DEMOCRACY UNCOVERED
Within the GAA there is a clear disconnect between those who make the rules and those who play under them
THE problem with kicking the can down the road is that eventually you meet it again. Given the importance of what is at stake at next weekend’s Special Congress, the GAA’s leadership has been particularly quiet on the issue of Championship reform. However, the problem they face is not so much how the voting will go but, rather, how the result will be explained.
Proposal B, which seeks to play the League as Championship, has gained considerable traction, most obviously from players and managers. A number of counties who see no future in remaining shackled to a provincial system also support it but that is not going to transfer into the number of votes that will be required to clear the 60 per cent required.
It will be intriguing to see how GAA president Larry McCarthy handles a result that is likely to be construed as a failure of administrators to not only legislate for a key cohort — those who play the game and who want reform — but to engage them in a debate that has been hopelessly one-sided.
There is speculation that rather than seeing it being beaten on the voting floor, there will be a move to withdraw the proposal with the promise of revisiting the issue down the road.
There is no evidence to back that up and according to Down hurling manager Ronan Sheehan, they would be well advised to avoid such a situation.
Sheehan, a Gaelic Players Association’s (GPA) representative on the GAA’s fixtures calendar review task force that drew up the two proposals that will be presented to Congress, believes such a move would accentuate the evident disconnect between those who make the rules and those forced to play under them.
‘If we turn around next week at Congress and we say we need to take it off the table and we’re going to revisit it again; the reality is this will just get buried like many other papers and reports that the GAA have had in the past and we’ll be stuck with the status quo,’ said Sheehan.
‘We all know the number of reports that have come out, been buried, then never seen the light of day again — all of which had loads of things to recommend them, some really great ideas, but they never came to fruition because there were certain bits that people didn’t like and it didn’t get the 60 per cent vote.
‘That’s my real concern. The principal objections to this at the minute are from a provincial perspective. Not wanting the provinces tampered with, that isn’t going to change no matter what proposal you come up with.
‘So we either face it down now or we’re stuck with it again for the foreseeable future.
‘We should put it to a vote. If it doesn’t pass, fair enough, but I think that is an indictment on us as an association that we are against change, and that we’re not brave enough to embrace change,’ he added.
But it is not just the fear of change, rather the reticence to engage in a real debate that is in many ways revealing a deficit of leadership. Given that Sheehan represents the one grouping that has been clear in advocating change, his intervention was hardly surprising. However, it is significant as he was the first individual from the task force to speak out in favour of one of the proposals it recommended. In truth, Proposal A is dead in the water – the equalisation of the provinces into four straight divisions of eight is friendless and only exists as a fall-back option for advocates of the provincial system. However, that said, proposals delivered by a centrally appointed committee are usually not short of advocacy from on high. Sheehan suggested yesterday that this is down to a desire to be seen as neutral, to respect the democratic wishes of the association, particularly the case with McCarthy and director general Tom Ryan. It seems rather odd, though, and it says little about the strength of democracy if it is deemed that those charged with leading it could be seen to have corrupted it by merely expressing an opinion on such a vital issue.
The leaders who preceded them have never had such a difficulty.
Ryan’s predecessor Páraic Duffy conceived and delivered the Super 8s. Former president John Horan suggested that the provincial system was not fit for purpose.
If the GAA is really so obsessed about the purity of its democracy, then surely it should have voted in favour of a Club Players Association motion some years back that all votes cast at Congress should be open and transparent to ensure mandates were being observed.
That lack of transparency is likely to be another obstacle to Championship reform, with less than a handful of counties declaring their hand so far.
‘It will be an indictment if the players and the managers, the people that actually facilitate the playing of the games, are in favour of change and yet administrators vote it down,’ said Sheehan.
‘We should know how they’re going to vote on one of the biggest votes for this association in the past 25 years. Why should they be silent?
‘They should come out and say one way or the other.
‘If they’re voting against it, they’re saying, “we’re going against the thoughts of our county manager and our county panel because we know better”.
‘If that’s what they’re going to say, fair enough but have the courage of their convictions to come out publicly rather than go in silently and put their hand up or press a button next Saturday and none of us know what way they voted or didn’t vote.’
The push for reform has once more revealed to the GAA that there is more to democracy than the counting of votes.
“We should know how they vote on big issues”