FAI get the Genesis ball rolling

FAI REFORM: The FAI took a significant step forward in its proposed journey of reform yesterday when there was broad acceptance of the main recommendations in the recent Genesis report at the meetings in Dundalk of the organisation's board of management and council.

The board members deferred their formal endorsement of their officers' plans for the implementation of the report's recommendations until they meet again on Friday but the organisation's main policy-making body, the council, voted by 50 to two with three abstentions to approve the proposals put before them.

"It was a good day," said FAI treasurer John Delaney. "There was a real sense of unity amongst the officers and the council meeting was one of the best, one of the most positive, that I've ever been at."

Several members of the council agreed it had been an extremely productive afternoon although most made it clear that what had been discussed were the broad principles involved rather than specifics, and those, it was felt, may be a little harder to get consensus on.

Delaney admitted, for a start, the issue of a time frame had not been discussed and the association's president, Milo Corcoran, said the process would "take as long as it takes". Both, however, maintained the major battles had all been won and the significance of the fact club and league representatives from around the country had "enthusiastically" accepted the core elements of the proposal, including the reduction of the board from 22 members to roughly 10, could not be underestimated.

On the appointment of a new chief executive Delaney said the issue had been identified as a priority by many speakers but, he observed, "we have to prepare the ground for the appointment. If you read the Genesis report," he added, "it makes it clear Brendan Menton had an impossible job as general secretary, there's no point in simply handing that same impossible job to the new chief executive."

The reason the board opted to delay their vote on the document, it was reported, was the proposals drawn up by the officers had only been completed late on Thursday night and delegates wished to have a week to consider the document before giving their approval.

But Andy O'Callaghan of St Patrick's Athletic, a member of both bodies, said the board had also been aware that without the backing of the council, which met later in the afternoon, there was little point in it pressing ahead.

"There was definitely an acceptance that change is needed but there was a feeling we have to bring everybody along, that the council has to agree and that we need to go back to the people we represent and let them know what is happening," he said. "A lot of people raised the issue of consultation but only a couple of people voiced any real reservations about what was before us."

Under the plan the main body responsible for overseeing the programme of reform will be the 10-member Implementation Steering Group. A proposal by the officers that they would take five of those 10 positions with the other five being drawn from the board met with resistance from representatives who felt the 10 selected should be the "best 10 available". A decision on the issue was among the matters deferred.

Whoever ends up on the various committees - the International Performance Group and the Football Development Group will be the others - it was agreed there must be extensive consultation with the association's grass roots as well as its staff, whose agreement for any proposed changes must be sought. There is clearly some unease among the latter group, a fact underlined when a letter was received yesterday by the officers in which clarification was sought by the association's existing management regarding their positions.

The Sports Council, meanwhile, will also be involved in the reform process, providing support to the committees as well as three members of a six-man monitoring group, the other members being senior members of the association.

Sports Council chief executive John Treacy, who will be a member of the main implementation committee, said he was pleased with the way the two meetings had gone.

"I got the strong impression from everything I saw today that there is a strong will to move on and build for the future." He added, however, that the council would withdraw from the process if it was not seen to be moving forward.