Croke Farse

FFS another EUR40 million has been promised by the state to fund Croke Park development. That brings the total amount to near EUR110 million. According to GAA President Sean Kelly, "There are no strings attched", i.e. no preconditions on the opening up of Croke Park.
This saga gets more disgusting by the day. It is a horrible thought to find that a private organisation with the view that offering support to fellow sporting organisations is against their ethos is allowed plough vast amounts of taxpayers' money into a stadium which sees so few capacity crowds in even twelve months. They (the GAA) forcefeed this 'amateur organisation with professional abilities' crap down people's throats at every available opportunity and yet continue to be allowed take the lion's share of sports funding, even after a series of games recently which would have grossed the association millions of EURO. For 110 million the government could have funded/co-funded (rem McManus' 50 million?) a superb stadium for the use of every man, woman and child in Ireland... 'with no strings attached'.

one point that must be known is that even when the gaa have recieved 105m in a period of time, they have paid 93m in paye, prsi and vat in the same period....

also we must remember that 191m will be pumped into landsdown road by the government as well.

i am not a major supporter, but after the consessions made by our local county borad re cup semi on sun, i find it hard to put in the boot on this matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by max power

also we must remember that 191m will be pumped into lansdowne road by the government as well.

---

Exactly, FAI are getting money from the government too, for a stadium that they will only fill around the same amount of times every year so stop the begrudging.

Saying that I'd love it if Croker was opened up and think that it probably will be at some stage but there is absolutely no right/obligation on the GAA to do so.

I don't have any problem with the GAA's rules and opinions. Like I said, they are a private organisation. Therefore, they can do what they like as far as I'm concerned. As regards taking the money, any properly run organisation would do the same.
I am angry that the government are prepared to support their exclusive stance on issues regarding the use of Croke Park. Had they pushed the GAA a bit more rather than dishing out the cha-chings maybe there would no need for a further 200 odd million to be spent.

RE not putting the boot in on the GAA. It's common knowledge that local GAA is light years ahead of its overall authority. Longford GAA have often shown themselves to be particularly progressive - hence the agreement for Sunday.

RE paying taxes, etc. If we all got grants back relative to the amount we spend in taxes we'd be living in a pretty sweet but fcuked up tax system. They pay those amounts because %age wise thats what we all pay.

[QUOTE=cullenswood]stop the begrudging.
QUOTE]

i don't begrudge the GAA a penny (see the above post). I do take an interest in the value i get for paying taxes though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cullenswood

Exactly, FAI are getting money from the government too, for a stadium that they will only fill around the same amount of times every year so stop the begrudging.

Saying that I'd love it if Croker was opened up and think that it probably will be at some stage but there is absolutely no right/obligation on the GAA to do so.

---

There was no obligation on the part of the my local (Tory) council here in Sasana to allow the local GAA the right to use their facilities but these so-called 'anti-Irish bigots' :rolleyes: still did. It's what I call not being such a f*cking dog-in-the-manger. BTW, if it wasn't for the GAA, €190 of tax money would be put to better use. FFS, I mean, it's not like the FAI and IRFU are asking for the use of the ground for free, is it?

Government are to blame here - hundreds of millions of euro will be lost to our economy when our home games are played abroad. Why not recommend to the broken glass spreaders that they earn their money from rent instead.

The money also comes with "no strings attached" which is actually true because even if Sean Kelly promises to do all that he can and he probably will he has already been shafted by the bigoted backwoodsmen.

Great post Magoo. Have to agree with you, lopez and gspain.

It makes me sick to see the GAA get such funding. Another 40million is a disgrace. If we were to listen to the likes of Max Power, we would be willing to accept this type of behaviour. As we all know, Max himself is a PRSI worker, yet I'm sure the government don't come running with large grants to him. As Magoo points out, this money could have been better spent on facilities for every man, woman and child.

The GAA are simply a branch of the Irish maffia. A sectarian organisation that only cares about itself. I feel sorry for Sean Kelly, a great man. As for Boothman, McDonagh, etc., they are the scum of the earth.

Shame on the GAA bigots, shame on this so-called government, and shame on those so-called Irish people who go out of their way to vindicate such actions.

Let me get this straight: the Government gave the GAA, Ireland's biggest sporting organisation, €110m towards the c. €450m re-development of their ground without any strings attached and are giving the IRFU and FAI €191m (or two-thirds of the projected cost) of the re-development costs of Lansdowne Road, similarly with no strings attachced???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Let me get this straight: the Government gave the GAA, Ireland's biggest sporting organisation, €110m towards the c. €450m re-development of their ground without any strings attached and are giving the IRFU and FAI €191m (or two-thirds of the projected cost) of the re-development costs of Lansdowne Road, similarly with no strings attachced???

---

One promotes sectarianism by it's intolerance of "foreign" games.
The other two promote global integration through competition.
FAIreland were blocked from building their own ground by the government.
The GAA had government assistance at every phase of the Croke Park redevelopment.

The economy of this country will lose hundreds of million so feuro if home Internationals are played abroad. We've already given up our Pool in the 2007 Rugby World Cup.

Pubs/Restaurants/hotels/Caterers will lose significant amounts of money. Jobs will be lost as a result of this.

Today 300-400 jobs may not mean much but who know sin 2-3 years time what state our economy will be in. We were a basket case during the 1980's.

The Ireland vEngland Rugby match last year was worth €90 million alone to the economy with significant benefits being felt as far away as Portlaoise.

Appreciate this is not the GAA's problem they are right to look for the money and pull whatever strokes they need one kerryman to another etc.

However the government has a resonsibility to taxpayers and the citizens of this country and this was a shameful act - hjust as bad as McCreevy bailing out hhis horse racing buddies in Punchestown.

The fact that the GAA has sectarian rules and huge power is wieled by narrow minded bigots are obviously other good reasons although that has always been the case.

Any funding for Croke Park should have been conditional on it being available while Lansdowne is being redeveloped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peadar

One promotes sectarianism by it's intolerance of "foreign" games.
The other two promote global integration through competition.

---

That sounds like the retoric of the DUP (only line dancing would've been included alongside the GAA as a 'force of evil'). 'Promotes sectarianism' - a recent example of this would be??

The GAA tolerates other sports, they just choose to not allow other sports to be played on their grounds - which is their right. Don't forget, the Government is paying out €10m to he hosts of the Ryder Cup in two years time, even though the golf society there (can't remember the venue) will not admit female members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peadar

FAIreland were blocked from building their own ground by the government.

---

The FAI were not blocked from building their own stadium - the Government gave them a financial sweetner if they rowed in behind the Stadium Ireland plans and did not proceed with Eircom Park, which they then chose to do so... surely any beef here should be with the Government, not the GAA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peadar

The GAA had government assistance at every phase of the Croke Park redevelopment.

---

The GAA went ahead with the redevelopment of their grounds before the vast majority of the funding was granted - the IRFU and FAI are only minor financiers of the re-development of the IRFU's own ground and approached the Government before submitting planning permission.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

The GAA tolerates other sports, they just choose to not allow other sports to be played on their grounds - which is their right.

---

As if its withing their gift to "tolerate" other sports
They allow american football and american concert artists, of course it is their right but not after millions of public money has been given to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Don't forget, the Government is paying out €10m to he hosts of the Ryder Cup in two years time, even though the golf society there (can't remember the venue) will not admit female members.

---

Untrue, its the K club which does allow female members, to do otherwise would be illegal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

The FAI were not blocked from building their own stadium -

---

Yes they were, amongst other things the Air corps were instructed to object on the basis of interfering with their flight path, absloute rubbish of course as there is already a mountain there which already hinders this flight path.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

The GAA went ahead with the redevelopment of their grounds before the vast majority of the funding was granted - the IRFU and FAI are only minor financiers of the re-development of the IRFU's own ground and approached the Government before submitting planning permission.

---

Again untrue, the IRFU/FAI are major contributors the the project, you really should check your facts before putting forward such views

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Let me get this straight: the Government gave the GAA, Ireland's biggest sporting organisation, €110m towards the c. €450m re-development of their ground without any strings attached and are giving the IRFU and FAI €191m (or two-thirds of the projected cost) of the re-development costs of Lansdowne Road, similarly with no strings attachced???

---

the new lansdowne road will be able to accommodate GAA matches and the GAA have already stated that they may be interested in holding the occasional game there. therefore no need to have any strings attached to the receipt of public money for the project.... it will be open to all sports!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Don't forget, the Government is paying out €10m to he hosts of the Ryder Cup in two years time, even though the golf society there (can't remember the venue) will not admit female members.

---

I think you'll find that's Portmarnock not the K Club.
Your arguments are as flawed as your opinion is misguided.

You'll see the money rolling in from the Ryder Cup and you'll try to remember why you got your knickers in a twist over the €10m petty cash provided by the government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowboy

amongst other things the Air corps were instructed to object on the basis of interfering with their flight path, absloute rubbish of course as there is already a mountain there which already hinders this flight path.

---

Yes and the regulations cited were with regard to a commercial airport not a private airodrome. Ironically when Ryanair made a proposal to get Baldonnell opened up as an alternative to Dublin airport they were basically told that would never happen.

Seems I’m on the minority side here on this issue, for some reason it seems that the GAA, who are perfectly within their rights to request Government funding for their redevelopment of Croke Park, have incurred the wrath of you lot for being granted funds amounting to, by rough calculation, less than a quarter of the total costs incurred.

Anyway, in response to a few of the replies:

1. I merely mentioned that the GAA ‘tolerates’ other sports because it had been said previously that the GAA ‘promotes sectarianism by it’s intolerance of “foreign” games.’ Sorry if this offended, but the original posting was not true.

2. I stand corrected on the venue of the Ryder Cup – however I remember a few years ago people on Questions & Answers giving out that public funds had gone to a golf club to enable them to host a major golfing tournament despite the rules of the club barring female membership. This remains the case.

3. The FAI were not blocked from building their own stadium – fact is they decided not to go ahead after meeting with Government officials and having received promises regarding funding / Stadium Ireland – they made a conscious decision NOT to go ahead with planning their own stadium. They never requested planning permission.

4. As for my comment that the FAI/IRFU are not major contributors to the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road I am correct – here is an excerpt from the Irish Times on 2nd September this year (under a heading Firm agreement on new stadium):
‘Under the terms of the agreement between the two federations, they have entered a joint venture with a 50-per-cent equal share, although the IRFU are providing funds of €68 million, the FAI €33 million and the state €191 million.’
This means the state/tax-payer will be paying two-thirds of the costs of a venue to which the ownership of the outcome will remain in the hands of private ownership.
I had checked my facts before putting forward my views.

5. Yes Lansdowne Road will be available for use by the GAA – all the better for the FAI and IRFU if they choose to exercise this option, since they will benefit from the rental of the venue to the GAA.

I don’t think it’s good for the GAA to refuse use of Croke Park to other sports, however it is their prerogative to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

3. The FAI were not blocked from building their own stadium – fact is they decided not to go ahead after meeting with Government officials and having received promises regarding funding / Stadium Ireland – they made a conscious decision NOT to go ahead with planning their own stadium. They never requested planning permission.

---

I think you'll find that you're very wrong here.
The FAI were left with no option but to scrap eircom Park.
Research it.

The government will have a stake in Lansdowne - they have no stake in Croke Park.

I agree Portmarnock Golf Club should not get state funding as they do not allow women members although women can play there. Would a whole "sporting" organisation that defacto discriminates against protestants and those ethnic British people on this island?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Anyway, in response to a few of the replies:

1. I merely mentioned that the GAA ‘tolerates’ other sports because it had been said previously that the GAA ‘promotes sectarianism by it’s intolerance of “foreign” games.’ Sorry if this offended, but the original posting was not true.

---

point taken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

2. I stand corrected on the venue of the Ryder Cup – however I remember a few years ago people on Questions & Answers giving out that public funds had gone to a golf club to enable them to host a major golfing tournament despite the rules of the club barring female membership. This remains the case.

---

and it is just as wrong as the croke park funding, they discriminate on the basis sport rather than gender, there is no logical resaon why soccer should not be played there in fact in flies in the face of financial logic, this latest "grant" just gives them more breathing space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

3. The FAI were not blocked from building their own stadium – fact is they decided not to go ahead after meeting with Government officials and having received promises regarding funding / Stadium Ireland – they made a conscious decision NOT to go ahead with planning their own stadium. They never requested planning permission.

---

This meeting took place after all the blocking tactics red tape etc were already in place and the decision not to proceed was made under duress. In reality they were blocked it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

4. As for my comment that the FAI/IRFU are not major contributors to the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road I am correct – here is an excerpt from the Irish Times on 2nd September this year (under a heading Firm agreement on new stadium):
‘Under the terms of the agreement between the two federations, they have entered a joint venture with a 50-per-cent equal share, although the IRFU are providing funds of €68 million, the FAI €33 million and the state €191 million.’
This means the state/tax-payer will be paying two-thirds of the costs of a venue to which the ownership of the outcome will remain in the hands of private ownership.
I had checked my facts before putting forward my views.

---

Since when is 33m a minor contribution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

I don’t think it’s good for the GAA to refuse use of Croke Park to other sports, however it is their prerogative to do so.

---

Not when they are using mine and others money to perpetuaute a sectarian agenda, their position is morally untennable in the current climate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Seems I’m on the minority side here on this issue, for some reason it seems that the GAA, who are perfectly within their rights to request Government funding for their redevelopment of Croke Park, have incurred the wrath of you lot for being granted funds amounting to, by rough calculation, less than a quarter of the total costs incurred

---

Any wrath incurred is due to the various reasons listed above by different people on this board. However, that is another argument, not necessarily to do with this one.
I, myself, said that i dont feel any resentment towards the GAA for taking the money. Come on, who wouldn't? My resentment lies in the fact that public funding is being offered with no return on investment being sought by the state. In every situation whereby anyone recieives a state provided grant it is always issued on the premise that the money being handed over is being saved by the state through not having to provide whatever the receiver of the grant is providing. In this case, however, under the current situation of closed doors in Croke Park, it looks as though the state will need to provide a suitable stadium for national events such as soccer, rugby, (concerts), whatever... despite having given the GAA all that cash.

Right, think (almost) enough has been said here but wanted to address the last few postings.

I have checked repeatedly in the national press and have read umpteen articles on the Eircom Park/Stadium Ireland fiasco - the FAI was not blocked from developing its own ground but instead was offered a deal, worth €45m in funding, by the Government to row in behind the Stadium Ireland project. After meeting with the Government a number of times in late February/early March 2001 the FAI decided to go with the Government's plans. I can quote various reports in the national media to support this and as I'm not privy to the private discussions at the meetings held, I don't see any other grounds for not going ahead with their plans.

The FAI & IRFU have both said that the Government will be 'stakeholders' in the redeveloped stadium, but in the same way as the general public will be. They have not said that the Government will profit directly from attendances at the ground, no more so than the State has a share in the revenue from crowds that attend GAA fixtures at Croke Park.

The IRFU and FAI are minor players in the financing of the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road, the GAA financed their own redevelopment and then received grant aid from the Government. Proportionally speaking, the GAA would be entitled to a further €190m if they were to receive the same financial support as the other organisations.

I have read a few comments regarding the GAA's supposed 'sectarian agenda.' Could someone give me examples of this in action?



Any further arguments can be made in person - I'll be available for discussions in Paris this weekend! :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roboyle

Right, think (almost) enough has been said here but wanted to address the last few postings.

I don't see any other grounds for not going ahead with their plans.

I have read a few comments regarding the GAA's supposed 'sectarian agenda.' Could someone give me examples of this in action?
:p

---

I repeat it was clear at the time that the government was not going to allow eircom park go ahead, Bernard O' Byrne was forced to resign subsequently as he was the main force behind eircom park.

All you need do is look at the GAA's rule book on "foreign" games to see what the agenda is. I have great admiration for Sean Kelly who is trying to chnage this while hampered by intrangagent older men , boothman et al.

Enjoy the weekend in paris Rob

Eddie Moroney

I bet regardless of what sport was played in whichever stadium, still this type of critic-in-the-stand nonsense would be heard

Feel free to move this, mods

Personally I dont have anything against the GAA getting funding from the government to help build Croke Park. They government gets a lot of it back in some form of tax anyway. Since the re development of landsdowne road is going ahead (although with a crappy 50,000 seats) it makes the whole thing fair.

My only problem is the complete lack of other stadia around the country. The Eircom League needs funding for stadia and the government should be putting up cash for a 30,000 IRFU/GAA/FAI stadium down in Munster. It should put some decent sized grants to help build 10,000 to 15,000 seater stadia for the Eircom League Clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magoo

Eddie Moroney

---

Brilliant, i have a pain laughing
:)

Speaking of GAA sectarianism, how about this little bit from yesterday's Indo ( http://www.unison.ie/irish_independe...issue_id=11503 )

Quote:

---

"Look, a mhac, are you that simple that you think the government would throw out €40 million to the GAA with nothing in return? Mark my words there are no flies on that O'Donoghue fellah. If the GAA don't agree to open up Croke Park at the next Congress don't bet on them ever seeing the second €20 million.

"Isn't it gas to think that a few years ago the government gave the GAA €38 million to keep Croke Park closed and now they are giving them even more to open it up? And these are the lads who are supposed to be running the country!

"They should let Liam Mulvihill and Seán Kelly run the country and let the politicians take over the GAA.

"Anyway the GAA Congress will not agree to let soccer and rugby into the hallowed ground of Croke Park. We might be gone all modern in the GAA and even international but surely there's enough people with backbone still to stop this happening.

"I can tell you that I will never set foot in Croke Park again if they let the soccer crowd play there. My own father and two of my uncles were there on Bloody Sunday, November 1, 1920 when the Black and Tans shot dead Michael Hogan and several others. How could we ever forget that?"

---

At the end of the day, you can't really blame the GAA. After all, they got a nice shiny new stadium with a lot of money coming from the government. It's the government who is at fault, for throwing money at different sporting organizations for 2 large stadiums when 1 would have been enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ???

"I can tell you that I will never set foot in Croke Park again if they let the soccer crowd play there. My own father and two of my uncles were there on Bloody Sunday, November 1, 1920 when the Black and Tans shot dead Michael Hogan and several others. How could we ever forget that?" ( http://www.unison.ie/irish_independe...issue_id=11503 )

---

Because of what the British did at a GAA match in the 1920s, Irish football supporters (and to a lesser extent Irish football players) should be punished 90 or so years later. Whats his arguement ? That football is a british game ? - theres evidence to suggest that either the Italians or the anchient Japanese invented it - either way its the global game now. Even if its a british game, how is it (the game of football) responsible for what happened in 1920?

Quote:

---

That football is a british game ?

---

China actually invented it

Quote:

---

At the end of the day, you can't really blame the GAA. After all, they got a nice shiny new stadium........

---

Whatever progressive ideals Sean Kelly has, it is obvious the GAA neanderthals dont want rugby or soccer in their 'nice shiny new stadium'.

The Lansdowne redevelopment should go ahead even if this means having to play home rugby and soccer internationals away for two years. It is a small price to pay to get rid of any dependency on the GAA.

By the time the Lansdowne Road project is completed, Croke Park won't be needed for rugby or soccer. By then many of those shortsighted pr**ks like Boothman and McDonagh will have gone to that great GAA pitch in the sky and when the stark ecomonics of running a vast stadium that is filled only three or four times a year (if they are lucky) finally hit home and the Government hansdouts stop, no doubt the olive branch will be offered.

When that day comes every rugby and soccer should get great pleasure when the begrudgers are told to stick their olive branch and Croke Park up their a**es.

The debate should stop now, I say 'F**k them', lets gets on with it. :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ???

"I can tell you that I will never set foot in Croke Park again if they let the soccer crowd play there. My own father and two of my uncles were there on Bloody Sunday, November 1, 1920 when the Black and Tans shot dead Michael Hogan and several others. How could we ever forget that?" ( http://www.unison.ie/irish_independ...&issue_id=11503 )

---

The GAA were banning 'garison' games long before this event happened and football clubs were not immune to sectarian violence during this period. While I have every sympathy for the victims of the Croke Park Massacre, I can't see the connection between a bunch of foreign criminals in a mix of police and army uniforms shooting people, with either rugby and football, both of which were played by many prominent Irish politicians, (Eg: DeValera, Oscar Traynor) the former especially with those that went through Jesuit schools.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thejollyrodger

China actually invented it

---

the GAME was played in Rome with decapitated heads. But the word Soccer came from England to avoid confussion between "UPPER CLASS" rugby and "LOWER CLASS" rugby.

though in its current incarnation 'tis chinese

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ccfcman

the GAME was played in Rome with decapitated heads. But the word Soccer came from England to avoid confussion between "UPPER CLASS" rugby and "LOWER CLASS" rugby.

though in its current incarnation 'tis chinese

---

Lots of claims to have invented football incl the Scots.

Football is a world game. It is the beautiful game there are no imitations that come even close

As for the origin of the term Soccer welll.......

Garry Archer who was well known on the net long before the web existed eg back in the 80's researched the origin of the term "soccer" - explanation is below.


SOCCER
------
From: Garry Archer (archer@hsi.com)
Date: May 1991

I am an Englishman that has taken on himself a personal crusade
to respond to comments regarding the use of the "American" word for
football. I have seen them over and over again on the worldwide
computer news network, USENET, in its rec.sport.soccer newsgroup
where I have been an active contributor for several years.

To love the game of football is to love it's rich history also.
It particularly disturbs me when modern fans of the game less conversed
in this history do not fully understand that the word "soccer" is an
English, _not_ American word derived from the second syllable of the
word "association".

"Soccer" was originally called "association football" during the
formation of the Football Association in England in the 1860s. This
was to maintain a distinction from the other football game being
organised in England at the same time based on the handling codes,
whilst Association Football conformed to the dribbling codes. The
other football came to be known as "rugby" football, named after the
Rugby School in England, where it is said that a certain young student,
William Webb Ellis, picked up the ball in his hands during an
association football match and ran with it over the goal line. Master
Ellis asked his teacher, who was refereeing, if that was a goal. The
reply was, "No, but it was a jolly good 'try'", which is where one of
the rugby scoring terms comes from. Rugby Union was formally organised
by 1871, but suffered another split by 1893 when Rugby League was
formed. I digress.

Near the end of 1863, Charles Wreford-Brown, who later became a
notable official of the Football Association, was asked by some friends
at Oxford whether he cared to join them for a game of "rugger" (rugby).
He is said to have refused, preferring instead to go for a game of
"soccer" - a play on the word "association". The name caught on.

English public schoolboys love to nickname things, then as much as
now. The tendency is to add "er" to the end of many words. Rugby [Union]
Football became "rugby", and then "rugger". Association Football was
better know as "assoccer" and naturally evolved into "soccer" which is
much easier for a schoolboy to say...

Therefore, the word "soccer" has been used in the mother country
of all football-type games since at least the mid-19th century. The
word "football", however, was more descriptive of the game (i.e.
kicking a ball with the feet!) and was the term more frequently used.
The British exported the game, so naturally the word "football" was the
name mostly used all over the world. In recent decades it has been
noted that the word "soccer" is apparently increasing in usage. The
word "football" still appears in formal designations, however, in for
example, Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). The
word "soccer" is more commonly used in several countries around the
world that play other forms of football. When Australians say
"football", they mean Australian Rules football instead [Well in southern
states they do, in the north they mean Rugby League -Ed]. The Irish
have Gaelic football. In the USA and Canada, of course, there is
Gridiron football. Rugby Union, Rugby League, Australian Rules,
Gaelic, American and Canadian football all owe their roots to
Association football. With the exception of Gaelic Football, they all
use an ovoid shaped ball. None is as popular around the world as
Association football.

"Football" is the world standard name for "soccer". I always used
the word "football" (and still do, wherever I can). The word "soccer",
however, is engrained into the origins of the modern game of
association football as much as any other aspect of The Game much of
the world enjoys today.

Finally, it must be remembered that British football, both
association and rugby, had been organised in the 19th century by
people in the upper echelons of the English educational system, from
"exotic" schools, colleges and universities as Harrow, Eton, Oxford
and Cambridge, just for starters. As I stated earler, students of
the Victorian era, as much as now, loved nicknames and "soccer" and
"rugger" were the accepted everyday names for those people. These
were sports for gentlemen.

When the games were taken up by those less fortunate enough to
have received the higher (and more expensive) levels of education
the game of soccer became very popular with the masses. Rugger, less
so. As the rules became increasingly divergent between the two sports,
soccer became the people's sport and rugger remained more of a
"gentleman's" game.

Ever heard the phrase, "Soccer is a gentleman's game played by
ruffians and Rugby is a ruffian's game played by gentlemen"?

So "soccer" was a fanciful, gentleman's name for the sport. The
mere, common man started to call it "football" for the obvious reason
that it's a game about a ball kicked with the foot. The game, and the
word, was exported by British workers, students and merchant and naval
seamen all over the world in the latter 19th and early 20th century...
and the name, and the game, blossomed.

I prefer to call it "footy" myself!

Yours in football,
Garry Archer