Should a sponsor be able to buy the right to name new Lansdowne stadium?
YES:
By 2010, when it is hoped the new stadium will be open, nothing of the old Lansdowne Road will remain. It is right that the name should be buried with it. A new 21st century stadium deserves to establish its own place in the world - there is a difference between celebrating Ireland's history and being shackled by it.
A common reading of England's visit to Croke Park earlier this year was that it signalled a desire to stop fighting old battles, telling the world that this is a proud, forward-looking nation. It is surely a sign of confidence that historical relics such as Lansdowne Road are consigned to memory - gone but not forgotten.
This process is made more difficult because, for all their macho posturing, sports fans are romantics, prone to misty-eyed nostalgia. Dull, eventless games can become classics in the retelling. The image of the terrace hard-man dissolving into tears as his team wins or loses the big game is a cliche of sports television.
Perhaps this is about clinging to the idea of shared experience. We lead increasingly atomised lives, so the sense of community that comes from attending big sports events is cherished more than ever. The job of the governing bodies, the IRFU and the FAI, is to protect this emotional equity, while ensuring that the ground gets built on time and without further recourse to taxpayers' money.
But their role goes beyond that. They must be careful not to embarrass supporters by saddling them with an ill-fitting sponsor. This is a sensitive balancing act. We shall see if they are up to it, or whether they just go with whoever offers the biggest cheque.
There is a useful parallel across the water. Attending games at the self- consciously titled New Wembley Stadium is an odd experience. The sleek, high-tech arena bears no resemblance to its predecessor, either in terms of style or atmosphere. There is no sense of the history because it is a different place. It is also worth noting that the English FA's decision to retain the Wembley name was not due to some greater affinity with the game's heritage.
They just found they could earn more money by finding several "founding partners" rather than one overriding title sponsor. Another factor, also pertinent to Lansdowne, is that would-be sponsors recognised that attempting to brand a famous old ground wouldn't work in practice.
The history of naming-rights deals suggests that only new builds work. Arsenal's Emirates Stadium is a classic example. It works because there is no legacy to overcome; there is nothing else to call it.
And any attempt to shoehorn a sponsor on to the existing name will also fail. The traditional end of season test match takes place every year at The Oval in south London. Test cricket has been played there since 1880 - the first England versus Australia match. By rights, this should be called The Brit Oval, but nobody beyond the marketing department of Brit (whoever they are), would dream of doing that. Over the past 10 years, the ground has been called the Fosters Oval and the AMP Oval, both to no avail.
The subject of money however, is a problem for many opponents of the Lansdowne Road plan. It is as if this is in some way the final straw, that by gaining financially, the governing bodies are "prostituting the name of the new Lansdowne Road as a revenue raising exercise".
Sports governing bodies such as the IRFU and FAI used to be low profile: guardians of the game's rule book and custodians of its history.
This has shifted as changes in the media environment have garnered huge sums from TV and sponsorship. As a result, they have become bloated monopolies, puffed up and pompous.
Much of the money that should flow to the bottom of the pyramid gets stuck in the middle. Ambitious plans for growth and diversification fuel spiralling head counts and huge communications departments.
The money issue is a red herring. This is not a battle for the soul of professional sport. I fear that was lost a long time ago.
Richard Gillis is cricket correspondent of The Irish Times and writes extensively on sport and business.
