans into stereotypical groups. I reckon were all Irish sports fans and should not be considering each other as "The Competition". Most people I know, who have any interest in sport, support all 3. Most of the regular supporters of the irish soccer team who attend the home internationals at landsdowne rd, also support there local and county gaa team and will visit croke park regularly (if there county is any good). Many local soccer and gaa teams have players who play both sports.

Croke Park is a very special place and the gaa deserves every little bit of credit it gets for it. But wouldn't it be great for Ireland, if all our great sporting heros got the chance to play in a special place like croke park, and to be able to bring other countries over and show them this amazing venue. The gaa would gain huge publicity and profit from this.

Yavvy

Logistical problems with opening Croke Park are secondary in my opinion, things like segregation, Hill 16 terrace, too many games, which games to allow..etc etc.. All problems that can be over come.

There are more long term issues at hand which I hope will be discussed at congress.

I am in favor of opening up head quarters to other sports because I honestly think in the long run it will make Gaelic football more popular. ( I don't know if it will damage hurling or not..thats another days thinking)

This is Sean Kellys big moment in history...will he be the man that opened up Croke Park ? I doubt it. But I respect him for trying.

Danno

Would FAI/IRFU have a case of discrimination if they were not allowed to play there?

cournioni

I don't think they would tbh. Rugby and Soccer are two professional sports, that rival an amateur non profitable organisation (one who funds counties and clubs). If someone cannot see that as a decent reason to keep Croke Park closed then I am amazed. Imagine a small club that would get very little funding but for the GAA, if this funding was put under threat by Soccer or Rugby it might not be able to survive. That is the problem IMO.

The Rooster

Pal wrote:

I cannot agree sir. I feel such irish soccer fans have a somewhat valid point of view there. The only one I have noted on the GAA side who seems to emerge from this sham with any dignity is Charlie the Dublin football player (don't know his surname) who admitted the equality of Irishness amonst all sportspeople on tv the other day. They must have squirmed down Jones Road at that one.

Pal, I believe it was Dessie rather than Charlie. I didnt hear it though and I'd hate to disagree with anything Dessie said, without having the full facts. However, I cant see what "Irishness" has to do with this debate.

Aze, there are a helluva lot of soccer supporters out there who dont know the first thing about GAA - especially in Dublin and other cities. TBH, as a sports fan, I'd love to see soccer and rugby in Croker, even if only while Lansdowne was being rebuilt. But I fear soccer heads and radio hosts and others who know nothing about the GAA, will put up stupid arguments that will only turn the GAA members dead against them.

Imposter

Aze,
What I mean by any of the groupings i used are the hardcore fans that fail to see anyone elses point of view. Imo those soccer (and rugby to a much lesser extent) fans that fall into that category generally have a very bigoted attitude towards the GAA. If anything the view of the bigots within the GAA is more valid as this is a decision for the GAA and noone else. In saying that they would be making a mistake, imo, if they didn't consider opinions of certain people not within the GAA.

(at the risk of starting this again)
Pal,
Can you explain why the GAA members who are against opening up Croker are any more bigoted than the soccer fans who call them bigots? Or can you explain what you mean a bit clearer.

Keano_sli

"Correct imposter. Most soccer/rugby fans have next to nothing to add to this debate, and when they speak on it, its generally based in ignorance of the real issues."

I'm still confused as to what the real issues are in the debate Rooster. You listed a load of issues that you considered not to be relevant to the debate and then speak of ignorance of the real issues but you have not expanded on what these real issues are. I would like to hear more about what they are, and for the record I do think that the massive amounts of Taxpayers money given to the GAA to assit with the development of Croke park is an important issue in the debate. Although we can hardly blame the GAA for taking the money, my annoyance would be directed at the Government and particularly Bertie Ahern for handing the money over with no conditions. Mainly in an attempt to facilitate the Bertie bowl pipe dream.
Anyway I really would like to know what GAA people see the the Main issues involved. At least that way it would be possiible to argue a case for opening up CP based on those issues.

As for the Segregation of fans, I don't think that would be such an issue as people make out. Someone mentioned cages, Obviouly they do not watch much soccer, Since Hillsborough disaster all Fencing and caging has been removed from English grounds. Fans are generally seperated by a few sections of empty seats and a cordon fo Cops and stewards and there is rarely trouble. Apart form the England fans we have never seen trouble at Irish soccer internationals and that was partly due to bad organisation by the FAI and the Garda. Most away fans at Lansdowne road are as peaceful as an average GAA crowd and there is no Segreagation at Rugby anyway. So I believe this argument is just a red herring.

Pal

Pal, Can you explain why the GAA members who are against opening up Croker are any more bigoted than the soccer fans who call them bigots?

No.
I don't know why this is.
They (GAA says no crowd) are not people I meet often so I wouldn't be privy to their rationale.

The Rooster

Keano, I personally believe that taxpayers money is not an issue because:
1. the FAI/IRFU will get similar funding if they ever build or rebuild a stadium.
2. countless building projects up and down the country receive capital grants, very few with pre-conditions. Any conditions that might attach would relate to levels of employment. There would be no conditions saying you must let a competitor use your office or factory. I (like thousands of others) was given a grant to buy my first house. No conditions attached about letting someone else in, if they were short of somehwere to stay. Its just a nonsense IMO. Why should Bertie have put conditions into the GAA grants, when he didnt put similar conditions into giving Intel (a multi billion dollar company) grants to build their new factory in Leixlip? Grants are irrelevant IMO.

A real issue to debate:

If a rugby or soccer game takes place in Croke Park, its likely to be a huge and spectacular event. It will generate massive interest, not to mention plenty of cash for the IRFU/FAI.

Why should the GAA go and help their biggest competitors in this manner? It is the GAA who have managed to raise in the region of €150m to build this magnificent stadium. Why should an non-profit (every penny is ploughed back into the game) amateur organisation help professional organisations who have wasted millions of their money on massive executive salaries and payoffs, huge travel/accomodation expenses for "officials", etc. etc. etc. No to mention that soccer generates a huge amount of hype in any event, and is constantly rammed down everyone's throat. Why should the GAA add to this hype?

The answer, if you're looking for a positive answer, could be:
1. Because it will generate good PR
2. Because it will generate extra cash.
Now, the GAA dont actually need either of the above, but in my opinion, it would be nice to have them both.

Hairy Homer

Any truth in the rumour that the argument in favour of opening up Croke Park has just received a boost on the grounds that a planned multimillion pound refurbishment scheme has just been cancelled following problems with a financing broker in Farran, Co Cork?

They might need all that soccer and rugby rental money now.

therecklessone

Glad to see the debate has remained civilised on this forum when it has become more heated on another.

The Rooster wrote:

The answer, if you're looking for a positive answer, could be:
1. Because it will generate good PR
2. Because it will generate extra cash.
Now, the GAA dont actually need either of the above, but in my opinion, it would be nice to have them both.

Really?

On point 2 GAA In Huge Debt - 22/03/03

Yes its nearly two years old, but read it and tell me things haven't changed.

It's an exciting time for the GAA, yet the financial implications of servicing the huge Croke Park debt will impose severe restrictions on other activities for the next 15 years at least. It takes no great financial wizard to work out that with annual interest of €4.2m before any repayments are made on the actual €70 million debt, other projects will come under pressure.

If the GAA were to borrow an additional €23m to develop the northern end, it would push their borrowings to €93m and leave them with an annual interest bill of €5.4 million.

Sounds to me like a couple of extra paydays a year would come in handy.

On your first point, I'll turn things around a little. If the GAA decides not to amend Rule 42, it would be a PR disaster. People need to realise the GAA does not exist in a vacumn.

Personally I see this as a win-win situation for the GAA.

Extra funds
Good PR
Croke Park exposed to a wider audience.
Specify that the redeveloped Landsdowne be made available for GAA in the Summer.
And limit the extent of the Rule amendment to Croke Park initially, so that local clubs don't suffer.

I know many think that amending the Rule will mean local clubs will suffer, I disagree. Changing Rule 42 doesn't mean you have to allow access, just that you can.

Imposter

Sounds to me like a couple of extra paydays a year would come in handy.

Handy yes but neccessary no.

Croke Park exposed to a wider audience.

Why is this neccessary (in particular, for the GAA)?

Specify that the redeveloped Landsdowne be made available for GAA in the Summer.

This would be a nice option to have but is hardly something that the GAA require. It'd be highly unlikely that they'd get the go ahead to have games on in both places on the same day. Although this, like with using Croker more, will inevitably put more of a strain on the relationship with redidents in the area.

And limit the extent of the Rule amendment to Croke Park initially, so that local clubs don't suffer.

And then 2 years down the line have this debate about letting Munster Rubgy, for example, play at the Gaelic grounds! It's best to deal with it all in one go. The "it's only one stadium" cry will go on and on if it's not all dealt with together.

I know many think that amending the Rule will mean local clubs will suffer, I disagree. Changing Rule 42 doesn't mean you have to allow access, just that you can.

I agree with this in theory but in practice the media seem to be wielding more power in this debate than any of the other interested parties (GAA, governemnt, FAI, IRFU). So what happens when the media start printing their sob stories about BallyGoBackwards soccer team being forced to disband cause they've no pitch, for example?

The Rooster

That was obviously before the final €40m lotto grant. The debt is now under €60m, and interest costs run at around €3m. That is not a problem to service by the GAA, hence they don't need extra money. Of course, and as I said, it'd be nice to have extra money - it just has to be balanced against perceived costs.

Keano_sli

Quote:
Croke Park exposed to a wider audience.


Why is this neccessary (in particular, for the GAA)?

While its propoably not strickly nessecary for the GAA, isn't there a GAA museum in Croke Park? How many people have actually visited it. If Croke Park was showcased on an international level couldn't many of the Tourists who visit Dublin be encourage to go to visit both the museum and the Stadium. Stadium tours are very popular in other cities, why not in this case. Maybe it already is, if anyone has the info they could let us know.
But if it is not as popular as say tours of Celtic Park, Old Trafford and the Camp Nou then maybe it could be and extra exposure would help. All of which would translate to even more money ofr the GAA.
I would even go as far as to say that he GAA could bid to host the Champions League final some time, Think how Iconic the stadiums that teams win this in become to the fans of those teams. Theres a whole world of possibilites out there.

Blackjack

While there are a hell of a lot of arguments for and against, it must also be remembered that neither the FAI or the IRFU have asked nor have they in any official capacity approached the GAA for the use of any Stadia owned by the GAA.
I think the request (or lack thereof) from either the Soccer or Rugby organisations should be discussed, prior to the discussion of what the rules of the GAA are as to what they do to their property.

I would love to see International games of Soccer or Rugby being played at Croke park, having attended internationals for both Rugby and Soccer at home and abroad in inferior stadia. However, that is a decision for the GAA, and the GAA only, not for those who feel that because the paid a few quid in tax at some stage of their lives that it is their Birthright to do what they see fit.
Rooster's point in relation to the First time buyers grant is particularly valid here. People have also suffered from an incredible bout of Amnesia considering the huge lump of cash that both professional codes are being handed for the rebuilding of Lansdowne road (191 Million by the Taxpayer, and 68 Million by the IRFU and 33 Million by the FAI).
As a taxpayer, does the donation of 191 million give me the right to use Lansdowne as my public facility?. The answer is no, and neither does this apply to Croke Park.

The Handwringing from the FAI as to where they will play now is just a bit too disengenuous at this stage.

For those with a subscription to the Irish Times, an article here sums up the demeanor of the FAI (and their followers) quite perfectly for me.

If the mods can confirm that there are no issues with providing the full text of the article here, then I would be more than happy to do so.

It really never ceases to amaze me that people are prepared to lambast the GAA for holding fast to a particular rule when the organisation who apparently have the most to lose (the FAI) have never asked to use the facilities for which the rule applies. Was it not a lack of facilities and equipment (e.g. Balls) that created the disaster in Saipan?.

Genesis appears to have counted for nothing.

thejollyrodger

Firstly its a matter for the GAA whether they want to open their stadium up for other sports. If they do then great, if they dont well thats fine.

I think that the GAA should open up Croker, the reason is that its whats best for the GAA. Soccer and rugby matches are going ahead anyway and the GAA might as well take some money off them and develop their own game.

therecklessone

I didn't return to this yesterday because work was calling...

In relation to the extra income the GAA would gain from allowing access to Croke Park:

Imposter wrote:

Handy yes but neccessary no.

The same applies to U2 playing two concerts during the summer. The same applies to the use of the Croke Park Convention Centre by non-GAA bodies. And the same applies to the hotel under construction beside Croke Park for which the GAA got planning permission in the Summer of 2003. Why draw the line at those revenue sources?

Doing some back-of-a-beer-maths now...

80,000 capacity venue made available to the IRFU and FAI for two years. In that time the IRFU require access for 5 matches (all 6 Nations ties) and the FAI for 5 (EC2008 qualifiers).

Each match sells out (and theres a very good chance of that happening) with tickets averaging €40 a pop. Per match thats a total gate of €3,200,000. Per match!

The GAA could comfortably charge €1,000,000 rent per match, grossing €10,000,000 over the two years. Thats quite a few € to spend on developing Gaelic sports, wouldn't you agree? Not needed? So every club has first class playing and training facilities available to them?

Imposter wrote:

Why is this neccessary (in particular, for the GAA)?

Not necessary, but considering the superb job thats been done of the development of Croke Park, shouldn't the GAA get the plauidts they deserve. If nothing else, its bragging rights for a non-profit organisation (at a time when professional sport is losing its soul)

Imposter wrote:

This would be a nice option to have but is hardly something that the GAA require. It'd be highly unlikely that they'd get the go ahead to have games on in both places on the same day. Although this, like with using Croker more, will inevitably put more of a strain on the relationship with redidents in the area.

I was thinking of the less high-profile games. There have been occasions when Croke Park has witnessed less than capacity ties, yes? Wouldn't access to Landsdowne help the GAA manage their fixture list while ensuring that teams still get to play in a modern stadium with a sell-out crowd? T'was just a thought anyway.

Imposter wrote:

And then 2 years down the line have this debate about letting Munster Rubgy, for example, play at the Gaelic grounds! It's best to deal with it all in one go. The "it's only one stadium" cry will go on and on if it's not all dealt with together.

I'd prefer to see it dealt with in one go TBH, but it seems the motions accepted by the Motions Committee will centre on temporary access to Croke Park for the duration of the Lansdowne development.

Imposter wrote:

I agree with this in theory but in practice the media seem to be wielding more power in this debate than any of the other interested parties (GAA, governemnt, FAI, IRFU). So what happens when the media start printing their sob stories about BallyGoBackwards soccer team being forced to disband cause they've no pitch, for example?

The GAA faces two choices. Either say no now, despite external pressure, or say yes now (with conditions) but face a possible scenario in the future which involves more media pressure to change. Tough call really, I'm not gonna deny it.

The Muppet

therecklessone wrote:

The same applies to U2 playing two concerts during the summer. The same applies to the use of the Croke Park Convention Centre by non-GAA bodies. And the same applies to the hotel under construction beside Croke Park for which the GAA got planning permission in the Summer of 2003. Why draw the line at those revenue sources?

Because it's up to the GAA to decide on how to fund their orgaisation. They chose to allow the concerts etc. If they were let make this decision without being told what they should do they may reach the conclusion most of the country wants.

I'm no fan of the GAA but I fully accept that it is their stadium,they have worked hard to build it and the decision on what is hosted there is theirs in conjuction with local residents.



BTW Excellent post above by blackjack .

The General

Im not into GAA at all and it doesnt bother me in the slightest what happens, but would it not be senseible to allow other sports in Croke Park, so Crock Park racks in more money and everyone is happy

therecklessone

The Muppet wrote:

Because it's up to the GAA to decide on how to fund their orgaisation. They chose to allow the concerts etc. If they were let make this decision without being told what they should do they may reach the conclusion most of the country wants.

I'm no fan of the GAA but I fully accept that it is their stadium,they have worked hard to build it and the decision on what is hosted there is theirs in conjuction with local residents.

Couldn't agree more Tom, thats why it was the first thing I said when I joined this debate in the soccer forum. Perhaps I should have brought that here as well.

On the topic of funding, Pat Spillane wrote the following in today's Sunday World:

Here is a wonderful asset that lies idle for six months of the year, that could be generating money for the GAA at a time when the GAA doesn't use it.

Recent estimates suggest that as much as five million euro could be brough in if the GAA would rent out the ground twice a year.

Over 50 million would be available for the three years that Lansdowne Road is being renovated.

That's money that could be well ploughing life into hurling, a game that is dying a death in most of the country, and more importantly poured into coaching and development, especially in large urban areas where the GAA is fighting a losing battle

The Muppet

therecklessone wrote:

Couldn't agree more Tom, thats why it was the first thing I said when I joined this debate in the soccer forum. ......................

I missed that one Ronan, I agree it would be fantastic to see out national soccer team play at Croker , I just don't think that the GAA should have to justify the decisions they make regarding their prized asset.

As Blackjack pointed out The FAI have never requested permission to play there, They seem to assume that public pressure will get them access to Croke Park without having the manners to ask and so let off the hook for not provoiding proper facilities of their own.

Johnny_the_fox

The Muppet wrote:

As Blackjack pointed out The FAI have never requested permission to play there, They seem to assume that public pressure will get them access to Croke Park without having the manners to ask and so let off the hook for not provoiding proper facilities of their own.

Did they not include Croke Park in the Scottish/Irish bid for Euro 08?

They asked the government to ask the gaa to allow the use of the ground of a "once-off basis"

therecklessone

The Muppet wrote:

I just don't think that the GAA should have to justify the decisions they make regarding their prized asset.

Couldn't agree more, just don't want the GAA to say no for no other reason than "its our stadium, get stuffed". Thankfully the debate here has largely been based on rational argument, I hope that regardless of the outcome that the motions get the same respect when they come up for debate by GAA delegates.

Imposter

Is it possible to read the motions that got through anywhere? Are they all dealing with just Croker or are there more general ones too?

The Rooster

Imposter, there will certainly be a lot more than Rule 42 on the agenda. I think there were 70 motions intially put to Past Presidents for approval, of which 11 related to Rule 42. 33 were sent back for re-drafting (which I suppose proves they werent just nit-picking on the Rule 42 ones). I didnt hear how many in total made it through as a result of the second chance. (note, this paragraph is all from memory of what I think I saw reported rather than absolute fact)

As far as I remember, motions do get published prior to the meeting, but they have not been published yet.

Did they not include Croke Park in the Scottish/Irish bid for Euro 08?
They asked the government to ask the gaa to allow the use of the ground of a "once-off basis"

I dont think it got that far Johnny. The Government asked and received permissions from the GAA to include Croke Park in the bid, and it was even inspected by UEFA. But as the bid didnt get very far, I think its still true to say that the GAA were never asked to stage a soccer match. I've heard FAI officials say before that there's no point asking them because their rules don't allow it - but that's very lame as it has given the GAA the opportunitiy over the years to defer debating it as they've never had the request (chicken, egg etc.).

Here is a wonderful asset that lies idle for six months of the year, that could be generating money for the GAA at a time when the GAA doesn't use it.

That's a little bit glib. Its not as if rugby and soccer will only need the stadium between October and March. The France soccer game is scheduled the week before the All Ireland hurling final. Not an insurmountable problem, but not straightforward either.

I hope that regardless of the outcome that the motions get the same respect when they come up for debate by GAA delegates.

Wishful thinking There are going to be some GAA old fogies, on the anti-opening side, who will more than match some of the ridiculous comments made by soccer supporters on the soccer board!! Although I think a large majority will debate the issues in a reasonable manner. 67% is going to be near impossible though.

Tom Humphries has an article on Rule 42 today in the Irish Times. Havent read it yet, but I bet its good!
EDIT: Just read it and its excellent. Should be mandatory reading for everybody who has an interest in the debate!

Imposter

The Rooster wrote:

Imposter, there will certainly be a lot more than Rule 42 on the agenda.

Sorry, what I meant is, are all the Rule 42 related motions just dealing with Croker or are some of them also dealing with the wider implications of changing Rule 42?

Yavvy

I know what you ment imposter and as far as i know getting rid of rule 42 will open the possabilities for other sports at all GAA rounds... i might be wrong ?

Amz

Alany wrote:

I know what you ment imposter and as far as i know getting rid of rule 42 will open the possabilities for other sports at all GAA rounds... i might be wrong ?

As far as I'm aware it does mean the opening up of all GAA grounds.

I realise I've joined this thread quite late, but as someone who has been involved in GAA since I was 9, played at inter-county level etc. (I'm now a coach). I have also played soccer and am now involved in rugby at college level. I think the opening up of Croke Park for certain sports would be a fantastic opportunity for the GAA to showcase their stadium and it would be an opportunity for them to show that they've moved on and developed as an organisation.

I don't believe the GAA are as threatened by sports such as soccer and rugby as many people make out. I have seen the GAA club in my area thrive even with the growth and development of the local soccer club, both have thousands of members and both are constantly expanding and from reading recent statistics neither has suffered as a result of the other's development.

Croke Park is an example of what the GAA can achieve and have achieved since it's inception and it's a credit to all who worked to finance it and develop it over the decades. For it to be sitting idle for so long each year is a travesty.

I accept that people feel aggrieved that these professional organisations want to become involved now because they’ve allowed themselves to get into the situation where their only stadium is in desperate need of renovation and their only alternative, at this time, is to go abroad to host their “home” internationals. Many people are of the opinion that it is only because of this that the FAI and IRFU hope to use Croke Park. These people are probably right, but as far as I’m concerned and I think as far as the FAI and IRFU are concerned this would only be a temporary measure to tide them over ‘til Lansdowne Road is upgraded. Nobody is expecting them to become a permanent fixture in Croke Park and it will not take away from the fact that Croke Park is GAA Head Quarters in Ireland.

I don’t believe that exclusion should be encouraged by any sporting body which prides itself on being so involved in community development and as a member of the GAA it is one thing that has always saddened me. To promote an ethos where certain sports are discouraged or looked down upon is not something that I would like instilled in my children and I would be very reluctant to promote this idea with others. Sport and physical activity of all types should be encouraged and welcomed by the community and those organisations active in the community, the GAA being a major one in this country.

I wonder if much of the problem with opening Croke Park is to do with pride rather than logistical problems etc.

The majority of people on this island voted for the Good Friday Agreement, which hoped to promote the working together of all communities in this country. For the GAA to open the doors of it’s HQ I believe it would be a fantastic example of this and would maybe serve to encourage those involved in bringing peace to this country to work towards similar attitudes and arrangements in their own areas.

People never expected to see a GAA match between the Gardaí and PSNI/RUC, but it happened. The GAA showed that they can move on and they can act in a way that surprises people and makes them think and because the GAA is so involved in communities all over this country, much moreso than soccer or rugby clubs, they really could foster the type of attitudes towards inclusion that communities should have.

Apologies, it's late, I'm tired and I went on a bit, I'll attempt to be more clear in future.

Imposter

Amz wrote:

I don't believe the GAA are as threatened by sports such as soccer and rugby as many people make out. I have seen the GAA club in my area thrive even with the growth and development of the local soccer club, both have thousands of members and both are constantly expanding and from reading recent statistics neither has suffered as a result of the other's development.

I agree more or less with everything else you've said but i'm not sure about the above. Are you from Dublin or a large town? The reason I ask is that Dublin and most large towns have GAA clubs that are very large with many teams. Most rural clubs struggle to field 2 or 3 adult teams (men's) and rarely field a team in the female competitions. These are the clubs that will be most affected by the rule change and these are also the clubs that make the GAA the organisation it is. It's easy to ahve a successful club with thousands of members but it's a very different thing to keep a club going, never mind be successful, when membership levels are very low.

What i've said above doesn't mean i'm agianst opening up all facilities to the possibility that other sports can be played there but there needs to exist enough safeguards to protect the small and weaker clubs. The GAA must leverage it's advantages to continue to thrive in rural areas and their facilities in even the smallest of communities are a huge advantage that similar soccer clubs could only dream about. Being forced into sharing those would not be good for these clubs.

Hairy Homer

Blackjack wrote:

While there are a hell of a lot of arguments for and against, it must also be remembered that neither the FAI or the IRFU have asked nor have they in any official capacity approached the GAA for the use of any Stadia owned by the GAA.
I think the request (or lack thereof) from either the Soccer or Rugby organisations should be discussed, prior to the discussion of what the rules of the GAA are as to what they do to their property.

For those with a subscription to the Irish Times, an article here sums up the demeanor of the FAI (and their followers) quite perfectly for me.

Well it seems to me that this argument damns the IRFU/FAI no matter what they do. If they ask for an arrangement re Croke Park, they'll be criticised for putting pressure on the GAA and sticking their noses in where they're not welcome; if they don't they're accused of not showing proper deference to the GAA.

As for your linked article, I've read much of what Tom Humphreys has read on this matter. He is one of my favourite sports writers, much the best in the country and that's coming from a fan of the game of rugby, about which Humphreys has never written a kind word. If you go back over the years you will see his tone and views on the subject of Croke Park wax and wane with his mood. Most times he's sympathetic to opening it up, some times he sides with the exclusionists.

Last night (Feb 21st 2005) the subject was debated on Questions & Answers (again). There were no FAI/IRFU people there. There was Eugene McGee from the GAA and a mixed audience. McGee pointed out that there has been no official request from the other sports to use Croke Park. But how could they when they know that the GAA is currently bound by its own rules not to make it available to other codes?

What this means is that the debate with all its rancour, mud slinging and often inaccurate arguments is taking place among the sports-loving populace, not in the corridors of power. The GAA is not being 'brow beaten' by the media - there is plenty of pro-GAA comment there, the FAI/IRFU (they're staying out of it for the time being) or even the Government.

Sure the Government wants efficient use of sporting infrastructure ie ground sharing and to keep major events in Ireland for financial reasons, but it has not started to cut up rough with the GAA. At least not yet. It could withold cash, obstruct development through planning restrictions etc et. It has not done so.

All it has done is gently make the point that sharing sporting infrastructure such as Croke Park is 'in the national interest' Well Duh.

And the debate is taking place in the population at large where every sports fan has an opinion on this matter, one way or the other. That's not brow beating; that's called democracy.

Hippo

It's frequently suggested that the GAA shouldn't open up Croke Park as it would hand a major advantage to its chief competitors. I remember when it was originally suggested that soccer internationals take place in Lansdowne Road (this was roughly a million years ago) the same kind of argument was advanced in rugby circles, and at a time when the sport wasn't thriving the way it is now. The very fact that everyone now takes it for granted that soccer is played at Lansdowne without having mentioned it in the current debate would seem to indicate that it was less of an issue than was originally thought. Lansdowne is the IRFU's, not the FAI's!

That being the case, maybe the threat to the GAA is not a great one. If Croker were opened it's surely likely that any agreement would ring fence the ground and not involve smaller GAA grounds in having to share with local soccer and rugby teams, where the threat is perceived to be so great. That's how the IRFU/FAI agreement has worked all this time. International rugby and soccer matches are played in Dublin all the time,and their exposure and popularity are either a threat to the GAA or not regardless of where they're played.

Hairy Homer

Hippo wrote:

It's frequently suggested that the GAA shouldn't open up Croke Park as it would hand a major advantage to its chief competitors.I remember when it was originally suggested that soccer internationals take place in Lansdowne Road (this was roughly a million years ago)

1973?? A million years ago?? Hardly.

hippo wrote:

Lansdowne is the IRFU's, not the FAI's!

It certainly is. But there is a perfectly normal adult business relationship between the two organisations regarding sharing the stadium to mutual benefit.

That being the case, maybe the threat to the GAA is not a great one.

I don't think the GAA has a single thing to fear from soccer. The great strength of the GAA, and one for which this Dublin 4-resident rugby fan thinks it deserves huge respect, is its emphasis on local development and the provision of the opportunity to participate in sport to every village and hamlet in the country.

Soccer, on the other hand, is not only a global game but a 'globalised' one. The difference: a global game is one that is played around the world and everybody supports their local team;
a globalised game is one that is played around the world and most people support either Manchester Bloody United or Boring Boring Bloody Arsenal.

The experience of your local small club, or even your county--eg Clare hurlers in the 90s--having a big day out at the county final or the All Ireland is not the same as seeing Unoited or Orsenal win yet another League/Cup double. It's a special experience and one that will ensure support for the GAA throughout the future no matter who plays at its big grounds.

Rugby, on the other hand, is a huge threat. It's got a much stronger amateur background, it's a cross-community sport in the way that the GAA isn't, its requirements for physique make it a more natural fit for Gaelic footballers. Its administration has done a heroic job so far of keeping the top Irish players at home and looking after them in a professional environment after the game went professional and it looked like they were all going to be cherry picked by the wealthy of England and France.

However, I think that the GAA emphasis on the parish and small town will be a powerful compelling factor ensuring its growth and survival.

But then, what would a rugby fan know.

Hippo

I only said 'a million years ago' cos I couldn't remember the exact date,and anyway over thirty years ago is a long time in sport! (it wasn't intended too seriously).
My point is precisely what you refer to, there is a proper professional arrangement between the FAI and the IRFU and that it should be possible to create another one involving the GAA without that organisation crumbling into a heap as its games are discarded by fickle GAA fans the length and breadth of the country, dazzled by the twin attack of Brian O'Driscoll and Damien Duff, two sporting heroes they've never seen before. Do GAA fans not have television in their homes? Do they never watch or play other sports? Of course not. I'm not convinced that allowing international events in Croke Park poses a deadly threat to the GAA and its ethos.

Amz

Imposter wrote:

Are you from Dublin or a large town? The reason I ask is that Dublin and most large towns have GAA clubs that are very large with many teams.

I'm from Leixlip, there are two thriving GAA clubs in the area and a large soccer club which is currently undergoing a major development at the moment.

Most rural clubs struggle to field 2 or 3 adult teams (men's) and rarely field a team in the female competitions. These are the clubs that will be most affected by the rule change and these are also the clubs that make the GAA the organisation it is. It's easy to ahve a successful club with thousands of members but it's a very different thing to keep a club going, never mind be successful, when membership levels are very low.

These smaller GAA clubs generally don't have a problem fielding teams because of other clubs in the area, such as soccer and rugby, as very often there are no other clubs in the area. The problem with fielding teams occurs because very often these clubs aren't accessible to everyone in the locality who may have a wish to play Gaelic games or the population in the area is not large enough to sustain the fielding of full teams.

Given that many people in these rural parts may move away to college or to work etc. will also cause them problems, access to training etc. will be difficult. Time constraints are a factor if they're travelling to work/college on a regular basis. I think if it was easier for members to transfer from one club to another it would help with this problem somewhat i.e. if the constraints on what areas in a locality came under the remit of which GAA club etc.

With regard to fielding a women's team, at adult or any level, this is always going to prove difficult unless there is a history of gaelic games for females in a particular area. Sport for women is always far more limited than sport for men (Speaking from experience here also!) and there will always be fewer participants no matter what area of the country you're in or what sport you consider (unless of course it's a sport only participated in by females).

I'm lucky in that at primary school level there were Gaelic football, camogie, hurling and handball leagues run between the three primary schools in the area, this was a fantastic base to start from and the local GAA clubs really beneiftted from us receiving such a great introduction, particularly from the point of view of a girl, there was little or nothing available for girls unless they wanted to play tennis or do gymnastics. If many girls hadn't been given the chance to play gaelic games they wouldn't now be playing at inter-county level etc.

The Rooster

Alany wrote:

I know what you ment imposter and as far as i know getting rid of rule 42 will open the possabilities for other sports at all GAA rounds... i might be wrong ?

I obviously havent read the motions so I can't be 100% certain. But I'm 99% sure that only Croke Park will be under debate.

Imposter

Amz wrote:

These smaller GAA clubs generally don't have a problem fielding teams because of other clubs in the area, such as soccer and rugby, as very often there are no other clubs in the area. The problem with fielding teams occurs because very often these clubs aren't accessible to everyone in the locality who may have a wish to play Gaelic games or the population in the area is not large enough to sustain the fielding of full teams.

Very often an area is able to sustain the GAA club but not both a GAA club and a soccer club. What happens when a soccer club is set up is as the numbers of players go down, so does the standard and the club then struggles to survive. This is where, imo, it would be unfair to expect the GAA club to share pfacilities with the soccer club as it could mean the end of the GAA club. The facilities are an advantage for the GAA just like a structured and virtually guaranteed timetable is an advantage for most soccer leagues.

What do you mean about clubs not being accessible to everyone?

Amz

Imposter wrote:

Very often an area is able to sustain the GAA club but not both a GAA club and a soccer club. What happens when a soccer club is set up is as the numbers of players go down, so does the standard and the club then struggles to survive. This is where, imo, it would be unfair to expect the GAA club to share pfacilities with the soccer club as it could mean the end of the GAA club. The facilities are an advantage for the GAA just like a structured and virtually guaranteed timetable is an advantage for most soccer leagues.

I don't think that the opening up of GAA facilities would instantly result in soccer clubs forming all over the country where GAA clubs are already established. The soccer clubs would struggle to recruit members for a start as the GAA in the area would already be well established.

I don't think the FAI or IRFU would expect clubs around the country to "move in on" the local GAA clubs. This would be unrealistic and in areas where there is a strong GAA tradition and little or no soccer/rugby influence then a club for either of these codes using GAA facilities or establshing facilities of their own would not be particularly viable.

The number of memebers in GAA clubs or soccer clubs do not remain constant. It is not uncommon for them to fluctuate and for a club to be unable to field say a minor men's team or an Under 10s side one year for example and the following year to have numbers for 2 teams in each competition.

The abolishion of rule 42 would not instantly mean the demise of Gaelic games in rural areas.

What do you mean about clubs not being accessible to everyone?

You mentioned that smaller, rural GAA clubs would struggle with the the opening up of Croke Park/Other GAA clubs to other sports.

My point about accessibility relates to the fact that many rural GAA clubs aren't on a public transport route, they're not always at the centre of population, therefore if one doesn't have access to a car or public transport etc. then it's going to be a barrier for them to join their "local" GAA club and train with them etc.

This obviously would be the same for a soccer club in the same situation. If people don't feel that their club is easy to get to etc. then they're not going to be motivated to go to it.

This problem isn't obviously a GAA issue as such, but it's a reason why GAA clubs in rural areas might suffer from lack of numbers.