Croke Park remains off limits - for now

The future of attempts to modify the GAA's Rule 42 (which is used to prevent rugby and soccer being played on association grounds) remains clouded.

After Saturday's defeat - 197 to 106 - of a motion to devolve authority for the use of Croke Park to the GAA's Central Council, president Seán McCague said he wasn't sure whether the matter would be debated later this year at the special congress to consider the report of the GAA's Strategic Review Committee, one of whose recommendations includes the provision of the defeated motion.

"It can reappear if someone tables a motion to that effect," he said. "There are over 300 recommendations in the SRC report, but it could be back in the same form. But there may be a precedent that the same motion can't be put down for two congresses in the one year."

When the big question about a motion at the GAA's annual congress is whether it will get as far as the floor, expectations for its success are clearly not high. In the end, Clare persevered with their motion, but it was - as had been foreseen for a long time - a beaten docket. GAA trustee Noel Walsh proposed the motion and he was philosophical about its defeat.

"All we wanted to do was to bring the motion to Congress. Pressure was put on us to withdraw, but it was nearly passed last year and we felt delegates should get another chance. It will go, like Rule 27 (ban on "foreign games") 30 years ago and Rule 21 (ban on northern security forces) more recently."

McCague was at pains to emphasise that he had no interest in stifling debate on the issue. He pointed out that he could have ruled the motion out of order but felt it preferable to allow the discussion go ahead.

Apparently the Clare motion was open to be being struck down because of a reference to amending Rule 5 "accordingly"- an insufficiently precise formulation for a change of rule. Rule 5 states that: "The association and its resources shall be used for and dedicated soley to the above aims" (support for native pastimes and the strengthening of the national identity).

The debate itself generated a strong sense of déjà vu. Although the president said that he didn't wish to hear a litany of last year's arguments, this was unavoidable given that the motion was identical to Roscommon's 12 months previously. The result was, however, markedly different, with a drop of over 30 per cent in the numbers supporting the change.

McCague was questioned afterwards about this radical change in opinion. "I can't be certain. But the votes of the clubs within some counties were as great as 44-1 and 25-1. Obviously from what ordinary members had read and heard they weren't prepared to support change. I think a lot of counties voted without mandate last year."

This was a surprising point to make given that all the publicity after last year's vote concerned delegates who had defied mandates and opposed change rather than vice versa.

The president also came under sustained questioning about his role in influencing Roscommon's failure at last December's county convention to support a re-tabling of their motion for change. He accepted that he had been in telephone contact with Tommy Kenoy, who had proposed the Roscommon motion, but denied trying to influence him.

"I told him, as I told Noel Walsh, that it was his call," said McCague, "and I was not in any way advising him that he should withdraw his motion."

One of the immediate casualties of the vote is the status of Croke Park as a proposed venue for the joint FAI-SFA bid to stage the European Championships in 2008. Although this was never specifically offered beyond noting the motion down for discussion at the weekend's congress, Croke Park's availability was a vital part of the bid meeting an interim deadline at the end of February.

Saturday's debate showed how influential the GAA hierarchy is in determining the attitude to motions. Whereas McCague protested that he had not campaigned on the issue, he didn't need to. Unchallenged irrationality (refusal to accept the proposal's multiple locks on restricting the relaxation of the rule to the use of Croke Park) was vital in creating a mood against change both in the lead-up to congress and during the debate.

As McCague proved in dismantling Rule 21, the president's most effective role is to lead rather than merely to observe.