FAI faces financial penalties unless 30pc of their board is female

Dirty Dingus McGee

http://www.independent.ie/sport/sports-bodies-face-financial-penalties-unless-30pc-of-their-board-is-female-35286125.html

Sports bodies face financial penalties unless 30pc of their board is female
New gender quotas ‘to give women a full role in Irish sport’; GAA, FAI and IRFU have no female members on boards

The country's sporting bodies will lose thousands of euro in State funding unless 30pc of their board positions are filled by women, the Irish Independent can reveal.
SHARE
GO TO
In a major policy proposal being brought to Cabinet, associations such as the GAA, FAI and IRFU will be forced to comply with strict gender quotas.
The plan, being devised by Sports Minister Patrick O'Donovan, will prove controversial, particularly in male-dominated sports.

However, Mr O'Donovan last night said the move represented the need for society to recognise the equal right of women to hold high office.
The measures are modelled on a 'carrot and stick' approach whereby the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport will reduce funding to organisations that fail to comply with the new rules.

From 2019, organisations with more than 10 employees will have to ensure that a third of their boards are made up of women. The rule will come into force a year later, in 2020, for smaller bodies with fewer than 10 employees.
At present, many large sporting organisations have few women on their boards.

The board of directors at GAA, the IRFU and the FAI have no female representative whatsoever. However, there are many who hold positions outside of the main boards in these organisations.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny is understood to be supportive of the move, which follows the decision by the Fine Gael/Labour coalition to introduce gender quotas in relation to Dáil seats.

In an interview with the Irish Independent, Mr O'Donovan said he wanted to see a situation where there were "no glass ceilings" for women in sport.
"I have had discussions with figures from other European countries and I believe the time is now right for Ireland to begin the conversation as to how we take out glass ceilings for women," the Limerick TD said.

"We have to make sure there is every available opportunity at the table for both women and men."
Mr O'Donovan said the measure was "gender neutral" and that in cases where boards were predominantly made up of women, the same 30pc rule would apply for male members.

He said the details of the exact funding cuts would be worked out and that a memo would go to Cabinet in the new year.
Sixty-five organisations ranging from household names such as the GAA and IRFU to smaller bodies like those overseeing hockey and basketball received taxpayer money totally €27m this year.

The funding is allocated through Sport Ireland, which co-ordinates the sustainable development of competitive and recreational sport.
The gender quota measures represent the first major policy announcement from the department since the formation of the new Government.

"I have spoken to the Taoiseach, who is right up to speed with what I'm trying to do. It is something that I believe is important and now is the right time to have this conversation," Mr O'Donovan said.

"This is not about trying to dictate in terms of boards. But everybody must have the opportunity to play a full role in Irish sport, both on the field but also in positions of governance and leadership," he added.
Earlier this year, Mr O'Donovan introduced strict new rules surrounding personnel, finances and decision-making for sports bodies.

The measures meant that all bodies under the auspices of Sport Ireland would have to sign up to a 87-page voluntary code of governance.
Irish Independent

Complete bollox if you ask me.What happened to the whole idea of the best person getting the job.

dundalkfc10

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/sport/sports-bodies-face-financial-penalties-unless-30pc-of-their-board-is-female-35286125.html



Complete bollox if you ask me.What happened to the whole idea of the best person getting the job.

In the FAI, the best person never gets the job :D

thebaz

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

[


Complete bollox if you ask me.What happened to the whole idea of the best person getting the job.

agree 100 % - Irish govermenent nanny state nonsense , if Irish women are better or equal to men absolutely give them job - but in typical Irish fashion we go to the extreme - utter political correctness nonsense

Dirty Dingus McGee

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

In the FAI, the best person never gets the job :D

Fair enough alright, but this might only lead to a female John Delaney being created.

GavRedKing

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Fair enough alright, but this might only lead to a female John Delaney being created.

Whats Joan Burton doing these days?

DeVore

A better way of doing this would be to anonymise the CV's first, filter the acceptable ones blind and then compare hiring rates to the gender proportion in the acceptable CVs.

ie: 500 CVs arrive for 10 jobs. Anonymise all of them. 300 of them are acceptable candidates (ie not tossers going givvus-a-job). Of those 300 say 200 are men and 100 are women. Hire the best of them.
The hiring proportion should be 2:1 male to female. This cant be exact so you put a tolerance of variance on it of say 20%.
In our example then 5-8 of the jobs should go to male, and 2-5 female (roughly). Anything which significantly varies from this over time is genuinely suspect.

This allows for the best candidates to be bubbled up, allows for variance in the candidates and still supports equality (of "opportunity", more than "outcome"). Its a proportional system so its flexible for cases where its 50/50 and cases where the candidates are overwhelmingly male/female.

I have hired for programmer jobs a good few times and I'd say 90%+ of the CV are of guys, I'm committed to equality rights but its nigh impossible to hire 30% of a workforce from that sort of skewing. If I'm being fair and sex-impartial it should be 9:1 male to female and the changes needed are further down the educational tree, long before they get to my desk!

Awesomeness

John will probably put his woman he never shuts up about on the board

White Horse

Are 30% of the registered players female? Surely Board membership should be proportionate to the genders of players.

greendom

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/sport/sports-bodies-face-financial-penalties-unless-30pc-of-their-board-is-female-35286125.html



Complete bollox if you ask me.What happened to the whole idea of the best person getting the job.

When you've got old men in suits deciding who gets the role, their definition of best person may be different to everyone else's and reality.

Dirty Dingus McGee

greendom wrote: »

When you've got old men in suits deciding who gets the role, their definition of best person may be different to everyone else's and reality.

and forcing quotas on people is a better idea.Has there been any proof that quotas will actually improve the running of sports bodies.

You are always going to have someone who has to make the final decision and most people at the top of any organisation will be older individuals.

Men are more interested in sport in general so men are always going to have more of a say in sport.

greendom

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

and forcing quotas on people is a better idea.Has there been any proof that quotas will actually improve the running of sports bodies.

You are always going to have someone who has to make the final decision and most people at the top of any organisation will be older individuals.

Men are more interested in sport in general so men are always going to have more of a say in sport.

30% is a bit excessive but unless some sort of regulation is brought in they will continue to do what they have always done. 70% is still more of a say. 100% is taking the proverbial though.

Korat

I think it's a good idea but it could still be seen as discriminatory for not mandating LGBTQIA representation too not to mention all the other non gender based minorities.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Korat wrote: »

I think it's a good idea but it could still be seen as discriminatory for not mandating LGBTQIA representation too not to mention all the other non gender based minorities.

Maybe they could include a black,female,gay,bisexual,transsexual,gender fluid, one legged woman (there's bound to be one) on every single board on the country an it/she/he/ze could be rotated around all the various bodies in the country.

Mr.H

When you have a quota rule you are allowing gender bias

If I cant get a job because the company needs to hire a woman that is sexist

thebaz

Korat wrote: »

I think it's a good idea but it could still be seen as discriminatory for not mandating LGBTQIA representation too not to mention all the other non gender based minorities.

- just hire the best person for the position - regardless of age, race, colour , gender - anything else is discriminatory

IvySlayer

And these women will be taken seriously knowing some are tokens?

Mars Bar

I wonder where I can send my C.V?

Myself and Cookie_Dough are gonna take over Irish football.

Mr.Nice Guy

I like the idea.

It's simplistic to say 'just hire the best person' when you have a society where people have the impression that they are not welcome in the field. Consider the PSNI for example. When quotas were brought in to increase the numbers of Catholics in the police you had unionists making these outraged statements about how it was tokenism, unfair on Protestants etc. 'Just hire the best person and there's no problem' they said, but of course part of the problem was that the society in NI gave Catholics the impression they were not welcome in that particular field.

Of course that society was built on a prejudice involving rampant sectarianism rather than casual sexism, but I think quotas are a fine solution to both. We will be waiting 20 to 30 years at a minimum to increase the number of women in the political and sporting sphere based on previous trends. That's too long. If I'm not mistaken they have brought in quotas in politics to get more women listed as candidates for parties. Great. I'm all for that. Bring it on in sport as well.

The standard of political and sporting administration in this country has been, and is, utterly shambolic and the evidence of other places, such as Scandinavia, seems to show that the more women get involved, the more things improve. And we sure need all the help we can get.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I like the idea.

It's simplistic to say 'just hire the best person' when you have a society where people have the impression that they are not welcome in the field. Consider the PSNI for example. When quotas were brought in to increase the numbers of Catholics in the police you had unionists making these outraged statements about how it was tokenism, unfair on Protestants etc. 'Just hire the best person and there's no problem' they said, but of course part of the problem was that the society in NI gave Catholics the impression they were not welcome in that particular field.

Of course that society was built on a prejudice involving rampant sectarianism rather than casual sexism, but I think quotas are a fine solution to both. We will be waiting 20 to 30 years at a minimum to increase the number of women in the political and sporting sphere based on previous trends. That's too long. If I'm not mistaken they have brought in quotas in politics to get more women listed as candidates for parties. Great. I'm all for that. Bring it on in sport as well.

The standard of political and sporting administration in this country has been, and is, utterly shambolic and the evidence of other places, such as Scandinavia, seems to show that the more women get involved, the more things improve. And we sure need all the help we can get.

But how do you decide on what the quota should be?

If women are really interested in getting involved in any fields the they would put themselves forward and would win on the basis of being good at what they do.Quota's don't encourage this, they lead to the suspicion that women who get on boards are there to fulfill the quota and that is a backward step not a forward step.

We've had plenty of female politicians in this country and they are just as bad as the men were so your example from Nordic countries is a bad example, perhaps people in Nordic countries just have more cop on than we have.

Why are quotas only proposed for desirable jobs and only for jobs where women (might naturally) be under represented?

There hasn't been a suggestion of a quota of men in Primary School teaching or nursing despite there being an absence of them.

Quotas aren't an answer to anything.Most people genuinely aren't sexist and maybe women are not represented as well on sports bodies because they are simply not as interested in sport as men are.

Mr.Nice Guy

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

But how do you decide on what the quota should be?

If women are really interested in getting involved in any fields the they would put themselves forward and would win on the basis of being good at what they do.Quota's don't encourage this, they lead to the suspicion that women who get on boards are there to fulfill the quota and that is a backward step not a forward step.

We've had plenty of female politicians in this country and they are just as bad as the men were so your example from Nordic countries is a bad example, perhaps people in Nordic countries just have more cop on than we have.

Why are quotas only proposed for desirable jobs and only for jobs where women (might naturally) be under represented?

There hasn't been a suggestion of a quota of men in Primary School teaching or nursing despite there being an absence of them.

Quotas aren't an answer to anything.Most people genuinely aren't sexist and maybe women are not represented as well on sports bodies because they are simply not as interested in sport as men are.

The numbers mentioned in the piece provided seem reasonable.

Women aren't getting involved in the game because the culture isn't open to it. Saying everything's all good because if women wanted to be involved they'd apply is a bit like a men's only golf club saying everything's all good because they get so few applications from women. Well, there's a reason for that. There are too few women involved and change isn't going to come from within because turkeys don't vote for Christmas. It has to come via external pressure.

If quotas aren't the answer to anything, are you saying then that you opposed them being used for the PSNI to combat sectarianism? As regards most people not being genuinely sexist, this article popped up in The Guardian today:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/dec/12/schoolgirls-say-fa-paper-on-football-treats-them-like-brainless-baby-barbies

Let's not kid ourselves that out FA are any better. In fact, I'd say they're worse.

CSF

People need to be asking the question of how it comes to be that 100% of the board is male in the first place. It's Stone Age type stuff like that which leads to the awkward decision of associations having to be forced into hiring 'token' women.

I'm not generally in favour of quotas of any kind but sometimes they're needed when the employment practices just seem too wrong.

People can say that it should be for the best person for the job but who can actually say that with the likes of John Delaney and Fran Gavin in their current roles and on that salary that these appointments are being made on merit in the first place.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

The numbers mentioned in the piece provided seem reasonable.

Women aren't getting involved in the game because the culture isn't open to it. Saying everything's all good because if women wanted to be involved they'd apply is a bit like a men's only golf club saying everything's all good because they get so few applications from women. Well, there's a reason for that. There are too few women involved and change isn't going to come from within because turkeys don't vote for Christmas. It has to come via external pressure.

If quotas aren't the answer to anything, are you saying then that you opposed them being used for the PSNI to combat sectarianism? As regards most people not being genuinely sexist, this article popped up in The Guardian today:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/dec/12/schoolgirls-say-fa-paper-on-football-treats-them-like-brainless-baby-barbies

Let's not kid ourselves that out FA are any better. In fact, I'd say they're worse.

Maybe women need to be more confident and get involved.There is no rule against women getting into positions of power within the game.I have a problem with it being enforced at the top level when really if women were properly interested they would work there way up and prove themselves to be good enough and move through the ranks, but that is not what is being proposed.There is always going to be a massive male bias in a male dominated sport, perhaps a better idea would be to have a Womens FAI (much like the Ladies Gaelic football and Camogie associations) and that women would have a big say in how the sport for women was governed of course I'd imagine a lot of politicians proposing these quotas wouldn't want that as it isn't high profile enough.

Most people aren't genuinely sexist though.That FA paper is just plain idiocy which is not really surprising coming from them.

Mr.Nice Guy

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Maybe women need to be more confident and get involved.There is no rule against women getting into positions of power within the game.I have a problem with it being enforced at the top level when really if women were properly interested they would work there way up and prove themselves to be good enough and move through the ranks, but that is not what is being proposed.There is always going to be a massive male bias in a male dominated sport, perhaps a better idea would be to have a Womens FAI (much like the Ladies Gaelic football and Camogie associations) and that women would have a big say in how the sport for women was governed of course I'd imagine a lot of politicians proposing these quotas wouldn't want that as it isn't high profile enough.

Most people aren't genuinely sexist though.That FA paper is just plain idiocy which is not really surprising coming from them.

I don't think it's anything to do with confidence but rather the culture of the day; it's a question of opportunity.

You didn't address my question about the use of quotas for the PSNI, though it doesn't help your argument that quotas aren't an answer to anything. Quotas were a vital part in boosting the numbers of Catholics to the police force north of the border and gaining greater support from nationalists; that quite simply would not have happened had the RUC been left to its own devices and not faced external pressure to modernize. I fail to see how something that has been shown to work in tackling sectarianism can't also work in tackling sexism, especially since the problems up North were more serious and rooted in deeper prejudice.

I doubt we'll come to agreement but I'm confident this measure, if followed, will be good for sport and good for equality.

Richard Hillman

I think it is a ridiculous rule but it is bad news for John Delaney. If they have to start going outside of the FAI Mafia for board places, his position will weaken.

Saying that, I can see the wives current members ending up on the board or even the esteemed Ms English.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't think it's anything to do with confidence but rather the culture of the day; it's a question of opportunity.

You didn't address my question about the use of quotas for the PSNI, though it doesn't help your argument that quotas aren't an answer to anything. Quotas were a vital part in boosting the numbers of Catholics to the police force north of the border and gaining greater support from nationalists; that quite simply would not have happened had the RUC been left to its own devices and not faced external pressure to modernize. I fail to see how something that has been shown to work in tackling sectarianism can't also work in tackling sexism, especially since the problems up North were more serious and rooted in deeper prejudice.

I doubt we'll come to agreement but I'm confident this measure, if followed, will be good for sport and good for equality.

That was because they didn't want the PSNI to be another version of the RUC which was a serious issue.What happens though if not enough Catholics went up for positions in the PSNI should people been dragged in and made police officers in the North?

This issue with sporting boards is not anywhere close to being as serious a situation and there has never been anything to stop any women getting involved in sports clubs in this country.

I'm all for encouraging women to get more involved but having a rule where there must be women involved limits choice which is never a good thing.

jem

Will this work both ways.
So for net ball (effectively women only) will they have to have 30% men on the board?
What about this gender fluidity? can a person decide that they want to be a woman when going for election and then revert back to man while on the board?
Have to say IMHO this is a load of ####. trying to be politically correct and deflect from the real problems in the country.

CSF

jem wrote: »

Will this work both ways.
So for net ball (effectively women only) will they have to have 30% men on the board?
What about this gender fluidity? can a person decide that they want to be a woman when going for election and then revert back to man while on the board?
Have to say IMHO this is a load of ####. trying to be politically correct and deflect from the real problems in the country.

This doesn't really have much to do with politically correctness. Simple question, do you think appointments in the FAI have been made on merit or politically?

Gender quotas should not exist as the status quo, absolutely not in areas where men and women have the same opportunities (a meritocracy). It is completely wrong that a lesser qualified woman should be employed in any role ahead of a man or viceversa. But rebalancing measures become necessary in prehistoric organisations like the FAI where the path to the top is clearly political and not based on competence.

Leroy42

100% male rep is pretty damning and one can go on about 'best person for the job' for it seems highly unlikely that in all this time a woman has never been in a better position than a man. It also seems highly hypocritical to suddenly espouse fairness when the evidence seems to suggest that it has been anything but.

The fact that one poster seemed to suggest that if women wanted to be involved let them get their own association, you know, dealing with wimmin and stuff. Sure, what would they know about mens football?

It is known that women and men bring different factors to the table. Different outlooks. So even if you take away the quotas from it surely we should all be looking at getting the best board possible and statistically it would seem very odd that not 1 woman can do the job better than the men on the board.

Maybe, instead of throwing a hissy fit about it, the sports bodies should use this as an excuse to carry out a full review of their current board and if they really believe that none of the positions can be better done than by the person that is currently there, then so be it, make the case.

Leroy42

jem wrote: »

Will this work both ways.
So for net ball (effectively women only) will they have to have 30% men on the board?
What about this gender fluidity? can a person decide that they want to be a woman when going for election and then revert back to man while on the board?
Have to say IMHO this is a load of ####. trying to be politically correct and deflect from the real problems in the country.

So are you in favour of it or not? You seem to go with the idea, once others have to do it as well, but then it bullsh1t later on?

Of course it will go both ways, in time, but the place to start is the biggest areas and let the natural drift happen form there. Nothing to stop all these highly qualified men that currently sit on 100% male boards for applying in the women dominated areas.

But even with this measure, men still have a clear advantage. It's just that the 100% advantage is being watered down.

Beasty

The problem is without something to "encourage" sports bodies like this the glass ceiling (and status quo) for women remains in place. It's been shown in other walks of life that positive discrimination is what is needed to start to redress the balance. It's interesting to note the comments by the former chiefs of English football about the number of members of the FA that are elderly white males. T'was ever thus and it needs some action to modernise the way we approach sport (in Ireland end elsewhere)

However if this is introduced Irish football (and other sports) is not obliged to participate - they will simply have to look elsewhere for some funding, or do without.

nice_guy80

all those women who have been itching for years to get onto boards and onto committees of clubs up and down the country must be delighted at this news

pity practically none of them ever turn up to actually help in the local club
or supervise their children while they play sport
or turn up to the once a year AGM to hear how the club is run

CSF

nice_guy80 wrote: »

all those women who have been itching for years to get onto boards and onto committees of clubs up and down the country must be delighted at this news

pity practically none of them ever turn up to actually help in the local club
or supervise their children while they play sport
or turn up to the once a year AGM to hear how the club is run

Wow, way to dismiss about 50% of the world's population in one fell swoop there.

Mars Bar

nice_guy80 wrote: »

all those women who have been itching for years to get onto boards and onto committees of clubs up and down the country must be delighted at this news

pity practically none of them ever turn up to actually help in the local club
or supervise their children while they play sport
or turn up to the once a year AGM to hear how the club is run

Must be a pretty rubbish club you're involved in. Females have a huge part to play in ours.

Dirty Dingus McGee

CSF wrote: »

Wow, way to dismiss about 50% of the world's population in one fell swoop there.

Unfortunately he has a point.

Even in women's sport from my experience most of the teams are coached by men, you don't see anywhere near the number of children's mothers volunteering to help coach teams, line pitches, put the nets up etc. etc.

Our GAA club had a female secretary for a long time and she wasn't there because of a quota she got the job because she went to the AGM but very few other women turn up at the AGM, if she didn't have a problem turning up and volunteering why would other women. There isn't really the barrier to getting involved at all , I'm pretty sure that most sports clubs would love more people to volunteer to help out male or female.

CSF

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

Wow, way to dismiss about 50% of the world's population in one fell swoop there.

Unfortunately he has a point.

Even in women's sport most teams are coached by men, you rarely see any of the mothers of children volunteering to help coach teams, line pitches, put the nets up etc. etc.

Our GAA club had a female secretary for a long time and she wasn't there because of a quota she got the job because she went to the AGM but very few other women turn up at the AGM, if she didn't have a problem turning up and volunteering why would other women. There isn't really the barrier to getting involved at all , I'm pretty sure that most sports clubs would love more people to volunteer to help out male or female.

Well it's not exactly news to anyone that football is more popular among men.

I still don't see how that has any relevance to the thousands of women in the country that do have an interest.

I could go into details about some of the horrible things that men in positions of power in football have done in football but I don't really see that it's any more relevant to all the ordinary males with an interest in football.

Mars Bar

It's not even women that are just looking to volunteer and help out that this is about. Women's football is only now a growing game and a lot of this generations parents wouldn't have been given the chance to play the game and wouldn't have a lot of interest. If you have a good environment in the club then you'll have the parents who will be happy to help with equipment, registration, teas and coffees and maybe some coaching.

There are plenty of women in coaching and who would be capable of taking a job at committee level like Laura Cusack, Laura Heffernan, Sharon Boyle, Maz Sweeney, Lorraine Counihan, Lisa Fallon and Eileen Gleeson. That's just off the top of my head and only from a football perspective.

With the FAI, I get the feeling that it doesn't matter whether you are male or female or good enough for the job. If you align yourself with the cronies up there then you are in with a chance regardless of your qualifications.

Dirty Dingus McGee

CSF wrote: »

Well it's not exactly news to anyone that football is more popular among men.

I still don't see how that has any relevance to the thousands of women in the country that do have an interest.

I could go into details about some of the horrible things that men in positions of power in football have done in football but I don't really see that it's any more relevant to all the ordinary males with an interest in football.

It has relevance because the domination of men in positions within the sport is largely naturally occurring because as you say men have more interest than women.This hasn't occured to the people who proposed this idea though.

Mars Bar

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

It has relevance because the domination of men in positions within the sport is largely naturally occurring because as you say men have more interest than women.This hasn't occured to the people who proposed this idea though.

But that doesn't mean there is no interest at all. Women's football is the fastest growing game in the world and I'd be surprised if it isn't the fastest growing game in Ireland at the moment either. The board should represent that growing trend.

CSF

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

Well it's not exactly news to anyone that football is more popular among men.

I still don't see how that has any relevance to the thousands of women in the country that do have an interest.

I could go into details about some of the horrible things that men in positions of power in football have done in football but I don't really see that it's any more relevant to all the ordinary males with an interest in football.

It has relevance because the domination of men in positions within the sport is largely naturally occurring because as you say men have more interest than women.This hasn't occured to the people who proposed this idea though.

Given that there is a 0% female ratio this 'relevance' is still not proportionate. And that's before even getting into the fact that this 'naturally occurring' phenomenon you're referencing is largely influenced by this pigheaded refusal to involve women in pretty much any position of power in football.

I mean before such a quota takes form what is the point in a female even trying to work her way up the footballing hierarchy in this country when you're just going to get laughed out of the house in favour of one of Delaney's drinking buddys.

irelandrover

Mars Bar wrote: »

But that doesn't mean there is no interest at all. Women's football is the fastest growing game in the world and I'd be surprised if it isn't the fastest growing game in Ireland at the moment either. The board should represent that growing trend.

Actually I wouldnt say it should.

It should take a number of years before the number of women on boards grows. After they have served time moving up through the association. But after a number of years then women should be fairly represented on boards.

Dirty Dingus McGee

CSF wrote: »

Given that there is a 0% female ratio this 'relevance' is still not proportionate. And that's before even getting into the fact that this 'naturally occurring' phenomenon you're referencing is largely influenced by this pigheaded refusal to involve women in pretty much any position of power in football.

I mean before such a quota takes form what is the point in a female even trying to work her way up the footballing hierarchy in this country when you're just going to get laughed out of the house in favour of one of Delaney's drinking buddys.

But that's just a bad FAI which has nothing to do with sexism and just more to do with idiocy.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Mars Bar wrote: »

But that doesn't mean there is no interest at all. Women's football is the fastest growing game in the world and I'd be surprised if it isn't the fastest growing game in Ireland at the moment either. The board should represent that growing trend.

People shouldn't be parachuted in at the top, they should work there way through the ranks.

Personally I think the FAI should follow the GAA model and actually have a completely separate organisation for the women's game, it's benefitted Camogie and Ladies Football massively. Dedicate a fair percentage of the FAI's revenue to this new linked organisation for the womens game and you'd have more women involved right at the beginning and much greater female representation in power.

Mars Bar

irelandrover wrote: »

Actually I wouldnt say it should.

It should take a number of years before the women on boards grows. After they have served time moving up through the association. But after a number of years then women should be fairly represented on boards.

Well if your post is what the general football population think then it goes to show how ignorant a lot of people are to women's football. The Women's FAI (WFAI) has been in operation for a number of years now and the women's national league has been running since 2011. That's 5 years of women working their way up under your nose.

The WFAI has recently moved under the FAI's remit so that should be reflected within the FAI's board.

CSF

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

Given that there is a 0% female ratio this 'relevance' is still not proportionate. And that's before even getting into the fact that this 'naturally occurring' phenomenon you're referencing is largely influenced by this pigheaded refusal to involve women in pretty much any position of power in football.

I mean before such a quota takes form what is the point in a female even trying to work her way up the footballing hierarchy in this country when you're just going to get laughed out of the house in favour of one of Delaney's drinking buddys.

But that's just a bad FAI which has nothing to do with sexism and just more to do with idiocy.

If it's excluding females then it's a problem and it needs to be redressed. I think there are plenty more reforms that should take place to turn the FAI into a meritocracy (what any organisation should be aiming towards and where there'd be no legitimate gripes about exclusion to redress) but those should happen aswell, not instead.

Mars Bar

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

People shouldn't be parachuted in at the top, they should work there way through the ranks.

Personally I think the FAI should follow the GAA model and actually have a completely separate organisation for the women's game, it's benefitted Camogie and Ladies Football massively. Dedicate a fair percentage of the FAI's revenue to this new linked organisation for the womens game and you'd have more women involved right at the beginning and much greater female representation in power.

What you are asking for existed. See my post immediately after yours. The FAI wanted the WFAI because god forbid somebody does something positive outside of their control. These women aren't being parachuted up, they've been doing the work but people are ignorant of women's football so they don't see it.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Mars Bar wrote: »

What you are asking for existed. See my post immediately after yours. The FAI wanted the WFAI because god forbid somebody does something positive outside of their control. These women aren't being parachuted up, they've been doing the work but people are ignorant of women's football so they don't see it.

Didn't know such a thing existed.

If that's the case then there should be more representation if they've stupidly decided to get rid of an organisation for no good reason.

irelandrover

Mars Bar wrote: »

Well if your post is what the general football population think then it goes to show how ignorant a lot of people are to women's football. The Women's FAI (WFAI) has been in operation for a number of years now and the women's national league has been running since 2011. That's 5 years of women working their way up under your nose.

The WFAI has recently moved under the FAI's remit so that should be reflected within the FAI's board.

All I stated was just because women's soccer is growing does not mean that they should have a place on the top board. That the efoort put into an association should be reflected in the board and that takes years to filter through to the top.

Since the WFAI was incorporated into the FAI has the board changed?

Mars Bar

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Didn't know such a thing existed.

If that's the case then there should be more representation if they've stupidly decided to get rid of an organisation for no good reason.

The WFAI was disbanded on the promise of a woman being elected to the board in 12 months.

irelandrover wrote: »

All I stated was just because women's soccer is growing does not mean that they should have a place on the top board. That the efoort put into an association should be reflected in the board and that takes years to filter through to the top.

Since the WFAI was incorporated into the FAI has the board changed?

No, it hasn't. When has the FAI board last changed anyway? I mean, a member of the board died a year ago and they still haven't filled his position.

irelandrover

Mars Bar wrote: »

The WFAI was disbanded on the promise of a woman being elected to the board in 12 months.



No, it hasn't. When has the FAI board last changed anyway? I mean, a member of the board died a year ago and they still haven't filled his position.

i don't have the answers. i was generally curious.

I tried to look up how the board was elected/nominated/given the job and i dont know.

Mars Bar

irelandrover wrote: »

i don't have the answers. i was generally curious.

I tried to look up how the board was elected/nominated/given the job and i dont know.

I tried too and it's impossible to find that information and I think that says a lot in itself!

Actually, according to this article in the independent there are six members of the current board who have been there for a decade!!

micks

Mars Bar wrote: »

Well if your post is what the general football population think then it goes to show how ignorant a lot of people are to women's football. The Women's FAI (WFAI) has been in operation for a number of years now and the women's national league has been running since 2011. That's 5 years of women working their way up under your nose.

The WFAI has recently moved under the FAI's remit so that should be reflected within the FAI's board.

About to post similar - well said

Ironically and maybe by accident rather than design the FAI will possibly be ahead in this as by absorbing the WFAI (who will receive places on the FAI board) they will gain some female members

If the government were interested in improving sport in this country a time limit / quota should be included in this
ie each board position should only be held for 3 yrs then compulsory abstention for at least 1 yr

Not just the FAI board in the case of football but right down to league committees

Far too many dinosaurs in the League / Provisional / national committees and by default as its the same people in the FAI board

Sex is not a barrier to getting onto any of these committees / boards its the status quo

The FAI will have no problem filling their quota there are several ladies in positions in league and provincial committees - they will be elevated as required - they are already part of the wider "boys club"



The other barrier that may stop this through all organisations is that these boards are elected