Vaughan saga seems finally resolved

GAELIC GAMES: One of the most protracted eligibility cases in GAA history, that of Kilmacud Crokes Mark Vaughan, appeared to reach a conclusion on Wednesday night when the disputes resolution authority endorsed their own decision from May 20th to allow the forward play in the Dublin championship against St Brigid's.

The unanimous decision was reached after a three-man committee comprising of barrister Garrett Simons (chairman), solicitor Matt Shaw and Dr Mick Loftus conferred for 20 minutes after hearing submissions from all relevant parties.

It therefore rejected the St Brigid's appeal, which had been upheld by the Leinster Council and the Central Appeals Committee, and Crokes now progress to the next round of the championship against Parnells. The Dublin county board are expected to confirm the fixture for the middle of next week.

The St Brigid's executive and players met late last night to decide whether it would be feasible to appeal to the High Court. The club released a statement yesterday questioning the DRA's ability to give due credence to GAA rules.

"Needless to say, St Brigid's are very disappointed with the decision of the DRA which seems to fly in the face of a vast majority of GAA peoples perception and interpretation of rules governing the Dublin county and Leinster club championships.

"It would appear that the DRA, a body created by the GAA to reduce involvement with the courts, focused more on rules of arbitration than on rules of the association, despite the DRA code stating that each are of equal importance."

Vaughan was sent off in the Leinster club championship semi-final defeat to Portlaoise on November 21st last year but the DRA ruled he was eligible for the Dublin championship despite an expected mandatory one-match ban. The decision sparked an objection from St Brigid's after Crokes beat them by a single point on May 20th. Vaughan kicked 0-6 on the night in a man-of-the-match performance.

"It was a fair hearing and the unanimous decision ensures the authority of the DRA has been re-established," said Kilmacud Crokes spokesman Martin Glynn. "It proves no authority within the GAA is above the rules." A full, written explanation will not be available from the DRA for another two weeks. DRA secretary Liam Keane confirmed the decision alone was promptly released so the Dublin championship would not be delayed.

"It is purely a logistical matter," he said. "Normally it is held off for a week or two in order to give a full and reasoned decision. The committee had to deal with a number of detailed, written, submissions where precedents were quoted on both GAA rulings and legal points. Knowing the three men involved I would expect it to be produced within the two weeks."

This still sparked criticism from Leinster Council secretary, Liam O'Neill, who felt the DRA were incorrect in their final stance.

"It doesn't inspire confidence that a decision which took 20 minutes to arrive at will now take two weeks to be produced in full," said O'Neill. "Apparently we have to accept this but it was an exercise in futility as they ruled they couldn't overturn their own previous decision. What was the point in having the hearing at all?"

The Leinster Council agreed with the St Brigid's objection due to a motion past at Congress in 1996, although not recorded in the GAA's Official Guide, and duly disqualified Crokes from the championship.

The 1996 motion reads: "Add to Rule 110: The provincial and All-Ireland championship shall be considered as an extension of the county senior championships and playing eligibility shall be in accordance with Rule 32. Rule affected - Rule 32."

"We have now learned that if the DRA make a flawed decision it can only be overturned by application to the High Court," continued O'Neill. "It is ironic that the process set up to keep people out of the High Courts can only be vindicated by a trip to the High Court. This has noting to do with GAA rules at all and we find ourselves in a different position than we initially thought we were a part of. I would not engage in this whole process lightly again."