Croke Park and Rule 42

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 9:43am #1

I've just been listening to Dunphy on Newstalk and he was discussing The GAA's Rule 42, the one which states that no "foreign" games can be played on GAA owned grounds.

I'm not too up on the GAA, but apparently they have some Annual Conference deal in a few weeks. It is at these conferences that amendments to the GAA Rules can be changed or amended.

Over the past couple of years, different County Boards have had various motions on the amendment of Rule 42 put forward to Congress, but they have not been debated or voted on, for various reasons.

This time, apparently, there seems like a good chance that the motions will indeed be discussed and voted on.

Fair enough, Croke Park belongs to the GAA, no matter how they paid for it, and surely it is up to them how they make use of their facilities.

The implications for Irish Soccer as to the outcome of these motions are plain. The current stadium that the Ireland Soccer Team uses for it's home international matches in the IRFU's Stadium at Landsdowne Road, as we all know. This stadium is due for re-development, and as such will be unavailable for use. This redevelopment will be taking place at the time of the Irish Soccer Teams World Cup 2006 Home Qualification Matches against both France and Switzerland. There is not another stadium in this country capable to meet the requirements to host such games, apart from Croke Park.

I feel it would be in the best interest of Irish Sport as a whole if the GAA was to open it's doors to the Irish Soccer Team for these occasions. Otherwise the FAI would be forced to play the matches on foreign soil, quite possibly somewhere in Britain, Cardiff, Glasgow and Liverpool have been mooted as possible venues for these Home matches in the past, and no doubt would be mentioned again.

While the FAI and Government are certainly at fault after years of dithering over the building of a proper stadium for Irish Soccer, nothing can be done about this problem in the short term, and a solution must be found. I feel it would be a disgrace if the National Soccer Team was forced to play it's "Home" Internationals in foreign lands. I Feel it would negatively impact on the chances of our qualification for the World Cup in Germany in 2006, and would deny many "grass-roots" fans the chance to see their National Team in action in what are clearly very important games.

If the GAA do not open Croke Park, and The Ireland Soccer Team fail to qualify for the World Cup, I feel the Irish Sporting Public would hold the GAA partly responsible. For the good of Irish Sport, I re-iterate that The GAA should do everything in it's power to allow the Irish Soccer Team to play these two games in Croke Park, and possibly a third game, should the Irish Soccer Team need to play in a further qualification round.

The Rooster · 16-02-2005 10:08am

Just to clear up some facts, it was debated and voted at Annual Congress twice. Firstly, in 2001, when it would certainly have been passed, but for the late intervention of the government. At the time the govt were dead against opening up Croker, as it would have been detrimental to the Abbotstown proposal. In the end the vote was lost very narrowly.

In 2002 it was voted on again. And it was lost by a big margin.

In 2003, none of the motions made it to the table because of incorrect drafting - there had been warnings that the 2002 wordings were insufficient, but a one-off exception was made.

The GAA rule book is a difficult beast (but thats for another discussion), but it looks like at least one motion will get through.

That was a well written piece, seansouth, but the one thing I would take you up on, is why should the GAA give a damn of the Irish soccer team makes it to the world cup or not? To hold the GAA partly responsible for Ireland not qualifying for a world cup would be a joke!

Its a decision that will be made for GAA reasons, and public image will only play a small role. A far bigger point to discuss is does helping a competitor achieve success make any sense? Is it offset by making a few quid?

And even if the GAA do all the FAI / IRFU want, there will still be an equally big hurdle to get over, i.e. the residents around Croker.

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 10:22am

The Rooster wrote:

That was a well written piece, seansouth

Thank you.

The Rooster wrote:

To hold the GAA partly responsible for Ireland not qualifying for a world cup would be a joke!

I'm not saying I would, I was simply stating that "The Irish Sporting Public" would hold the GAA partly responsible.

How could they not?

Here we have a perfectly good stadium that seats somewhere in the vicinity of 80,000 people that is lying there unused for the majority of the year, most certainly at the times of the mentioned games. If the Irish Soccer team is having to play "Home" games in Britain when Croke Park is lying idle, questions will be asked by both the media and the tax-paying public in general.

I feel the GAA has increased in popularity in recent years, however the constant fudging over this issue does nothing for the public image of the organisation.

I'm not asking that they permanently open every GAA venue in the country to "Foreign" games, simply a temporary easing of the rule.

Imposter · 16-02-2005 10:35am

seansouth wrote:

I'm not saying I would, I was simply stating that "The Irish Sporting Public" would hold the GAA partly responsible.

How could they not?

If for example they realise the issues involved and treat the GAA's decision as one they are entitled to make rather than listen to the constant media crying over the issue.

Here we have a perfectly good stadium that seats somewhere in the vicinity of 80,000 people that is lying there unused for the majority of the year, most certainly at the times of the mentioned games. If the Irish Soccer team is having to play "Home" games in Britain when Croke Park is lying idle, questions will be asked by both the media and the tax-paying public in general.

Tolka park is also "lying idle" if it's the "home" games part of things thatÄs the problem.

I feel the GAA has increased in popularity in recent years, however the constant fudging over this issue does nothing for the public image of the organisation.

agreed

I'm not asking that they permanently open every GAA venue in the country to "Foreign" games, simply a temporary easing of the rule.

Rules are rules. Rule 42 is quite likely to be changed/abolished this year but that doesn't mean other sports will be allowed to play in Croker.

There's already a thread on this on the GAA board. Is there any chance that they can be merged together. I know the 2 boards (3 if rugby comes into the discussion again) have different readers but having 2 threads on the matter just means the same comments on both threads albeit with a slight bias in one direction or another.

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 10:55am

Imposter wrote:

If for example they realise the issues involved and treat the GAA's decision as one they are entitled to make rather than listen to the constant media crying over the issue.

The only thing the masses will see or understand is that the GAA has refused to open Croke Park, now you and I both know there are other issues abound, but quite simply, people either don't know, or care what these are. They see it in black and white. Will Croke Park be opened or not.

Imposter wrote:

Tolka park is also "lying idle" if it's the "home" games part of things thatÄs the problem.

Fair enough, but even Shels had to move out of Tolka to play DLC recently, because the lighting in Tolka is not up to required UEFA Standard (play the games in the afternoon?), also, Tolka Park holds less than 10,000 people, simply not sufficient for the games mentioned.

Imposter wrote:

Rules are rules. Rule 42 is quite likely to be changed/abolished this year but that doesn't mean other sports will be allowed to play in Croker.

I know Rules are Rules, and I think some people will never rest until they see the GAA opening Croke PArk to Soccer and Rugby. If the issue is discussed at congress level within the GAA, and then they come out with a ruling, then it should be left, but I can assure you, there are people within the GAA who want to see the changes, this is plain from the fact that motions from county boards are on the table in the first place.

I have read the thread in the GAA Forum, and yes of course it has a GAA bias, but it is informative to say the least to find out what issues they see as important, and what they see as simply non-starters as far as the reasons for opening Croke Park are.

The Muppet · 16-02-2005 11:39am

I would like to see soccer at Croker but the decision is the GAA's to make . The stadium is their's and I believe if they are left to make their decision without pressure from outside influences they will allow one or two soccer games per year. It makes financial sense for them to do that.

If they choose not to allow it that's their priveledge, you can not blame the GAA for the FAI's inadequacies.

cournioni · 16-02-2005 11:56am

The Muppet wrote:

I would like to see soccer at Croker but the decision is the GAA's to make . The stadium is their's and I believe if they are left to make their decision without pressure from outside influences they will allow one or two soccer games per year. It makes financial sense for them to do that.

If they choose not to allow it that's their priveledge, you can not blame the GAA for the FAI's inadequacies.

Spot on.

I think what most people fail to spot is that the GAA are a non-profitable organisation. Everything that is made is put back into clubs and counties (for the running of teams etc.). Soccer and Rugby are a threat to GAA, so therefore it restricts the amount of money that the GAA can make for the clubs around Ireland. This is money that these clubs need for survival, not for peoples pockets.

Why should the GAA have everything they've built over the past 120 or so years be put under threat just because of incompetences elsewhere?

Töpher · 16-02-2005 11:58am

But it would be nice to think that as Irish people they would aid one of our nations sports teams.

They allow concerts afterall! Were the Special Olympics not foreign?

cournioni · 16-02-2005 12:02pm

But none of those are sports that put the GAA under threat like Soccer and Rugby. They are one off events.

Why should they "aid" Soccer and Rugby?

yop · 16-02-2005 12:15pm

The Muppet wrote:

I would like to see soccer at Croker but the decision is the GAA's to make . The stadium is their's and I believe if they are left to make their decision without pressure from outside influences they will allow one or two soccer games per year. It makes financial sense for them to do that.

If they choose not to allow it that's their priveledge, you can not blame the GAA for the FAI's inadequacies.

Exactly as I see it, the stadium is the GAA's and it is a credit to them (us?? as n Gaa supporters etc) and I for one am in awe of the sheer size of it.

Personally I think it would be a real real shame if we could not experience our soccer and rugby teams playing there. That the likes of Keane * 2, Duffer, O'Driscoll could not play in the stadia that their sheer class deserve when it is sitting there empty would be a real shame.

CP should still be controlled and owned by the GAA but that the IRFU and FAI could rent it off them?? I don't know but I for one would love to attened an Ireland V Frace or England match there, the atmosphere would be unreal.

Time will tell

BTW - Good post Sean South, well put together

por · 16-02-2005 12:28pm

seansouth wrote:

This stadium is due for re-development, and as such will be unavailable for use. This redevelopment will be taking place at the time of the Irish Soccer Teams World Cup 2006 Home Qualification Matches against both France and Switzerland. There is not another stadium in this country capable to meet the requirements to host such games, apart from Croke Park.

Are you sure about thses dates, I was under the impression that it would be unavailable from summer '06 i.e. the qualification for Euro '08.

Either way I think it sould be opened for the re-dev. of Lansdowne period, and after that possibly on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances.

LizardKing · 16-02-2005 12:36pm

PORNAPSTER wrote:

Why should they "aid" Soccer and Rugby?

I think It would be very beneficial for them , a great marketing ploy ... They'd be able to sit back and watch as the crowds turn up for Soccer/Rugby games then see the quality stadium and say "Hey .. why don't we come back for the next big GAA or Hurling game" ..

yop · 16-02-2005 12:46pm

"I think It would be very beneficial for them , a great marketing ploy ... They'd be able to sit back and watch as the crowds turn up for Soccer/Rugby games then see the quality stadium and say "Hey .. why don't we come back for the next big GAA or Hurling game" .."

Interesting point, it could actually happen BUT I think that it could be a case of sitting back and watching the 1 million Euro (guestimate) per match rolling in, say 4 rugby matches per year, 4 soccer matches per year, If they got for example 40% of that you could be talking 3 odd million extra a year?

BolBill · 16-02-2005 12:48pm

LizardKing wrote:

I think It would be very beneficial for them , a great marketing ploy ... They'd be able to sit back and watch as the crowds turn up for Soccer/Rugby games then see the quality stadium and say "Hey .. why don't we come back for the next big GAA or Hurling game" ..

You're dreaming mate, people aren't as fickle as you think.

BTW Well done seansouth, very informative, thanks.

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 12:50pm

For me the important thing is not whether they actually grant access to the FAI or the IRFU. I am more interested in the reasons the GAA give for not granting access..

The simple fact is that they regularly rent the venue out to other sports/events. They persistently refuse to open the stadium up to Soccer or rugby purely because they are sports of British origin. There is no escaping this and no amount of excuses such as "the wear on the pitch" or "competing sports" will wash..

The Muppet · 16-02-2005 1:06pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

For me the important thing is not whether they actually grant access to the FAI or the IRFU. I am more interested in the reasons the GAA give for not granting access..

The simple fact is that they regularly rent the venue out to other sports/events. They persistently refuse to open the stadium up to Soccer or rugby purely because they are sports of British origin. There is no escaping this and no amount of excuses such as "the wear on the pitch" or "competing sports" will wash..

But surely as it's their stadium they can do what the want with it. They could just say no and not give any reason. However I don't think that will happen as the fact that the proposal has made it onto the table against the wishes of the "dinosaur Faction" in the GAA indicates that is unlikely to happen. I expect to see soccer played in croker in the near future.

smemon · 16-02-2005 1:07pm

if croke park was open to soccer, we'd have no need to build a new stadium and everyone would be quite happy. rule 42 is old, out-dated and very politically incorrect in this day and age.

basically 'f off, it's our stadium, go get your own'. soccer is a bigger sport than gaa, much bigger. recognised all around the world and is much more friendlier towards mixed societies. gaa is irish and irish only.

seen as soccer is the bigger of the 2, it's unfair it gets neglected. with proper funding and decent facilities from grass roots up, the way the gaa have it, ireland might even have a shout at the euro's, wc. its remarkable we are ranked as one of the top sides in world football considering our population, management (fai) and of course lack of cash.

irish fans are the best in the world in many people's eyes, they deserve a proper stadium: allseater and allroofer. is that too much to ask?!

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 1:23pm

The Muppet wrote:

But surely as it's their stadium they can do what the want with it. They could just say no and not give any reason. However I don't think that will happen as the fact that the proposal has made it onto the table against the wishes of the "dinosaur Faction" in the GAA indicates that is unlikely to happen. I expect to see soccer played in croker in the near future.

They could adapt that approach.. Mind you, if I owned a shop and allowed every other nationality except the British in, I don't think I would get away with it.

The stadium if theirs, even if over half of it was paid for by tax payers.. If they don't want to allow Soccer or Rugby, they shouldn't allow Concerts or American Football or the Special Olympic either.. If they are going to allow some sports, and not others, you have to examine the reasons..

As it stands, the reason for not allowing Soccer or Rugby to be played in Croke park, while still allowing other sports and concerts, is a sectarian reason..

The Muppet · 16-02-2005 1:27pm

smemon wrote:

soccer is a bigger sport than gaa, much bigger. recognised all around the world and is much more friendlier towards mixed societies. .
!

Indeed it is and much more lucrative financially which is why Soccer should have it's own modern facilities and not be depending on either the GAA or the IRFU for a venue for their fixtures.

gandalf · 16-02-2005 1:31pm

In an ideal world Croke Park would be available to all Sports that were prepared to hand over a set amount of the gate fee's as rental. However I can see where the GAA are coming from. Why let your rivals have access to your facilities. This would be a fair position if they had only built this wonderful stadium with their own funds. They haven't, they took taxpayers money, some of those monies came from soccer & rugby supporters. If they want to restrict the number of games per year that is fair enough but to exclude games and specifically "English Games" because of the past is sectarian and very short sighted.

As people keep pointing out there is no issue with Rock Concerts (for both local and "foreign" performers) taking place, and they have had foreign sports their in the past in the form of American Football games around 15 years ago (if my dim memory serves me well) so their position now is hypocritical.

Apart from the financial benefits (and from reading various newspaper articles even with Government funds they are very tightly stretched with this upgrade) which would be very lucrative again as someone has suggested they will be exposing many others to the world of GAA games and maybe giving the opportunity for some of those "foreigners" to get interesting in our national game. Why keep looking inwards when you can look outwards to new markets.

por · 16-02-2005 1:31pm

smemon wrote:

seen as soccer is the bigger of the 2, it's unfair it gets neglected. with proper funding and decent facilities from grass roots up, the way the gaa have it, ireland might even have a shout at the euro's, wc. its remarkable we are ranked as one of the top sides in world football considering our population, management (fai) and of course lack of cash

And who's fault is it that the above is the case, hardly the GAAs.
Before balming everything on the GAA, soccer should have a good look at itself and realise that its their own fault for being in the current situation.

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 1:34pm

The Muppet wrote:

Indeed it is and much more lucrative financially which is why Soccer should have it's own modern facilities and not be depending on either the GAA or the IRFU for a venue for their fixtures.

You have to wonder whether they would have their own facilities now if the goverments didn't mess then around over Eircom Park and Abbotstown..

You also have to consider how much the goverment (me and you) contributed towards the construction of Croke Park.

All this is irrelevent however. The GAA is a sport, Soccer is a sport.. Allowing one sporting body to rent another sport bodies facilities shouldn't be a problem assuming it does not conflict with the owners schedule.

What would happen if the GAA approached the FAI/IRFU for a dig out.. I can't imagine thinking they were refused for sectarian reasons..

gandalf · 16-02-2005 1:34pm

As an aside the FAI should get their act together and organise a Soccer Stadium of around 45,000 anyway. It is a disgrace and a crying shame that when Abbottstown collapsed (sorry I mean flattened by Tellytubby Harney) they didn't spring into action and get things moving on their own project again. Then again as we have all seen from past actions they are more interested in hanging each other than sorting out how football is run in this country.

The Rooster · 16-02-2005 1:51pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

The simple fact is that they regularly rent the venue out to other sports

Twice in 20 years, I think. Is that "regular"? Once for an exhibition of American Football (average attendance at US football games in this country would be of the order of 10!), and the other was the Special Olympics, which hardly qualifies as a sporting event, as it was just the opening ceremony.

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

They persistently refuse to open the stadium up to Soccer or rugby purely because they are sports of British origin. There is no escaping this and no amount of excuses such as "the wear on the pitch" or "competing sports" will wash..

Thats all largely untrue. There is nobody with Brain in the GAA who I have ever heard saying "Keep rugby out because it is a British sport". There is very little oppostion to rugby being played at all within the GAA - the main concern would (and quite frankly I could not care less that you dont believe it) is potential pitch damage and helping a competitor.

Soccer on the other hand, does have plenty of detractors within the GAA. But, being British has only a small amount to do with it. Although one thing the anti-opening up brigade will always point to is the hooliganism in Lansdowne Road when the English were last over - "do we really want to bring that type of person into Croke Park?".

And it is a fact, that if a soccer game was to be played in Croker, it would involve an unprecedented level of police/security (unprecedented for Croke Park, that is) and segregation would be required for the first time. Thats not a pleasant thought for the ordinary GAA member.

There is a small minority of GAA supporters who cannot abide the thought of "God Save the Queen" being belted out in Croke Park, because of "800 years of oppression" and because of the "occupation" of the North, and because of Bloody Sunday. I dont think thats got anything to do with Croke Park now.

There are also a minority of GAA people (this category is made up mostly of GAA members in the 6 counties) who don't want soccer in because it represents a 26 county sport - and that goes against the whole ethos of GAA which is based on a 32 county country. Again, I think this is irrelevant.

The God Save the Queen and 26 county factors will count against soccer when the debate begins - but in reality it'll only be a tiny part of the debate I believe. The vast majority of GAA people have moved on (albeit the small minority can be vocal and does get air-time). The threat of hooliganism would be more of a factor, but given recent improvements in behaviour, it should not be critical.

The most important issue is (like it or not JTG) whether the GAA is comfortable giving the IRFU and FAI the platform to stage spectacular sporting occassions with 80,000 in attendance.

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 1:54pm

I wonder how this debate would go down in a cross platform forum with the GAA heads on here.

I see some people have touched on the "secterian" nature of the debate, and frankly I think it is complete rubbish, and will get the debate nowhere. Accusations and name calling are not going to solve anything.

I agree that it would be nice to see the best sportsmen of the country in the best sports stadium we have.

Sure, the FAI should have done something, but they haven't, and won't be able to in time for the matches we are talking about.

What the GAA need to realise is that allowing 80,000 people in to watch a soccer game in Croke Park is not going to adversely affect the amount of people who are interested in GAA, for the following reasons.

1. The games will take place in what is effectively the GAA "close season". There will be no choice to be made, there will be no big inter-county matches being played, no "International Rules" matches, no NFL here.

2. The people that come to the matches are people that would have gone to the game no matter where it was being played, they are not taking from the GAA support, and are in fact filling then GAA coffers at a time when in all likelyhood the GAA is losing money.

3. IRFU are not looking for GAA to "bail them out" or anything of the sort. They are simply asking for a "loan" of Croke Park until their own stadium is re-built.

What the FAI need to realise is that they cannot continue forever living in Landsdowne, for some time now UEFA have been threatening that the place is not suitable for International Standard games.

What will happen in future if IRFU decide to go down the GAA* route and not allow non-rugby games to be played in their new state of the art stadium?

*edit : said FAI, changed to GAA

smemon · 16-02-2005 2:09pm

gandalf wrote:

As an aside the FAI should get their act together and organise a Soccer Stadium of around 45,000 anyway. It is a disgrace and a crying shame that when Abbottstown collapsed (sorry I mean flattened by Tellytubby Harney) they didn't spring into action and get things moving on their own project again.

my thoughts exactly. i know it's costly, i know it's a huge project but ultimately it WILL pay for itself and would be worth it. sure eircom park was going ahead, i even have a leaflet here somewhere on it. afair it was supposed to be built by now! so where did all that money go? even tickets were being sold for eircom park, obviously the fai had the finance, and had fully intended to build their own stadium.

the most frustrating thing is, for a while it looked like we'd have 2 state of the art stadiums being built, now we've none. the bertie bowl imo was always too far fetched, there wasnt even a real need for it. however a compact 40,000 seater or so would do nicely for the fai.

a few concerts, hosting irish cup finals and perhaps even sharing with irfu would keep things afloat and eventually, eventually it WOULD pay for itself. portugal pulled it off by building a few top notch compact stadiums very cheaply and on time. all ireland need is 1.

gandalf · 16-02-2005 2:09pm

Sean I can see why you are saying the sectarian labels are not helpful but in essence that is an issue with some GAA supporters.

You are right thou whatever is agreed the FAI have to stand on their own two legs Government assistance or not and get a stadium built with maybe an agreement with the GAA to get access to Croke Park for one or two games a year during the GAA off season.

Likewise I do not think it is mature of GAA supporters to label all soccer supporters hooligans either.

The Rooster · 16-02-2005 2:24pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

The stadium is theirs, even if over half of it was paid for by tax payers..

I don't know offhand what the exact figures are, but I thought it was well under 50% - somewhere between 30% and 40%. In any event a sizeable chunk (approaching 80%) of the "taxpayers money" was repaid in VAT and payroll taxes. So the net cost to the Exchequer was not a whole lot.

gandalf wrote:

This would be a fair position if they had only built this wonderful stadium with their own funds. They haven't, they took taxpayers money, some of those monies came from soccer & rugby supporters.

This is the type of argument that does my head in. "They took taxpayers money." Jeez Louise!! Firstly, with the amount of community work done by the GAA up and down the country for countless years, they deserve every penny they get. Secondly there are countless capital grants given to organisations every year. Intel have received massive grants for buildings in Leixlip. Are they now obliged to open their doors for any Irish business that might be in need of a place to stay?? I took 3 grand in punts of taxpayers money when I bought my house. Does that mean I have to let in any taxpayer who is short of somehwere to stay?? No and No. Its nonsense. Its irrelevant to the debate.

And lets not forget, now that the IRFU and FAI appeared to have got their act together and are developing Lansdowne Road, the taxpayers will contribute hugely to that.

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 2:26pm

Well, according to the GAA Forum, they are at least going to discuss some aspects of Rule 42 at the Congress.

That is really good news, I have to say.

cournioni · 16-02-2005 2:30pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

For me the important thing is not whether they actually grant access to the FAI or the IRFU. I am more interested in the reasons the GAA give for not granting access..

The simple fact is that they regularly rent the venue out to other sports/events. They persistently refuse to open the stadium up to Soccer or rugby purely because they are sports of British origin. There is no escaping this and no amount of excuses such as "the wear on the pitch" or "competing sports" will wash..

Where exactly did you get this idea of the GAA refusing Soccer and Rugby simply because of British origin? They are "professional" sports competing with amateur sports. The GAA have put all of their money into all areas of the sport. They are a non profit organisation. I come from a small club which probably wouldn't survive without GAA funding. Why the hell should we put that under threat just because the saint's in the FAI want help. Christ man, open up your mind a little bit.

The Rooster · 16-02-2005 2:35pm

gandalf wrote:

Likewise I do not think it is mature of GAA supporters to label all soccer supporters hooligans either.

Its hardly mature of soccer supporters to make such allegations if they are not true. Maybe you can point out where it was said. It certainly should not have been said.

What some GAA people are worried about is a hooligan element attending a soccer game and ripping up seats, similar to what happened the last time the English were over. As I said previously I would be of the hope that because of apparent improved behaviour, this should not be a critical issue.

BTW, I'm largely in agreement with seansouth's post #25

cournioni · 16-02-2005 2:35pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

What would happen if the GAA approached the FAI/IRFU for a dig out.. I can't imagine thinking they were refused for sectarian reasons..

Once again... :rolleyes:

gandalf · 16-02-2005 2:54pm

The Rooster wrote:

Its hardly mature of soccer supporters to make such allegations if they are not true. Maybe you can point out where it was said. It certainly should not have been said.

Sorry misread a couple of posts on GAA forum. I withdraw that comment.

What some GAA people are worried about is a hooligan element attending a soccer game and ripping up seats, similar to what happened the last time the English were over. As I said previously I would be of the hope that because of apparent improved behaviour, this should not be a critical issue.

BTW, I'm largely in agreement with seansouth's post #25

Well that would be simple to sort out. Make it part of the agreement that any damage caused is the responsibility of the leasing body or their insurance.

But also that is the only incident I remember where any significant hooliganism has occured at Irish international matches. Again it is slightly hypocritical to use this as a objection when reffing GAA matches can be a hazardous occupation

pickarooney · 16-02-2005 2:59pm

Can someone please explain how playing soccer in Croke Park is a threat to anybody or anything? How is turning down a few million quid a year in gate revenue helping the GAA promote gaelic games?

cournioni · 16-02-2005 3:14pm

pickarooney wrote:

Can someone please explain how playing soccer in Croke Park is a threat to anybody or anything? How is turning down a few million quid a year in gate revenue helping the GAA promote gaelic games?

In the long term it can be a threat to the popularity of the GAA. How exactly would it promote Gaelic Games any more in Ireland? There is no need to, everyone in Ireland knows about it and the stadium. Other than the fact that it would teach the FAI and the IRFU how to build a proper stadium without causing a fuss. If anything, it would damage the GAA. Not in the short term as the money would pay off debt, but in the long term where the popularity would fall because of the growth in popularity of the other sports.

If the FAI need to play in Ireland that badly, why don't they play at Dalymount or Tolka?

The Rooster · 16-02-2005 3:20pm

Just to once and for all quosh the taxpayers money argument (are you listening jesus_that_gre???

)

First we need to acnkowlege that there is a big difference between taxpayers moeny and lotto funds. The Lotto is purely optional, and everyone who plays it knows (or should know) that one of its primary beneficiaries is sport - and rightly so.

Cost of Croke Park &#8364;250m
Taxpayers money &#8364;19m = 8%
Lotto money &#8364;91m = 36%
GAA money &#8364;140m = 56%

Est cost of Lansdowne &#8364;300m
Taxpayers money &#8364;127m = 42%
Lotto money &#8364;64m = 21%
IRFU money &#8364;54.5m = 18%
FAI money &#8364;54.5m = 18%

So, in addition to my previous post, I hope this proves to soccer supporters not to use taxpayers money as an argument for opening up Croke Park. There are good arguments to open it up, stick to those please, not to irrelevant ones.

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 3:21pm

The Rooster wrote:

Twice in 20 years, I think. Is that "regular"? Once for an exhibition of American Football (average attendance at US football games in this country would be of the order of 10!), and the other was the Special Olympics, which hardly qualifies as a sporting event, as it was just the opening ceremony.

What about the numerous concerts that take place in the Stadium. The GAA seem to want to run Croke Park like any other modern stadium, i.e. by offering conference rooms and hosting events like the FAS job fair they have shown they want the extra money that these type of events generate.

The Rooster wrote:

Thats all largely untrue. There is nobody with Brain in the GAA who I have ever heard saying "Keep rugby out because it is a British sport". There is very little oppostion to rugby being played at all within the GAA - the main concern would (and quite frankly I could not care less that you dont believe it) is potential pitch damage and helping a competitor.

Soccer on the other hand, does have plenty of detractors within the GAA. But, being British has only a small amount to do with it. Although one thing the anti-opening up brigade will always point to is the hooliganism in Lansdowne Road when the English were last over - "do we really want to bring that type of person into Croke Park?".

I am sorry, being a British sport is the main reason for the problem they have with Soccer.. Football hooligism is a very rare event in this country and what happened with the English fans was a once off.. Restrictions on the international travel of these hooligans and many police authorities co-operating with each other will likely mean that such an event will never occur again..

The GAA is inherently backward and there stance regarding soccer particulalry compounds the deep seeded racism problems that plague this country.

The Rooster wrote:

And it is a fact, that if a soccer game was to be played in Croker, it would involve an unprecedented level of police/security (unprecedented for Croke Park, that is) and segregation would be required for the first time. Thats not a pleasant thought for the ordinary GAA member.

It would require proportionately more to cope with the increase in numbers when compared to Lansdowne Rd.. If anything, the Gardai could probably hangle things betters as it is a modern stadium and no doubt allows for better surveying of the crowd through security cameras..

The Rooster wrote:

There is a small minority of GAA supporters who cannot abide the thought of "God Save the Queen" being belted out in Croke Park, because of "800 years of oppression" and because of the "occupation" of the North, and because of Bloody Sunday. I dont think thats got anything to do with Croke Park now.

Using this as justification boils down to sectarianism..

The Rooster wrote:

The most important issue is (like it or not JTG) whether the GAA is comfortable giving the IRFU and FAI the platform to stage spectacular sporting occassions with 80,000 in attendance.

Would you care to explain this.. The hosted FAI and IRFU events during the re-development of Lansdowne road would prove to be a massive cash cow for the GAA.. They are in such a strong position, they could negotiate a very good deal..

seansouth wrote:

I see some people have touched on the "secterian" nature of the debate, and frankly I think it is complete rubbish, and will get the debate nowhere. Accusations and name calling are not going to solve anything.

I have not insulted anyone in any of my posts.. The accusations that the GAA are Sectarian is also reasonable.. How can an organisation that was set up by mostly staunch Catholics as a way to oppose British oppression not be sectarian?

seansouth wrote:

What the GAA need to realise is that allowing 80,000 people in to watch a soccer game in Croke Park is not going to adversely affect the amount of people who are interested in GAA, for the following reasons.

Exactly. It makes sense from a business perspective.. Just have to persuade the hard liners..

seansouth wrote:

1. The games will take place in what is effectively the GAA "close season". There will be no choice to be made, there will be no big inter-county matches being played, no "International Rules" matches, no NFL here.

2. The people that come to the matches are people that would have gone to the game no matter where it was being played, they are not taking from the GAA support, and are in fact filling then GAA coffers at a time when in all likelyhood the GAA is losing money.

3. IRFU are not looking for GAA to "bail them out" or anything of the sort. They are simply asking for a "loan" of Croke Park until their own stadium is re-built.

Once work begins on Lansdowne Rd, there is no longer any reason for the GAA folks to think that that FAI is going to claim squatter rights in Croke Park!

seansouth wrote:

What the FAI need to realise is that they cannot continue forever living in Landsdowne, for some time now UEFA have been threatening that the place is not suitable for International Standard games.

What will happen in future if IRFU decide to go down the GAA* route and not allow non-rugby games to be played in their new state of the art stadium?

The FAI and IRFU are re-developing Lansdowne together..

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 3:27pm

The Rooster wrote:
Just to once and for all quosh the taxpayers money argument (are you listening jesus_that_gre??? )

First we need to acnkowlege that there is a big difference between taxpayers moeny and lotto funds. The Lotto is purely optional, and everyone who plays it knows (or should know) that one of its primary beneficiaries is sport - and rightly so.
Cost of Croke Park &#8364;250m
Taxpayers money &#8364;19m = 8%
Lotto money &#8364;91m = 36%
GAA money &#8364;140m = 56%

Est cost of Lansdowne &#8364;300m
Taxpayers money &#8364;127m = 42%
Lotto money &#8364;64m = 21%
IRFU money &#8364;54.5m = 18%
FAI money &#8364;54.5m = 18%
So, in addition to my previous post, I hope this proves to soccer supporters not to use taxpayers money as an argument for opening up Croke Park. There are good arguments to open it up, stick to those please, not to irrelevant ones.

Perfect timing:

http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:cljP_sn6IasJ:www.arts-sport-tourism.gov.ie/Pressroom/pr_detail.asp%3FID%3D659+croke+park+funding&hl=en

 will bring the level of Exchequer contribution to &#8364;110 million

The final 20million of the 110million is to be donated this year. 90 million was donated over the past 10 years or so.. 50 million ten years ago in worth alot more than that now.. Taking inflation into account, the money donated to each group is about even...

yop · 16-02-2005 3:28pm

Where did you get them figures Rooster??

jesus_thats_gre · 16-02-2005 3:29pm

Anyway, I am backing out of the argument as I have said all I am going to and have a feeling its going to get silly.

There is far too much "we" and "they" combined with "why should be help" for me to stomach.. If its not sectarian, its narrow mindness.

LizardKing · 16-02-2005 3:30pm

PORNAPSTER wrote:

In the long term it can be a threat to the popularity of the GAA. How exactly would it promote Gaelic Games any more in Ireland? There is no need to, everyone in Ireland knows about it and the stadium. Other than the fact that it would teach the FAI and the IRFU how to build a proper stadium without causing a fuss. If anything, it would damage the GAA. Not in the short term as the money would pay off debt, but in the long term where the popularity would fall because of the growth in popularity of the other sports.

If the FAI need to play in Ireland that badly, why don't they play at Dalymount or Tolka?

"Oohh ... Its my ball you're not playin"

Come on man ... Opening up the Stadium to the other sports would help put the stadium on the worldmap ... Its a savage stadium that should be shown off not hidden away... Also the GAA WILL benefit financially , initially and they can then use the extra monies to put back into the grassroots game , into small clubs such as your own. They are also going to be showing GAA games on setanta and possibly PPV so the GAA definetly won't be collapsing because of Soccer/Rugby being played on there flagship pitch ...

cournioni · 16-02-2005 3:34pm

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

being a British sport is the main reason for the problem they have with Soccer..

I'm sorry but please stop making accusations like that. I am a fan of soccer and I am against the opening up of Croke Park. Does that make me a big "fenian GAA bigot"?! :rolleyes:

cournioni · 16-02-2005 3:42pm

LizardKing wrote:

"Oohh ... Its my ball you're not playin"

Come on man ... Opening up the Stadium to the other sports would help put the stadium on the worldmap ... Its a savage stadium that should be shown off not hidden away... Also the GAA WILL benefit financially , initially and they can then use the extra monies to put back into the grassroots game , into small clubs such as your own. They are also going to be showing GAA games on setanta and possibly PPV so the GAA definetly won't be collapsing because of Soccer/Rugby being played on there flagship pitch ...

No I'd say its more like, "hey homeless person, get off my doorstep".

But that should be up to the GAA to decide, its their stadium. If they want it on the world map, fine. If they don't, then fine. Again, it is not the rest of the world the GAA are worried about it is Ireland. If Soccer keeps growing like it has been, there will be some sports losing out. And the GAA will be one of them.

yop · 16-02-2005 4:05pm

"Come on man ... Opening up the Stadium to the other sports would help put the stadium on the worldmap ... Its a savage stadium that should be shown off not hidden away... Also the GAA WILL benefit financially , initially and they can then use the extra monies to put back into the grassroots game , into small clubs such as your own. They are also going to be showing GAA games on setanta and possibly PPV so the GAA definetly won't be collapsing because of Soccer/Rugby being played on there flagship pitch ..."

don't usually agree with a pool fan but in this case you are spot on.

Porn lad, fair enough you are not anti - brit but I do think that behind it all with the old foggies that it is still an Anti- Brit , black and tans thing

por · 16-02-2005 4:23pm

LizardKing wrote:

Come on man ... Opening up the Stadium to the other sports would help put the stadium on the worldmap ... Its a savage stadium that should be shown off not hidden away...

Why does it have to be on the world map ?. It's a fantastic venue, but so is Coors Field in Denver, I'm sure that f**ck all people in Ireland care about it. Or do we Irish just have to show the world how brilliant and progressive we are by building a stadium. Will it fill us with pride to tell our European neighbours that we have a 80k seater stadium but a s**t health service.

yop wrote:

Porn lad, fair enough you are not anti - brit but I do think that behind it all with the old foggies that it is still an Anti- Brit , black and tans thing

Sadly this is true, but they are more likley to be Northerners and not that old.

seansouth wrote:

This stadium is due for re-development, and as such will be unavailable for use. This redevelopment will be taking place at the time of the Irish Soccer Teams World Cup 2006 Home Qualification Matches against both France and Switzerland. There is not another stadium in this country capable to meet the requirements to host such games, apart from Croke Park.

This is not true, re-developemnt will start in 2006. So it will be this Congress and posibbly next years (april 2006) that changing the rule will have to be sorted out.

cournioni · 16-02-2005 4:48pm

yop wrote:

Porn lad, fair enough you are not anti - brit but I do think that behind it all with the old foggies that it is still an Anti- Brit , black and tans thing

Well to be honest yop, I know alot of GAA members. One of whom was even the Chairman of the Ulster council a few years and to be honest I've never met or heard of a GAA member with an Anti-Brit attitude towards the opening of Croker. I know a good few people from Armagh and they don't have that attitude when it comes to Croke Park either.

And being honest, the only really anti-British people I've met are those in the green and white hoops of Celtic. That is not a generalisation because not all Celtic fans are like that, its just what I see and hear.

Imposter · 16-02-2005 4:55pm

This is probably going to be a long one!

Firstly there are two things that have not been mentioned yet in this thread: the residents and the fact that Rule 42 governs all GAA facilities and not just Croke Park.

The residents groups are unhappy with the amount of games played at the stadium at the moment. Are they going to be happy with more games? If they are soccer supporters then maybe they will be happy, but then wouldn't they be hypocrites if they objected to more GAA matches? If they were unhappy should the GAA sacrifice some of it's less profitable games for those big international rugby or soccer games? I think you'll find most GAA fans against that one and rightly so imo. The same could be said of any sporting organisation in a similar position.

Abolishing Rule 42 just for the sake of Croker could have dire consequences across all of Ireland. While at elite level GAA, Soccer and Rugby are not really in competition except in some extreme cases where there may be conflicts with games. Where the problem arises here is when local rivalries are made worse because the GAA won't ground share with the local regional league soccer team! Also who gets to decide if BallyGoBackwards FC can play on BallyGoBackwards's GAA pitch? Should it be the GAA's central council, the provincial council, the county board or the club itself? I reckon you'll get quite a few different answers if you ask that question of GAA people! That's not even getting into the issue of the bigger county and provincial grounds.

People who are/were having a go at the GAA at the moment (or previously) about not allowing soccer and rugby in are forgetting that with Rule 42 on the books the GAA's hands were tied. They cannot allow the games in until the rule is changed. In addition to that neither the FAI or the IRFU have ever asked for the stadium. The government did in the run up to the Euro 2008 bid but they should have known the response and were way out of line in the way they handled that imo.

For those who want to counter that with the American Football excuse then here is Rule 42 for your perusal:

Rule 42 wrote:

Rule 42: Uses of Property
(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.

Now whether you agree or dissagree with it the powers that be have deemed soccer and rugby a threat to the association (see the bit in bold above). All talk of "foreign sports" is invalid also as that is not what is said there.

yop · 16-02-2005 5:12pm

PORNAPSTER wrote:

Well to be honest yop, I know alot of GAA members. One of whom was even the Chairman of the Ulster council a few years and to be honest I've never met or heard of a GAA member with an Anti-Brit attitude towards the opening of Croker. I know a good few people from Armagh and they don't have that attitude when it comes to Croke Park either.

And being honest, the only really anti-British people I've met are those in the green and white hoops of Celtic. That is not a generalisation because not all Celtic fans are like that, its just what I see and hear.

That is fair enough, it will be interesting to see what will happen and would they even go as far as having a GAA members vote, one of those things.

d22ontour · 16-02-2005 7:11pm

At the end of the day it is the gaa's stadium to do with it whatever they want,as a football fan i don't think they should let any sports in that they feel they are in direct competition with.
It just shows the total ineptness of the fai who in 2005 still have not got a proper stadium or facilities for its professional teams.
While some of the sectarian reasons put forward by some posters seem like some of the reasons why they won't allow foreign/british sports into their stadium,every country in the world has history of some sort, ours was oppression by our neighbours.
Right or wrong some members of the gaa are holding on to our history and can we judge them for that?
England/Germany ,England/Argentina, Germany/Holland, Germany/France and countless other countries have bad feelings between them at a sporting level because of their history,why should the gaa be any different if thats the reason rule 42 stands.

_blank_ · 16-02-2005 7:14pm

Imposter wrote:

Originally Posted by Rule 42

Rule 42: Uses of Property
(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.

Selective Bolding there I think.

Try mine?

Rule 42 wrote:

Rule 42: Uses of Property
(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.

That is stating in quite clear terms that GAA grounds are not to be used for non GAA controlled games, ie Soccer, Rugby, Hockey, in fact the only Field Games the GAA does control are Football and Hurling / Camogie.

All I am doing here is highlighting the fact that anyone can take the rule and twist it to help their own argument.

Chucky the tree · 16-02-2005 7:37pm

The Muppet wrote:

If they choose not to allow it that's their priveledge, you can not blame the GAA for the FAI's inadequacies.

Give me two ways the FAI can raise the adequate funds for a stadium, if you can even give me one good one i will be amazed.

smemon wrote:

seen as soccer is the bigger of the 2, it's unfair it gets neglected.

Soccer in ireland(for the FAI perspective) is a million miles behind GAA in terms of popularity, and even behind Rugby.

The Muppet wrote:

Indeed it is and much more lucrative financially which is why Soccer should have it's own modern facilities and not be depending on either the GAA or the IRFU for a venue for their fixtures.

Again soccer in ireland is the least lucrative of the GAA and rugby, i dont see how you can it is the most lucarative? Does soccer get attendances of 40,000 like GAA does week in week out during the summer? hardly. If one Dublin team was to play there matches in landsowne it wont even get a big a crowd as rugby.

The Rooster wrote:

hooliganism in Lansdowne Road when the English were last over - "do we really want to bring that type of person into Croke Park?".

We can ask them to riot on the trains instead if you like? Keep it in line with the GAA tone of things.

hooliganism is a desperate attempt at clutching at straws, a bit embarissing. English match was the only time i can ever remeber something like that happening and we arent playing them in the WCQ so its irrelevant. Also, when was the last time a ref in an irish match had to be escorted of by the garda and one garda go a bottle in the face? i cant anyway.

I know its these arent nessecairly your excuse but since you mentioned it i had to comment on it.

The Rooster wrote:

Thats all largely untrue. There is nobody with Brain in the GAA who I have ever heard saying "Keep rugby out because it is a British sport". There is very little oppostion to rugby being played at all within the GAA - the main concern would (and quite frankly I could not care less that you dont believe it) is potential pitch damage and helping a competitor.

The six nations finishs in march isnt it? Croke Park will be used in June yes? How long does it take them to fix a few divots in a pitch for gods sake?? also, surely all the people at the U2 gig will have a much more damaging effect?! Again this excuses are laughable.

On the issue of everyone saying the GAA is risking losing out by helping a competitor, how excactly?

Are people going to watch the soccer and rugby matches in croke park and suddenly say " oh god, what are these sports playing in croke park?! i have never seen them before! well i am gonna give up supporting GAA and support these sports instead, hurrah for soccer and rugby!" hardly.

Croke Park and Rule 42

Comments