ANY fly that happens to survive the verbal salvos which rebound off the walls of 80 Merrion Square today will be able to command a king's ransom. A potentially combustible day begins with a meeting of disaffected National Coach Joe McGrath and the FAI officers, after which the officers will convene to discuss their strategy for the Executive Council meeting.

So disaffected has McGrath become with the association's officer board that he took the unusual step of writing to them through his .solicitors outlining his many grievances and perceived lack of co-operation from the officers.

Indeed, there is widespread annoyance within the Irish coaching community as a whole at the lack of financial support given them, and the association's perceived lack of interest. However, rumours of McGrath's pending resignation - and even the long-shot of a disgruntled Mick McCarthy washing his hands of the association - could prove premature.

Given their current poor standing and the adverse publicity they have brought upon themselves, the officer board may well be willing to agree to McGrath's demands. Ditto McCarthy, who meets them on Tuesday to discuss the vexed issue of his assistant Ian Evans, and whether his role should be part-time or full-time. McGrath and McCarthy are probably in a far stronger position than they themselves realise and anybody with any demands on the FAI could do worse than come calling this week.

McCarthy is still on holidays while McGrath was still in England yesterday where his Republic of Ireland Under-16 side were beaten 2-1 by their English counterparts. Nor was the stand-in chief executive/press officer, Des Casey, able to return our calls yesterday.

However, the under-fire FAI President Louis Kilcoyne augmented Michael Hyland's comments the day before by intimating that the FAI might call a press conference and actually make themselves accountable for the wave of unanswered question now circling the FAI.

"There's not much point in talking about anything at this stage. I would prefer to wait and address the media after tomorrow night's Executive Council meeting," said Kilcoyne yesterday.

Until such time as that happens, a number of pressing questions remain unanswered.

Was Sean Connolly pressurised into resigning?

Was he paid compensation?

Are the officers lining up Joe Delaney's successor as chief security advisor and Michael Hyland's predecessor as AUL representative Brian O'Byrne (the man who was in charge of security at the Lansdowne Road debacle a year ago) as Connolly's replacement?

Why did Michael Morris resign?

Was he pressurised into resigning?

Why was Joe McGrath motivated to write to the officer board through his solicitors demanding certain written assurances from them?

To lose one, or even two, members of their full-time staff would seem unfortunate, but three could be perceived as careless. Is this part of a systematic campaign by the officers to force out the association's staff?

At the very least, is there a a schism between the officers and the staff?

Was there a shortfall, at any stage, of £200,000 from the FAI's allocation of tickets for the 1994 World Cup finals?

Did an FAI officer meet the shortfall of £200,000, and if so why?

Will there be art inquiry, external or internal, into the above?

Is it true that the FAI could have agreed to an out-of-court settlement prior to the court's verdict in favour of the referees, Michael Tomney and Tommy Traynor, which was considerably less than the £40,000 they were ordered to pay them by a judge who described the association as autocratic?

Was a subsequent letter sent to 142 demoted junior referees in contravention of the court's judgement?

If so, who approved the letter?

Does Mick McCarthy enjoy the full support of the selection committee chosen to appoint a replacement for Jack Charlton and do they regret leaks and gaffes which suggest otherwise?

Was a statement to that effect withdrawn by the President Louis Kilcoyne, and if so on who's advice?

What is PJ Mara's role/title/job remit/salary?

Is he a press officer who is available to the press, or is he a hired consultant to one or more of the officers?

Most of these issues, probably all, and maybe more, will be brought up this evening. There is increasingly widespread anger within the game, at National League and junior level, over the officer board's modus operandi. Talking to some executives, and others on full council, there is a groundswell of opinion moving against the officer board.

In addition, the League's 22 clubs, 16 of whom are not represented on the 20-man Executive, have been granted a meeting with the five officers on March 6th.

In the meantime, it is clear that the officers expect to ride through the current stormwaves and they probably will. While it is possible that members of the Executive could put forward a motion of no confidence in one or more of the officers, it's doubtful that it will come to that.