Senior GAA figures say it is unlikely the association would call a special congress to vote again on opening up Croke Park to other sports, despite the ambivalent signals emanating from the Dail yesterday.

Friday's announcement at congress by GAA president Sean McCague that the Government was to grant the association £60 million for the development of the stadium was interpreted by officials as unconditional. But comments by the Taoiseach yesterday suggested that overtures would be made to persuade the GAA to make the ground available to other sports.

To do that, congress would again have to vote on the amendment to Rule 42, which was defeated last weekend.

"I would not see that happening," said former GAA president John Dowling. "Congress has spoken, the vote is over and the congress will not meet again for another 12 months. And we can't allow public opinion or media pressure to sway us on that."

Kerry chairman Sean Walsh also believes the GAA will not debate the issue before next year. He also believes that to force another vote would lessen the chances of the motion being passed.

"I have to say that if there was a significant amount of Government upheaval over this and it took a calling of special congress to resolve it, then I wouldn't be against it. But if obtaining the grant is dependent on passing the motion, I think that could be interpreted as a form of blackmail by many of our delegates. It could have an adverse effect on the motion if they held a gun to our heads."

As he sees it, the differing interpretations of the Fianna Fail members of the coalition and Progressive Democrats leader Mary Harney is not a matter for the GAA.

"I think it is up to the politicians to iron it out," he says. "We took the announcement of the grant in good faith and understood that there were absolutely no strings attached. Now, I think that had there been no announcement on Friday evening, the motion on Rule 42 might well have been passed.

"It is beginning to look in hindsight as if the Government's timing was designed that way, and now that the shoe is on the other foot Mr Ahern is taking a different stance on the matter."

Dowling, who spoke out against the motion at congress, also believes its chances of gaining a two-thirds majority were significantly altered by the announcement of the grant.

"It is only my opinion, but I think that the amendment would have gone through had their been no announcement. The news of the £60 million was something that greatly pleased the delegates and it was absolutely felt that it was in no way conditional on the vote on Rule 42."

Dowling's reservations about the motion for change centred on his belief that the pitch simply couldn't sustain a regular programme of rugby internationals.

"As one on the delegates against this, I have been portrayed in the media as a bitter person," he said. "But I am not bitter. I have nothing against soccer or rugby, if I could do either sport a good turn, I would. But it is not often reported that that field in Croke Park is used for schools hurling and football up to four times a week. They would be the first to lose out."

He was upset by the demands at congress for a recount of the show of hands following the one-vote failure to secure the two-thirds majority.

"I understand the Roscommon delegates calling for a recount, it was their motion. But there were others present who know that this is the way we have always done things at congress. And the thing is, the people counting the voters are reliable people. We have had slender margins of defeat before without calls for a recount," he said.