Central Council's motion on Players grants

[stephenite]

Sourced from AFR.com

Player Awards

It was stated that there will be a number of motions on the subject of the Sports Council's award scheme for players before Congress in April. In keeping with previous decisions and policy Central Council agreed to sponsor the following motion for the Congress Agenda:

"That Congress, is satisfied that the scheme proposed by the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, to recognise the contribution of Senior Intercounty G.A.A. players and additional costs associated with enhancing team performance in the form presented to Congress is in accordance with rule 11 of the Official Guide and that Congress approves the introduction and implementation of that scheme" .


Seems a wee bit vague to me, but every club member in the country should demand a speak on this before their County Boards final meeting and ensure that delegates vote as per results from clubs.

[thebandit]

Seems a wee bit vague to me, but every club member in the country should demand a speak on this before their County Boards final meeting and ensure that delegates vote as per results from clubs.

There is no doubt that it should be debated at all levels, but the motion would have to be clarified first.

[believebelive]

Sourced from AFR.com

Player Awards

It was stated that there will be a number of motions on the subject of the Sports Council's award scheme for players before Congress in April. In keeping with previous decisions and policy Central Council agreed to sponsor the following motion for the Congress Agenda:

"That Congress, is satisfied that the scheme proposed by the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, to recognise the contribution of Senior Intercounty G.A.A. players and additional costs associated with enhancing team performance in the form presented to Congress is in accordance with rule 11 of the Official Guide and that Congress approves the introduction and implementation of that scheme" .

You see this is what I need clarification with - there is no figures out yet so we do not know what the difference is (in money per week terms) between the the two tiers of funding for county players. This motion, IMO, is saying that there are additional costs associated with enhancing team performance - to me this means that there needs to a quantifiable and measurable improvement in performance before any grant is paid out - but the problem is as we know if you get to the last 12 in football you qualify for the top tier - Cork are practically guaranteed a place in the last 12 every year so how can they be tested to see if they are bringing about enhanced team performance?

Central Council are putting forward a motion on a deal which has not been agreed to and which has not been made public to the Association as a whole. How can we debate something that is not yet in the public domain. A joke.

[rrhf]

I take it central council are entitled/obliged to underwrite political face saving motions for our president.  Am I naiive here are have they not jumped through half the democratic process ie club through county through province through central council.  Is there a possibility that every other motion be ruled out through various technicalities along the way?  Also is there still no recognition yet that the GAA is breaking its own rules.  Do they think we are stupid?

[orangeman]

Do they think we are stupid?

They do - but don't give a shit !