Should the gaa allow the Liam Miller testimonial in Pairc hi Caoimh - poll

[sid waddell]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

Cricket is Ireland's fifth most popular field sport. Ireland recently attained test status and have competed at each of the last three World Cups, giving an excellent account of themselves at all three, beating Pakistan, England and the West Indies.

Drogheda is not a million miles away from the cricket heartlands of Fingal.

So, any future publicly-funded playing field facility in Ireland with spectator room, or any existing stadium which is improved with public money, must come with the stipulation that the stadium be able to host cricket?

Is that what we're saying?

[Baile Brigín 2]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

[dec]

it's an EU rule

No it isn't

which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

No it musn't

[johnnycool]

it's an EU rule

No it isn't

which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

No it musn't

I'm only quoting your man from Balbriggan

[johnnycool]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

Entirely agree with this statement.

Cork GAA do share their grounds. With the Ladies Gaelic football association and the Camogie Association.
Does that not cover the EU's community aspect coupled with the fact you yourself agree that multi-sport does not automatically include anyone or maybe everyone.

Maybe you'll answer this question when you are at it;

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

[Jim_Murphy_74]

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

I don't know if full plans have been lodged so I won't comment on main pitch dimensions.  However even a half-arsed outfit like the FAI play the game by announcing that they will have several full sized pitches that are available to all the community.  They can point that they have no rules precluding use of the facilities. 

Now if the plans when lodged with Louth County Council don't have a sufficiently large pitch and the GAA want to raise this an issue they need to be careful how the handle it. 

Louth County Council previously wanted to develop a multi-use facility at Dundalk IT with the GAA on board.  The Louth County Board pulled out over concerns of "not wholly owning" a facility they were investing in.  They then decided to redevelop of the County Grounds but after 5 years of to'ing and fro'ing they decided not to in April of this year.  So that's two developments the council will point to that crashed and burned due to GAA messing about.   In the meantime they feel they have lost business to Dublin when Dundalk had big European soccer nights.  Twice bitten, they might want to drive on this time without the GAA.

So taken in isolation, I see your point.  However, if Louth County Council feels burned by GAA and wants to proceed without them or their requirements I suspect it won't raise much of a whimper.

/Jim.

[Baile Brigín 2]

it's an EU rule

No it isn't

which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

No it musn't

I'm only quoting your man from Balbriggan

Well quote me properly. I never said there was an EU rule. I said there was an EU findimg specific to this project.

[Baile Brigín 2]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

Entirely agree with this statement.

Cork GAA do share their grounds. With the Ladies Gaelic football association and the Camogie Association.
Does that not cover the EU's community aspect coupled with the fact you yourself agree that multi-sport does not automatically include anyone or maybe everyone.

Maybe you'll answer this question when you are at it;

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

I dont agree that a soccer facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for adult Gaelic games. And nor do you.

[johnnycool]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

Entirely agree with this statement.

Cork GAA do share their grounds. With the Ladies Gaelic football association and the Camogie Association.
Does that not cover the EU's community aspect coupled with the fact you yourself agree that multi-sport does not automatically include anyone or maybe everyone.

Maybe you'll answer this question when you are at it;

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

I dont agree that a soccer facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for adult Gaelic games. And nor do you.

But the rules are the rules are they not?

I don't agree that a GAA facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for soccer games.

The converse should also be true or it's double standards.

[Rossfan]

So Soccer is a "Community" activity but Gaelic games aren't.?
The GAA can only meet a "Community aspect" if they allow soccer in their grounds but soccer clubs can ensure there won't be Gaelic games in their grounds and that's fine.
And alleged "GAA volunteers" are here pushing that, one at least who has hardly a post on any other subject.

Reminds me a bit of the 6 Cos 1922 to recent years where GAA people paid taxes like everyone else but weren't given any public funds.

[Baile Brigín 2]

So Soccer is a "Community" activity but Gaelic games aren't.?
The GAA can only meet a "Community aspect" if they allow soccer in their grounds but soccer clubs can ensure there won't be Gaelic games in their grounds and that's fine.
And alleged "GAA volunteers" are here pushing that, one at least who has hardly a post on any other subject.

Reminds me a bit of the 6 Cos 1922 to recent years where GAA people paid taxes like everyone else but weren't given any public funds.

How could you you possibly come to that conclusion from what i wrote?

How are soccer clubs ensuring there wont be GAA on their grounds? By playing on soccer pitches?

[Baile Brigín 2]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

Entirely agree with this statement.

Cork GAA do share their grounds. With the Ladies Gaelic football association and the Camogie Association.
Does that not cover the EU's community aspect coupled with the fact you yourself agree that multi-sport does not automatically include anyone or maybe everyone.

Maybe you'll answer this question when you are at it;

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

I dont agree that a soccer facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for adult Gaelic games. And nor do you.

But the rules are the rules are they not?

I don't agree that a GAA facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for soccer games.

The converse should also be true or it's double standards.

Name one GAA ground, anywhere, ever, designed with soccer in mind?

[johnnycool]

I think this is a pretty unique case.
To take the example of the soccer team wanting to use a GAA stadium with a bigger capacity for a competitive game, it wouldn't have anything like the groundswell of support that the Miller charity game has had, and could be easily shot down if necessary.

Who would shoot it down?

If the county board decided to - do you think the social media warriors would wade in supporting the U-14s whose final was that night?

Cancer is in the news every day of the week, so when you refuse access to a stadium for a fundraising game on the basis that 'rules is rules', you're pulling in a massive constituency that has no real interest in sport, but cannot understand why everything is not being done to support a charity game for a young husband and father who died of cancer.

But rules *are* rules - the most recent query on this rule would have been Clare's motion on opening up grounds that were not Croke Park. Defeated by approx 77% to 23%.

The best ad-hoc the GAA could have done would have been a telephone vote of county delegates on a one-off opening of PUC for this game.

As I have said before, congress should separate Croke Park, PUC and a stadium in each of Connacht and Ulster, from the rest of the GAA grounds in the official guide.
Let them run any event they see fit.
If Munster need more capacity for a big European game, let them use PUC.
If Connacht need more capacity, let them use Pearse stadium.
The reality is that there are not a massive amount of big sporting events that would be able to make use of the additional capacity, outside of European Cup rugby games.

That suggestion makes sense. However, to take this case, would PUC have been the designated Munster stadium? Or would it have been Semple Stadium?

What about the rules the GAA agreed with the EU over the funding? You seem to have avoided that

Is this the community aspect you are talking about?

Yes, obviously.

   I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

If the GAA can't have their cake and eat it (BTW I do agree on multi functional facilities when government funding is used) then neither should the FAI and the IRFU.

Gaelic games, or any other sport, will not be banned from the project. If they can be accommodated they will be. This argument was used in relation to Tallaght and its false.

You are very disingenuously not making a distinction between Rule 42 type bans on sports and a sport not being logistically appropriate in a venue.

Does this European lCommunity requirement make this distinction?

Is there any reason Gaelic games cannot be accommodated on this green field development in Drogheda?

Yes, explicitly and unambiguously. To paraphrase, we have no intention of making you share the venue with professional sports/competitors, but you take this money you make the venue available on a reasonable basis for community events.  Black and white, so the whole 'we have to go to congress/get legal advise' bit was dubious.

I would be surprised if Gaelic Games, especially underage stuff, aren't accommodated given the lack of decent GAA facilities in Louth in general, Glenn Emmets aside. The question is will a soccer facility be structurally altered at significant cost and capacity reduction to accomodate adult Gaelic Games.  Thats a different question.

It's a green field site and if it isn't designed to facilitate adult Gaelic games then it doesn't meet the EU criteria we both espouse.
If the additional cost is deemed prohibitive by the sponsor /sitting tenant then paddle your own canoe.

If you make it only suitable for U12 games then that doesn't cut it IMO.

Louth GAA should be on to Shane Ross and whoever else was hammering the GAA last week for the very same rule infraction.

What about adult cricket?

Not sure of the demand for cricket in Louth, but in principle yes.
Not my rules, it's an EU rule which must be adhered to in the strictest form.

there is a differene between a facility getting a large amount of public funds being available where practical to the broader community and redesigning every sports facility that gets any funding to accomodate a sport that wont share it's grounds. Multi sport does not automatically include anyone.

As has been said, why not replace gaelic games with cricket? This line of argument cost the GAA a million in legal fees 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

Entirely agree with this statement.

Cork GAA do share their grounds. With the Ladies Gaelic football association and the Camogie Association.
Does that not cover the EU's community aspect coupled with the fact you yourself agree that multi-sport does not automatically include anyone or maybe everyone.

Maybe you'll answer this question when you are at it;

I see this new stadium in Drogheda is on a green field site owned by Louth County Council. Surely it will need to meet this community requirement and be fit to hold GAA games to get Government funding, no?

I dont agree that a soccer facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for adult Gaelic games. And nor do you.

But the rules are the rules are they not?

I don't agree that a GAA facility can only be considered to have a community aspect if it is modelled specifically for soccer games.

The converse should also be true or it's double standards.

Name one GAA ground, anywhere, ever, designed with soccer in mind?

I'd image it's the same number as soccer grounds designed with GAA in mind.

[Baile Brigín 2]

I'd image it's the same number as soccer grounds designed with GAA in mind.

Correct. So what exactly are you arguing here?

[Jim_Murphy_74]

I'd image it's the same number as soccer grounds designed with GAA in mind.

Correct. So what exactly are you arguing here?

A few salient points:

1. GAA rules preclude more sports than just soccer.
2. GAA rules preclude  other sports from more than just their pitches.
3. No other sporting organization has a written rule precluding other sports from using their facilities.
4. Nothing in the government policy paper states that any particular sport must design with another sport in mind.
5. Policy paper does not propose to preclude any sporting organisation from funding on grounds of single use
6. What the policy paper does state is infrastructure with multi-use and potential for high utilization will receive priority in funding. 
7. The specific clauses related to PuC come from an EU paper.  This is because the volume of funding relative to overall sports capital funding program was very high.  The government thought based on precedent set they could be accused of granting state aid to one organisation to extent that is provide unfair advantage.  The government themselves asked for EU recommendation to avoid a third party raising the case.   So this "community" clause is specific to PuC.
8. Looking at last years capital funding the GAA are doing very well relative to other sports.   

Based on these points, I don't believe it's disloyal or inappropriate for GAA members to take a discussion on the relative benefit gained from points 1-3 in light of points 4-8.  

The documents referred to above can be found online:

Sports Policy: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/sport/english/national-sports-policy-2018-2027/national-sports-policy-2018.pdf
EU Ruling on Pairc Ui Chaoimh: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/262741/262741_1832940_137_2.pdf
GAA Official Guide Part 1: https://learning.gaa.ie/sites/default/files/2016%20Official%20Guide%20-%20Part%201%20(1).pdf
Local sports capital allocations 2017: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/sport/english/sports-capital-programme-2017-local-allocations/2017-scp-list-grants-publication.pdf
Non local sports capital allocations 2017: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/sport/english/successful-and-unsuccessful-non-local-applications-sports-capital-programme-2017/successful-regional-projectsallocationssports-capital-programme-2017.pdf
Other sports capital allocations 2017: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/sport/english/2017-special-allocations/special-allocations-2017.pdf

/Jim.