|
Replying To TheUsername: "You can flip the argument really.
Arguably Dublin have been underfunded for years and really what you can say, is that other counties particularly Kerry with their geographical and financial advantages have had massive and artificial advantages toward their success.
Let me elaborate. Those that say Dublin are financially doped do so on the basis of accepting finances to registered players that is flawed, because GDF is designated to go to registered players its designated to attract players who are not registered essentially school children etc. So that the flaw in the argument.
The second issue for those with a problem of Dublin funding is, is the 18 mill figure since 2007 in comparison to other counties. Yet that argument doesn't take into account the cumulative population those funds meet over the same period, it works out as a ratio of just over a euro a head, which is good but far off a lot of counties.
So essentially both arguments are flawed.
Ive often presented the metric for GDF per head of population which is fairer in my opinion, though id acknowledge not perfect, but i suspect likely closer to the model the GAA use based on recent comments, the break down is this:
Monaghan GDF 124.000, Population of Monaghan 60.483 2.05 per head.
Dublin GDF 1.3 mill, population 1.34 mill, ratio = 97 cent per head.
Kerry GDF 197.600 euro, population of Kerry 147.000, ratio = 1.34 euro per head.
Mayo GDF 134.29 euro, population of Mayo, 130.5k, ratio = 1.02 euro per head.
Tyrone GDF 119.000 euro, population 177.9k = 66 cent per head
Galway GDF 184.4k euro, population 258.0k = 71cent per head.
Donegal GDF 130.2k euro, population 159.1k = 81 cent per head.
Kildare GDF 341.3k euro, population 222.5k = 1.53 euro per head
Roscommon GDF, 146k euro, population 66.5k = 2.2 euro per head.
Cork GDF, 249k euro, population 542k = 45 cent per head.
Meath GDF, 367.4k, population 195.0 = 1.88 euro per head.
*That before provincial grants, east Leinster project supplements - Dublin dont get. So really other counties get significantly more then above.
So we can see that with the change the Dublins funding back in the 00's there is a fair argument there, that the funding just about brought Dublin up to about level with other countries given their specific context for the first time in DUlin history.
But lets think back before that, Dublin back before the ISC grant were getting about the same as Kerry, Cork, Meath, Kildare, yet had to spread that around a much larger population. Obviously counties with smaller populations could make that money go further. Thus Dublin were at a disadvantage to other counties and arguably those counties were financially doped when facing Dublin. Its only with an equity of funding per head of population has Dublin been able to compete on a level playing field with every one else. Its actually quite remarkable how successful we have been before the funding became equitable.
People talk of financial doping, arguably we have a right to discredit any rival out there who got the better of us, as i would contend its only since the 00s that funding per context has been made equal.
People dont like it etc, as they may have seen themselves a some remarkable county rather then one advantaged, but its certainly more equatable then it ever has been." Funding sent directly to counties should be based on the number of registered players. Basing funding on population makes sense if you're running a country.
Hawkeye9212 (Donegal) - Posts: 266 - 27/07/2019 12:27:19
2217051
Link
4
|
|
Replying To TheUsername: "You can flip the argument really.
Arguably Dublin have been underfunded for years and really what you can say, is that other counties particularly Kerry with their geographical and financial advantages have had massive and artificial advantages toward their success.
Let me elaborate. Those that say Dublin are financially doped do so on the basis of accepting finances to registered players that is flawed, because GDF is designated to go to registered players its designated to attract players who are not registered essentially school children etc. So that the flaw in the argument.
The second issue for those with a problem of Dublin funding is, is the 18 mill figure since 2007 in comparison to other counties. Yet that argument doesn't take into account the cumulative population those funds meet over the same period, it works out as a ratio of just over a euro a head, which is good but far off a lot of counties.
So essentially both arguments are flawed.
Ive often presented the metric for GDF per head of population which is fairer in my opinion, though id acknowledge not perfect, but i suspect likely closer to the model the GAA use based on recent comments, the break down is this:
Monaghan GDF 124.000, Population of Monaghan 60.483 2.05 per head.
Dublin GDF 1.3 mill, population 1.34 mill, ratio = 97 cent per head.
Kerry GDF 197.600 euro, population of Kerry 147.000, ratio = 1.34 euro per head.
Mayo GDF 134.29 euro, population of Mayo, 130.5k, ratio = 1.02 euro per head.
Tyrone GDF 119.000 euro, population 177.9k = 66 cent per head
Galway GDF 184.4k euro, population 258.0k = 71cent per head.
Donegal GDF 130.2k euro, population 159.1k = 81 cent per head.
Kildare GDF 341.3k euro, population 222.5k = 1.53 euro per head
Roscommon GDF, 146k euro, population 66.5k = 2.2 euro per head.
Cork GDF, 249k euro, population 542k = 45 cent per head.
Meath GDF, 367.4k, population 195.0 = 1.88 euro per head.
*That before provincial grants, east Leinster project supplements - Dublin dont get. So really other counties get significantly more then above.
So we can see that with the change the Dublins funding back in the 00's there is a fair argument there, that the funding just about brought Dublin up to about level with other countries given their specific context for the first time in DUlin history.
But lets think back before that, Dublin back before the ISC grant were getting about the same as Kerry, Cork, Meath, Kildare, yet had to spread that around a much larger population. Obviously counties with smaller populations could make that money go further. Thus Dublin were at a disadvantage to other counties and arguably those counties were financially doped when facing Dublin. Its only with an equity of funding per head of population has Dublin been able to compete on a level playing field with every one else. Its actually quite remarkable how successful we have been before the funding became equitable.
People talk of financial doping, arguably we have a right to discredit any rival out there who got the better of us, as i would contend its only since the 00s that funding per context has been made equal.
People dont like it etc, as they may have seen themselves a some remarkable county rather then one advantaged, but its certainly more equatable then it ever has been." What about London and New York? Both have much large populations than Dublin but don't seem to get much funding compared to Dublin for underage development?
Jack_Goff (Meath) - Posts: 2920 - 27/07/2019 12:42:35
2217056
Link
9
|
|
Replying To Tizcold: "A serious question!!
Should the Dubs complete the 5 in a row (No doubt about it), will this unbelievable generation of footballers achievements be tarnished?
Views?" Yes.
DLlegends (Donegal) - Posts: 503 - 27/07/2019 12:43:54
2217057
Link
1
|
|
Replying To TheUsername: "You can flip the argument really.
Arguably Dublin have been underfunded for years and really what you can say, is that other counties particularly Kerry with their geographical and financial advantages have had massive and artificial advantages toward their success.
Let me elaborate. Those that say Dublin are financially doped do so on the basis of accepting finances to registered players that is flawed, because GDF is designated to go to registered players its designated to attract players who are not registered essentially school children etc. So that the flaw in the argument.
The second issue for those with a problem of Dublin funding is, is the 18 mill figure since 2007 in comparison to other counties. Yet that argument doesn't take into account the cumulative population those funds meet over the same period, it works out as a ratio of just over a euro a head, which is good but far off a lot of counties.
So essentially both arguments are flawed.
Ive often presented the metric for GDF per head of population which is fairer in my opinion, though id acknowledge not perfect, but i suspect likely closer to the model the GAA use based on recent comments, the break down is this:
Monaghan GDF 124.000, Population of Monaghan 60.483 2.05 per head.
Dublin GDF 1.3 mill, population 1.34 mill, ratio = 97 cent per head.
Kerry GDF 197.600 euro, population of Kerry 147.000, ratio = 1.34 euro per head.
Mayo GDF 134.29 euro, population of Mayo, 130.5k, ratio = 1.02 euro per head.
Tyrone GDF 119.000 euro, population 177.9k = 66 cent per head
Galway GDF 184.4k euro, population 258.0k = 71cent per head.
Donegal GDF 130.2k euro, population 159.1k = 81 cent per head.
Kildare GDF 341.3k euro, population 222.5k = 1.53 euro per head
Roscommon GDF, 146k euro, population 66.5k = 2.2 euro per head.
Cork GDF, 249k euro, population 542k = 45 cent per head.
Meath GDF, 367.4k, population 195.0 = 1.88 euro per head.
*That before provincial grants, east Leinster project supplements - Dublin dont get. So really other counties get significantly more then above.
So we can see that with the change the Dublins funding back in the 00's there is a fair argument there, that the funding just about brought Dublin up to about level with other countries given their specific context for the first time in DUlin history.
But lets think back before that, Dublin back before the ISC grant were getting about the same as Kerry, Cork, Meath, Kildare, yet had to spread that around a much larger population. Obviously counties with smaller populations could make that money go further. Thus Dublin were at a disadvantage to other counties and arguably those counties were financially doped when facing Dublin. Its only with an equity of funding per head of population has Dublin been able to compete on a level playing field with every one else. Its actually quite remarkable how successful we have been before the funding became equitable.
People talk of financial doping, arguably we have a right to discredit any rival out there who got the better of us, as i would contend its only since the 00s that funding per context has been made equal.
People dont like it etc, as they may have seen themselves a some remarkable county rather then one advantaged, but its certainly more equatable then it ever has been." Copy, paste, repeat.
Absurd and ridiculous suggestion that funding is based on population.
So effectively money is given to Dublin to cover certain demographic that will never play the game?
I can see it now, Mrs Doyle 80 years of age throwing on the boots for a kick around in bushy park.
westkerry (Kerry) - Posts: 1250 - 27/07/2019 12:59:56
2217063
Link
4
|
|
Replying To TheHermit: "At this stage Dublin supporters seem to be the GAA equivalent of climate change deniers ;D
And yes for me anyway they'll be an asterisk next to their 5 in a row given all that's gone on.
I doubt I'll be the only person that feels the same ...
But let their posters on here keep arguing black is white, sure it gives them something to do on a Friday night :D" What 5 in a row ?
superbluedub (Dublin) - Posts: 2837 - 27/07/2019 13:00:10
2217064
Link
2
|
|
Replying To DLlegends: "Yes." Absolutely not. They are a credit to themselves and their county. If they win the 5 in a row it will be the result of talent, hard work, good management and proper use of resources.
avonali (Dublin) - Posts: 1974 - 27/07/2019 13:08:40
2217066
Link
10
|
|
Replying To avonali: "Absolutely not. They are a credit to themselves and their county. If they win the 5 in a row it will be the result of talent, hard work, good management and proper use of resources." Absolutely not. They are a credit to themselves and their county. If they win the 5 in a row it will be the result of talent, hard work, good management and proper use of all the GAA's resources
I fixed that for you ;D
TheHermit (Kerry) - Posts: 6354 - 27/07/2019 13:24:50
2217076
Link
5
|
|
Development funding should not be based on registered members.
Why should it be? It's money to coach children, why would 60 year old registered member Hector Murphy factor in to the strategic decisions of how the GAA should allocate resources to the future of the association?
Anyone talking about London or New York are just being silly.
In 2010 out of a total population of 38k children in Dublin of the correct age over 7k were participating in GAA go games in football and pretty much 5k in hurling.
It's hard to know the overlap but I think it's likely that over 20% of the population were playing Gaelic games. They may not be registered members, but they are great numbers in Dublin playing our games and this is what this money is enabling.
Just to put some context on those numbers. There were only 8k children born in Connacht in 2010.
Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4241 - 27/07/2019 13:57:57
2217089
Link
8
|
|
Replying To TheHermit: "At this stage Dublin supporters seem to be the GAA equivalent of climate change deniers ;D
And yes for me anyway they'll be an asterisk next to their 5 in a row given all that's gone on.
I doubt I'll be the only person that feels the same ...
But let their posters on here keep arguing black is white, sure it gives them something to do on a Friday night :D" What absolute rubbish. The only thing next to 5 in a row will be 6 in a row.
Bon (Kildare) - Posts: 1916 - 27/07/2019 14:13:17
2217092
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Joxer: " Replying To Jack_Goff: " linkRob Hartnett the CEO of Sport for business thinks Dublin are actually underfunded according to the Irish Examiner. "But when you think about that, we've got about 33% of the population - you could argue that we're actually being underfunded". Interesting views, maybe we have it wrong and Dublin should get an increase." Maybe we could lock yourself a couple of Kildare accounts, the Kerry WUM accounts, Legends' many fake accounts pretending to be from other counties and a couple of more into a Dublin Money forum where you can discuss the topic ad-nauseam and to your hearts' content, continuing your obsession with the boys in blue. Meanwhile the rest of us may continue talking about the sport. There was a time when us Dubs used to take a hiding when starting a thread on the main forum about Dublin. Now every second thread is about the Dubs and few if any started by a Dub. Obsessed doesn't even begin to describe it."
Donegalman (None) - Posts: 3830 - 27/07/2019 14:49:13
2217105
Link
3
|
|
Replying To TheUsername: "You can flip the argument really.
Arguably Dublin have been underfunded for years and really what you can say, is that other counties particularly Kerry with their geographical and financial advantages have had massive and artificial advantages toward their success.
Let me elaborate. Those that say Dublin are financially doped do so on the basis of accepting finances to registered players that is flawed, because GDF is designated to go to registered players its designated to attract players who are not registered essentially school children etc. So that the flaw in the argument.
The second issue for those with a problem of Dublin funding is, is the 18 mill figure since 2007 in comparison to other counties. Yet that argument doesn't take into account the cumulative population those funds meet over the same period, it works out as a ratio of just over a euro a head, which is good but far off a lot of counties.
So essentially both arguments are flawed.
Ive often presented the metric for GDF per head of population which is fairer in my opinion, though id acknowledge not perfect, but i suspect likely closer to the model the GAA use based on recent comments, the break down is this:
Monaghan GDF 124.000, Population of Monaghan 60.483 2.05 per head.
Dublin GDF 1.3 mill, population 1.34 mill, ratio = 97 cent per head.
Kerry GDF 197.600 euro, population of Kerry 147.000, ratio = 1.34 euro per head.
Mayo GDF 134.29 euro, population of Mayo, 130.5k, ratio = 1.02 euro per head.
Tyrone GDF 119.000 euro, population 177.9k = 66 cent per head
Galway GDF 184.4k euro, population 258.0k = 71cent per head.
Donegal GDF 130.2k euro, population 159.1k = 81 cent per head.
Kildare GDF 341.3k euro, population 222.5k = 1.53 euro per head
Roscommon GDF, 146k euro, population 66.5k = 2.2 euro per head.
Cork GDF, 249k euro, population 542k = 45 cent per head.
Meath GDF, 367.4k, population 195.0 = 1.88 euro per head.
*That before provincial grants, east Leinster project supplements - Dublin dont get. So really other counties get significantly more then above.
So we can see that with the change the Dublins funding back in the 00's there is a fair argument there, that the funding just about brought Dublin up to about level with other countries given their specific context for the first time in DUlin history.
But lets think back before that, Dublin back before the ISC grant were getting about the same as Kerry, Cork, Meath, Kildare, yet had to spread that around a much larger population. Obviously counties with smaller populations could make that money go further. Thus Dublin were at a disadvantage to other counties and arguably those counties were financially doped when facing Dublin. Its only with an equity of funding per head of population has Dublin been able to compete on a level playing field with every one else. Its actually quite remarkable how successful we have been before the funding became equitable.
People talk of financial doping, arguably we have a right to discredit any rival out there who got the better of us, as i would contend its only since the 00s that funding per context has been made equal.
People dont like it etc, as they may have seen themselves a some remarkable county rather then one advantaged, but its certainly more equatable then it ever has been." You would do well in PR for Donald Trump. Would you stop trying to tie your self up in knots trying to justify Dublin getting funding way above their share based on the fact that they have a big population. Games Development funding, while there is an element about promoting the game to new people has to be primarily funding clubs/schools to be able to cater for their members.
Saying a club has a huge catchment area is all very well but if the reality is a big proportion of kids/ parents have no intention of getting involved in the games they don't deserve to be funded proportional to the size of their catchment area.
It would be like offering a family of 4 kids a bar of chocolate each, 3 refuse so you give the 1 remaining kid 4 bars of chocolate because of the size of the family.
bdbuddah (Meath) - Posts: 1361 - 27/07/2019 15:05:06
2217106
Link
1
|
|
County and games development funds should be distributed based in the number of registered players. Distributing funds based on population makes sense of you're running a country. The figure for county funds was €12.5 million in 2015. Games development was €10.3 million. I'm using the 2015 figures because the latest figures for the number of registered players in each county are for 2015. The figure is 369315.
Dublin: 39197 players (10.61% of the population)
Total: €2,419,080
Cork: 33832 (9.16%)
Total: €2,088,480
Galway: 21681 (5.87% of the population)
Total: €1,338,360
Down: 10373 (2.89% of the population)
Total: €658,920
Leitrim: 3570 (0.96% of the population)
Total: €218,880
Hawkeye9212 (Donegal) - Posts: 266 - 27/07/2019 15:18:19
2217108
Link
3
|
|
Replying To Hawkeye9212: "County and games development funds should be distributed based in the number of registered players. Distributing funds based on population makes sense of you're running a country. The figure for county funds was €12.5 million in 2015. Games development was €10.3 million. I'm using the 2015 figures because the latest figures for the number of registered players in each county are for 2015. The figure is 369315.
Dublin: 39197 players (10.61% of the population)
Total: €2,419,080
Cork: 33832 (9.16%)
Total: €2,088,480
Galway: 21681 (5.87% of the population)
Total: €1,338,360
Down: 10373 (2.89% of the population)
Total: €658,920
Leitrim: 3570 (0.96% of the population)
Total: €218,880" Sorry. It should % of registered players, not population.
Hawkeye9212 (Donegal) - Posts: 266 - 27/07/2019 15:37:26
2217113
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Bon: "What absolute rubbish. The only thing next to 5 in a row will be 6 in a row." Google Stockholm syndrome there lad ;D
TheHermit (Kerry) - Posts: 6354 - 27/07/2019 15:41:27
2217115
Link
3
|
|
Replying To Donegalman: " Replying To Joxer: "[quote=Jack_Goff: " linkRob Hartnett the CEO of Sport for business thinks Dublin are actually underfunded according to the Irish Examiner. "But when you think about that, we've got about 33% of the population - you could argue that we're actually being underfunded". Interesting views, maybe we have it wrong and Dublin should get an increase." Maybe we could lock yourself a couple of Kildare accounts, the Kerry WUM accounts, Legends' many fake accounts pretending to be from other counties and a couple of more into a Dublin Money forum where you can discuss the topic ad-nauseam and to your hearts' content, continuing your obsession with the boys in blue. Meanwhile the rest of us may continue talking about the sport. There was a time when us Dubs used to take a hiding when starting a thread on the main forum about Dublin. Now every second thread is about the Dubs and few if any started by a Dub. Obsessed doesn't even begin to describe it."
lilylanger (Kildare) - Posts: 758 - 27/07/2019 15:55:01
2217121
Link
1
|
|
89.7% of statistics quoted are made up on the spot.
lionofludesch (Down) - Posts: 475 - 27/07/2019 15:55:02
2217122
Link
2
|
|
Replying To Whammo86: "Development funding should not be based on registered members.
Why should it be? It's money to coach children, why would 60 year old registered member Hector Murphy factor in to the strategic decisions of how the GAA should allocate resources to the future of the association?
Anyone talking about London or New York are just being silly.
In 2010 out of a total population of 38k children in Dublin of the correct age over 7k were participating in GAA go games in football and pretty much 5k in hurling.
It's hard to know the overlap but I think it's likely that over 20% of the population were playing Gaelic games. They may not be registered members, but they are great numbers in Dublin playing our games and this is what this money is enabling.
Just to put some context on those numbers. There were only 8k children born in Connacht in 2010." The faux county allegiance really slipping Whammo.
greysoil (Monaghan) - Posts: 965 - 27/07/2019 16:19:13
2217127
Link
3
|
|
Replying To Jack_Goff: " linkRob Hartnett the CEO of Sport for business thinks Dublin are actually underfunded according to the Irish Examiner. "But when you think about that, we've got about 33% of the population - you could argue that we're actually being underfunded". Interesting views, maybe we have it wrong and Dublin should get an increase."
oneoff (UK) - Posts: 1380 - 27/07/2019 16:20:55
2217128
Link
3
|
|
maybe the youth are being under-funded judging by todays Minor All -Ireland quarter final
BeJasus (UK) - Posts: 383 - 27/07/2019 16:27:04
2217130
Link
0
|
|
Replying To lionofludesch: "89.7% of statistics quoted are made up on the spot." 40% of all people know that :)
CornAghais91 (Dublin) - Posts: 126 - 27/07/2019 16:33:09
2217134
Link
0
|