Smaller panels 'anti-player'

Gaelic Games NewsAs expected, the reduction in county panels from 30 to 24 players declared at the weekend's GAA Congress has been greeted with notable displeasure outside administration circles.

It had already been feared by county managers and yesterday the Gaelic Players' Association (GPA) described the move as "logistically, morally and culturally" a body blow for Gaelic games at intercounty level.

Somewhat surprisingly, the motion was passed unanimously. Officials from Armagh and Kilkenny were among the few to publicly oppose the move, which has reversed the decision of just two years ago, when the number was increased from 24 to 30.

Yesterday Galway football manager John O'Mahony described it as "a major retrograde step" which was essentially financially motivated.

"I just see the whole thing as anti-player," he said. "One of the reasons the GAA has been so successful in recent years is because of the huge commitment put in by players and teams around the country. Despite the income that they help bring in they are brought back to this situation."

The GPA also put the decision down to financial reasons, as the association's chief executive, Dessie Farrell, explained: "Just weeks after the introduction of significant price hikes for tickets was specifically attributed to the increasing cost of squad preparation, the GAA has chosen to blatantly penalise players.

"And in an era of unprecedented commercial opportunity and revenue within Gaelic games, this cost-cutting policy can only be construed as ill-conceived and discriminatory against fringe players. In the mindset of players and managers, these squad members contribute as much to the team unit and its success as any individual."

One of the reasons presented for the move was that it would free up an additional six players for club duty on days they weren't needed for county purposes. Yet it was clear from most of the opinions at Congress that the financial drain entailed in county panels of 30 had already become difficult to maintain.

"Well, the demands and rules of the modern game are such that injuries and suspensions place a constant strain on a squad's resources," added Farrell. "This motion can only exacerbate the challenges faced by managers in this regard and we would anticipate their widespread support for player opinion on the matter.

"And it would be naive of the GAA to assume that this would achieve anything other than a widening of the gulf between players and administrators."

Worse still, said Farrell, was that it would take next year's Congress before any moves could be made to re-address the issue. The new ruling doesn't come into effect until next January 1st.

Yet for O'Mahony, it was clear that such a reduction would be next to impossible to enforce.

"Just to give you an example," he said, "in the last week we've had only 22 of our panel of 30 at training because of injuries. So if we're supposed to be working off a panel of 24, then we'd have 14 or 15 available. So it just doesn't make sense to me.

"But most of all this is a player issue. You cannot ask players in the modern game to make the commitment they are now giving and then on big-match days tell them they are not part of the panel. That's just not acceptable.

"And the argument about clearing up more players for club duty just doesn't stand up. When you're talking about the senior championship the counties involved won't be playing club matches anyway. It also shows up the gulf between the administration and playing side of the game, and that's a pity. Particularly from managers' point of view, who are caught in the middle.

"No matter what the county is, we're trying to be successful by uniting the administration side with the playing side. And it's anti-county board because it's likely now that a team will just be fined for having the extra players."

Coincidentally, O'Mahony was one of several county managers who earlier this year sat down with GAA president Seán Kelly and director general Liam Mulvihill - at their invitation - where these views were put strongly by all the managers. Tommy Lyons and Mick O'Dwyer from football and Conor Hayes and Ken Hogan from hurling were among the others who attended.

"I would have thought that it was of particular importance at the moment to bring together the GAA and whatever players' voice is there," added O'Mahony. "This is going to create a bigger gulf. Obviously, by going up and down the country you are talking to other managers a lot of the time and this is the one thing we all seem to agree on."

As for what happens next, Farrell said the issue was sure to get a considerable airing at the GPA a.g.m., which is set to take place in Tullamore this weekend.

In the meantime the GAA has still to finalise its own plans to re-establish player representation of some sort. According to Farrell, those plans still seem a long way off: "We met with Seán Kelly the week before last, but we still haven't established anything concrete on where the future relationship might stand.

"So I just don't know where he stands on his own players' group. But our stance hasn't changed, in that we wouldn't be participating in ballots and elections and the like. We have requested that they put a proposal to us, that we'd run it by our membership, and make some decision on it on a democratic basis. But that doesn't seem to be forthcoming as yet."