Why The Grants/Awards/Pay-for-Play Scheme Has To Be Opposed

[GrandMasterFlash]

This is taken from the 'Of One Belief' sounding board and is posted for those who do not subscribe to the circular or visit http://www.ofonebelief.org/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There are many, many reasons why we shouldn't touch the grants/awards/pay-for-play scheme with a barge pole. Here's twenty to start with:

    * It flies in the face of our Rule 11 which clearly states that "a player, team, official or member shall not accept payment in cash or in kind in conjunction with the playing of gaelic games". As such it represents an attempt at the most fundamental shift ever in GAA ethos and policy. And it shifts the entire focus within the GAA from "We" to "Me".

    * It is a policy which, if introduced, will never be reversed: once the principle of paying players is introduced, experience in every other sport in every other setting shows that the only issue for debate thereafter is: "How much more?"

    * The GAA is about giving, not taking. The GAA gives the money it earns back to the people of Ireland in the form of facilities; coaching; games development; and equipment. Only by retaining our amateur status can we ensure this reinvestment continues, generation after generation.
    * Playing for your County is a choice, not an obligation. Always, always, always in the GAA you do what you do because you want to. If you don't want to ... then don't do it. That brilliantly simple concept has served us so well for 124 years. This proposed arrangement totally undermines that understanding.

    * Paying this money establishes a dangerous precedent. The GAA will have to pick up the tab when the government, as it inevitably will, drops out

    * Inflation and claimed "increased-costs-of-playing-gaelic-games" will have to be factored in

    * There is no moral argument for not paying the same money to the inter-County back-room people who put in the same time and effort. Counties will have to come up with the money and the arrangements to do this.

    * Once we start paying back-room teams, there is no moral argument in turn for not paying other County Committee people: they put in as much (if not more) time and effort and without them there would be no County GAA to start with.

    * It is not at all clear who carries the legal liabilities (of which there will be many) in all this. The first case for "wrongful dismissal" or whatever from a County panel is inevitably on its way.

    * The "Bosman" and other EU rulings mean once money becomes involved and "restraint of trade" issues invariably follow, the GAA won't have a legal leg to stand on in terms of stopping players transferring to Counties where their financial prospects are better

    * There will be a financial incentive regime in place in the GAA which discourages elite players from putting themselves at risk in Club games

    * There'll be no incentive or justification to address the current poison of paid managers in the GAA ... which should be an absolute priority for the GAA

    * Some players will inevitably object because they have to play more matches than players from other Counties to reach the Championship Quarter-Finals and be awarded the money that comes with that. This will fatally undermine the structure of our Championships.

    * The first headline as follows is already on its way: "That refereeing decision cost us 'so-many-thousand' euros"

    * We will have a scenario where County A's players get the money on the basis of attending 80% of, say, 100 sessions whilst County B's players will get it on the basis of attending 80% of, say, 50 sessions

    * The scheme seriously expects people with full-time jobs to "visit schools and youth facilities" as part of their new "GAA contractual arrangements". The costs of those school and other visits will have to be picked up by someone: that someone will be the Counties.

    * The GPA has already claimed players should be entitled to a share of TV money ("HQ Warned to Share TV Money Around", Setanta, 23 October 2007). The GAA will have no moral (let alone legal) justification for opposing such a future GPA claim ... paid directly to them of course by a third party, the TV company. (No doubt it will be backed up by the threat of strike action - which in the new pay-for-play context it will actually be a strike)

    * The rest of the GAA is still expected to fundraise to provide elite facilities when the users of those facilities are going to have to be paid to use them

    * The new contractual requirements placed on players are the diametric opposite to the supposed concern with over-burdening players ... and on which we recently held a Special Congress

    * The GAA will be morally and legally unable to oppose a sponsor who offers a County panel a large, performance-based, sum of money to win a title

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Is Misé Le Méas.

[AZOffaly]

I think we've had this debate on here about 15 times at this stage, and most of those arguments were used by the 'anti' camp. I don't think we need to get into it all again.

I agree with a lot of them, but as I said, we've been there and talked this to death.

[Gnevin]

This is taken from the 'Of One Belief' sounding board and is posted for those who do not subscribe to the circular or visit http://www.ofonebelief.org/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There are many, many reasons why we shouldn't touch the grants/awards/pay-for-play scheme with a barge pole. Here's twenty to start with:

    * It flies in the face of our Rule 11 which clearly states that "a player, team, official or member shall not accept payment in cash or in kind in conjunction with the playing of gaelic games". As such it represents an attempt at the most fundamental shift ever in GAA ethos and policy. And it shifts the entire focus within the GAA from "We" to "Me".

The GAA ignores plenty of its own rules and basic principals so why should this be any different ?

    * It is a policy which, if introduced, will never be reversed: once the principle of paying players is introduced, experience in every other sport in every other setting shows that the only issue for debate thereafter is: "How much more?"

Who cares let the government worry about that,of course grants will increase over time 5 k now won't be the same in 60 years

    * The GAA is about giving, not taking. The GAA gives the money it earns back to the people of Ireland in the form of facilities; coaching; games development; and equipment. Only by retaining our amateur status can we ensure this reinvestment continues, generation after generation.

Coaches it pays , GAA isnt spending it money on grants , so no worries there then

    * Playing for your County is a choice, not an obligation. Always, always, always in the GAA you do what you do because you want to. If you don't want to ... then don't do it. That brilliantly simple concept has served us so well for 124 years. This proposed arrangement totally undermines that understanding.

The GAA play people who admittedly do fill time jobs maybe they should walk away

    * Paying this money establishes a dangerous precedent. The GAA will have to pick up the tab when the government, as it inevitably will, drops out

    * Inflation and claimed "increased-costs-of-playing-gaelic-games" will have to be factored in


    * There is no moral argument for not paying the same money to the inter-County back-room people who put in the same time and effort. Counties will have to come up with the money and the arrangements to do this.

Moral argument , this inst cloning we are talking about

    * Once we start paying back-room teams, there is no moral argument in turn for not paying other County Committee people: they put in as much (if not more) time and effort and without them there would be no County GAA to start with.

Moral argument , this inst cloning we are talking about

    * It is not at all clear who carries the legal liabilities (of which there will be many) in all this. The first case for "wrongful dismissal" or whatever from a County panel is inevitably on its way.

The sports council of Ireland and issuing them  and have been for years , cant recall them being sued to date

    * The "Bosman" and other EU rulings mean once money becomes involved and "restraint of trade" issues invariably follow, the GAA won't have a legal leg to stand on in terms of stopping players transferring to Counties where their financial prospects are better

No grants are not effected these rulings

    * There will be a financial incentive regime in place in the GAA which discourages elite players from putting themselves at risk in Club games

Whatever than the current system where they don't play with their club from may to september. These are paid on a yearly bases so be injured in a club game for a few week won't affect the grant
    * There'll be no incentive or justification to address the current poison of paid managers in the GAA ... which should be an absolute priority for the GAA

    * Some players will inevitably object because they have to play more matches than players from other Counties to reach the Championship Quarter-Finals and be awarded the money that comes with that. This will fatally undermine the structure of our Championships.

    * The first headline as follows is already on its way: "That refereeing decision cost us 'so-many-thousand' euros"
doubt it , maybe time will prove me wrong

    * We will have a scenario where County A's players get the money on the basis of attending 80% of, say, 100 sessions whilst County B's players will get it on the basis of attending 80% of, say, 50 sessions

So , these are one off grants the effort you put in is up to you

    * The scheme seriously expects people with full-time jobs to "visit schools and youth facilities" as part of their new "GAA contractual arrangements". The costs of those school and other visits will have to be picked up by someone: that someone will be the Counties.

never seen that , can you provide a link

    * The GPA has already claimed players should be entitled to a share of TV money ("HQ Warned to Share TV Money Around", Setanta, 23 October 2007). The GAA will have no moral (let alone legal) justification for opposing such a future GPA claim ... paid directly to them of course by a third party, the TV company. (No doubt it will be backed up by the threat of strike action - which in the new pay-for-play context it will actually be a strike)

Yet again with the morals . How about the GAA have made it clear they are not giving money , never will these are government grants

    * The rest of the GAA is still expected to fundraise to provide elite facilities when the users of those facilities are going to have to be paid to use them

Grants are not the same as being paid.

    * The new contractual requirements placed on players are the diametric opposite to the supposed concern with over-burdening players ... and on which we recently held a Special Congress

link please

    * The GAA will be morally and legally unable to oppose a sponsor who offers a County panel a large, performance-based, sum of money to win a title

More morals , what are you lads philosophers?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Is Misé Le Méas.

[Bud Wiser]

* There will be a financial incentive regime in place in the GAA which discourages elite players from putting themselves at risk in Club games

That rules out most club games in Laois so, U21 football championship, Camros v Castletown etc.

[his holiness nb]

The GAA ignores plenty of its own rules and basic principals so why should this be any different ?

Gnevin, I have no intentions of getting to this whole thing again, but if the above is honestly an argument for the grants, then I really do despair.

Surely correcting the other instances of rules / principles being broken is the thing to do, rather than add one more to the list 

[quidnunc]

 Posted by: AZOffaly
Insert Quote
I think we've had this debate on here about 15 times at this stage, and most of those arguments were used by the 'anti' camp. I don't think we need to get into it all again.

I agree with a lot of them, but as I said, we've been there and talked this to death.



AZ, I admire the stance you've taken on this issue up to now, but your above response is misplaced on so many levels.

How is the issue talked to death when it has NEVER been discussed at any national body of the association other than Central Council?

We were talking about opening Croke Park to soccer and rugby for 5-6 years; we've only been talking about the grants for 3 months!

Most of the scenarios outlined in this list are realistic future scenarios if the grants are paid. You are going to have row after row if they are paid, for the reasons outlined and more. Going through every issue now in debate is much more preferable than ceaseless wrangling over how much a player is "worth" when you factor in inflation etc.

The pro-grants camp have absolutely no genuine answer to the legalistic implications of these grants. And yet you say, "go ahead lads, plough on anyway".

Believe me, this "debate" hasn't even begun yet.

[quidnunc]

GNevin's response to the list of 20 reasons is one of the most pathetic efforts at argument I've ever seen.

He doesn't put up a proper argument against any of the 20 points, and resorts to sarcastic talk about anti-grants people being "moral" about cloning. In case you didn't notice (although I'm sure you did, given your remarkably telepathic line of thinking with GPA HQ), but the GPA's whole case for grants is based on the argument that it is morally wrong for GAA players not to get grants when some other sportspeople do.

Yes, GNevin, no sarcasm - the GPA has been pleading about the "plight" of inter-county players - that is the moral argument to beat the band.

The following is just unbelievable:

No grants are not effected these rulings

Of course, how could I forget, we in the GAA are not subject to European law. We live in our own little bubble and if someone takes a case based on the Bosman or Deliege cases, we can depend on a clever county secretary to get the GAA off on a technicality. The European judges wouldn't be able to handle our boys...

[Hardy]

GrandMasterFlash - is there any chance you could fix the formatting to
make this thing readable?

Thanks.

[Gnevin]

The GAA ignores plenty of its own rules and basic principals so why should this be any different ?

Gnevin, I have no intentions of getting to this whole thing again, but if the above is honestly an argument for the grants, then I really do despair.

Surely correcting the other instances of rules / principles being broken is the thing to do, rather than add one more to the list 

Its not an argument for or against just ,more of a rant against the "List" and its many many tenuous reasons why the devil sent the grants to destroy us all

[Gnevin]

GNevin's response to the list of 20 reasons is one of the most pathetic efforts at argument I've ever seen.

He doesn't put up a proper argument against any of the 20 points, and resorts to sarcastic talk about anti-grants people being "moral" about cloning. In case you didn't notice (although I'm sure you did, given your remarkably telepathic line of thinking with GPA HQ), but the GPA's whole case for grants is based on the argument that it is morally wrong for GAA players not to get grants when some other sportspeople do.

Yes, GNevin, no sarcasm - the GPA has been pleading about the "plight" of inter-county players - that is the moral argument to beat the band.

The following is just unbelievable:

No grants are not effected these rulings

Of course, how could I forget, we in the GAA are not subject to European law. We live in our own little bubble and if someone takes a case based on the Bosman or Deliege cases, we can depend on a clever county secretary to get the GAA off on a technicality. The European judges wouldn't be able to handle our boys...

Why should i bother putting in any effort when the people who compiled the list put in even less effort and are only short of saying they have feeling in their waters .

[Gnevin]

GNevin's response to the list of 20 reasons is one of the most pathetic efforts at argument I've ever seen.

He doesn't put up a proper argument against any of the 20 points, and resorts to sarcastic talk about anti-grants people being "moral" about cloning. In case you didn't notice (although I'm sure you did, given your remarkably telepathic line of thinking with GPA HQ), but the GPA's whole case for grants is based on the argument that it is morally wrong for GAA players not to get grants when some other sportspeople do.

Yes, GNevin, no sarcasm - the GPA has been pleading about the "plight" of inter-county players - that is the moral argument to beat the band.

The following is just unbelievable:

No grants are not effected these rulings

Of course, how could I forget, we in the GAA are not subject to European law. We live in our own little bubble and if someone takes a case based on the Bosman or Deliege cases, we can depend on a clever county secretary to get the GAA off on a technicality. The European judges wouldn't be able to handle our boys...

Grants are not the same are payments ,so the bosman doesn't apply

[feetofflames]

most of those arguments were used by the 'anti' camp.
I would reject that anyone who dosent want the GAA to go down the road, so damnified by members of many rugby clubs who have been literally destroyed since the era of professionalism has came in should be described as the "anti camp".  Try using Pro (but not professional) GAA camp instead.  Anyone who is "Pro" Grant I ask them to talk to any member of Dungaanon Rugby Club, AIL Division 1 winners in 2000 what they think of professionalism.  Dont propose your grants any more until you at least do your research.  Talk to any of these guys, and then come back to the "anti" brigade.

[his holiness nb]

Its not an argument for or against just ,more of a rant against the "List" and its many many tenuous reasons why the devil sent the grants to destroy us all

Dont make a point if you dont beleive it Gnevin.
The comments about the "devil sending grants to destroy us all" is typical of the sarcastic lazy attempts to mock the anti grant camp.
This is why for the main part, I've avoided this debate, too much shite talked from both sides.

[Gnevin]

most of those arguments were used by the 'anti' camp.
I would reject that anyone who dosent want the GAA to go down the road, so damnified by members of many rugby clubs who have been literally destroyed since the era of professionalism has came in should be described as the "anti camp".  Try using Pro (but not professional) GAA camp instead.  Anyone who is "Pro" Grant I ask them to talk to any member of Dungaanon Rugby Club, AIL Division 1 winners in 2000 what they think of professionalism.  Dont propose your grants any more until you at least do your research.  Talk to any of these guys, and then come back to the "anti" brigade.

GRANTS != Professionalism

[Gnevin]

Its not an argument for or against just ,more of a rant against the "List" and its many many tenuous reasons why the devil sent the grants to destroy us all

Dont make a point if you dont beleive it Gnevin.
The comments about the "devil sending grants to destroy us all" is typical of the sarcastic lazy attempts to mock the anti grant camp.
This is why for the main part, I've avoided this debate, too much shite talked from both sides.

I'm a Dub i can feckin do what i like . 

HNN I've now problem with the anti grant camp and half decent arguments but that list as i've said before i just short of i feel it in my waters