There used to be a moment at congresses and agms when it was traditional to thank the media for their coverage of Gaelic games, as if the press tables were there for no good reason apart from to indulge the GAA.

The sentiment was of course courteous and appreciated but journalists report on the association’s activities for one reason: there is widespread public interest and people want to read about them.

For the most part that is because football and hurling are mainstream, mass-spectator sports. There are other influences at work in the levels of public engagement, such as the recreational involvement of both adults and children.

How many people are interested in Gaelic games simply because their national significance is emphasised by the nationalist trappings of flag and anthem?

Jarlath Burns caused controversy this week with his frank observations on the issue of flag and anthem and how dispensable they might be in the effort to improve unionist engagement with Gaelic games. Speaking to Eamonn Mallie on Irish TV, the former Armagh captain had this to say:

“Yeah, it wouldn’t cost me a thought and you know this; flags are divisive. Do we need to say that any louder? If somebody was to propose in the morning that they were going to get rid of them all, it wouldn’t bother me at all. It’s not one of the core values that I have.

"It's an overtly political thing. It's something which is specific to national borders. It's nothing to do with (the) cultural – if I thought for a moment that suddenly Tom Elliott (Ulster Unionist MLA and former leader) would become our greatest fan I would get rid of them surely.

“You could do all of those things and there would still be a section of unionism that would still feel repelled by the GAA because of our love of the Irish language, for example.”

It was a considered reflection from someone who as well as being an impressively articulate voice for social inclusion has increasingly walked the walk – literally when attending a gay pride march with staff and senior pupils from the school St Paul’s Bessbrook where he is principal.

Burns comes to the flag and anthem issue with impeccable credentials. If a leading GAA figure, nationally and in Ulster, and fluent Irish speaker can hold such views they merit serious discussion.

Needless to say that hasn’t happened. Some social media criticism has done the usual thing of casting ad hominem aspersions on Burns as someone trying to work the room to advance his political ambitions of becoming GAA president.

Other criticism has focused on the familiar fault-lines of the Ireland's Call debate in rugby. Notwithstanding Ireland's status as one of the few teams on the international stage to cross borders and jurisdictions the demand is that Amhrán na bhFiann should be played and anyone not liking it knows where the gate is. The objections are as logical as expecting the European Ryder Cup team to play our anthem because we're part of the team.

In Gaelic games the anthem and flag have become part of the furniture at matches. No matter what, there’s always a Tricolour at the ground and a recording that occasionally sounds like it’s being played on a scratchy 78 – which is undignified for the anthem.

Do the games need this overt identification? They are played because people enjoy taking part in and watching them.

Former director general Liam Mulvihill more than 11 years ago reflected in this newspaper on a conundrum for overseas members.

“When you hear of them looking for a rulebook and wonder what sense they make of rules one, two and three (aims and ethos). It’s an aspect that’s the subject of a motion to this year’s congress from Australia (it didn’t make it onto the 2004 clár), asking that we look at changing the basic aspirations in so far as they apply to units abroad.”

The Official Guide isn’t as prescriptive about these things as might be imagined. The flag is to be flown at games according to Rule 1.8 (a) but (b) only requires the anthem to be observed respectfully “where it precedes a game”.

In Northern Ireland this is naturally a more complex issue, as during The Troubles more than 3,000 people died because of issues of nationality and religion. Waving the Tricolour was an act of defiance as well as a projection of identity but flags in the north have become part of a toxic landscape.

Burns has been misunderstood in relation to his views on this matter. He wasn’t trying to appease Unionist opinion in respect of the GAA – stating realistically that removing flags and anthem probably wouldn’t change attitudes throughout that community – and he realistically accepted that it was unlikely to be accepted within the GAA either. He was simply saying that in his opinion the GAA’s core identity would not be affected by the removal.

Rule 1.2 of the Official Guide is interesting, describing the GAA’s ‘Basic aim’ as ‘the strengthening of the national identity in a 32-county Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic games’.

The Irishness of the GAA is all about those games and the spell they can cast on communities. Look at people in the far-flung places where the GAA has taken root: they play hurling and football – a more profound and celebratory declaration than a flag or anthem.

All Jarlath Burns has asked is whether the GAA membership feel that being more accessible to the unionist community might possibly be worth the loss of what are ceremonial but basically non-essential trappings of identity. smoran@irishtimes.com