I think it's only natural that fellas missing a couple of days work should be re-imbursed. Players should be taken care of better. Our mileage is 15 pence which just covers you. Getting 30 or 40 pence would make a huge difference to us. Providing meals and playing gear, I think, is irrelevant. All you want after pushing the boat out at training is a cup of coffee and a bit of fruit and a chat. There's a lot of money being spent on big meals which are the last thing on your mind.

Maybe it's because I've been around for a long time and I have a lot of gear but it means nothing to me. I give it away and a lot of it is wasted from my point of view. The money could be spent on improving expenses and holidays.

Endorsements aren't that important either in the sense that only a handful of players can get them and even then a lot depends on where you live. Ken Mortimer's about as high a profile footballer as you can get in Mayo but he wouldn't be in huge demand. Taking 50 per cent from whatever a player gets is crazy. A guy travels for two hours to open a shop and around this time of the year might be doing a few things like that. He deserves what he can get out of it.

D J Carey (Kilkenny)

I've no argument against not allowing pay-for-play. It's unrealistic until such time as the association can handle that sort of expense and that won't be in my playing career. But I believe players should be compensated for missing work. I disagree that any player should be out of pocket as a result of playing for their county. You're playing to give entertainment, your livelihood isn't at stake. From a serious point of view, if you miss work or overtime, it's not worth it on an ongoing basis. It's a professional sport, only there's no money changing hands but you can be training three or four nights a week. The mileage proposals are fair enough but I'm not that far from training so I haven't thought about it much.

Allowing endorsements is fair enough. If you're asked to endorse a product because of your public profile, you're entitled to be paid and the company will have budgeted for it. I've no objection to half the money being distributed to others. I don't know why they've decided against players using agents, I think everyone would do better if they were allowed but I suppose they (the GAA) are trying to close all the angles.

PA Laide (Kerry)I'd agree with not paying for playing but it's hard on players not to be re-imbursed. I'm lucky working in the bank and they're good to me but self-employed players shouldn't be out of pocket. Improving communications between players and county boards in relation to finances would be a good idea. The general impression is that county boards are well off. Players don't understand the structures of the GAA, they see the Cusack Stand being rebuilt at a cost of £28 million and think `why can't we get some of that?'.

More communication is desirable, there's a lot of bitterness. If a player receives 50 per cent of endorsement money, I think that could also cause bitterness. In our case, everyone would want Maurice Fitz and in other counties the Sherlocks and Canavans would be most in demand but other players wouldn't. I'm not saying any of us would begrudge Maurice but in some cases, it could get a bit sour.

We get 21 pence per mile in Kerry which only covers petrol but all our expenses are paid up. In Kerry, the senior footballers are well looked after.