|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 19:46:45 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 8, 2016 19:46:45 GMT
Keeping expenses under control a major task, admits Éamonn Fitzmaurice
Tuesday, November 08, 2016
By Eoghan Cormican
Sports Reporter
Curtailing the spend on inter-county teams represents a “huge challenge” within the GAA, according to Kerry manager Éamonn Fitzmaurice.
The Kerry football boss believes it is possible to achieve significant improvements without “having to spend the world” and claimed the amount of money being pumped into his Kerry team is “negligible” by comparison with other counties.
Team expenses in Kerry last year, across both codes and all grades from minor upwards, ran to €998,495, a 3% rise on the 2014 total. Included in that were the physiotherapy and medical services which reached €194,292, an 18% hike by comparison with the previous year’s spend. The costs associated with the various Kingdom teams put the county sixth overall, behind Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick, and Tipperary, all of whom broke the €1m mark.
“With regard to the costs, it is a huge challenge,” Fitzmaurice said at last Friday’s Club Limerick business breakfast.
“In Kerry, I’d be big into using what we need. Outside of the medical team in our management, everyone else is voluntary.
“The cost of the backroom team and management is negligible by comparison with other counties.
“You are always looking to improve and strive to be better. But I think you can do that without having to spend the world. Sometimes, when a fella names a price, most fellas would think the higher the price, the better the person. It doesn’t always equate that way.”
He continued: “We try to put the money into things for the players. Having the nutrition right, having the gyms right. When I took over in 2012, I looked at things I felt we could improve on. When you are looking for marginal gains, one of the things we did was bring in a full-time nutritionist. Kevin Beasley from Listowel came on board. He is a volunteer, which is refreshing in the modern climate when every fella wants his few quid. He has made a huge difference and a huge impact on how we prepare for games in terms of nutrition pre-game, post-game, post-training and what they eat away from the training.”
The increasing spend on club teams, added Fitzmaurice, mustn’t go unchecked. “The amount of expertise that players are demanding at club level is serious. There is so much information and knowledge out there through social media. If you want to beat a team, you think you have to have all this stuff. I don’t think everything is necessary. I think you have to get what is right for your team and what the proper fit for your team is, be it a club team, a county team or whatever.”
On the black card, the 2014 All-Ireland winning manager voiced his support for the retention of the controversial third card, although he was adamant that referees must do a better job with regard to its implementation.
“It is a good rule if it is enforced properly. I’d probably be in the minority in saying that. I don’t think it is enforced correctly. There is no consistency. There is no consistency from referees refereeing from game to game. I see a lot of club games in Kerry and the black card is rarely shown. The one big positive of the black card is that going back a couple of years to 2012/13, a huge problem in the game was checking of players off the ball. If you were trying to play a one-two, be it either with the hand or foot, checking was a huge part of the game in stopping the runner. That is gone from the game because referees tend to spot it and it is an automatic black card. If the rule is enforced as it should be, it is a good rule. But I think there is too much inconsistency in it so they probably have to look at it.”
|
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 21:27:04 GMT
Post by thebluepanther on Nov 8, 2016 21:27:04 GMT
Nicely just under the million. Id say a few adjustments were made to get to that.
|
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 21:38:22 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 8, 2016 21:38:22 GMT
Team expenses of a million across both codes and all grades from minor upwards. The Christy Ring would have cost a bit. That includes overnight hotels for QF and SF presumably.
Panther....Whats the figure for Dublin for team expenses.
|
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 21:45:23 GMT
Post by thebluepanther on Nov 8, 2016 21:45:23 GMT
Team expenses of a million across both codes and all grades from minor upwards. The Christy Ring would have cost a bit. That includes overnight hotels for QF and SF presumably. Panther....Whats the figure for Dublin for team expenses. Very gullible Mick to believe those numbers . Definetly higher . A bit like when when an attendance is announced at a game , ye know a lot of kids got in for free and the actual figure is a lot higher. |
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 21:49:18 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 8, 2016 21:49:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 21:50:33 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 8, 2016 21:50:33 GMT
Team expenses of a million across both codes and all grades from minor upwards. The Christy Ring would have cost a bit. That includes overnight hotels for QF and SF presumably. Panther....Whats the figure for Dublin for team expenses. Very gullible Mick to believe those numbers . Definetly higher . A bit like when when an attendance is announced at a game , ye know a lot of kids got in for free and the actual figure is a lot higher. I have no idea if the figures are right or not. What makes you think they are wrong |
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 22:07:40 GMT
Post by kerrygold on Nov 8, 2016 22:07:40 GMT
Team expenses of a million across both codes and all grades from minor upwards. The Christy Ring would have cost a bit. That includes overnight hotels for QF and SF presumably. Panther....Whats the figure for Dublin for team expenses. Very gullible Mick to believe those numbers . Definetly higher . A bit like when when an attendance is announced at a game , ye know a lot of kids got in for free and the actual figure is a lot higher. Why would the KCB falsify their accounts? |
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 23:12:18 GMT
Post by thebluepanther on Nov 8, 2016 23:12:18 GMT
Very gullible Mick to believe those numbers . Definetly higher . A bit like when when an attendance is announced at a game , ye know a lot of kids got in for free and the actual figure is a lot higher. Why would the KCB falsify their accounts? Seriously . . If I remember they got in a spot of bother over Payments made to Jack o Connor in 2007. Off course it was all retracted and Jack admitted he only got a holiday. |
|
|
|
Money
Nov 8, 2016 23:14:58 GMT
Post by MrRasherstoyou on Nov 8, 2016 23:14:58 GMT
Very gullible Mick to believe those numbers . Definetly higher . A bit like when when an attendance is announced at a game , ye know a lot of kids got in for free and the actual figure is a lot higher. Why would the KCB falsify their accounts? You must admit, they've a little bit of a history of bendixing the rules................. |
|
|
|
Money
Nov 12, 2016 9:28:30 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 12, 2016 9:28:30 GMT
Review of GAA funds distribution won’t target Dublin
Emphasis will be placed on providing more effective support for struggling counties
Fri, Nov 11, 2016, 01:00
Seán Moran
The GAA body established to review discretionary expenditure is expected to report before Christmas. It was set up within the last year amidst – but independent of – concerns about the amount of games development funding Dublin was receiving.
In his annual report this year director general Páraic Duffy made reference to “the efforts of National Financial Management Committee to try to address, in so far as it is possible, the disparity that exists in resources and fundraising capacity among counties”.
Dublin’s games development grant of €1.46 million constituted 47 per cent of the total grants in this category disbursed to all the counties in Ireland.
At the time the GAA’s finance director Tom Ryan, a member of the committee, denied that Dublin would be the focus, pointing out that the body had already been set up.
“There is a small group that has been constituted,” he said, “to look specifically, not at Dublin – it would be unfair to characterise it as Dublin – but just to look at the total amount that we generate in a year and if you think in terms of discretionary spend, maybe €25-30 million and our job is to look at how we can actually distribute that in the most equitable way.”
There is no doubt, however, that the proportion earmarked for Dublin has caused controversy.
Furthermore in 2005 the Irish Sports Council (ISC) agreed to put €1 million a year into the county to develop participation in Gaelic games. This was used to appoint games promotion officers (GPOs) to clubs in order that they could assist with training and organisation as well as devising and implementing out-reach programmes to local schools.
It wasn’t free to everyone and the funding basis is 50:50 between the participating clubs and the county board, which accesses the money through Croke Park, as that was how it was decided to distribute the ISC funding.
ADVERTISEMENT
The GAA is caught between the need to maintain development programmes in the country’s main population centre and anxieties elsewhere about the growing strength on the field of Dublin’s footballers who have won four of the last six All-Irelands.
Speaking on Thursday, Ryan explained that the report had not yet been completed but that it would not seek to target Dublin.
“It’s not about chopping what Dublin have. The two extremes are often cited as Dublin and Leitrim but Dublin can say it costs a fortune to run what we run and Leitrim can correspondingly argue we have very few resources to run what we’re trying to run. Both arguments have merit.
“One thing worth considering is that the investment that has gone into Dublin has worked in terms of spreading the games. There have been other investments elsewhere – albeit not on the same scale – that haven’t worked.
“I also think if people were to take a longer-term view and look back over a number of years they would see that it’s maybe not as skewed as people might perceive. Things have been done in other areas of the country – albeit largely capital projects rather than coaching.”
He also said that one of the challenges has been to find a fair way of distributing funds that takes into account population but also the needs of smaller units.
“The old model is that you divide everything by 32 and the other extreme is to use some form of proportion. If so, what proportion do you use: membership, population or number of clubs? For any one of those there is a counter argument.
‘Augmented grant’
“In previous years there used to be an augmented grant for what used to be called weaker counties but we got rid of it because every year there used to be cases made for counties you wouldn’t believe to have themselves classified as weaker counties so that they could avail of it.”
Ryan said that the changes to the funding model would most likely be “nuanced” and fluid, as the feeling is that rigidly structured grants are inefficient.
“Rather than tie ourselves down to any particular formula we’re going to look at a standard amount that is available to everybody and we’re going to look at augmenting that for a certain number of counties but they won’t be set in stone year on year. It will depend on the circumstances the counties find themselves in either in terms of day-to-day operations or projects they may have in hand.
“We’re also going to look at the capital projects in various counties and make them eligible for a higher degree of funding than other counties. I’m loth simply to pump money into counties because, what do you get?
“We might try and provide more resources for counties both in the realms of looking after teams as well as the administrative and commercial side of things so that counties don’t have to spend money on things that we can provide for them. We would try and set up the facilities for this and see what services counties want.”
He concluded by defending the distribution system as it has been operating but accepting that it needs to be more responsive.
“What we would like going forward is something that’s a bit more agile. The flexibility to focus on specific projects for a certain period of time – two, three, five years – with specific outcomes to be measured. I would hate to think what we’re doing is terrible inequitable and I don’t think it is even if it may not be perfect.”
|
|
|
|
Money
Nov 12, 2016 12:10:42 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Nov 12, 2016 12:10:42 GMT
well this bit pretty much clarifies the funding issue. The AIG sponsorship dwafts all other sponsorship too.
Dublin’s games development grant of €1.46 million constituted 47 per cent of the total grants in this category disbursed to all the counties in Ireland.
Furthermore in 2005 the Irish Sports Council (ISC) agreed to put €1 million a year into the county to develop participation in Gaelic games. This was used to appoint games promotion officers (GPOs) to clubs in order that they could assist with training and organisation as well as devising and implementing out-reach programmes to local schools.
It wasn’t free to everyone and the funding basis is 50:50 between the participating clubs and the county board, which accesses the money through Croke Park, as that was how it was decided to distribute the ISC funding.
|
|
|
|
Money
Dec 5, 2016 23:57:26 GMT
Post by inforthebreaks on Dec 5, 2016 23:57:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Money
Dec 6, 2016 0:00:37 GMT
Post by inforthebreaks on Dec 6, 2016 0:00:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Money
Dec 7, 2016 12:56:12 GMT
Post by glengael on Dec 7, 2016 12:56:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Dec 7, 2016 13:09:06 GMT
John Costello is perfectly entitled to talk out of both sides of his mouth. Others are perfectly entitled to label what the GAA is doing with Dublin and funding as "financial doping". |
|
|
|
Money
Dec 7, 2016 22:48:51 GMT
Post by thebluepanther on Dec 7, 2016 22:48:51 GMT
John Costello is perfectly entitled to talk out of both sides of his mouth. Others are perfectly entitled to label what the GAA is doing with Dublin and funding as "financial doping". Really don't mind what he says to media and press, behind the scenes the man is a huge reason Dublin are where they are today. |
|
|
|
Money
Sept 20, 2017 22:16:45 GMT
Post by Mickmack on Sept 20, 2017 22:16:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 21, 2017 9:13:13 GMT
Post by glengael on Sept 21, 2017 9:13:13 GMT
There was an article in the Business Post at the weekend on Dublin's finances, I must try and get a look at it at some stage.
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 21, 2017 9:13:23 GMT
Post by onlykerry on Sept 21, 2017 9:13:23 GMT
MacKenna touched on the financial disparity between Dublin and other counties. "Mayo, €22.30 per club registered player between 2010 and 2014 in games development money. Tyrone, €21, Kerry, €19. It goes on like this," he said, before continuing. "Dublin, €270.70 and before I came on, people will say we need to redress the balance, we need to throw money at other counties as well. We absolutely do but we don't have that money because what we have now is other teams that are so far behind, with massive natural disadvantages that aren't the GAA's fault in terms of distance to facilities, population and all that. But there are 330,082 registered players outside of Dublin. Were you to bring the level back up to what Dublin are getting (€270.70 per player) that would cost €90 million. The current budget for the other 31 counties in games development is €3 million. You'd have to find €87 million to just level the field." |
|
|
|
Money
Sept 21, 2017 9:17:22 GMT
Post by onlykerry on Sept 21, 2017 9:17:22 GMT
Bringing the conversation back to the investment per club registered player is a very good common denominator - forget total population.
The disparity is stunning - add in the "home advantage" that Dublin have (partly due to geogrpahy which cannot be avoided and partly due to bias which can be addressed - by bias I mean access, preferential treatment etc to Croke Park) and you are certainly giving Dublin an unfair leg up.
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 21, 2017 9:31:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by Mickmack on Sept 21, 2017 9:31:47 GMT
This is just the money from the GAA. It does not include the 10m from the sports council since 2007.
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 22, 2017 10:08:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by kerrythekingdom on Sept 22, 2017 10:08:29 GMT
I used to think it wasnt such a big issue how much Dublin were getting money wise, but those figures per registered club player is shocking. I have experience of growing a small organisation into a large one with little or no funding. Money isnt needed to get off the ground and get to a deceng level - but when we wanted to grow to compete and bring the organisation to the next level, developing youth etc. money became THE issue. Dublins finance gives the county a huge advantage in coaching, in the logistics of developing youth and in getting to the top level over a spell of years. Of course you need the talent but its much easier to develop raw talent in youth with coaches and money. Kerrys youth development is probably seven or eight years behind Dublin and is in the halfpenny place when it comes to funding compared to the Dubs. Our minor teams will start coming through but I suspect we may need a few more years of hurt to create the kind of determination the Dubs have developed courtesy of their disasters in the noughties especially the latter part.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Pitches on Sept 22, 2017 12:03:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by himself on Sept 22, 2017 12:36:08 GMT
In fairness to Dublin, if it was money that was the foundation for their recent phenomenal success at senior, how come we (Kerry) have four minor titles in a row? Dublin have own 1 minor final and lost another in the past decade. If money were the big difference in terms of providing coaching and development, how come that isn't showing at minor level?
In the same time period, Dublin have four U21 titles. That, to me, is the key issue. Dublin are managing the transition from good U16 footballers to great U21 footballers better than anyone else right now.
I'm not convinced that money is the big over-riding factor in Dublin's senior success - while I do think that lack of it is stinting growth in the weaker counties, I don't believe that Mayo, Kerry, Cork, Tyrone, Donegal, et al fall within that category.
I think that Dublin have had some incredibly talented footballers who have been very well managed. I don't think money has been a factor in that and I don't see their future dominance as guaranteed; nor do I see the automatic progression from minor success to senior that too many are confidently predicting without substance.
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 22, 2017 14:33:33 GMT
Post by onlykerry on Sept 22, 2017 14:33:33 GMT
In fairness to Dublin, if it was money that was the foundation for their recent phenomenal success at senior, how come we (Kerry) have four minor titles in a row? Dublin have own 1 minor final and lost another in the past decade. If money were the big difference in terms of providing coaching and development, how come that isn't showing at minor level? In the same time period, Dublin have four U21 titles. That, to me, is the key issue. Dublin are managing the transition from good U16 footballers to great U21 footballers better than anyone else right now. I'm not convinced that money is the big over-riding factor in Dublin's senior success - while I do think that lack of it is stinting growth in the weaker counties, I don't believe that Mayo, Kerry, Cork, Tyrone, Donegal, et al fall within that category. I think that Dublin have had some incredibly talented footballers who have been very well managed. I don't think money has been a factor in that and I don't see their future dominance as guaranteed; nor do I see the automatic progression from minor success to senior that too many are confidently predicting without substance. Well argued points and a lot of merit in what you are saying particularly about their process of transitioning. However the margin of victory by Dublin in the past number of successes is as close as it can be - three titles by 1 point. With such tiny margins I would argue the minute details are the differrence and many of these come back to resources (i.e. money) - the psychologists, mental preparation, dietary preparation and individualised programs. This is part of what separates when the margin of victory is so tight. |
|
|
|
Money
Sept 22, 2017 15:34:18 GMT
Post by kerrybhoy06 on Sept 22, 2017 15:34:18 GMT
Of course Money is an overriding factor- it allows you to hire additional backroom staff, it allows you to get lads soft jobs, it allows these guys to live more or less professional lives with lifestyle coaches etc, it allows you to look after these lads when they are in college with cars, all their meals paid for.
Lads stop this nonsense of trying your hardest to be above this when it is so bleeding obvious.
Dublin have lots of money- they spend it on lots of things that can make their team better and make it easier for their players to be more or less professional- they get better.
People say about the money has to be spent well- thats fine but the right people will only go there if the money exists in the first place. Why aren't any intelligent business men running the Longford county board? Cos they have no cash and are on a hiding to nothing- its not that the county lacks people of business savy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mickmack on Sept 22, 2017 15:55:47 GMT
Maybe Chelsea's rise had nothing to do with money either.
I think i will start calling skybluezone "dubromivich" from now on. 🙂
Very refreshing to read the "bleedin obvious" there.
You are in dublin too long!
|
|
|
|
Money
Sept 22, 2017 17:00:02 GMT
Post by himself on Sept 22, 2017 17:00:02 GMT
The reason Abramovich's money made such a difference to Chelsea FC is because they were able to use that money to purchase contracts with the most expensive players, because they compete in a professional sport. Dublin patently haven't done that. If Paul Geaney lines out at corner forward next year beside Michael Murphy and Jamie Clarke and Lee Keegan is at wing back, all of them wearing blue, I'll be asking questions.
Until then, I accept your point, onlykerry, but I think it only validates my own. The fact that Dublin have only won by one score margins in their recent All Irelands (they seem to completely dominate play against Kerry but only scrape past the line, it makes me question to efficacy of their forwards) makes me even less worried that a financial behemoth is going to bestride the game from now and forever more.
I do think that a greater share of the grant money allocated to Dublin should be allocated instead to weaker counties. If necessary, employ coaches directly at a national or provincial level and rotate around different counties' juvenile systems so that the money is applied directly into improvement in development rather than mis-used by County Boards.
But I still wouldn't say that Kerry, or Mayo, or Tyrone need more money in order to take the Sam Maguire off Dublin. Money is not the problem; I still say that in Kerry it's our development from minor, through U21 (now U20) into senior ranks. That's our stumbling block, not any other counties' finances.
|
|
|
|
Post by foggylol24 on Sept 22, 2017 18:00:09 GMT
If you have 100 full time development coaches opposed to 2 that must help bridge the gap between minor and senior.I mean this enables Dublin to closely monitor the development of so many more players then other counties. Like even to the point of keeping players interested, your far less likely to lose interest if their is an official county coach overseeing your progress.
|
|
|
|
Post by kerrygold on Sept 22, 2017 18:20:33 GMT
It is all about money. The Dublin lady footballers came out into the stand after their recent quarter final game to watch Kerry's game with their prepared pasta and fruit packs. (Info courtesy of one the Kerry players father).
You either drive a Lada, a vw or a Porsche depending on finances. One gets your there in comfort and with performance, one is functional and the other is a pain in the butt.
I'd take the annual €1.4 additional funding from the Sports Council and employ the big number of additional coaches if given the chance also. That is good business indexed to greater performance.
|
|
