Skorts.

An association voting contrary to the majority opinion of its members is voting for its own extinction.

Elderly, "tradition" supporting delegates appear to be the issue here and need to be replaced as delegates - delegates are by their very name delegated to represent their members, not their own desires.

Once representative delegates exist it is unlikely they'd vote to retain an anachronism.

Can someone explain how delegates are voting against the wishes of the majority of members? How does that happen?

Normally, in any sport, if a delegate is representing e.g. a club, the club decides internally how to vote on each item on the agenda and the delegate is given voting instructions. Shouldnt matter if they are "old biddies" or not.

This is technically correct.

But pressure is being applied. I think the skorts or the delegates will soon be gone.

Not knowing the structure of the governing body but going on how others work, delegates are probably elected by the committee rather than directly by members and/or players.

To remove a more traditional delegate would probably require the routing of the entire committe.

I would think there are more former players and other older voting members than there are current players.

The inertia of the voting membeship being top heavy with older, more traditional people would tend to make change difficult even if the traditionalist committee members are only being voted in due to their long standing in the club and local community. Ousting them over a single issue would be no mean feat.

Players are in a minority in something that effects them the most. If there is a players representative organisation, outside of the camogie association, they should organise a nationwide protest, similar to that before the Kilkenny v Dublin match, before every match until the rule is changed.

Most sports will have set rules on playing gear. I know FIFA doesn't allow sleeveless (AFCON does though) and cycling has rules on sock length and bans on aero attachments.

GAA is often the outlier though.

was the skort a better bet than a skirt? Give that choice it might have been popular.

It's the same bullsht "tradition" thing that governs dumb stuff like Wimbledon, cricket or golf attire although they might be more about snobbery than tradition.

It's also common enough for the ruling body to be massively out of touch with players and fans. Look at the GAA rules on playing or hosting of foreign games which are widely regarded as lasting way longer than they should or the RFU and it's "57 old farts" as Will Carling once quipped.

You won't find any. Not any willing to admit it anyway.

A few on here pretending they care about "process" or trying to discredit the idea it's unpopular but no one will be brave enough to defend it.