Angry Farrell denies "long-term objective" of pay-for-play in "war" - Indo

[doire na raithe]

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

So your aggrieved that a select minority of opinions control the GPA and set its agenda, yet it has clearly been admitted by the anti-GPA contingent that Farrell harbours pay-for-play opinions yet allows the majority of members opinions to override this personal desire and represents this to the public?

[Hardy]

Farrell harbours pay-for-play opinions yet allows the majority of members opinions to override this personal desire and represents this to the public?

No he doesn't. May I quote again?

"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.

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".

[Rossfan]

There's a few big differences between the GPA and ordinary trade unions. First of all, Dessie gave himself the CEO job -

How does one give one self a job apart from someone who owns a big company.?

Some of the stuff the anti GPA boys come out with is something else.

[his holiness nb]

"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.

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".


Guys, its blatantly clear from these quotes that Farrell personally wants professionalism. That couldnt be any clearer. Its very worrying for the "leader" of the GPA to have these personal views.

I am not against the GPA in theory, its a good idea. But while Farrell who wants professionalism is at the helm, and is chipping away slowly, one "battle" at a time till this happens, I will happily declare myself "anti-gpa".

[Uladh]

"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.

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".


Guys, its blatantly clear from these quotes that Farrell personally wants professionalism. That couldnt be any clearer. Its very worrying for the "leader" of the GPA to have these personal views.

I am not against the GPA in theory, its a good idea. But while Farrell who wants professionalism is at the helm, and is chipping away slowly, one "battle" at a time till this happens, I will happily declare myself "anti-gpa".

whatever about the conclsions you may draw from these quotes, nothing is "blatantly clear" from them.

Your assumptions are only very worrying (a) if you are right and (b) if you then consider one man's opinon amongst thousands to to be as "worrying" as the scare mongerers would hope it would  be.

[Zapatista]

He is not just one man he is the voice of the GPA so please quit with the spin.  Does he not have a mandate? If does and is misrepresenting that mandate then it is very worrying.

[Uladh]

Zap - i didn't really think it would be possible to misrepresent the gist of this thread in one line, but congratulations.

[Zapatista]

Havn't even been reading the thread sorry

[reddgnhand]

"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.

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".


Guys, its blatantly clear from these quotes that Farrell personally wants professionalism. That couldnt be any clearer. Its very worrying for the "leader" of the GPA to have these personal views.

I am not against the GPA in theory, its a good idea. But while Farrell who wants professionalism is at the helm, and is chipping away slowly, one "battle" at a time till this happens, I will happily declare myself "anti-gpa".

whatever about the conclsions you may draw from these quotes, nothing is "blatantly clear" from them.

Your assumptions are only very worrying (a) if you are right and (b) if you then consider one man's opinon amongst thousands to to be as "worrying" as the scare mongerers would hope it would  be.

uladh

can I ask what conclusions do you draw from the quotes?

[Zapatista]

After readind it through i'm not sorry.


Uladh wrote
"if you then consider one man's opinion amongst thousands to to be as "worrying" as the scare mongerers would hope it would  be."

You talk as if DF has little influence and takes complete guidance from the members. This is false and the reverse is true. The members are not in the room when he is negotiating on there behalf. This is fair enough as it's his job to do that.


Edit Zero influence to little influence.

[believebelive]

If this is the direction the Association wants to take, then it should be decided properly by the whole Association and not the dictatorship that appears to be showing itself in Croke Park.

But that's exactly how it will be decided, whatever Dessie's or anyone else's personal opinions are on professionalism, it can only come to pass if the majority of the GAA vote for it. The GPA are here to stay and the GAA are right to recognize them and engage with them, the GPA have a role to play in the modern GAA and lads need to accept that.

If, by this stage, you are not fully aware of Dessie Farrells intentions then you must have been living on a different planet. These grants are the first step on the road to professionalism.

You forgot to say 'in my opinion', it isn't a fact.

Will the majority of the GAA vote on this? Whatever u think of the rights or wrongs of grant aid it seems to me that the very least that should be done is for clubs to debate this and then mandate their county boards. Is that happening? Has anyone here got notification of a club meeting to debate these grants? I haven't.  The central council motion to congress specifically states that they are backing the grant aid package in its final form, yet this final form is not yet available for anybody to read? How can clubs discuss a motion to congress when the fine details of what the motion proposes have not even been worked out and will not be realeased until the middle of this month? It has taken Croke Park/The sports Council/The GPA/ three and a half months to finalise the package yet clubs are expected to discuss the package within a two week time frame and return their verdict to county boards by the first week of April so their delegates can vote as their count members want them too at Congress.

This will be decided by congress (and congress has a shocking record of agreeing with the wider association on major issues) and by congress that means county chairman and by county chairman that means people who will do what the president says because they would rather not rock the boat than create controversy. You can call this what you want but this is not democracy. This is politics, nothing more and nothing less and is being done to save the face of a president who IMO has already proven one of the weakest in my memory.

[Zulu]

Will the majority of the GAA vote on this? Whatever u think of the rights or wrongs of grant aid it seems to me that the very least that should be done is for clubs to debate this and then mandate their county boards. Is that happening? Has anyone here got notification of a club meeting to debate these grants? I haven't.  The central council motion to congress specifically states that they are backing the grant aid package in its final form, yet this final form is not yet available for anybody to read? How can clubs discuss a motion to congress when the fine details of what the motion proposes have not even been worked out and will not be realeased until the middle of this month? It has taken Croke Park/The sports Council/The GPA/ three and a half months to finalise the package yet clubs are expected to discuss the package within a two week time frame and return their verdict to county boards by the first week of April so their delegates can vote as their count members want them too at Congress.

The grants and pay for play are very different issues IMO, the point is that DF's opinions on the future of the GAA are largely irrelevent as indeed are the opinions of IC players. Until the majority of GAA members vote for professionalism it doesn't matter what peoples private opinions are on the matter. I have no problem with DF wanting a professional GAA (if infact he does) and I have no problem with him trying to achieve that goal (if infact he is), the point is he has to convince me, you and thousands of others before that can happen.
                               IMO Dessie doesn't want a pro-GAA and he is not pursuing that goal, but if I'm wrong, so what? The bottom line is that like every other major change in the GAA it will only happen when the vast majority of members want it and vote for it.

[Hardy]

Like the attempted introduction of the grants without reference to any, never mind the vast majority, of members?

[Zulu]

Hardy read the first line of my previous post, the grants is a minor issue when compared with turning the GAA into a full time professional sporting organisation. You don't think that paying IC players a living wage could be foisted upon the GAA without a vote, do you?

[orangeman]

Has anyone done an exercise into how much it would cost the GAA to pay the players ?