Objections from Croke Park area residents and the costs involved in facilitating soccer and rugby are among the difficulties, writes Martin Ryan.
The reaction to the amendment of the GAA's rule 42 has been interesting. Clare's Noel Walsh, a long-time proponent of change of the controversial rule, stated on radio that it was nothing more than a transfer of power to central council. However, the Sunday newspapers were festooned with pictures of rugby and soccer players, rather than central council members - the apparent powerbrokers of the new era.
Many people like myself, who have argued against change in this case, are under no illusions as to what the practical upshot of the vote will be.
The curious paradox that has escaped many who heralded the power of democracy after the passing of Sligo's motion is that the move - in theory at least - takes power away from the masses in the GAA and hands the Croke Park imprimatur to a small group of officials.
In practice of course, this body will be wary of the opprobrium aimed at people such as the motions committee during the course of this debate, and will defy popular opinion at its peril.
It reflects badly on the GAA that the vote itself was taken in an information vacuum, with fear of not changing the rule being seized upon, rather than a coherent argument for change being presented. However, the issues which the GAA's leadership singularly failed to address prior to congress will now have to be tackled. In that sense, the punchline of that famous piece of Churchillian rhetoric after El Alamein - "it is the end of the beginning" - is perhaps an accurate way to describe the Croke Park situation now. Despite the energy that has gone into the matter on all sides, it represents a signpost along the way, rather than a terminus to the matter.
The considerations are multifarious. The most obvious one to anyone looking out the window at Saturday's congress is the GAA's relations with Croke Park area residents. A full annual programme of soccer and rugby internationals would add at least 10 major occasions to the Croke Park calendar. That is not to even consider big Heineken Cup occasions which hopefully will still be on the horizon for the Irish provinces.
The potential extra burden on the ground, and its environs, might not be far off doubling current annual usage. How will this sit with the GAA's planning regulations?
A difficulty that has been mooted already is the potential cost of preparing the ground for soccer matches. Floodlighting is an obvious expense, and not one to be disregarded lightly. If the GAA has to foot this bill, it will take many a full house in Croke Park to break even, not to mind generate the much vaunted extra money. For our sporting brethren to have to pay big money for this facility would surely make use of Croke Park an unjustifiable economic consideration for them, and force them overseas anyway. Will the Government arrive on its white charger to save the day?
While a trip to Lansdowne Road to mingle among Irish soccer supporters is a pleasure, recent events in the San Siro, and the memory of the English supporters in Lansdowne in 1995, show us that the FIFA's strict crowd control measures are well justified. However, the inability of Croke Park, as currently constituted - with its horizontal alignment - to effectively segregate crowds will have to be addressed.
Whether this involves putting temporary physical barriers between stands remains to be seen, but the solution will have the twin challenge of satisfying FIFA's crowd-control requirements, without impinging on fire regulations and emergency evacuation necessities. This issue will cost money too. It is difficult to see Croke Park being a complete solution to the FAI's requirements.
During the course of the rule 42 debate, the GAA has been very reticent about publicly defending itself against the negative images of the association portrayed by many.
It can no longer stand apologetically in the corner and allow its business to be dictated by others. There are serious funding anomalies to be addressed. The public purse is expected to fund 66 per cent of the redeveloped Lansdowne Road. This is before the inevitable overrun, which will probably necessitate further State intervention. This means the FAI and the IRFU will have a completed stadium in 2½ years, with access to Croke Park in the interim, for a total capital expenditure of little more than the GAA's current debt.
If the gratitude of the nation is commensurate with the vigour of the campaign to bring about the opening of Croke Park, it is inconceivable that the GAA should carry this debt any longer.
Even after the change in rule 42, there remains a strong argument that the GAA is bucking all the conventions of competitive practice by providing a glittering shop-window for its greatest rival.
The decision is now made and the GAA will have to live with the consequences. However, Saturday's historic decision may have serious ramifications for the GAA's amateur status.
Is it possible to juxtapose the image of professional sportsmen bestriding Croke Park, with two strictly amateur endeavours in hurling and football, and expect no knock-on effect? With media reports suggesting that the GPA is testing the water on possible strike action, the advent of professional sports in Croke Park may precipitate the most significant long-term effect of the rule 42 campaign.
A new era dawns and for some of us, Croke Park will never be quite the same again. But we have done our duty. Let one thing be said; if our professional sportsmen can grace Croke Park with the majesty of a Jack O'Shea or a Henry Shefflin, the indomitable spirit of a Brian Lohan or a Brian Mullins, the style and class of a Nicky English or a Maurice Fitzgerald, or the sorcery of a John Leahy or an Eamon Cregan, they will be doing the state some service.
Martin Ryan is a member of the Ballinahinch GAA club in Tipperary, and writes under the nom de plume "Mulcair" on www.premierview.ie - the Tipp GAA fan website