I like the idea. With the right support who's to say it couldn't produce something useful?
It seems to me that the three key people on that committee are John O'Mahoney, Mick Wallace and Eamon Coughlan - all three have the strong sports background to appreciate the benefits of good sporting infrastructure and practice. Wallace, though, has a conflict of interest given the Youths and might have to step back on it.
For anything to get brought up at a JHOC, it needs to be current or related to legislation, or (cynic!) capable of shining a positive light on the members. Anything else is harder to put on the agenda. Knowing at the outset what you want to achieve is crucial: do you want to mark the FAI's cards, create a debate (again, why?), facilitate state-private sector involvement etc. The better briefed the JHOC is, the stronger the case, so a comprehensive briefing document and meetings or other communication with the members would be essential. At the very least, you would need to know at the outset which members of the committee would support a national debate on football, and for instance,which would care little about it, or prefer to be seen active on GAA issues. That's where having an organisation behind you makes sense.
Just riffing with ideas, but questions on underage coaching (tied into tackling social disadvantage or crossing the gender divide), preventing the forced migration of youngsters to UK clubs, potential employment opportunities from professionalisation of clubs (players and administration) and exchequer benefits from infrastructure projects, increased commercial activity etc that that would bring. As I said, just riffing -there are probably much better things to consider.
Bookmarks