A year ago it became something of a joke. The GAA was coping with so many controversies that journalists could store the intro on their save-and-get keys and the keys would have been well worn. In the last 12 months, despite a stirring congress speech by president Joe McDonagh and a raft of disciplinary reforms, there's still no let-up.

Last weekend must have been like Groundhog Day for Croke Park as two fresh controversies erupted into the public domain: more speculation, criticism and painful focus on the enduring inadequacies of the GAA's disciplinary systems.

Meath player Ollie Murphy's sending-off in Celtic Park, Derry, wasn't remarkable in itself. At the end of what was a bad-tempered match, Murphy was sent off by referee Brendan Gorman for what appeared to be a headbutt on Derry player Sean Lockhart. None of this would have been exceptional but for the intervention of Meath manager Sean Boylan.

At the time of the sending-off it was clear Boylan was incensed by the decision and took to the field to remonstrate. Afterwards in an interview with RTE radio's Brian Carthy, he implicitly denied that Murphy had committed the head-butting: "I hate to see someone accused of something they did not commit." He further implied that the player had been provoked and called on Lockhart to clear the air - which the Derry player not surprisingly refused to do apart from denying that he had provoked anyone.

Unfortunately for Boylan and Murphy, the comments triggered intense media scrutiny, including much-played TV footage of the off-the-ball incident. Whereas the video evidence wasn't conclusive on the charge, neither would it be of much use to Murphy as a defence against the referee's report. It also magnified the prominence of the incident beyond what would have been the case had the Meath manager stayed silent.

Last weekend's other controversy was far more serious, although it received comparatively little coverage. Westmeath's football manager Brendan Lowry had a six-month suspension lifted by the GAA's Management Committee. Originally imposed in respect of incidents during the O'Byrne Cup final, Lowry's suspension was exacerbated by a previous warning received for behaviour during the 1999 League match against Wicklow in Mullingar.

His acquittal yesterday week was on a technicality - albeit a sizeable one - and despite compelling video evidence. Lowry hadn't been informed about the more serious charges he faced in advance of the meeting which he was unable to attend. Accordingly his appeal succeeded.

Within the GAA, there is considerable embarrassment at the fashion in which the case against the Westmeath manager disintegrated. As one provincial delegate put it: "A few weeks ago we (Leinster Council) were celebrating 100 years of doing great things and then we go and cock up something as badly as this".

This has been doubly unfortunate in that Leinster had earned a sound reputation for doing things properly and not shirking more severe punishments when considered appropriate.

Yet, in a broader sense, the events of last weekend were just an extension to the seemingly unending difficulties of the GAA in relation to disciplinary matters. Croke Park must consider it a bitter irony that the year since their most concerted effort to do something about indiscipline has been rewarded by a series of controversies which uphold the most damaging image of the association as essentially lawless.

If the Murphy and Lowry incidents have more general application it is that they reflect two of the greatest problems facing the GAA's authority over matches. One is the nature of punishment and the other is the access to the playing field casually - and uniquely to Gaelic games - assumed by team officials.

Last year's disciplinary package accepted by Congress on an experimental basis was largely a welcome attempt to address some of the most pressing problems in the area. It centralised the power to discipline and appoint referees for the championship, despite reservations from the provincial councils who were ceding those powers, and it introduced the use of yellow and red cards.

Yet crucially it decided against some measures which would be of considerable benefit in current circumstances. One was the introduction of an Australian/International Rules runner who is the communication cord between a team's management and players on the field. This would facilitate the relocation of managers and selectors in the stand.

Twenty years ago and more, the spectacle of managers prowling the sideline was rare and teams coped with this comparative inactivity. There is a strong view that coaching should end when a team takes the field and on-field instruction should be kept to a minimum. The instances in which trouble has been caused by unfettered access to the pitch are too numerous to be ignored.

The second measure ruled out by the disciplinary sub-committee was the concept of time-based suspensions. As a result the anomaly of players earning suspensions ranging from the severe to the meaningless for the same offence largely continues.

Some attempt was made to address this by declaring December and January as void months for the serving of suspensions, but the simple fact remains that players serving one-month suspensions during the league and championship are incurring fundamentally different punishments.

Match-based or competition-specific suspensions were ruled out because they would militate unduly against weaker counties. In other words, a three-match ban for a player whose county routinely loses in the first round of the championship would be in effect a three-year suspension. Tough.

Such sensitivity to the difficulties of the miscreant is an unusual starting point for any disciplinary system. Anyway, the fact that some counties have only one serious match a year is something that the Football Development Committee proposals are addressing and the provision of more guaranteed championship matches would have the added bonus of making match and competition-based suspensions more appropriate.

Given the weakness of authority - and to be fair, last year's reforms were aimed at addressing that weakness and may yet enjoy some success - it is hardly surprising that that there is increasing lawlessness in the games. Teams, counties and players frequently believe that they can obey what rules suit them.

Last May, a month after GAA president Joe McDonagh pledged the association to new levels of rigour in the field of discipline, his own county, Galway, failed to charge the person who struck a referee in front of 2,000 people. A year previously, Clare's county board postponed their senior hurling championship to facilitate Colin Lynch's evasion of the full impact of a three-month suspension.

What credibility can these units have when they try to uphold the rules again within their jurisdiction?

Part of this lawlessness is the lack of respect accorded to referees. No other sports allow their arbiters to be treated in this fashion. English soccer is rocked with controversy when a bunch of Manchester United players surround a referee and harangue him. Within the GAA, referees are abused, sometimes assaulted and frequently hung out to dry in the hot air of public condemnation with no established representative to defend them.

Referees have to be defended even when they're wrong, particularly when they're wrong. Without independent arbitration accepted by both teams, no sport can exist. There will always be human error and that too has to be accepted. Referees who continually get things wrong shouldn't be given matches, but occasional errors have to be tolerated and the officials' authority upheld.

One of the great cultural arguments deployed in defence of the status quo echoes former president Jack Boothman's line about the "latent violence in Irish society".

One sport which was saddled with similar assumptions is Australian Rules football. Yet all the mayhem which formerly characterised the game has largely vanished. This is one of the reasons why the International Rules series has been successfully revived. Patrick Keane is press officer to the National Football League in Australia.

"After the 1990 Grand Final which had been a shambles, it was decided something had to be done and very severe suspensions were handed out. We now video all games and anything an umpire doesn't catch during the game is studied afterwards. Suspensions for anything between two and six games are handed out for offences, sometimes more if it's very serious. For minor offences, players are fined.

"Fifteen to 20 years ago, Aussie Rules used to be little more than a lot of fellas belting each other. Since the last three or four years, you never see anyone using fists or elbows. The game is immeasurably cleaner."

Words that Keane's Croke Park counterpart Danny Lynch would love to be able to repeat the next time Liveline comes looking for him.