As the dust settles on the events of last weekend, the glorious coalition of media and political opinion which lobbied so earnestly for GAA movement on Rule 21 might like to have a tilt at a few other Irish sporting windmills. Now that the country's largest sporting movement is sanctified and purified to the satisfaction of all the many interested parties, attention can turn to righting a few more of the blemishes on sport on this island.

The status of women in the country's golf clubs and the racist undertones which are becoming part of the fabric of football culture have not been addressed because it would seem that there is currently no political will to face up to either of these issues. And if the Rule 21 debate has shown anything, it is that change is relentlessly driven and manipulated by those same opinion-forming political movers and shakers.

Just in case they lose any enthusiasm for the wider job in hand, here are a few suggestions as to where the combined forces of national, right-thinking opinion might line up next.

1 For too long, too many people have been too quiet about Rule 2(1) of ice-hockey's official rule book. This states quite unequivocally that only those wearing garish, over-sized replica Belfast Giants shirts are allowed to appear in any television footage of games from the Odyssey Arena. This regulation is steeped in the tradition of the sport and appears to have been inspired by the notion that every effort should be made to exaggerate and magnify the level of support ice hockey enjoys.

In an eerie echo of the nefarious way the GAA used to police the Ban many years ago, ice-hockey enforcers are dotted through the crowd at the Odyssey. Dressed in black turtle-neck sweaters and trousers, they blend into the background close to all television points and move quickly if anyone not dressed in the regulation gear appears in shot. Offenders are offered the opportunity to buy a replica shirt there and then and, if they decline, are asked to move out of sight. The time has come for action because such blatant manipulation of opinion cheapens all of us.

2 Rule 21 (1) of rugby's official guide is no less shocking. This stipulates that anyone who aspires to play the game at either club or international level must first prove their ability to deliver an impassioned, chest-thumping speech extolling the virtues of all or most of the following: prep school, boarding school, cold showers, polo shirts, Munster pride, cashmere sweaters, diplomas in business studies, men-only dinners, four-wheel drives, international weekends in Edinburgh and drinking games.

Furthermore, this speech must be prepared and ready at all times. Particular occasions when unsuspecting players may be called upon to perform include the dressing-room before a game and the club bar 11 or 12 hours later. A sub-section of this invidious rule extends its tentacles to supporters and hangers-on, with the added requirement that they can extol the virtues of gin and tonic and the free market and rail against troublemakers in trade unions.

We say that this burden is too much for one group of sportsmen to be expected to carry, regardless of their elevated station in life.

3 Lurking at Rule 211 of the founding charter of the body that governs Irish men's hockey is a little known stipulation with a big impact. The net effect is to exclude anyone who has engaged in a sporting activity from which they derived even the smallest amount of excitement. The spurious justification is that such people will not then be disappointed when they endure a sporting career made up entirely of seemingly endless, incident-free games of hockey.

Devotees of downhill skiing, scuba diving, mountain biking, even draughts, should not be deprived the opportunity to sample hockey's fine fare. As the GAA has been told repeatedly over the past month, removing an archaic prohibition and throwing open the floodgates would be a tremendous display of strength and self-confidence. It matters little if it makes next to no difference in practical terms to any facet of the organisation. Bow to the pressure, men of hockey.

4 Road bowls is not a sport where one would expect to find prejudice, but scratch the surface and there it is at number 2111 of the rules. Mindful of the pernicious influence of other games popular in foreign countries, the founding fathers of road bowls made it a stipulation that anyone who has had contact with the ancient Scottish sport of curling cannot be a member of their association.

This is the obvious explanation as to why the much-anticipated compromise rules game encompassing all the best aspects of both sports has never been allowed to flourish. Such intransigence has proven to be world sport's loss but it is never too late to make a big gesture.

5 Northern Ireland football is the last place one would normally hunt around in for any suggestions of tension, bias or division but, in keeping with modern trends, it too has its own particular problems with its own Rule 21 (paragraph 21). Again this is framed in broad terms but the main thrust is directed towards mothers or fathers and their children intending to go along to international matches at Windsor Park.

Within the provisions of the rule they are told in no uncertain terms that may not harbour any expectations that the occasion might be one which is suitable for young families or which will be devoid of any sectarian or racial abuse. Anyone who persists with such a fanciful notion is not welcome at the games for fear they will be chronically disappointed by what unfolds in front of them and demand a refund.

The stock response for any opposition to this provision is citing of the World Cup qualifier against the Republic in November 1993 and Neil Lennon's most recent international appearances as examples of "genuine, authentic and realistically gritty celebrations of all that is good about the local game." There is no answer to that cleverly thought-out response, so this is one rule which seems destined to remain on the football statutes.

Will we see action on all or any of these before the GAA finds itself in the eye of another storm of disapproval centred around Rule 42, the banning of "foreign games" on grounds controlled by the association? Don't hold your breath.