On Gaelic Games:Like some lucrative Hollywood franchise the Thurles disorder blockbuster at the time of writing ponders a further sequel. Those with an interest - however dishearteningly abstract that can sometimes seem - in the observance of rules and fair play will have perked up at the fact the penalties from the Cork-Clare match have by and large survived so far.

But the steady erosion of regard for discipline has continued. Maybe it's a good thing there's so much controversy early in the season in that it holds the subject up to the light and allows a swift opportunity to get things right or - at a distant second best - gives a clear signal that the current, new disciplinary apparatus will not work despite the best hopes for it.

A cursory audit halfway through June shows on the asset side initially firm action in relation to the Thurles incidents. The debit side however is already accumulating. Skip for the sake of argument the delay in the Clare-Cork process that saw the issue still staggering on over a fortnight after the events took place - to an extent that's unavoidable with amateur committees and players, who can't always bend their lives to the dictates of administration.

More substantive problems exist. The arguments from Cork and Clare and their supporters have ranged from the contributory negligence of the match officials in allowing the teams enter the tunnel at the same time to the predictable complaints about consistency. Now we all know the consistency argument is a crock. It's like telling a Garda who's holding a luminous breathalyser that there were fellas 10 times worse than you back in the car park. But it's not completely irrelevant because faith in and respect for any system is based on its perceived fairness.

Already we have had a separate brawl between Laois and Offaly hurlers followed by the Graham Geraghty controversy a week later. The Thurles Seven were dealt with but at least Seán Ó hAilpín, when asked about the incidents, accepted they were wrong and an obvious lapse from a team that prides itself on its discipline.

The other two matches have passed without any sanction. That's bad news for a Central Competitions Control Committee that looked to have made a decisive start to the championship when expediting the Thurles investigation. Because the initial decisions in that case were so firmly and quickly handed down the failure to address what had happened in Tullamore was glossed over.

But the aftermath of Dublin-Meath suggests a failure of will. Geraghty was twice seen clattering David Henry in incidents that were replayed on an almost continuous loop. CCCC had the power - under Rule 144 (e) - to seek clarification from referee Jim McKee as to whether he had seen the incidents but declined to avail of this facility.

There seems to be resentment within the GAA at the role played by media in highlighting these matters, particularly RTÉ's Sunday Game, but that is to blame the messenger. The problem - it is the GAA's biggest problem - is that discipline is being flouted on a regular basis. When acts as egregious as Geraghty's take place in front of a combined television audience of nearly a million they demand to be treated seriously. It may be Meath's admirable sense of responsibility in relation to the suspension of their top scorer, Brian Farrell, which they neither tried to protest nor appealed, created a reserve of goodwill towards the county or that the exciting nature of the match and the regard for Geraghty's battling qualities and talent as a footballer created a reluctance to suspend the player. But surely the need for disciplinary consistency is more important?

The grounds on which no further action was taken in the Geraghty case were also disappointing. To suggest the referee noticed and dealt with the two incidents by awarding frees is stretching credulity. In one of the cases it is pretty obvious he hit Henry after the free was whistled.

In the light of the Geraghty case the assertion Michael Haverty, the Galway referee who had charge of Laois-Offaly, had noticed and taken action in relation to that fracas becomes part of a pattern - a marked reluctance to revisit breaches of rule where the referee hasn't been able to spot them and consequently the maintenance of an environment where disregard for discipline goes unpunished.

That environment is preserved in other respects. The insistence on contesting every adverse decision no matter how obvious and fair is another example. The GAA's Official Guide is meant to be a code to which members of a large voluntary organisation subscribe of their own free will. Instead it has become a manual for adversarial strife up and down sundry committee rooms.

Then at the weekend Kilkenny manager Brian Cody seemed to suggest the rules on foul play were wrong unless the infractions were malicious and launched a startling broadside at the referees' assessment system.

The generally benevolent souls who sit in stands and issue verdicts on refereeing performances have always seemed on the basis of their collective estimation of refereeing standards to be closer to Pollyanna than Draco. But according to the manager of the All-Ireland champions they should be shot. What does such an intervention - made publicly despite the availability of more discreet channels of communication - do except feed the same chaotic environment?

This will probably end with the introduction of a commissioner for discipline whose office will be independent of all Croke Park committees. There will be wailing about this slight on voluntary officials, that the GAA will be saying they can't trust their own members to do the job. On the evidence to date they can't.

It might sound strange to say that the untimely passing of Eamonn Coleman ends this column on a brighter note but the former Derry manager managed the considerable trick of combining an almost belligerent passion for football with a mischievous twinkle. His death at the age of 59 is very sad but to have known him even tenuously was great fun.