Gaelic football and the media

[Lar Naparka]

Still think it's a hard sell Lar?! 

I sure do and the going is not getting easier either.
For one thing, we are talking about an amateur sport played at a professional level. That's brings unique problems in it train and for another, the principal rivals for the public's attention, soccer and rugby, have far greater resources and those sports are marketed in a professional manner.
It's fair to sat Man Utd, rakes in more money in a week than the GAA does in a year.
Crucially, the vast bulk of its income is coming through indirect channels (product endorsements, TV contracts and the sales of franchised paraphernalia, e.g., scarves, banners, flags etc.
I'm told there are phenomenal sales of Ipad, PSP etc games as well.
Only a tiny fraction of its income comes from spectators paying at the turnstiles. In the case of the GAA, the opposite is the case.  It's a Goliath versus David scenario all over again but this time there are countless Goliaths and only one poor little David.
In a nutshell, the GAA needs all the publicity it can get, from any quarter, to keep its place on the public stage.
It sells sweet FA hats, jerseys etc which is a pity. All the stuff you see on match days is sold be private individuals and not a cent winds up in GAA hands.
I don't know if anything can be done about this but if you or I try to flog any Man U jerseys or player dolls or whatever, we'd get a nasty letter from some solicitor before a week was out.
It's men v boys in the paraphernalia sales league.
I don't like Vincent Hogan either; I'd put him in somewhere between a jackass and a laitcheko if I were doing personal critique of sports writers but his opinions get more public attention than mine. BTW, not all of his readers come from a GAA background so he can't be expected to see things the way we do.
In a somewhat similar way, Joe Brolly won't lose his job with RTE as long as he generates controversy and I don't think the blazers at HQ would want to see him dumped either.
My great pity is that the GAA must keep pace with its professional competitors if it is to stay in the race. A way must be found to grant the media access to the players. Other sports don't have the problem of amateur players being subjected to professional demands.
The GAA must keep abreast of the times we are in: damned if you do but double damned if you don't.

I dunno Lar.
My question was 'Is it a hard sell?' to which you responded 'Yes'.
But your key point seems to be we are not selling it well enough, which is a different issue I think.

In your OP I guess you were expecting your readers to respond with an emphatic "No" to your closing question.
In other words, the GAA is doing fine aand doesn't need the likes of Vincent Hogan to promote its cause:
We're doing' just grand as we are and don't welcome outside interference, thank you very much.
Nothing personal me oul' buddy but I fundamentally disagree with you.

We are an amateur organisation competing with professional rivals for the public's attention. That in itself causes unique problems- for starters; soccer and rugby are prepared to allow the media virtually unrestricted access to their players. They welcome such intrusions. That just isn't possible where amateur players are concerned.
Both have the glam factor of international competition to help spread their respective message; the GAA does not.
All in all, I think the GAA is doing a commendable job of displaying its wares to the public but it needs all the publicity it can get. (That includes Vincent Hogan.)
We can't have it both ways; the media isn't obliged to follow the GAA's agenda and to those in that business controversy is indeed ratings gold.
Our beloved association can't have the proverbial cake and eat it so negative reports by the likes of Vincent Hogan are to be expected.
In any even, I find nothing wrong with his assessment that "......Maybe Dublin apart, the focus of its big guns seems to be on systematic fouling and the subjugation of attacking flair. The game has become graceless and, largely, ugly.'
Isn't that the major gripe on this board right now?
Dublin' s positive approach is a recent phenomenon; remember the Dubs V Donegal semi in 2011 when the final scoreline was 0-8 to -06 in Dublin's favour?

Can the GAA prosper without intrusion from the media or can it get by with the style of play so prevalent at the moment?
On both counts, it can on me posterior!

[Jinxy]

Lar, you seem to be misunderstanding me completely.
'Gaelic football is a hard sell' in the context of the OP refers to the product itself being poor, and 'consumers' being turned off by the quality/entertainment value of the modern game.
As far as I am concerned, the evidence suggests otherwise.
But, you can ignore this post like all the others and go off on a rant about the GAA not marketing the game properly if it makes you feel better. 
p.s. Using the Dublin v Donegal game in 2011 as evidence to support your assertion that Dublin were a negative team until recently is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

[Jinxy]

We are an amateur organisation competing with professional rivals for the public's attention. That in itself causes unique problems- for starters; soccer and rugby are prepared to allow the media virtually unrestricted access to their players. They welcome such intrusions. That just isn't possible where amateur players are concerned.

I just saw this bit now Lar.
That statement is simply not true.
Media access to soccer and rugby players has never been more restricted and controlled.

[Lar Naparka]

Lar, you seem to be misunderstanding me completely.
'Gaelic football is a hard sell' in the context of the OP refers to the product itself being poor, and 'consumers' being turned off by the quality/entertainment value of the modern game.
As far as I am concerned, the evidence suggests otherwise.
But, you can ignore this post like all the others and go off on a rant about the GAA not marketing the game properly if it makes you feel better. 
p.s. Using the Dublin v Donegal game in 2011 as evidence to support your assertion that Dublin were a negative team until recently is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

Bloody hell!!
So I'm misunderstanding you completely, am I?

'Gaelic football is a hard sell' in the context of the OP refers to the product itself being poor, and 'consumers' being turned off by the quality/entertainment value of the modern game.

This board alone carries more complaints/gripes/whinges about the prevalence of cynical fouling than about any other aspect of the modern game.
Vincent Hogan thinks  "...the focus of its big guns seems to be on systematic fouling and the subjugation of attacking flair. "
You don't agree apparently.
I'll go by the evidence of what's to be found on this board to back my case about the focus on the systemic fouling approach. I believe there is overwhelming evidence to suggest you are on a loser on this one.
What about the "subjugation of "attacking flair?"
Have you read what Colm Cooper has to say n the subject?
He states that a player like him wouldn't have a chance of making it at senior intercounty scene  if he was starting out. (Or something like that.)
He'd be horsed out of it because of his physique  if he wasn't already an established player.
Has Colm Cooper got attacking flair in abundance? I sure think so.
Who should I believe: one of the most gifted players of modern times or a bloody Meath man?

But, you can ignore this post like all the others and go off on a rant about the GAA not marketing the game properly if it makes you feel better.

Oh, I can; can I?

"All in all, I think the GAA is doing a commendable job of displaying its wares to the public but it needs all the publicity it can get."

So sucks to you; where's the rant there?

p.s. Using the Dublin v Donegal game in 2011 as evidence to support your assertion that Dublin were a negative team until recently is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

I am going to extreme lengths to put my arguments in idiot-proof language and you are playing the man not the ball.
You haven't provided a shred of corroborative evidence to back up your own, well, ridiculous claim.  There's plenty of stuff in online archives to suggest otherwise.
Dublin were well-known and condemned on all sides for packing their defence and concentrating on keeping opponents' scores down rather than using their present approach.
How' bout an oul' quote from the likes of Brolly or Spillane; not to mention O'Rourke or indeed the rest of humanity to back your argument? Try any year between, say, '08 and '11.
How can a score of 0-8 in an AI semi be taken as evidence of a positive style of play?

I'm not saying you're thick or any thing like that but you are definitely obtuse.

Oh and by the way;

"That statement is simply not true.
Media access to soccer and rugby players has never been more restricted and controlled."

You're way off the mark, as usual.
The media can interview just about any goddamn player they like but they can't set the agenda when they do,  "which is a different issue I think," as your good self might put it.

Now; over to you.


(PS. If you think I'm still sore about '96, you're bloody well right for once.)

[Jinxy]

How many Weetabix did you have this morning Lar?

[Lar Naparka]

How many Weetabix did you have this morning Lar?

Huh? Bloody typical Meath response; go for the man and not the ball.
How 'bout answering some of my questions first?

[Jinxy]

I'm at work, don't have time now.
I'll get to YOU later.

[Syferus]

How many Weetabix did you have this morning Lar?

Huh? Bloody typical Meath response; go for the man and not the ball.
How 'bout answering some of my questions first?

They call that a 'Sean Cavanagh' these days, Lar.

[Lar Naparka]

How many Weetabix did you have this morning Lar?

Huh? Bloody typical Meath response; go for the man and not the ball.
How 'bout answering some of my questions first?

They call that a 'Sean Cavanagh' these days, Lar.

Ah, FFS, I waiting waiting for his next move to throw that one at him.