Ham-fisted CAC blunder into third-level minefield

The CAC's misinterpretation has undermined the CAO's exhaustive efforts to word a rule book that caters for all institutions

AT THE time of writing there's still no word whether the Garda College's defeat of Cork IT in
yesterday's delayed Sigerson Cup quarter-final is to be the subject of an objection. Either way this year's competition has turned into a nightmare for the organising Comhairle Ardoideachais (CAO).

The CAO have done an impressive job of trying to codify rules on eligibility in such a way that they can be applied to everyone, from the newer ITs and vocational colleges to the traditional universities. This hasn't been easy. In recent years there has been a surge in the numbers entering third-level education and whereas that is a welcome phenomenon it has created difficulties for those organising the Fitzgibbon and Sigerson Cup competitions.

The growth in the number of competing educational institutions has given the competitions higher profile and status and, now that more or less anyone who wishes to attend third level can do so, nearly all young intercounty players are likely to find an outlet in one of the CAO competitions.
Given the wide range of institutions the CAO have had to draft exhaustive rules on eligibility.

For instance, they have to cater for apprentices on block release and weigh up the nature of the academic work involved (Rule 31 is awash with references to the European Credit Transfer System and the levels of the National Framework of Qualifications). Last week's objection against the Garda College's Graham Dillon arose from one of the many subsections of the CAO's extensive Rule 31 on the definition of student eligibility.

This covers: "a recognised course leading to a degree or diploma in Policing Studies or a degree or diploma in Military studies - a student pursuing such a course shall be eligible to play in his first academic year if he commences a module before 31st January of that academic year but he shall not be eligible to play any more than two academic years while on any such course."

This was introduced because the organisation of the above courses is not on the familiar basis of three terms or two semesters and student gardaí are able to enter college at any of four stages during the academic year. It had become a bone of contention with other colleges that recruits registering as late in the year as February were playing Fitzgibbon and Sigerson.

Accordingly two years ago the CAO introduced the above rule, 31 (b) (iii), to prevent late entrants competing immediately and so to discourage any temptation to transfer players in and out of Templemore during the spring.

The restriction of Garda students to two years is at odds with the college's insistence that its courses are of three years' duration. But the rule stands at two years. Dillon's situation was mitigated in the
Garda College's view by the fact that he hadn't played during his first year of eligibility, 2005-2006 (he had started the course before the end of January), although he did play the following year as well as in the current Sigerson. Maybe that was a hard case but no more than that.

The above rule looks pretty clear in that it's about the CAO's interpretation of eligibility: in other words a player can't be eligible to play more than two years - not that he can't play for more than two years when eligible. On Sunday, however, Croke Park's Central Appeals Committee (CAC) decided otherwise. That might have been a surprise were it not for the CAC's now impressively large portfolio of daft decisions.

If they release a greatest-hits album when leaving office in a year's time the standout tracks will of course be Anthony Lynch's success in having his suspension for elbowing an opponent lifted because he was in fact guilty of attempting to elbow, despite the fact that there is no difference between the offences in terms of suspension, and Peadar Carton's double acquittal on imaginary
technicalities.

The latter drove the authorities mad and Central Council tried to take its own committee to the Disputes Resolution Authority (DRA) - an admirable sentiment but not one that was likely to succeed. Interestingly this wasn't the first time that such a move had been contemplated. After the
CAO suspension of a University of Limerick player was overturned last year by the CAC - on grounds that weren't specified but had they been would surely have been the basis of inclusion in the greatest-hits collection - the third-level governing body was so incensed that it too wanted to go to the DRA but was persuaded not to do so.

Nonetheless, the decision left such a bitter aftermath that the CAO wrote to the GAA's Management Committee to express their lack of confidence in the appeals body. The
third-level authority is currently considering seeking a ruling from Management in relation
to the latest CAC intervention.

In the current climate of sharp practices in relation to player eligibility - instances that are far more questionable than last week's Garda College case in which the player objected to was duly registered - it's a miracle that the CAO rule book has largely held things together, but for how long?

Matters have long ago reached the stage where colleges with enforced entry requirements are being placed at a disadvantage by rivals who bend admissions policy to recruit star-studded teams.

One senior figure in a traditional third-level institution has said privately he believes that such establishments will simply withdraw from the competitions in protest at the irregularities that arise.

And then while the CAO try to maintain order and enforce their necessarily Byzantine regulations, the CAC come along and effectively undermine the intended effect of
the rule book.

At this rate the competitions are in danger of becoming biathlons - partly fought on the pitch and partly in committee rooms - and it can only be a matter of time before the recently affiliated King's Inns (as Cumann Óstaí na Rí is better known) emerges as the college to watch.

[ smoran@irish-times.ie ]