Football

Study: How GAA shares team expenses grant money

Belfast native Conor Murray is a PhD student at DCU’s school of history and geography. He has crunched the numbers from the GAA’s annual financial reports from 2015 to 2019, and calculated the levels of grant money given to each county to fund games development and team expenses. The results make interesting reading…

The GAA's expenses grants to county include monies paid to the All-Ireland finalists each year for team holidays
The GAA's expenses grants to county include monies paid to the All-Ireland finalists each year for team holidays The GAA's expenses grants to county include monies paid to the All-Ireland finalists each year for team holidays

PRIOR to winning a sixth All Ireland title in-a-row, the detractors who question whether Dublin’s success has been achieved on a level playing field had met a robust blanket defence of former Dublin players and coaches, who maintain that their county’s success is founded on the efforts of volunteers or the quality of work done in a gym, for example.

Whilst that contest has arguably been more competitive than many recent Leinster championship fixtures, the increasingly polarised debate has largely coalesced around two broad themes; those geographical and those financial.

To date, some of the relevant statistics have appeared on various platforms to justify both camps, however how do those existing arguments stack up if employing a familiar division 1-4 format within traditional county boundaries (no splitting in two or four).

What is often lost in this debate, inevitably underpinned by the current state of play, is a consideration of how and why the Dublin juggernaut came to be.

In doing so, we might consider this an examination of cause and effect.

Maximising the output of Ireland’s most densely populated city was the cause of then GAA president Sean Kelly’s appearance at a Dáil committee in October 2004:

“The one place where we need to change — we are trying to address this — is in urban areas. Fast growing urban areas present a big problem for everybody. I am chairing a committee and on 22 November the Taoiseach will launch our plans for Dublin which will involve us in trying to get a greater market share for ourselves there, to get more clubs up and running and to have more people playing our games, first for enjoyment but also to raise standards. We will employ a number of coaches, three strategic personnel and three development officers in three Dublin regions.”

The effect, arguably, arising from that massive Games Development investment has ensured that a decade of Dublin dominance following their breakthrough in 2011 shows no sign of slowing anytime soon.

Whilst it may be a stretch to suggest that the GAA’s rescue of Dublin GAA from undefined “big problems” in 2004 amounted to a sporting variant of state aid, in 2017 the comments of former Galway, Mayo and Leitrim manager Senator John O’Mahony at the same Dáil committee were revealing:

“Funding that came through the Irish Sports Council was ring-fenced for Dublin GAA about ten or 15 years ago. Is that ring-fenced by the Government or by the GAA?

''I do not in any way suggest that money be taken away from Dublin because the outcomes have been hugely successful for the investment, in other words, it has been value for money.

''Wearing my sporting hat as well as my political hat, I believe there is a major issue for the GAA down the line unless extra funding is distributed to the weaker counties and the weaker clubs in the counties because otherwise we will perpetuate the problem.

''Mr. Duffy can perhaps rightly be critical of successive Governments over rural policy. However, we do not want to see that in a sporting sense.”

In response, the remarks of then Director General of the GAA, Paraic Duffy, suggested there was either a reluctance or inability to slow down the juggernaut that the GAA had, perhaps inadvertently created:

“We still allocate a considerable amount to Dublin for two reasons: first, because there is a huge level of activity there; and second, because the initial process that was put in place was that full-time development officers were appointed to clubs all over Dublin, there are people in employment there, that funding pays half of their employment costs and the club pays the other half.

''Clearly, if one were to remove that funding just like that from those clubs, they probably would not be able to afford to keep those people in place.

''However, we are aware, particularly our organisation in Dublin, of the need to rebalance that.

''This is happening at the moment with the approval of the GAA in Dublin. There will be a reduction in the funding going to Dublin, allowing us to invest in other places.”

In order to address the problems identified in 2004, it is undeniable that Games Development funding has been shrewdly invested into the development of a base for the games in the primary schools of Dublin.

However, despite a breakthrough in 2011 that began a decade of dominance, there appears to have been no clear reduction in funding to Dublin as was suggested by the director general in 2017.

Indeed, during the period of their five in a row between 2015-19, Dublin received approximately €5.6m more than the next highest recipient of Games Development funds (Meath), and in 2016 Dublin had 1,441 more people-per-square-kilometre than Leitrim.

In an attempt to merge the existing geographical and financial realms of this debate, the same statistical data reveals that Dublin appears to be in a very strong position when it comes to grants for team expenses, which are paid to help cover players’ mileage and nutrition.

The GAA annually pays counties varying amounts to help cover the cost of running inter-county teams, which are broken down into players’ mileage, players’ nutrition and unspecified ‘team expenses’.

The players’ mileage rate was 65c per mile prior to this year, while a maximum of €1.2m was set aside to cover nutrition.

In terms of land mass, Dublin is the third smallest county in Ireland.

Whilst Galway received the most of any county in this stream of funding between 2015-19, conventional wisdom might suggest that larger, less densely populated counties would likely accrue greater mileage expenses.

However, despite being the third smallest county by land area, Dublin received significantly more in team expenses per square kilometre than any other county in those five years.

Dublin were given team expenses grants totalling just under €1.47m, averaging at €1,612 per square kilometre.

Only Galway received more in funding at €1.51m, but when broken down in terms of the land mass of the county, it works out at €246 per sq km over that five-year period.

When the annual €80,000 payment towards the team holiday for All-Ireland winners plus the extra €50,000 from last year’s replay is removed, the Dublin figure drops to €1.04m.

Beaten All-Ireland finalists are given the same €80,000 grant by Croke Park.

Galway (€1.28m), Kerry (€1.26m) and Mayo (€1.12m), all of whom have featured in at least two All-Ireland finals during the time, are the only counties to have received more.

Even with team holidays removed, Dublin’s grant over 2015-19 averaged out at €1,178 per square kilometre.

Kilkenny, who do not participate in the football championship, were the closest in terms of average per sq km, but theirs was just €433 per square kilometre.

Once their team holidays are removed, it drops to €317.

Team expenses 2015-2019

1. Galway €1.53m

2. Dublin €1.49m

3. Kerry €1.47m

4. Mayo €1.34m

5. Tipperary €975k

31. Offaly €198k

32. Carlow €171k

Expenses funding per sq km

1. Dublin €1,612

2. Kilkenny €433

3. Kerry €306

4. Waterford €300

31. Cork €92

32. Clare €85

Games development funding 2015-2019

1. Dublin €6.86m

2. Meath €1.22m

3. Kildare €1.13m

4. Cork €1.11m

5. Antrim €1.10m

9. Derry €919,000 

21. Cavan €656,339  

24. Donegal €595,000

28. Fermanagh €567k

29. Tyrone €564k

30. Monaghan €561k

31. Armagh €524k

32. Down €517k