What do you make of this?

[DownFanatic]

Two schoolboys in Kerry are being told they can't join a club 1.5km away from their home.

Instead, the brothers - Padraic (14) and Colin ( O'Sullivan - have been asked to travel 11km to play for a rival team.

The pair want to line out for Listry beside their home at Ballytrasna, Faha, Killarney but are being forced to represent Ballyhar-Firies as they happen to live within the boundaries of Firies parish.

The case against Kerry GAA's ruling is being heard in the High Court at present.

Through their mother, Christine O'Sullivan, the siblings are seeking an injunction restraining the secretary of the County Board, Peter Twiss, from preventing or restricting them from playing for Listry.

They are seeking declarations including that the failure to exempt them from rule 20 of the GAA bylaws, governing playing for one's parish, is in breach of their right to freedom of association under the Constitution.

The boys' solicitor says that if they don't get to play for their club of choice ["They may be technically from Firies, but their hearts and souls are in Listry"], they will take early retirement.

[seafoid]

It would be tragedy if Kerry GAA erupted into open warfare over this meaning they
couldn't field a county football team for a generation but every cloud has a silver lining.

[Denn Forever]

I thought it was based on where the primary school was? 

[macdanger2]

The boys' solicitor says that if they don't get to play for their club of choice ["They may be technically from Firies, but their hearts and souls are in Listry"], they will take early retirement.

Not sure how that will stand up in court, surely if they choose to join any association, they must abide by the rules of said association??

At 14, surely the older lad already plays for a club??

The rule is to stop bigger clubs taking youngsters away from smaller clubs, in reality though, it happens all the time......

[lynchbhoy]

madness.
live beside a club. should play for it.
esp as they are only kids and not glory hunting armagh-heads looking for senior clubs in Dublin !!

it saddens me to see two kids dragged through the crap over this.
would not be surprised if they never play football again - thats flipping stupid stuff.

some of these fellas in the clubs need a good kick in the head

[muppet]

This has been coming.

'surely if they choose to join any association, they must abide by the rules of said association'

If there is a conflict between the rules of the association and the law of the land, there is only one winner.

[AZOffaly]

What law of the land is in question? Sorry, I just read it again

In my view this is a typical story of adults fighting battles that hurt the kids. It's a no brainer that the kids should be allowed play with their friends etc, and when the pitch is so close as well. HOWEVER the GAA has rules to protect smaller clubs from being obliterated by people going to play with the biggest nearby club. This case should not negate the very valid viewpoint that these smaller clubs have to be protected.

Hard cases make bad laws, and if the GAA were to say that anyone can choose the club they play for, you can imagine the carnage as clubs actively recruit players from the smaller clubs.

It's just a pity that the adults in this scenario can't come together and agree that the kids come first.

[macdanger2]

This has been coming.

'surely if they choose to join any association, they must abide by the rules of said association'

If there is a conflict between the rules of the association and the law of the land, there is only one winner.

I'm no lawyer but seeing as nobody is forcing them to join the association then I would have thought this has nothing to do with the law of the land - you can't just joint something and then take them to court cos you don't like the rules even though you knew the story when you joined.

As above however, this shouldn't something that's going to court, they should be able to sort it out locally.

[muppet]

This has been coming.

'surely if they choose to join any association, they must abide by the rules of said association'

If there is a conflict between the rules of the association and the law of the land, there is only one winner.

I'm no lawyer but seeing as nobody is forcing them to join the association then I would have thought this has nothing to do with the law of the land - you can't just joint something and then take them to court cos you don't like the rules even though you knew the story when you joined.

As above however, this shouldn't something that's going to court, they should be able to sort it out locally.

'Nobody forcing them to join the association' does not absolve the association form having to follow the laws of the land.

Here is the key point in the post above:  "is in breach of their right to freedom of association under the Constitution."

If a judge agrees it doesn't matter what the Gaa or its constitution thinks.

[deiseach]

I'm no lawyer but seeing as nobody is forcing them to join the association then I would have thought this has nothing to do with the law of the land - you can't just joint something and then take them to court cos you don't like the rules even though you knew the story when you joined.

muppet's point is that if the rules of the association are not in compliance with the law of the land then the rules of the association have to change. I'd find it hard to believe that the courts would make such a broad interpretation of the law - that anyone can join any club they wish - on such a narrow case. But we'll see.

[AZOffaly]

It's a bit tenuous at best. Nobody is preventing them 'associating' with the kids there, and nobody is preventing them joing the GAA. It would be interesting though, to see what a judge says, but I reckon HQ might be down fairly quick to resolve this with the clubs in question. If there's a doubt about the position of that rule in relation to the right of association, then the GAA is in big trouble regarding club transfers etc.

[muppet]

I'm no lawyer but seeing as nobody is forcing them to join the association then I would have thought this has nothing to do with the law of the land - you can't just joint something and then take them to court cos you don't like the rules even though you knew the story when you joined.

muppet's point is that if the rules of the association are not in compliance with the law of the land then the rules of the association have to change. I'd find it hard to believe that the courts would make such a broad interpretation of the law - that anyone can join any club they wish - on such a narrow case. But we'll see.

Look at it from the other side of the argument.

They are prohibited from joining a club of their choosing, for life, because of where they live.

[macdanger2]

'Nobody forcing them to join the association' does not absolve the association form having to follow the laws of the land.

Here is the key point in the post above:  "is in breach of their right to freedom of association under the Constitution."

If a judge agrees it doesn't matter what the Gaa or its constitution thinks.

I suppose it depends on what freedom of association means legally. They are free to move to the next parish if they like.

If this were upheld by the court, could the same argument be made for not allowing say 19 year olds play minors?

[deiseach]

Look at it from the other side of the argument.

They are prohibited from joining a club of their choosing, for life, because of where they live.

I'm sure the GAA will make the point that it's important for the integrity of the association that clubs are not allowed move towards a situation where certain clubs can monopolise all the best players and the parish rule is a good way of preventing that. If you look at Article 40.6.iii of the Constitution (pdf), it guarantees "The right of the citizens to form associations and unions. Laws, however, may be enacted for the regulation and control in the public interest of the exercise of the foregoing right". So there is no absolute right to freedom of association, any more than you can build a house anywhere you like because you want to be near your family

[muppet]

'Nobody forcing them to join the association' does not absolve the association form having to follow the laws of the land.

Here is the key point in the post above:  "is in breach of their right to freedom of association under the Constitution."

If a judge agrees it doesn't matter what the Gaa or its constitution thinks.

I suppose it depends on what freedom of association means legally. They are free to move to the next parish if they like.

If this were upheld by the court, could the same argument be made for not allowing say 19 year olds play minors?

Make up your own mind:

http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/Constitution%20of%20Ireland.pdf

Your question now appears to be: Are age limits in sports unconstitutional?

Again it is up to a judge but I'd guess there would be no problem with that one. The issue there might be age discrimination but as those restrictions are to the advantage of the individuals (i.e. younger players are protected from older ones) and no-one is discriminated on the basis of colour, creed, where they live etc, it would probably be fine.

That is a different question to can the Gaa force children to join the club of their choice rather than the club of the individuals choosing.