The Late Late show

[armaghniac]

Would Hayes not have been involved in Cúl camps and the like?

This is the issue, involvement in the GAA as a number of levels.

Should someone be allowed
- be a member of the GAA
- paint lines on the field
- play minor
- play junior/reserves
- play senior
- play intercounty
- manage/coach minor
- manage coach reserves
- manage coach club
- manage/coach intercounty
- chair a club
- be on a provincial council
- become President of the GAA
 
Burns made a distinction between playing and coaching on the basis that the latter is an influence on others. You could argue that Hayes is not more likely to attack another player on the field than anyone else, and that the rules of the association would deal with that. You could reasonably simultaneously argue that he should not be put in a position of influence over others.

Gallagher is a bit more complicated, the evidence is unclear but there is quite a bit of it. You could also argue that it is in the past.

I'd argue that players have a higher profile than managers, so JB's reasoning behind getting involved in one and not the other is total BS in my opinion.

As for the evidence, unclear to us yes, but not sure what you mean by "quite a bit of it". I'd have thought if there was so much evidence he'd have been charged? Social media posts can't be considered evidence.

Burns made the point that a coach directs the conduct of other people in the association, whereas a player does not.

As for evidence, we don't want people convicted on rumours, but are you proposing that no person can limited in their GAA activities unless that have been charged with a criminal offence? How about Conor McGregor, he was not charged? 

[Milltown Row2]

I seen Conor McGregor is playing for some soccer club online

[SaffronSports]

Would Hayes not have been involved in Cúl camps and the like?

This is the issue, involvement in the GAA as a number of levels.

Should someone be allowed
- be a member of the GAA
- paint lines on the field
- play minor
- play junior/reserves
- play senior
- play intercounty
- manage/coach minor
- manage coach reserves
- manage coach club
- manage/coach intercounty
- chair a club
- be on a provincial council
- become President of the GAA
 
Burns made a distinction between playing and coaching on the basis that the latter is an influence on others. You could argue that Hayes is not more likely to attack another player on the field than anyone else, and that the rules of the association would deal with that. You could reasonably simultaneously argue that he should not be put in a position of influence over others.

Gallagher is a bit more complicated, the evidence is unclear but there is quite a bit of it. You could also argue that it is in the past.

I'd argue that players have a higher profile than managers, so JB's reasoning behind getting involved in one and not the other is total BS in my opinion.

As for the evidence, unclear to us yes, but not sure what you mean by "quite a bit of it". I'd have thought if there was so much evidence he'd have been charged? Social media posts can't be considered evidence.

Burns made the point that a coach directs the conduct of other people in the association, whereas a player does not.

As for evidence, we don't want people convicted on rumours, but are you proposing that no person can limited in their GAA activities unless that have been charged with a criminal offence? How about Conor McGregor, he was not charged? 

That's a nonsense to me. RG is coaching a team of adults so will they be influenced by how he conducts himself on or off the pitch or will they take his advice on how he wants them to play football and draw the line there.

Also, there's the next generations. More kids in Ireland now will want to grow up to be the next Kyle Hayes than the next Rory Gallagher. I think there probably needs to be a clear cut approach that anyone involved who is charged with something needs to be considered on a case by case basis. I'm no fan of RG but I just don't see how Burns can justify his involvement in that case and not others.

[tbrick18]

Would Hayes not have been involved in Cúl camps and the like?

This is the issue, involvement in the GAA as a number of levels.

Should someone be allowed
- be a member of the GAA
- paint lines on the field
- play minor
- play junior/reserves
- play senior
- play intercounty
- manage/coach minor
- manage coach reserves
- manage coach club
- manage/coach intercounty
- chair a club
- be on a provincial council
- become President of the GAA
 
Burns made a distinction between playing and coaching on the basis that the latter is an influence on others. You could argue that Hayes is not more likely to attack another player on the field than anyone else, and that the rules of the association would deal with that. You could reasonably simultaneously argue that he should not be put in a position of influence over others.

Gallagher is a bit more complicated, the evidence is unclear but there is quite a bit of it. You could also argue that it is in the past.

I'd argue that players have a higher profile than managers, so JB's reasoning behind getting involved in one and not the other is total BS in my opinion.

As for the evidence, unclear to us yes, but not sure what you mean by "quite a bit of it". I'd have thought if there was so much evidence he'd have been charged? Social media posts can't be considered evidence.

Burns made the point that a coach directs the conduct of other people in the association, whereas a player does not.

As for evidence, we don't want people convicted on rumours, but are you proposing that no person can limited in their GAA activities unless that have been charged with a criminal offence? How about Conor McGregor, he was not charged? 

Don't you think kids up and down the country try to emulate their hero's on the field? Surely that's a more influential position than a manager of adults.

I'm suggesting we can't have a subjective approach to limiting the involvement of someone with GAA activities. It has to be in line with regulations otherwise its a free for all. In the absence of any GAA regs outside of safeguarding what regulations are there? Rule of law, innocent unless proven guilty.
If the GAA dont have a set of circumstances that exclude people from being involved, then the President or no-one else can just make them up.
The simplest solution to it (if the GAA community want controls like this) is to exclude on criminal records.
But I'd guess they wont do that as it would affect a lot of people.