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

[quidnunc]

The judge did not say "regardless of who paid it".

My interpretation is that the fact it was the judo federation paying it was very important.

I was paraphrasing the judge, but the point still holds true.

A legal person, having analysed the judge's decision, concluded that "it does not matter whether the players receive the grant directly from the federation or from elsewhere; what matters is that the grants are paid to them consistently over a period of time and are dependent on their participation in the sport. The hullabaloo over whether it is the GAA or the Sports Council that pays the grant would then be irrelevant. Paying a grant for participating in a sport establishes an economic link under EU law."

The argument that it matters who pays is silly for another reason. The GAA would be distributing the money. It would be a party to and partner of the agreement; it would be aiding and abetting. Someone who is laundering money can't just say, "It's not money, I'm just distributing it and I have no responsibility for it."

And even in the unlikely event of you being right, what's the worst thing that can happen?

Player transfers can only happen if they are allowed under GAA rules. If young brilliant Clare footballer wants to play for Kerry, but Kerry won't take him because he doesnt qualify, there is nothing he can do - Bosman or no Bosman. Only if the Kerry (or other) county boards change their rules or policies on accepting outsiders would there be any chance of unrestricted inter county transfers.

You just don't understand this, do you? It is blatantly obvious how a Clare footballer could take a case about unfair restriction of his attempts to join Kerry:
1. Kerry reach the last 12 of the football championship practically every year without fail. Therefore the Kerry players would be entitled to the higher rate of grant. Clare footballers have not reached the last 12 in a decade and are unlikely to do so most years. Therefore the Clare footballers would get the lower rate of grant.
In any given year, the Clare footballer can take a case to the ECJ, on the precedent of the Deliege case, to say that the GAA's rules on transfers, COMBINED WITH the grants scheme, is an unfair restriction of his potential to maximise his earnings accruing from football. He would argue that he is discriminated against because of his county of birth, over which he has no control.
The ECJ would inevitably - as the vast majority of legal decisions are based on precedent - that the inter-county footballer was a "non-amateur" and patently engaged in an "economic activity", and that the GAA rules put unfair restrictions on his economic movement. He would win huge compensation, and it would mean that as long as the grants were paid, any player should have freedom of movement by transfer.

The most profound effect of this would probably be that good club players from, say Kerry, could demand transfers to a weaker football county, such as Clare, in the hope of getting onto the Clare county team. They would argue that it is unfair discrimination to say that they cannot go to Clare in the hope of earning money from playing football, when they were born in a county where there is greater competition. And they would inevitably win their cases. So all established transfer rules would be dead letters. So there's a lot of scope for a businessman, in Denis O'Brien style, to step in and say,"I want to act as a benefactor for Clare football; can we get 20 good players up from Kerry?"

It all comes back to the one thing, that many can't get into their heads. No matter what the players may want, there is no chance of professional GAA unless and until GAA officialdom brings it in.

To reiterate or synopsise my argument above, the GAA's laws on transfers are automatically superseded by European law when there is a proven ecoonomic activity and incentive. You can't seem to get your head around this.

And by the way, in every other sport that became professional, the professionalism actually happened (a) against the stated wishes of the governing body; or (b) the governing body tried to bring it in in a controlled way, but soon found out that it was a beat that could not be tamed or kept in subjection.

[Gnevin]

Why doesn't the Bosman apply to International teams?

[quidnunc]

Why doesn't the Bosman apply to International teams?

Most people competing for international teams would have too much pride in their own country to seek a transfer to another country, let alone force a legal case to get that transfer. Plus international teams play irregularly, which means that they are engaged with clubs as their primary source of income, and they may have lost their international place from season to the next.

But Bosman would almost certainly apply if it were put to the test. Hence Kenyan athletes are running for countries like Denmark and Qatar and it is allowed, although many people are unhappy about it. 

[behind the wire]

do international footballers get paid for being on international duty?

[quidnunc]

do international footballers get paid for being on international duty?

International soccer players do anyway.

[feetofflames]

I have no doubt that there are those in our midst who are itching to be the first to bosmanise the GAA.

[Hound]

Why doesn't the Bosman apply to International teams?

Most people competing for international teams would have too much pride in their own country to seek a transfer to another country, let alone force a legal case to get that transfer. Plus international teams play irregularly, which means that they are engaged with clubs as their primary source of income, and they may have lost their international place from season to the next.

But Bosman would almost certainly apply if it were put to the test. Hence Kenyan athletes are running for countries like Denmark and Qatar and it is allowed, although many people are unhappy about it. 

You write a good story quidnunc - but thats all it is - a story.

No way can the EU or anyone else impose new rules on the GAA regarding who can play for what county. The only time we might get into trouble is if some counties try and push out their boundaries - even then I don't see individual counties ever challenging the GAA rules - but if they do its them at fault, not the players.

The whole international soccer comparison proves irrefutably that your arguments are invalid.

And the Kenyan athletes have absolutely nothing to do with Bosman or the EU!!! Thats just down to nationality rules in the relevant countries.

[quidnunc]

No way can the EU or anyone else impose new rules on the GAA regarding who can play for what county. The only time we might get into trouble is if some counties try and push out their boundaries - even then I don't see individual counties ever challenging the GAA rules - but if they do its them at fault, not the players.

There are none so blind... In fact, you are deliberately twisting what is clearly obvious.

It wouldn't be about "individual counties ever challenging the GAA rules" or the EU imposing "new rules on the GAA regarding who can play for what county".

It would be about a player challenging the rules and the EU saying that the GAA, being to a party to a grants system constituting "economic activity", has rules of transfer that are unfairly restrictive for its participants. If Rory O'Connell or Derry Foley or Na Fianna are prepared to go to the courts over suspensions/disqualifications, sure as hell players are going to go to court to enable themselves to earn more money.

I don't recall anyone saying the EU would impose rules on who could play for any county. But in a Deliege/Bosman-type decision, as long as grants were paid, ANY GAA player could assert his legal right to play for ANY county and earn as much as his potential will allow.

The whole international soccer comparison proves irrefutably that your arguments are invalid.

How exactly is that then? An Irish international soccer player earns nearly all of his income from club duty. He earns relatively little from internatonal duty, infrequent as it is. It is not worth his while, for the money or his reputation, to seek to play for another country, even though in many circumstances he could.

And the Kenyan athletes have absolutely nothing to do with Bosman or the EU!!! Thats just down to nationality rules in the relevant countries.

I didn't intend it to be an exact comparison. It was just the first example that I thought of. But it is still relevant, because it shows that sportspeople can represent a country other than their own in international competition, even if their qualification grounds are tenuous and money is obviously their primary motive. Once participation in any sport is legally established as a profitable enterprise, the ordinary rules of territorial jurisdiction and the governing body's will/ability to enforce them, shrink to insignificance.

[Malone Aristocrat]

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?

[quidnunc]

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.

[Uladh]

As a total layman, i cannot see how that ruling can be applied to the situation that confronts us?

[his holiness nb]

Whatever about who pays it, blocking a transfer from a big county where the guy doesnt get near the team, to a small one where he will definately play, is affecting the players "earnings", and as such, he would surely have a case to get the courts involved?

I'm not going to quote previous cases, as this is a unique situation, but bosmas was unique at the time.
Just because it hasnt happened before doesnt mean it wont.

[take_yer_points]

Re European Laws vs Association rules...

What happened the rule in the English Premier League some years back? I can't remember exactly what happened but I think it might be relevant here. There was a rule about the number of foreign players that could play in a team and this has since been done away with - because it was going against European Law as far as I know. There's been talk about this rule being reintroduced but its been said that it will never happen again because European Law won't alllow it.

I'm not using this as an example of how a player could transfer from team to team, but more as an example of how the GAA would have to alter their rules to ensure they meet any relevant European Laws - just like the Premier League had to do away with their rule restricting the number of foreign players in each team's starting 11.

This could result in players moving freely between teams and using European Laws to do it and the GAA's rules would not stand up against this. If the GAA did try to prevent this free movement from county to county and thus restricting someone's potential earnings, then surely they could be leaving themselves open to court cases and possible compensation as quidnunc has suggested.

[zoyler]

We now have the ludicrus position where players in London & New York are now expectiung to get 'their grant monies' as well.  So now Irish taxpayers will be paying grants to UK taxpayers as well as players in New York who may be illegal immigrants.   The whole thing is crazy,

[deiseach]

Hound's view seem to be that the GAA can create any rules it likes as to what the eligibility rules are for playing for a club / county and there is nowt the courts can do about it. To illustrate how misguided this position is, look at the case of Maros Kolpak and the impact on English cricket. Kolpak was (still is?) a Slovakian handball player in the German leagues. He was released by his club due to quotas and he took his case to the European Court of Justice, which found in his favour on the basis that if you meet the work permit criteria, it would be discriminatory to prevent you playing on the basis of nationality quotas. The kicker for English cricket was that seeing as Britain has trading relationships with its former colonies, people from those colonies could not be prevented from plying their trade in England as professional cricketers by means of quotas.

Now, I realise this has little direct relevance to the GAA. But the important point for us is what happened when the Englandandwales Cricket Board tried to implement rules to regulate the access of foreigners to the the county game. They stated that to play county cricket, you could not have played international cricket for 12 months previously. Yet when Yorkshire signed Jacques Rudolph in 2007, the ECB admitted that they could not prevent Rudolph from playing for Yorkshire because they knew that if Yorkshire and / or Rudolph took the matter to court, the ECB would be taken to the cleaners. They were reduced to tut-tutting at people doing things that may "not be in the best interests of cricket in England and Wales generally". If the ECB can't get their eighteen counties to act in "best interests" of the game, what chance that the GAA will be able to it's thirty-two plus counties to act in a collective (i.e. cartel-like) manner?