nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Dominance of Dublin GAA Mod warning post#1

seligehgit

Discussion of all matters relating to this contentious subject is welcome and the potential implications of same.This thread is solely for this purpose.

There appears to be a perception that the moderators are attempting to shut down discussion of this topic and direct same off to a low traffic stickied thread.Nothing could be further from the truth.Our sole motive was to confine discussion to a single thread and prevent cross thread posting which was adversely affecting the enjoyment of fellow posters.

Can we please keep posts civil and constructive in nature.

The Changes in the GAA-super thread is now for discussion of all other suggested reforms not relating to Dublin GAA.

Extra Mod Warning:
Right, a separate warning to both sides in this debate:
Firstly, any more mentioning of "financial doping" or any intimation that rules have been broken by Dublin or that Dublin have cheated are banned from now on. You can debate the issue of the funding that Dublin have received without resorting to that. There is zero evidence of it and posting about it will be considered trolling from here on in.

Secondly, this topic is, like it or not, a big talking point in gaelic football at the moment. You are more than welcome to argue your point, but posting in this thread to simply mock those on the other side or complaining about the topic is known as thread spoiling and is specifically banned in the charter (see point 8 here). No one is forcing you to click on this thread and no one is forcing you to post in it. If you don't like the topic, then don't post. It's as simple as that.

This thread is here so that all the discussion is in one place and it won't filter into other threads. This makes it easier to ignore for posters who don't really want to be involved in it. As a result, we haven't really been moderating it as severely as other threads. However, a number of posts recently from both sides are sailing too close to the wind and getting borderline personal. So please take a minute before you hit submit to ensure that your post won't fall foul of the rules. We'll have no hesitation in issuing cards and/or threadbans to posters who fail to heed this warning.

Please report any posts that you feel break the rules.

Any questions, please feel free to PM the mods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TCP/IP

Enquiring wrote: »

I told you what I support.

Again not answering the question you are losing a lot of credibility by not answering a straight and simple question.

Enquiring

ArielAtom wrote: »

I agree with you on this statement, deflection. We still have to see the 20yr funding that has been spouted here. The funding some posters seem to have a problem comprehending is funding from the ISC. This is given to the GAA to allocate to its members. It is doing a great job in doing so. If it wasn't then the ISC sports council would be within its rights to withhold as it did with the FAI. Ergo, the the GAA are doing a fine job. Long may it continue.

The 20 years has already been posted. 2007-2017 was busted a long time ago.

The Sports Council money is the taxpayers money already discussed too. It is to be welcomed for sure. The only issue in this case being that so much of it was ring fenced for Dublin. Why use Dublin as a special case? If it was distributed fairly, the calls for the split of Dublin wouldn't be happening.

Unfortunately, that didnt happen and here we are with splitting Dublin as the only option to take.

Enquiring

TCP/IP wrote: »

Again not answering the question you are losing a lot of credibility by not answering a straight and simple question.

My credibility has been earned by providing backed up evidence for my posts. Facts, figures and statements all coming from official accounts and verifiable sources.

Tombo2001

Enquiring wrote: »

I support all counties getting fair treatment from the GAA.

This means every county receiving enough funding to oversee the development of Gaelic football and hurling in that county. Resources for enough development officers and importantly, officers to monitor and implement the correct structures.

Basically what Dublin were provided with 20 years ago. The 4 new counties in Dublin will receive appropriate funding also.

As mentioned, there are 300 games development officers of which 54 are in Dublin. Thats 18% in Dublin.

The population of all Ireland is 6.8mn, of which county Dublin is 1.23mn, or 18%.

Cant get much fairer than that.

TCP/IP

Enquiring wrote: »

My credibility has been earned by providing backed up evidence for my posts. Facts, figures and statements all coming from official accounts and verifiable sources.

You still will not answer a question that is very simple and you said you would answer why is that have you something to hide or perhaps an agenda.

Simply answer the question posed to you. A lot of your posts are about getting people to answer a question you have raised and if you don't get the answer you are looking for you say people are hiding the answer but yet when I ask you a simple question of what county do you support you will not answer.

Enquiring

Tombo2001 wrote: »

As mentioned, there are 300 games development officers of which 54 are in Dublin. Thats 18% in Dublin.

The population of all Ireland is 6.8mn, of which county Dublin is 1.23mn, or 18%.

Cant get much fairer than that.

As mentioned. You can't ignore 2 decades of funding because it doesnt suit your argument.

Every county had 6 or less coaches while Dublin had one per nearly every club. How many clubs are in Cork? What's the population of Cork? Did Cork get half the funding of Dublin and half the coaches?

Enquiring

TCP/IP wrote: »

You still will not answer a question that is very simple and you said you would answer why is that have you something to hide or perhaps an agenda.

Simply answer the question posed to you. A lot of your posts are about getting people to answer a question you have raised and if you don't get the answer you are looking for you say people are hiding the answer but yet when I ask you a simple question of what county do you support you will not answer.

I said you could ask. I didn't say I'd answer.

TCP/IP

Enquiring wrote: »

I said you could ask. I didn't say I'd answer.

And there we have it won't answer a simple question posed to him now why is that.

Honestly, that's just pathetic you talk about credibility you have just lost all of yours so you do have an agenda and something to hide if you can't answer a simple question like which county do you support.
Your just a keyboard troll nothing more.

Tombo2001

Enquiring wrote: »

As mentioned. You can't ignore 2 decades of funding because it doesnt suit your argument.

Every county had 6 or less coaches while Dublin had one per nearly every club. How many clubs are in Cork? What's the population of Cork? Did Cork get half the funding of Dublin and half the coaches?

Not aware of the disparities over 'two decades' and havent seen any stats on it.

Your point on Cork - run a google yourself. I've already shown that the split of Games Dev Officers in Dublin is exactly in line with population which is the fairest way to do it.

Enquiring

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Not aware of the disparities over 'two decades' and havent seen any stats on it.

Your point on Cork - run a google yourself. I've already shown that the split of Games Dev Officers in Dublin is exactly in line with population which is the fairest way to do it.

It started off with Dublin receiving funding of about 700,000 per year from 02-05. This moved up closer to 2 million per year after that. So using recent figures is pretty irrelevant as their has been a massive gap in funding since the early century.

I don't need to google. Cork received far less than half the funding Dublin received and despite having far more clubs and a far bigger region to cover, Cork had 6 or less coaches while Dublin had one for nearly every club.

I don't think fair is an accurate word to describe this.

ooter

You can't ignore failure at senior hurling level in Dublin for 2 decades despite funding because it doesn't suit the agenda.
Please provide evidence that the Dublin senior footballers have only had 2 away games in the championship since 2007?

Strumms

Ultimately if people can’t beat a strong Dublin team, let’s weaken the strong Dublin team, load of ... crapola :)that’s the agenda.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I did allocate it! Do you dispute that Dublin had a development officer for nearly every club while all other counties had 6 or below or what's the issue?

You showed who got what from all the extra millions that aren't in the county allocation you posted?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

More anecdotes. Lacking in any factual evidence.

yet oddly enough Nickey Brennan was spouting the same 'anecdotes' back in 2005 having examined the books of counties who had received games development funding. Are you calling him a liar?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

As mentioned. You can't ignore 2 decades of funding because it doesnt suit your argument.

Every county had 6 or less coaches while Dublin had one per nearly every club. How many clubs are in Cork? What's the population of Cork? Did Cork get half the funding of Dublin and half the coaches?

And you cant ignore millions in unaccounted for Games Development funding that doesn't suit your argument

seligehgit

TCP/IP wrote: »

@Enquiring you speak a lot about Dublin and your thoughts on their situation.
Can I ask which county do you support?

Enquiring wrote: »

Yes, you can.

TCP/IP wrote: »

Great thanks so which county do you support.

TCP/IP wrote: »

No that is not answering the question.

Enquiring wrote: »

I told you what I support.

TCP/IP wrote: »

Again not answering the question you are losing a lot of credibility by not answering a straight and simple question.

Enquiring wrote: »

My credibility has been earned by providing backed up evidence for my posts. Facts, figures and statements all coming from official accounts and verifiable sources.

TCP/IP wrote: »

You still will not answer a question that is very simple and you said you would answer why is that have you something to hide or perhaps an agenda.

Simply answer the question posed to you. A lot of your posts are about getting people to answer a question you have raised and if you don't get the answer you are looking for you say people are hiding the answer but yet when I ask you a simple question of what county do you support you will not answer.

Enquiring wrote: »

I said you could ask. I didn't say I'd answer.

TCP/IP wrote: »

And there we have it won't answer a simple question posed to him now why is that.

Honestly, that's just pathetic you talk about credibility you have just lost all of yours so you do have an agenda and something to hide if you can't answer a simple question like which county do you support.
Your just a keyboard troll nothing more.

Mod Note

Please do not ask the bolded again.

You can and have drawn your own conclusions as to the reasons why said poster has failed to answer your question and can speculate on any agenda he/she may have.

It is not permitted to call out a poster as a troll on thread as it considered backseat moderation as per the rules of the forum charter.

Enquiring

Strumms wrote: »

Ultimately if people can’t beat a strong Dublin team, let’s weaken the strong Dublin team, load of ... crapola :)that’s the agenda.

100 titles across the board post funding. As described by high ranking Dublin GAA officials; all areas of Dublin GAA have reaped the benefits of the paid coaches.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

You showed who got what from all the extra millions that aren't in the county allocation you posted?

Yes. All other counties got funding for between 1 to 6 coaches. Millions sounds like a lot but when divided by 31, it isn't. Millions for one county is a lot.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

yet oddly enough Nickey Brennan was spouting the same 'anecdotes' back in 2005 having examined the books of counties who had received games development funding. Are you calling him a liar?

You are talking about a completely different anecdote. Other counties were getting very little in games development funding but if they were spending it on other things then that was wrong, why would you think otherwise?

This doesn't have any impact on the fact that it was also wrong for Dublin to receive far more funding than everyone else. You won't be able to admit to this obvious fact, however.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

And you cant ignore millions in unaccounted for Games Development funding that doesn't suit your argument

I haven't. This has got to be about the 10th time I've answered this exact same comment from you. You're like that guy who kept going on about hurling despite having his point destroyed time and again.

The millions you're talking about breaks down to between 1 and 6 coaches per county.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

Yes. All other counties got funding for between 1 to 6 coaches. Millions sounds like a lot but when divided by 31, it isn't. Millions for one county is a lot.

Should every county get the same under your proposals? Do Leitrim get the same as Mayo for example? How do you propose to allocate the money?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I haven't. This has got to be about the 10th time I've answered this exact same comment from you. You're like that guy who kept going on about hurling despite having his point destroyed time and again.

The millions you're talking about breaks down to between 1 and 6 coaches per county.

Ah I see so you’re saying that pays for the 118 coaches for the rest of Leinster for example. That’s presumably in addition to the funding the counties got directly, since its a much bigger sum. And who pays for the 65 or so (55% of the rest of Leinster total) coaches for dublin?

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Should every county get the same under your proposals? Do Leitrim get the same as Mayo for example? How do you propose to allocate the money?

No, all counties wouldn't get the same. An analysis would have to be done for each county and a plan drawn up of what's needed to develop hurling and football. More football officers may be needed in Kilkenny, more hurling in Mayo for example. Appointments of personel to oversee it and be answerable for the progress will be essential.

tikkahunter

Enquiring wrote: »

More anecdotes. Lacking in any factual evidence.

Go and ask for a look at your counties finances and scan them. You will get your factual evidence there. Then to justify each expense.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Ah I see so you’re saying that pays for the 118 coaches for the rest of Leinster for example. That’s presumably in addition to the funding the counties got directly, since its a much bigger sum. And who pays for the 65 or so (55% of the rest of Leinster total) coaches for dublin?

Again, you're talking about recent developments. The East Leinster project is a few years old. This accounts for most of the extra coaches. This was also apart of the plan drawn up by the strategic review committee in 2002. Why should 4 counties get access to these coaches above every other county in the country?

As I say though, tackling that now would be like tackling the unbalanced funding for Dublin in 2005. It's gone way to far in Dublin's case. Again, you can't write off near 2 decades of funding disparity.

Enquiring

tikkahunter wrote: »

Go and ask for a look at your counties finances and scan them. You will get your factual evidence there. Then to justify each expense.

Other counties county boards being incompetent is irrelevant to the issue under discussion. This is not to say it's untrue, it's just irrelevant.

dobman88

Enquiring wrote: »

Other counties county boards being incompetent is irrelevant to the issue under discussion. This is not to say it's untrue, it's just irrelevant.

What county board will you be bringing your findings to?

As you've correctly suggested we should do in our respective counties. I'll be asking my club in Meath to bring up the funding issue and see can it be spread more evenly when we have our AGM.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

Again, you're talking about recent developments. The East Leinster project is a few years old. This accounts for most of the extra coaches. This was also apart of the plan drawn up by the strategic review committee in 2002. Why should 4 counties get access to these coaches above every other county in the country?

As I say though, tackling that now would be like tackling the unbalanced funding for Dublin in 2005. It's gone way to far in Dublin's case. Again, you can't write off near 2 decades of funding disparity.

Pretty sure that doesn’t answer the question I asked....

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Pretty sure that doesn’t answer the question I asked....

In fairness, you've been unable or unwilling to answer the majority of questions posed to you and then you continue to ask questions already answered multiple times.

So let's get some answers. How can you justify Dublin receiving funding for one development officer for nearly every club while Cork received funding for 6? Cork have far more clubs than Dublin and about half their population.

ooter

Away championship games Dublin senior footballers have played since 2006.
Laois, June 2016.
Carlow, June 2017.
Wicklow, June 2018.
Tyrone, July 2018.
Louth, May 2019.
Tyrone, August 2019.