Messages

If Dessie Farrell IS NOT the GPA, how did he, as one of an interviewing panel of 3, give himself the CEO job?

I have never heard of this in any other properly constituted organisation in the world.

There are of course other GPA members with their own opinions, but only one or two count.

Who elected the first trade unions Hardy? In fairness a group was formed to represent the collective views of players and the players (the majority anyway) accept that the GPA speak on their behalf. In any large group their will always be people who disagree with the majority view but I don't think it can be argued that the GPA don't represent the IC players. And as such the GAA do need to engage with them, some of ye are taking that one quote from Dessie and using it to beat the GPA with.

There's a few big differences between the GPA and ordinary trade unions. First of all, Dessie gave himself the CEO job - democracy, where are you? Secondly, he only represents some of an elite group of county players.  Thirdly, the GPA as a trade union is not seeking better terms for players; it's seeking better terms for the GPA. A real trade union would be negotiating a reduction of the amount of training county players do; GPA leaders promote the idea that more is better. The GPA treats players as commercial entities much more than the GAA leaders do.

Also, as for this notion of all county players being happy with the GPA agenda, does it not strike you that this document was provided by a county player who was disgusted with its agenda?

On the one hand you take that quote as indisputable evidence of their true goals while dismissing Dessie's more recent pronouncements as lies.

Yes of course we do. The comments about the long-term objectives were made in private when he thought nobody was reading. His public pronouncements since then are specifically aimed for public consumption.

However, susbsequently as a body the members of the GPA decided NOT to go after pay for play. Dessie as leader of the GPA is therefore not pursuing pay for play. And he reiterates this ad nauseum.

Dessie can repeat he and the GPA are not for pay for play as much as he wants, but very few members of the GAA believe him.

It's incredible to say that he is not purusing pay-for-play. He tried to organise a national strike to get through a grants scheme which many GAA members think amounts to pay for play, and which would be found as such under European law.

Yes, most GPA members don't want pay for play - but Dessie is one of the main influences trying to push them towards it. Don't believe any of his public utterances.

Angry Farrell rejects GPA professional slur


By Colm Keys
Friday February 29 2008

DESSIE Farrell has dismissed the latest document from the 'Of One Belief' group opposed to the inter-county player grants as "something you would see in an American presidential election".

An email from one of the lobby group members, which is currently taking a case to the Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA) over the impact on the grants proposal on the amateur status rule, claims that Farrell and the GPA privately harbour long-term aims to create professional Gaelic games.

Wexford club hurler Gerard O'Donoghue has circulated a page taken down off the GPA website in 2002 where, in a private members' questions and answers forum relating to the merits of expenses and pay- for-play, Farrell made some revealing comments.

"We need to crawl before we can walk and also in the current climate the expense rate is more acceptable in media circles as how we are perceived is very important at present," wrote Farrell at the time.

Battle

"Having said that, it should not prevent us from harbouring private opinions on this with long-term objectives. At the moment though, let's take it one battle at a time until the war is won," he adds.

The 'Of One Belief' group -- which expect to learn today when their DRA hearing will take place -- believe this is evidence of the GPA's true ideals.

Farrell admits he "probably" did say that at the time but stressed that the remarks were written in a much different climate than exists now

"At the time the £100 (€127) expenses for inter-county players was in the domain. Shortly afterwards it was Charlie McCreevy and tax breaks, then it morphed again into Government grants," recalled Farrell yesterday.

"The relationship was very different back then, it was one based on hostility and suspicion. Thankfully that's not the case now."

Farrell says the GAA have accepted their "bona fides" on preserving the amateur status.

"We're on the record countless times saying we are not about pay-for-play. In the grants document we have re-emphasised the need to uphold the integrity of the amateur status."

Meanwhile, GAA presidential candidate Sean Fogarty has challenged the GPA to produce a constitution and evidence of a proper membership structure before they can be formally approved by the association.

Fogarty has accused the GPA of using a "settled form of guerrilla warfare" against the GAA with the threat of strike.

Fogarty feels a strike may have been no harm last year. "A strike is a dangerous weapon until you go and use it. The players have a very short life span and I don't think players would stay out too long. It would also give us an indication of strength of the players' organisation which I'm not sure about."

My opinion is that there are posters who don't have the first notion what the man is like, staining sean og's charachter.

I thought I had made this clear:

I've met the man a few times and I always thought him to be one of the greatest living Irishmen - no exaggeration - except when it came to appraising the whole amateur/professional argument and now Frank Murphy/Cork administration.

Is it a stain on his character to say he is "one of the greatest living Irishmen"?

PHHNR, I agree county players have always done relatively done well 70s, 80s, whenever. I never disagreed with that. Though Uladh appears to beg to differ.

It is widely known that certain Cork players charge appearance fees. Figures have been quoted on another website recently, and specific sums keep getting mentioned in various quarters. Players' agents are involved. As I said, ordinary members tolerate this. Maybe we shouldn't, but we don't have chips on our shoulders about county players. Most of us despise the GPA, but that is a different matter.

Your challenge for me to quote specific figures here is futile and I think you know it. Firstly, I don't think it would be appropriate legally to be naming figures for certain players. And even if I could legally, it would seem that I was out to get certain players - which I am not - so I won't be quoting any figures.

I also know that it is regular practice for players in many counties to claim travelling expenses they are not entitled to, but I have no interest in a name and shame game.

and by the way, i object to your inference that intercounty players are better than the rest of us.

When was the last time you were offered a free car because of your GAA profile?

(Do you know how much a car costs, and if so, do you think ordinary members get offered the equivalent because of their GAA profile or earn the equivalent amount while county players are training?

And yes, I know not every county player has a car, but we are talking about Sean Og and his comments here.

I've met the man a few times and I always thought him to be one of the greatest living Irishmen - no exaggeration - except when it came to appraising the whole amateur/professional argument and now Frank Murphy/Cork administration.

Sean Og is the sort of guy who trains compulsively out of habit, not because he has to. Isn't it well documented that he went to the gym the morning after Cork won their last All-Ireland hurling title? No-one was forcing him to do it. His dedication is admirable, but it is based on choices he makes himself.

TheSkull1 is spot on with regard to the GPA's attitude to training. The leading personalities in the GPA are all "more training is good" disciples. Which is okay if they want to live their lives that way. But then they try to force the whole of the GAA to change to suit their choice of lifestyle.

We don't even begrudge the free cars Cork county players get. We raise our eyebrows about their appearance fees, but we don't shout about it. They should know that we appreciate their commitment, and our acceptance of these freebies they get reflects this fact.

It's not true to say that the comments on this thread are simply anti-GPA, although a few have definitely gone too far with the sarcasm about a man I still think has many attributed of greatness.

What the comments really reflect is the fact that in proportion to the amount of power and money they accrue, players lose ordinary members' goodwill.

Certain players don't seem to realise that their lives will only be worse if they get grants - for the small amount of money that is in them, they will have a lot more work/training stress and less goodwill.

Just heard Brian Cody and Seamus McEnaney on RTE radio pleading for Cork to be given back their deducted points.

Is it a total coincidence, or would it be connected to the fact that they are the managers of the counties of Nickey Brennan and Paraic Duffy?

Given their record over the last few weeks, I'd guess this is their latest cunning trick to work around the rules to try to tidy up messes.

The only problem is that these tricks tend to cause problems further down the line.

the girls playing in the Nat Leagues, and they have the added stress of having to shave their legs and to look pretty as well.

Love this!

If the men can argue for govt grants to cover internet access, fresh car tyres and "hydration costs", could the girls make a case for the Ladyshave coming under the "costs associated with enhancing performance"?

From Hoganstand


Anti-grants group heads back to DRA
20 February 2008

The Of One Belief group has gone back to the Dispute Resolution Authority with its claim that Central Council has acted, and continues to act illegally on the grants issue.

The group of members from across the GAA opposes the breaking of the GAA's Rule 11 that the payment of cash "grants" to inter-county players would entail. They went to the DRA back in January and have now taken up the offer the DRA then made of a reconvening of its hearing.

The re-convening is sought on the basis that the motion passed by Central Council last Saturday is out of order and the Council has caused a breach of trust according to the Of One Belief group.

"When we got an adjournment at the initial hearing of the DRA case," said Joe O'Brien from Longford, "it was on the basis that Central Council's solicitors claimed that no decision had been made on grants. Central Council also undertook to bring any future proposals properly to Congress. We accepted all this in good faith but now find that, along with the DRA and the rest of the GAA, we have been misled on both points. The press-release from Saturday's Central Council meeting referred to its 'previous decisions' on this issue. Three weeks ago we were all assured there were no such decisions. And in the GAA if you take things to Congress, you take them there in the right way, according to the Rules. You don't make it up to suit yourself as you go along. On Saturday our Central Council agreed to put a motion to Congress that is clearly out of order."

"It's time people were properly tested on this and this constant misleading was ended. The DRA - our own proper GAA arbitration system - is the means to do that."

The group believe that the Central Council motion is out of order because Rule 85 (b) says that if Central Council wants to submit a motion to Congress for approval of its interpretation of rules, it must seek to change the Rule accordingly. Any amendment to Rule 11, the amateur status rule, would need to be structured correctly and get a two-thirds majority in order to be passed they claim, but the motion from Saturday's Central Council meeting merely asks Congress to vote that it is "satisfied" with the grants scheme and doesn't seek the necessary change of Rule.

"It's obvious by now that Central Council is trying to sneak this fundamental change through on the nod," said Tyrone's Mark Conway.

"It's wrong that Counties like Fermanagh, which debated this whole issue openly and honestly, have their motion on it ruled out of order yet Central Council puts in a motion its members didn't even debate on an agreement it says isn't yet agreed. Trust has gone out the window in all this and it's just further proof of how the people who want to foist pay-for-play on us won't do their business through the GAA's proper democratic processes and rules.

"Central Council's solicitors' amazing claim at the last DRA hearing that there was no grants agreement or decision was made because they knew that the grants breach Rule 11. Like the rest of us they knew full well that "a Lord Denning-type appalling vista" would result, with Central Council found to be blatantly breaking rules it is meant to enforce.

"The longer this goes on the messier it gets. The people who want to introduce pay-for-play have now had three months when every Club in Ireland and beyond and every GAA member could have been properly consulted on this. They've stubbornly refused to allow that consultation to happen. Why is that? Where have the honesty; integrity; and openness that used to underpin the GAA gone? And as for proper corporate governance, well the smallest Club in the GAA wouldn't be allowed to do its business this way."

People opposed to the grants - and even many who favour them - feel this whole issue needs to be properly debated at all levels in the GAA claim the group, who now say that the debate is not being facilitated.

"It just gets stranger and stranger," said Martin Ryan, Tipperary. "Saturday's Central Council meeting asked that all Counties discuss the suggested re-opening of the Australian Rules connection, but it steadfastly refuses to open up the pay-for-play debate. Even basic legal research shows that if these "grants" are paid then EU commercial law comes into play and overrides any internal GAA rules we might have. The grants will change the GAA irrevocably. Those who care about that won't let it happen. That's why this all is so critical."

Does that not apply to the administrators also?Huh

Of course it does. Starting with the chief administrator of the GPA.

I imagine you've finished your press-release on Holland's shafting, KingDub...

Ok Deiseach I will try and explain this in a simple way -

I work as a independent consultant, my company "ie me" is employed by an agency on behalf of the bank I work in....My rates are paid by the agency so I am not an employee of the Bank where I work as I don't get paid by them so I have no "employee" rights as such with the bank as I am not their employee...

The irony! Deiseach's contributions have been much more erudite than yours, and then you come out with this garbled nonsense. I cannot make sense of it no matter how many times I read it. Try some punctuation for a start.

Again, it doesn't matter who pays the money - Chelsea FC players are affiliated to the FA Premier League, but it doesn't pay their wages. Their wages are paid by the club/agency called Chelsea FC, or by Roman Abramovich basically. They are entitled to all the freedom of movement rights established by Bosman.

So for the umpteenth time in a few years the GAA is now finished - Rule 21/Rule 42/Grants/GPA/Cork situation/Aussie Rules taking players.....etc etc

Roscommon "progressives", of whom there seem to be a remarkable number, should know when to keep their traps shut.

Their county board is the most incompetent, bungling body of the GAA, running up record debts in excess of €1 million.

If it wasn't for the generosity of the GAA as a national body, you would be financially ruined, and in any other sport you would be bust and no longer exist.

Rossfan, I happen to believe that some of the above will irrevocably damage the GAA, although not all of them. Even if you do not agree with another's opinions, you should accept their genuineness and cut the sarcasm.

You are in no position to laugh at others.

Is this thread a wind up?

what's the point if posters are going to present opinion as fact and, going by this thread, hunches as legal standing.

Do the grants get handed out this coming year saying as there won't be any congress til the autumn?

I hope your message isn't a wind-up - Congress is in April.

I am not presenting opinion or hunches. I am quoting from the decision in the case and others' legal analysis of the decision. Its proper title is

Christelle Deliège V Ligue Francophone de Judo et Disciplines ASBL (Joined cases C-51/96 and C-191/97)

I would post the whole bloody decision up here but it's 20 pages long and I don't think anyone would thank me for that.

But if you seek a copy of the decision, you might find it, and see that I am quoting fact.