Ireland have no right to take moral high ground

Seán Moran On Gaelic GamesAnd lo it looms into sight through the seasonal mists: the International Rules series, all of the GAA's ills made corporeal. The one service the series indisputably does is to highlight the tendency within the association to bury heads in the sand and blame external influence for internal woes.

A year ago and the reaction to the series in Australia was overwhelmingly concentrated on the violent scenes that erupted in the second Test. Maybe through the filter of the television coverage that beamed the match back home there was something starker and more menacing about it but for many of us present in the Telstra Dome the dangerous fouls that had disfigured the evening were an unhappy sideshow to a main stage on which Ireland had been outclassed.

That was obviously before word from home and radio stations had explained to us that the nation was in uproar. It was interesting to see in last weekend's Sunday Times, Michael Foley's video analysis of the second Test that indicated a number of less publicised fouls by Ireland players that had acted as provocation. This doesn't justify retaliation, especially delivered with the random viciousness of its execution at times last year, but it points up one central fact of the international game: the two countries and their sets of players find different things insupportable.

I remember one experienced colleague a long time ago noting with disapproval the tendency of certain Dublin players to head butt: "Country fellas hate that," he said. Boxing and kicking were all right but using the head was an ethical breach.

Similarly Australians find the practice of "shirt fronting" (full frontal challenges) acceptable compared to the Irish habit of pulling or kicking when the ball's on the ground or the slyer tricks of defensive black arts as practised here. This creates a volatile margin in which players, meaning to disrupt or hassle opponents, end up outraging them to flashpoint. This doesn't happen as much when the match is tightly contested as teams concentrate on the play. That wasn't the case last year and the devil found work for idle hands but it wasn't a one-way street.

Finding common definitions of "unacceptable" is sometimes difficult and the steps taken to punish breaches of rule more stringently are one way of dealing with the issue because having to play a man short offends the sense of the collective that is shared in all team sports.

Physical confrontation is just one aspect of the disciplinary issue. Another is illustrated by a rule Ireland frequently failed to observe last year, that after a free is given the ball must be returned directly to the player awarded the free. In Gaelic games the common practice is to fire the ball away in any direction after conceding a free. The rule is a good one, insisting on sporting behaviour but either through instinct or ignorance Irish players found it hard to obey.

Listening to the tumult of a year ago, a man from Mars (or, less ambitiously, anywhere else outside of Ireland) would have assumed discipline was somehow a prized virtue within the GAA rather than an area that causes more trouble and discredit to the association than virtually anything else. Implicit in the threat to unplug the series should there be further mayhem this year is the belief the Australians are more violent and therefore to blame. A glance at the disciplinary environment within the GAA would indicate that's quite unlikely.

Even for advocates of the game there's no point in denying two things have the capacity to derail the project: continuing violent indiscipline and a lack of competitiveness. The latter is the more pressing consideration, as the signs are the Australians have mastered the round ball.

This series will gauge how much of a response Ireland can muster but if another thrashing comes to pass the game would be as good as dead just short of its 10th year. Which would be a pity. Played at its best, it's faster and more exhilarating than either of its constituent codes and takes Gaelic football back to its roots as a transfer game in which the ball was moved out of contact situations rather than carried into them.

The original idea behind the game was to recognise the cultural similarities of the two sports and create an international outlet for players. With very few exceptions players from both countries have been keen to test themselves on the international stage. Although the Australians tend to limit their appearances to a couple of series - and there is evidence Irish players have taken a similar view - there's no disputing the best have taken up the challenge since the series resumed in 1998. The Brownlow medallists (AFL Player of the Year) for the past 10 years have all played International Rules.

There's no arguing with the public response. It's alleged low pricing and generous allocation feeds the capacity attendances but papering the house can hardly explain cumulative attendances of over 100,000 per series.

One major irritant in the past few years has been the recruitment of Gaelic games players by Australian Rules clubs. The GAA have managed to agree restrictions on this practice with the AFL but there are a couple of points worth bearing in mind. Were the series to lapse the clubs would continue to scout Irish players and the scouting would be done by GAA people. The hostility to this is dog in the manger stuff anyway. Gaelic games can't offer players a full-time sports career but if a tiny few get the opportunity and that's what they want to do isn't that a good thing?

Recent focusing on the difficulties facing club schedules has seen the series dragged into the debate. Blaming events that were fixed in the schedules about nine months ago for the continuing inability of county boards to organise championships that start in May and are still running in November is, to be euphemistic, far-fetched. In the meantime it's - literally - all to play for. ... smoran@irish-times.ie