bruschi wrote: » selective quoting? O Rourke thinks Dublin should be split.
bruschi wrote: » Again, I have no issue what was done. However I have a huge issue that this was only done, and only available to one out of 32 counties. It is being incrementally corrected, albeit in my opinion at least 10 years too late and in most cases, about 15 years too late. And it also still is not available to the majority of the counties in Ireland. Its great to get more kids playing, its great to have top class coaching resources to hand. But why is it only in one county, where in the clubs where this happens there is resources there that the club can actually cope without any additional funding to cover these costs.
kyote00 wrote: » https://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/gaelic-football/colm-orourke-dublin-dont-get-enough-funding-and-why-gaa-punditry-needs-figures-like-joe-brolly-38509226.html
After watching Dublin make history, O'Rourke insisted that they are underfunded in coaching terms for a county of their size but believes the time will come when the GAA will have to consider splitting the county. "I think the future of Dublin has to be what I have been saying for a long time - there is going to have to be a division. "People talk about funding, I don't think Dublin are over-funded, in fact I think they're under-funded because the funding goes to the development of clubs and that's the most important thing of all."
TrueGael wrote: » Bravo Bruschi This paragraph should be pinned to the top of every page of this thread as it perfectly exposes the hypocrisy and duplicitous nature of the AIG propagandists who want it every way and feck the rest to oblivion 'Qu'ils mangent de la brioche'
omega man wrote: » But how do we ever get the kids in those areas playing our sport? What’s the solution or do people not care (not directed at you)? You’d swear the money was been thrown at competing sports, it’s staying within the gaa!
bruschi wrote: » I understand the point, I just dont think I'd agree with it. We have a huge population, so want to increase the playing numbers. Yet our huge population has no impact on an advantage of playing numbers. the funding too is directly apportioned to clubs. It is, in the main, for clubs to have full time coaches to develop coaching infrastructure for the future of a club. Included in this would be for increased participation and working with schools within the clubs catchment area. So on one hand it is for the "general population" but more importantly, it is for the club. Realistically, the only way to measure its success is by increased playing numbers and registered players, which is why I believe the rate should be on per head of members, rather than per head of population. A frequently used argument by Dublin supporters about population is that there are huge areas of Dubin and huge numbers of specific people for one reason or the other who dont or will never play GAA or who have no input into GAA. But yet these heads are included in the population rate of funding.
omega man wrote: » Your contributions are balanced in fairness but what I’m saying is that to increase games participation at the time (that was the goal of DCB and GAA was it not?) in the capital then the funding had to reflect population and not existing clubs or registered players. OK maybe that’s not required now (I’d argue it still is) and that funding should be in line with registered players etc. However on the other hand you can’t say we’ve won AIs because we have a huge population. Anyone with any knowledge of dublin gaa knows that even today It’s still struggling to survive let alone grow in many high population areas. Whatever about participation figures you just need to look at the core support for our footballers (never mind the hurlers) which I reckon is around 10-15K but yet there’s close to 1.5m living in Dublin.
bruschi wrote: » but I hope you at least see the contradiction in that. And forgive me for paraphrasing, but you state that Dublins success shouldnt have their vast advantage of population used as a way of saying it is an advantage as not everyone plays but then say that they should receive their funding allocation based on their vast population. If population is not an advantage, because their registered numbers actually playing are similar to Cork, then they should receive funding similar to other counties on a registered player per head. I understand the point you make but it is looking for both sides of the argument to be in favour. It should also be noted, that money didnt win all this for Dublin. It absolutely was a huge contribution, but there are many other factors involved too and I certainly dont agree with the financial doping phrase nor saying they bought their titles. And again, this is not Dublins fault. This is solely at the hand of the GAA. If the GAA went to a county with a whole new coaching strategic plan for long term development, of course a county will take that up. The fault being that they only allowed this happen in one county, that one already being the one with the most financial resources, best infrastructure in clubs, biggest population and historically one of the biggest counties with football tradition has us where all this has now ended up.
threeball wrote: » I never said Limerick didn't use the facilities in UL. You said Dublin didn't train in DCU and called me ill informed and not worth debating. I think it shows the calibre of your arguments when you're prepared to lie and deflect from easily verifiable facts. Its been your modus operandi all through the thread.
omega man wrote: » Some fair points in your argument @bruschi but my point on population was that the funding should be based on population if the aim is to increase participation but on the flip side shouldn’t be used against us as a metric for our current success, just like saying China should be a top team in soccer based on their population resources. Of course at some point if participation growth is significant then yes funds should be based on clubs/registered players on a par with other counties.
omega man wrote: » You’re actually just making stuff up now.
rm75 wrote: » I'll leave this herehttps://limerickgaa.ie/limerick-gaa-and-lit-sign-10-year-partnership/
threeball wrote: » I'll just leave this herehttps://www.dcu.ie/dcusport/high_performance.shtml
rm75 wrote: » Its almost not worth engaging so ill informed is the commentry. We'd regularly have a panel member at club fundraisers. Where do Limerick train?
TrueGael wrote: » When exactly should they do the report? Now is the only logical timeline Rugby will dominate sporting headlines the next week and Brexit and the Border will dominate the current affairs
TrueGael wrote: » Because we all fund your phalanx of professional underage coaches it allows the AIG Subaru Ballygowan Aer Lingus money be injected into creating a professional IC setup ( altitude chambers and the like which makes a strong team unbeatable) If ye wanted to remain wholly organic, ye could have but instead opted to buy sports science facilities light years ahead of the competition and make the whole thing hollow and meaningless
omega man wrote: » But there is a clear attack from many (not you). It’s starts off by well done to dublin but...and ends with financial doping or an asterisk beside our AIs etc. 3 days after we won an historic 5 in a row and RTE run a primetime piece on Dublin funding. Seriously, why??!!
omega man wrote: » You’ve just destroyed any credibility in comparing Dublin GAA to PSG or Man City ffs. Didn’t realise we could just buy the best players from other counties and here’s us putting in thousands of hours developing our own players from underage to senior level. I’m starting to think you’re not even a GAA person at all.
omega man wrote: » 3 days after we won an historic 5 in a row and RTE run a primetime piece on Dublin funding. Seriously, why??!!
RedDevil55 wrote: » I didn't say anything about access to sports science. Just that Dublin don't need to play the poor mouth around no centre of excellence. You brought up capital grants to show how other counties have got funding. It's irrelevant to this thread. I would be in favour of redeveloping Parnell park. It is not right that Dublin have played home league games in Croker since 2011. If the funding keeps getting divided by population, then splitting Dublin is inevitable and nobody wants that. Everyone knows it's up to the GAA to address the problem, yet Dublin people feel it's an attack on them.
omega man wrote: » Ok you said they had the run of DCU (UCD as pointed out since) with all sorts of access to sports science and medical teams so can you explain where you got that information from? We don’t need capital grants but as everyone says we get an unfair advantage playing home games in Croke Park so why not give Dublin grants like other counties to redevelop Parnell Park perhaps? Then Croke Park wouldn’t be a issue anymore, one less advantage no? The games funding was/is for kids due to the poor state of the game in the capital. This has been a huge success but there is no direct correlation between that funding and our current senior football success. As I’ve said before though there are still hugely populated areas with only 1 single club so it’s not all rosey. It’s also worth pointing out that the Clubs pay 50% of the development coaches costs. If one of these coaches is covering multiple age groups it’s not exactly elite coaching!! Anyway none of this is of any concern to Dublin whatsoever and if there are any genuine funding issues then it’s up to the GAA to address it, not the DCB.
TrueGael wrote: » I don't dislike anybody I detest financial doping in all forms be it PSG, Man City or here. It ruins it for everyone - the other teams blocked from organic success and those that "win" via such methods are upset and angry that they dont get the credit and acclaim normal teams do So its a lose lose scenario for all!!!!
Tombo2001 wrote: » Can you show us the actual stats on this How many full time coaches are in Dublin, exactly? And how many in other counties, exactly?
omega man wrote: » You clearly dislike dublin, just come out and say it and stop the pretence that you have any interest or desire to understand Dublin GAA matters. Your username is quite ironic I guess... Edit: while you’re at it admit that you didn't want to see our sport grow in the capital because god forbid we’d actually become successful!
omega man wrote: » You clearly dislike dublin, just come out and say it and stop the pretence that you have any interest or desire to understand Dublin GAA matters. Your username is quite ironic I guess...
