The View: Congress throws up virtual curve balls with serious consequences

Few GAA Congresses in recent times received as much attention as last Saturday's virtual event which has resulted in a few right curve balls being thrown into the games mix.

In-coming President Larry McCarthy could hardly have thought that his inauguration would take place from his hotel room in Dublin - he arrived in from New York during the week and was isolating in keeping with the lockdown requirements.

But, thanks to technology, he was able to conduct the business of Congress. And, it is perhaps also thanks to technology, that some of the decisions made by delegates will have a major impact on Tipperary. Why technology? Well, it is quite likely that had the Tipp club delegates been in a room delivering the voting mandate to Congress delegates rather than having a virtual debate, the mandate might well have been different.

Tipp voted for the rule on a maximum of 16 teams for county championships. This means that there may not be any link between the divisional championship and the county championship.

So, what's the big deal - didn't it work out OK in 2020? Yes it did, but the Covid championship was a very different reality to the usual norm. Most would have hoped that the 2021 championship would revert to the norm, and while that seems highly unlikely now, still thanks to Covid, there may be no return to what we regard as being the norm - that is: the county and divisional championships intertwining.

The deathknell is surely being prepared for the divisions as a result of that vote at Congress?

Granted Tipperary's vote would not have changed the outcome, but many clubs have expressed their dissatisfaction with the lack of consultation with the clubs - the timeframe for returning opinions was very very tight and clubs throughout the county have been very upset since. Clearly, there is a movement amongst some to have the divisional link severed from the county championships, but equally clearly there are many clubs out there who do not want this to happen. So, is it a case of the tail wagging the dog?

Are not the clubs of the county, the bedrock of the Association? That's becoming increasingly questionable.
Another question: why is Croke Park busying itself with the local county championships anyway? Do they not appreciate that a one size fits all approach does not work? How can Louth, for instance, be regarded as the same as Tipperary? They can't - it makes no sense.

When you're u20 but not actually u20??
Another new rule which makes no sense is the one which prevents an u20 player from playing with the county team, if they are already on the senior team. While there are those who say that u20 is a developmental grade and by ruling out senior players it gives others the chance to shine, it's hard to see the logic of it all. Removing those senior players certainly reduces the glamour of the championship - surely we want to see the best players playing, no matter what grade.

For weaker counties who could have a number of u20 players in their senior team, it gives them no chance of achieving success in the underage grade if their better players are prohibited from togging out with their own age group - it just weakens them further still.

All this means that u20 is no longer simply u20 - it is bastardised version of u20 and, quite frankly, it is as ridiculous a rule as you could possibly dream up.

What's next - if you happen to be a county minor, you can't play u15?

Sin Bin
The Sin Bin is in, but no black card. The culprit of cynical play will receive a yellow card and penalty will be awarded if the foul is committed inside the 21 yard line - it should be pointed out that this ruling does nothing for a cynical foul outside the 21 yard line, and there have been a number of those in recent times.

So, basically this is a rule designed to deal with fouling defenders - does any other rule in the game, discriminate in such a fashion? A forward can commit the exact same foul upfield and get away with giving away a free - that hardly seems right? Surely, a cynical foul is a cynical foul no matter where it is committed? Not now is aint!!

The joint captains rule - was that really a problem? I didn't think it was anyway, but the powers than be obviously had a difficulty with something or other - perhaps having two captains was preventing the hierarchy from being seen in the presentation photos!! Oh that's harsh!! Yes, but is it correct??

Oh no not Amazon
I know the Association is struggling financially and every possibly avenue of revenue raising must be looked at. But, signing a deal with Amazon for television rights would be just a step too far. It's bad enough that exclusive pay-per-view is being adopted for a number of games each season thanks to the SKY deal etc. but doing business with Amazon would put the games beyond a vast swathe of viewers.

The Association has a social responsibility and should remember that its foundations have been laid on the shoulders of each and every community in the country. There are more important things than cash and the Association should not alienate its people.