The GAA has confirmed that a sample recently provided by one of its players as part of the Irish Sports Council's Anti-Doping Programme has revealed an adverse analytical finding regarding the use of Salbutamol.
The finding will require the player to show that the result was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol.
Salbutamol is a commonly prescribed treatment for asthma, but it is a banned substance, and players are only allowed to take the drug under strictly controlled guidelines.
The player involved has not been named.
In accordance with the provisions of the Irish Anti-Doping Rules, the GAA are obliged to provisionally suspend the player involved pending the outcome of a hearing of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee.
A date for this meeting has not yet been scheduled
Are these rules for intercounty players only?
I've been playing for years and have never once been told of a list of banned substances that could get you in trouble.
Whatever about performance enhancing stuff, thats general cop on, but the likes of commonly prescribed asthma treatments??
I wonder how aware all the intercounty players are of what they can and cant take.
If the player has "knowingly" taken a banned substance the blame would have to lie squarely with, in no particular order, Nelson Mc Causland, Gregory Campbell & the BBC/ITV.
Kerry player fails drugs test
17 November 2008
A leading Kerry footballer could be facing a ban from the game after failing a drugs test.
It's understood that the case relates to a product taken for the treatment of asthma, rather than a performance-enhancing substance. The unnamed player was drug-tested after one of the Kingdom's championship matches in Croke Park this summer and while stressing he knew "very little" about the case, Kerry chairman Jerome Conway confirmed that it involved a Kerry player.
This is the first time an inter-county star has tested positive since the GAA signed up to the anti-doping code in 2001, and is certain to send shockwaves throughout the Association. However, given the apparent innocent nature of the breach, it remains to be seen what suspension, if any, will be imposed when the investigation is brought to a conclusion.
A statement released by Croke Park on the matter read: "The GAA has confirmed that a sample recently provided by one of its players as part of the Irish Sports Council's Anti-Doping programme has revealed an adverse analytical finding regarding the therapeutic use of Salbutamol, which will require the player to show that the result was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol."
"In accordance with the provisions of the Irish Anti-Doping Rules, the GAA are obliged to provisionally suspend the player involved pending the outcome of a hearing of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee. A date for this meeting has not yet been scheduled.
"The GAA will not be making any further comment on the matter until such time as the hearings process is complete."
Under Rule 14 of the GAA's Official Guide, the GAA "forbids the use of prohibited substances or methods, a practice generally known as doping in sport."
The Gaelic Players' Association has declined to comment, while Dr Una May, the Sports Council's anti-doping programme manager, said: "The Sports Council would never make any comments on rumours or anything else."
A Kerry player according to reports. I'm sure it will turn out to be an inhaler issue and will all be sorted without any problems.
agreed, rather harsh if its asthma related and therefore a non-story!!! >:( >:(
"It's understood that the case relates to a product taken for the treatment of asthma, rather than a performance-enhancing substance"
If the player has asthma and is prescribed the medicine by an MD and all that has been made public to the relevant GAA authorities, then the player is in the clear.
If not, then he is in the soup.
There is a so called "performance-enhancing substance" present in Asthma medicine. The inhalers contain steroids and/or other ingredients to effect an action on the breathing capacity.
Are the players provided with a 'proscribed' list of substances and products? I think they are.
If the player was given that, and ignored it, or was careless, then he's in trouble.
Is not knowing an acceptable excuse?
A rugby player for Munster got busted for a similar offense, he was prescribed it afair but he didn't inform the IRFU.
Got a lesser ban I think.
Does Ventolin need a prescription?
Intercounty GAA players are presented with a fact sheet written by the Irish Sports Council every year which clearly outlines the substances which are not allowed. Anyone playing at the top level should be careful enough to ensure they are not taking any substance mentioned on this.
Quote from: Main Street on November 17, 2008, 02:00:37 PM
Is not knowing an acceptable excuse?
A rugby player for Munster got busted for a similar offense, he was prescribed it afair but he didn't inform the IRFU.
Got a lesser ban I think.
Does Ventolin need a prescription?
I don't think ignorance can be treated as defence, because it's very hard to prove you didn't know. Especially if they do get these sheets of substances and products they need to avoid.
Having said that, if a GP has prescribed something, it would at least be understandable, and probably mitigate the ban. If it's something he took himself, off his own bat, then I'd be afraid that he might get a harsh ban, even if it is an honest mistake.
A load of balls - the guy has asthma ! No story here lads - move on !
Wasnt there an article a year or two ago, Posted on here whereby a leading Doctor admitted that he was contacted by some "Top" IC GAA players and asked would they be alright for a test a few months after using banned substances,
Unfortunately as the Inter County game gets more and more competitive there will be players looking for that extra edge.
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 02:10:49 PM
A load of balls - the guy has asthma ! No story here lads - move on !
Read the posts, consider the precedents.
The player may well have a case to answer, the GAA is obliged to follow standard Sport discipline in these matters.
It could be a simple error alright but it's amazing how many high performing athletes are asthmatic - Is it a higher percentage than of the general population I wonder?
Quote from: Main Street on November 17, 2008, 02:15:02 PM
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 02:10:49 PM
A load of balls - the guy has asthma ! No story here lads - move on !
Read the posts, consider the precedents.
The player may well have a case to answer, the GAA is obliged to follow standard Sport discipline in these matters.
There's a story all right. The player has been suspended after all so it's not just idle speculation. And if it kicks off a good debate about performance enhancing drugs in the GAA ... then all the better.
Quote from: RMDrive on November 17, 2008, 02:20:22 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 17, 2008, 02:15:02 PM
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 02:10:49 PM
A load of balls - the guy has asthma ! No story here lads - move on !
Read the posts, consider the precedents.
The player may well have a case to answer, the GAA is obliged to follow standard Sport discipline in these matters.
There's a story all right. The player has been suspended after all so it's not just idle speculation. And if it kicks off a good debate about performance enhancing drugs in the GAA ... then all the better.
How many times have you seen managers running on with an Inhaler to give to lads who are struggling with their conditions ?
Jesus - this year keeps getting worse.
Hopefully nothing sinister involved, however, ignorane can hardly be a defence after the Frankie Sheehan affair.
The player is entitled to a proper defence but if found guilty he deserves any ban coming his way.
On a broader note, hopefully the indiclipne shown (throughout) this year will be a bad memory now that Jack is back.
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 02:22:15 PM
Quote from: RMDrive on November 17, 2008, 02:20:22 PM
Quote from: Main Street on November 17, 2008, 02:15:02 PM
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 02:10:49 PM
A load of balls - the guy has asthma ! No story here lads - move on !
Read the posts, consider the precedents.
The player may well have a case to answer, the GAA is obliged to follow standard Sport discipline in these matters.
There's a story all right. The player has been suspended after all so it's not just idle speculation. And if it kicks off a good debate about performance enhancing drugs in the GAA ... then all the better.
How many times have you seen managers running on with an Inhaler to give to lads who are struggling with their conditions ?
As I said earlier I'm sure it is just a mistake and that the player has no case to answer. I just don't think that it should be ignored, cause as Main Street said, the GAA must follow the correct procedure and show that it can deal with a case like this. And I honestly believe that a good debate now on drug use will benefit the GAA in the long run. Better than waiting for a serious failure at any rate.
Quote from: Franko on November 17, 2008, 02:02:58 PM
Intercounty GAA players are presented with a fact sheet written by the Irish Sports Council every year which clearly outlines the substances which are not allowed. Anyone playing at the top level should be careful enough to ensure they are not taking any substance mentioned on this.
Untrue, totally untrue
i am sure this is a nothing story and have no doubt there is nothing untoward about it, but the redtops will have a field day, 'drug cheat' headlines nonsense etc.
Quote from: southoftheborder on November 17, 2008, 03:13:52 PM
Quote from: Franko on November 17, 2008, 02:02:58 PM
Intercounty GAA players are presented with a fact sheet written by the Irish Sports Council every year which clearly outlines the substances which are not allowed. Anyone playing at the top level should be careful enough to ensure they are not taking any substance mentioned on this.
Untrue, totally untrue
I was handed one in my day but I don't think it was handed round every year though..
Old proverb - When you take the shilling you follow the drum!!
To get grants they had to sign up to the antidoping rules but would not and should not have to as amateur players.
I have no doubt it is accidental use through an inhaler oe some such but at the time this was introduced I was against it as an infringment of the rights of individuals.
Quote from: johnneycool on November 17, 2008, 03:30:33 PM
I was handed one in my day but I don't think it was handed round every year though..
Are you talking "Pass the Dutchie on the Left Hand Side" or are you taking about the banned substances sheet? ;)
We will see what the GAA's anti doping scheme is made of now
A serious wake up call I'm afraid for all inter county footballers. The flipside for accepting the Govt grants and very serious for any young player's job prospects.
Am usually sanguine about any Kerry problems but I really feel sorry for this guy as he is going to face some serious media flak shortly.
Quote from: zoyler on November 17, 2008, 03:32:43 PM
To get grants they had to sign up to the antidoping rules but would not and should not have to as amateur players.
Nonsense. the IC players were eligible for the grants for a number of reasons, one of them being that they had already been signed up to international anti doping regulations years before. the GAA sign IC players up to those codes yonks ago.
being prescribed the inhaler doesn't clear you at all. it must be submitted to croke park at the relevent time or is looked upon as manipulation.
lads, there is abuse of performance enhancers out there in our games. there is no doubt in my mind.
Sounds to me it's harmless. A genuine mistake by an asmatic player. Hopefully it would be sorted out quickly and cleaning, without dragging the player's name through the mud.
It's an inhaler for God's sake - that's all ! It's not cocaine !
Thye should have investigated the situation first before making the announcement. Now practically everybody knows who the player is and his reputation will be tarnished even if he does eventually get off.
Quote from: blanketattack on November 17, 2008, 04:42:52 PM
Thye should have investigated the situation first before making the announcement. Now practically everybody knows who the player is and his reputation will be tarnished even if he does eventually get off.
Good point ! Shit sticks.
He needs to be banned for some period - 6 months I'd say.
Why? Because if you don't, every idiot who is taking stuff will use the same excuse he does.
Anyway ... by right he should have known the consequences ... I'd also lay blame at the team Doctors door for not knowing it.
To the guys who asked about ventolin - yes it is prohibited.
Quote from: JMohan on November 17, 2008, 04:46:56 PM
He needs to be banned for some period - 6 months I'd say.
Why? Because if you don't, every idiot who is taking stuff will use the same excuse he does.
Anyway ... by right he should have known the consequences ... I'd also lay blame at the team Doctors door for not knowing it.
To the guys who asked about ventolin - yes it is prohibited.
Would you take his grant money away as well ?
Quote from: Aghdavoyle on November 17, 2008, 04:32:29 PM
Quote from: zoyler on November 17, 2008, 03:32:43 PM
To get grants they had to sign up to the antidoping rules but would not and should not have to as amateur players.
Nonsense. the IC players were eligible for the grants for a number of reasons, one of them being that they had already been signed up to international anti doping regulations years before. the GAA sign IC players up to those codes yonks ago.
being prescribed the inhaler doesn't clear you at all. it must be submitted to croke park at the relevent time or is looked upon as manipulation.
lads, there is abuse of performance enhancers out there in our games. there is no doubt in my mind.
I remember hearing Fergus Connolly who trained Derry last year and worked with premeriship soccer teams and rugby say at a seminar a few months ago that this very situation was going to happen ... some poor guy would done for medicine rather than proper drugs
He also metnioned how he had been asked for advice about prohibited substances 4 years ago by a northern coach ... of course it's being used, just not being caught since so few guys are actually being tested.
I feel sorry for this guy, but there needs to be some punishment or it'll turn into a joke.
Who is the player, by PM if necessary?
Quote from: orangeman on November 17, 2008, 04:49:49 PM
Quote from: JMohan on November 17, 2008, 04:46:56 PM
He needs to be banned for some period - 6 months I'd say.
Why? Because if you don't, every idiot who is taking stuff will use the same excuse he does.
Anyway ... by right he should have known the consequences ... I'd also lay blame at the team Doctors door for not knowing it.
To the guys who asked about ventolin - yes it is prohibited.
Would you take his grant money away as well ?
I prefer to let him off if I'm honest ... I just think that in 2 months time if some guy is failed for a 'real' perfromance ehnacing drug such as ephedrine then we'd have to let him off too .... That's just what I see happening down the line
Quote from: full back on November 17, 2008, 04:55:10 PM
Who is the player, by PM if necessary?
I don't think it's known
Mick O'Dwyer? I heard he's making a come back, along with Tagh Kennelly.
There's a very important issue here which people seemed to hav overlooked.
If /When players are given the list of banned substances was the list in Béarla or Gaeilge. The point being that if it was only in Béarla then it was illegal as the players should have been given access to the same documentation as Gaeilge. So, looks like the poor oul Kerryman could get off on a technicality - not that Kerrymen would ever dream of doing such a thing.
PM me the player as well!!! I'm so nosey
Quote from: Teachtaire on November 17, 2008, 05:17:26 PM
There's a very important issue here which people seemed to hav overlooked.
If /When players are given the list of banned substances was the list in Béarla or Gaeilge. The point being that if it was only in Béarla then it was illegal as the players should have been given access to the same documentation as Gaeilge. So, looks like the poor oul Kerryman could get off on a technicality - not that Kerrymen would ever dream of doing such a thing.
So he's one of the Gaeltacht lads then?
GAA player in positive drug test
The GAA has confirmed that a sample recently provided by one of its players has tested positive for the use of the banned drug Salbutamol.
Salbutamol is a widely-used treatment for asthma through an inhaler but players are only allowed to take the drug under controlled guidelines.
It was found that there was an adverse finding regarding the use of the substance.
It is believed that the player concerned is from Kerry.
In accordance with the provisions of the Irish Anti-Doping Rules, the GAA are obliged to provisionally suspend the player involved pending the outcome of a hearing of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee.
A date for this meeting has not yet been scheduled.
The finding will require the player to show that the result was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol.
Ireland rugby player Frankie Sheahan had a similar problem with Salbutamol five years ago and had a two-year ban slapped on him.
However, the ban was reduced to three months on appeal when the Munster hooker claimed he had forgotten to properly inform authorities that he was using a Ventolin inhaler to combat his asthma.
Sloppy work altogether. If it was well known what can and cannot be taken, there's no excuse.
Remember reading a lot of stuff 3-4 years ago when this first became an issue, a lot of confusing things for players, like Lemsip bought in the North being OK, but having a slightly different constitution if bought in the South making it illegal. It's a complicated issue, it would be up to each county board and their doctors to make sure the players are well informed. It would be very unfortunate to see someone getting into trouble over an asthma related drug, many great players and some gods have overcome this issue to perform at the highest level.
In the Eng Premiership the team doctor has to veto everything that a player takes even from the most basic cough medicine. Does the team doctors in GAA not perform the same task?
Tyrone brought all the players in before the 2003 championship season to the Dr's office and each one was given a list of what they could and couldnt take. They were told that if there was any confusion to contact the team Dr before taking what would appear to be even the most basic of medical remedies.
It's happened with rugby a few times. It's in an enhaler.
It's a banned substance but they shouldn't be banned. The drug itself, it's not even near an enhancer, it makes you sleepy and tired and it's pretty much the opposite to preformance enhancing.
A few rugby players, Frankie Sheahan being one, got tested positive for it, but after the other players kicked up a fuss, O Gara, Stringer, Wallace, O Connell, all have asthma, and all fought his corner like crazy, they all did, becuase it was ridiculous and his suspension was reduced.
He tested positive for the same drug, Salbutamol. He first got a ban of 2 years but it was reduced way down to 3 months.
It's ridiculous. It doens't enhance the preformance of a player, it does the opposite, they've a right to breath. Some stupid rule shouldn't stop that. To put a barrier up between asthma sufferes and other athletes.
I'm assuming there's an active ingredient in it, which is found in other more sinister substances? It obviously wouldn't make sense if they were going around banning asthma medication.
Having said that, I remember in my playing days lads taking a suck out of an inhaler before matches, who never used it and didn't have asthma. Basically they thought it gave them better lung capacity during the game. That's probably rubbish, but I don't know.
Quote from: ONeill on November 17, 2008, 05:33:13 PM
Sloppy work altogether. If it was well known what can and cannot be taken, there's no excuse.
So a player who uses an inhaler should be able to work out exactly what the level of Salbutamol in their blood stream is before each time they use an inhaler?
So they should remember how many times they used the inhaler in the previous 48 hours, whether a full inhale or a partial one, plus include other factors that can affect the level such as dehydration, fatigue and any other medical ailments such as having the flu and from this calculate what their salbutamol levels are before inhaling again, and do all this while their gasping for air and if they find out that they are over the 1000ng limit what should they do if they're gasping for air? Just sit it out until they pass out?
QuoteDoes the team doctors in GAA not perform the same task?
Depends on the team and the doctor I suspect but in my direct experience - yes. Anybody on the team that needd anything medical went to the team doc first, not the GP
Despite a few attempts here to suggest otherwise, it is a story and there is little or no excuse for anybody at intercounty level to get caught. The case wouldn't be helped by the reality that the inhalers are beneficial to anyone trying to breath more clearly and I've seen and know of players that used them even though they were not medically diagnosed asmatics.
To be excluded from any sanction, the player involved will have to have registered in advance as requiring an inhaler - you basically get an exemption from anything that you are prescribed by a doctor. If you don't have that in advance, then it is deemed as an offence. If you can convinve the Doping people that it was a genuine error you get off with a reprimand, like the swimmer Bree before the Olympics. If not...
Quote from: Norf Tyrone on November 17, 2008, 05:43:30 PM
In the Eng Premiership the team doctor has to veto everything that a player takes even from the most basic cough medicine. Does the team doctors in GAA not perform the same task?
Some of the doctors even give the stuff out!!!!
Quote from: Reillers on November 17, 2008, 05:47:59 PM
It's happened with rugby a few times. It's in an enhaler.
It's a banned substance but they shouldn't be banned. The drug itself, it's not even near an enhancer, it makes you sleepy and tired and it's pretty much the opposite to preformance enhancing.
A few rugby players, Frankie Sheahan being one, got tested positive for it, but after the other players kicked up a fuss, O Gara, Stringer, Wallace, O Connell, all have asthma, and all fought his corner like crazy, they all did, becuase it was ridiculous and his suspension was reduced.
He tested positive for the same drug, Salbutamol. He first got a ban of 2 years but it was reduced way down to 3 months.
It's ridiculous. It doens't enhance the preformance of a player, it does the opposite, they've a right to breath. Some stupid rule shouldn't stop that. To put a barrier up between asthma sufferes and other athletes.
1. It does work
2. The Asmathic claim in many cases is nonsense. Do you know how many pro athletes 'claim' to be asmathic? Well it's FAR greater than the normal distribution in the normal population. Many doctors are conned into disgnosising it as an illness... if you're a pro athlete you'll know how to do it.
Dodgy ould gear according to this report:
This study of the effects of supra-therapeutic doses of inhaled salbutamol on endurance cycling in non-asthmatic athletes found the drug enhanced performance to a significant degree – enough to give users a real advantage in competitive events.
In a double-blind, randomised cross-over study, 16 athletes performed two trials – at least four days apart – in which they had to perform a certain amount of work as fast as possible on a cycle ergometer, 30 minutes after inhaling either 800µg salbutamol or placebo. In the second trial the conditions were reversed, with those taking placebo switched to the active drug, and vice versa. Performance times were recorded and a range of blood and respiratory measurements were taken before and after exercise.
The most important finding was that average performance time on salbutamol was reduced by 82.7 seconds – 3,927.6 seconds (65 minutes), compared with 4,010.2 seconds, a difference of just under 2%. As the researchers point out: 'The relevance of a more than 1-minute improvement in an approximately 1-hour time trial for competitive events is obvious.'
Quote from: Aghdavoyle on November 17, 2008, 04:32:29 PM
Quote from: zoyler on November 17, 2008, 03:32:43 PM
To get grants they had to sign up to the antidoping rules but would not and should not have to as amateur players.
Nonsense. the IC players were eligible for the grants for a number of reasons, one of them being that they had already been signed up to international anti doping regulations years before. the GAA sign IC players up to those codes yonks ago.
being prescribed the inhaler doesn't clear you at all. it must be submitted to croke park at the relevent time or is looked upon as manipulation.
lads, there is abuse of performance enhancers out there in our games. there is no doubt in my mind.
That's not quite the way I remember it. I'm nearly sure that players had to sign up to a variety of things in order to qualify for grants. Like professionals, they had to sign up to drug tests, make team/individual goals at the start of the year, make development plans etc. Now, I could be wrong on this but I think it's something the GPA and Sports Council agreed on prior to vetoing the grants.
You would have to feel for the player. Yes, if he was on the inhaler he should have been declaring it but a lot of the blame must lie with the doctor/backroom team. At the end of the day, there's more chance of a Kerry footballer being drug tested than, say, a Louth hurler (more high profile, play more games etc.) so you would have thought they would leave nothing to chance.
Quote from: blanketattack on November 17, 2008, 05:52:19 PM
Quote from: ONeill on November 17, 2008, 05:33:13 PM
Sloppy work altogether. If it was well known what can and cannot be taken, there's no excuse.
So a player who uses an inhaler should be able to work out exactly what the level of Salbutamol in their blood stream is before each time they use an inhaler?
So they should remember how many times they used the inhaler in the previous 48 hours, whether a full inhale or a partial one, plus include other factors that can affect the level such as dehydration, fatigue and any other medical ailments such as having the flu and from this calculate what their salbutamol levels are before inhaling again, and do all this while their gasping for air and if they find out that they are over the 1000ng limit what should they do if they're gasping for air? Just sit it out until they pass out?
100% yes. If not the player, the medical team.
Oh, and PM me the name if anyone knows!
Quote from: pedro on November 17, 2008, 06:38:46 PM
Oh, and PM me the name if anyone knows!
Lads get a pm sent my way aswel please. Lovely bit of gossip this
I agree in that the Salbutamol could be used in a way to enhance performance but my guess would be that it was just an inhaler which was not properly declared to the Doping Council (I would be surpised if it wasn't). What I'm most surprised about is that for a team like Kerry who are so high profile, so well prepared etc you would imagine that they would ensure all the "dopiing" boxes had been ticked off. If a team like Kerry can't get it right what chance is there that smaller teams who mightn't have regular access to a team doctor would have similar "drug takers"?
Think the thread's a joke, results shouldn't be made public unitl the matter is dealth with by the relevent authorities. I doubt very much anyone would use an astmatic steroid to increase muscle mass or whatever as they are the easiest to detect. there is plenty of other shite that can be taken for that purpose that wouldn't be found. I don't think there is a story here at all, except some poor sod is going to have his name dragged through the mud in the media and other kangaroo courts like here.
Quote from: AFS on November 17, 2008, 06:55:09 PM
Guys, a lot of very naive posts here from people that don't seem to understand some of the issues. If the lad has only taken an inhaler he should be able to explain his way out of it but I'm sceptical.
The basic fact that some people don't seem to fully understand is that Salbutamol is a steroid. If taken in high enough doses it can act as an anabolic agent to increase protein synthesis and build up muscle. So the simple reason Salbutamol is a banned substance is because it can very definitely be used as an anabolic steroid, a term most sports people will be very aware of and understand.
This is a pretty serious matter and deserves to be fully investigated and not just dismissed, as some have done here, as a simple inhaler issue.
All that said, for the sake of everyone involved I really hope this is a simple mix up.
Salbutamol is
absolutely not a Steroid.... Anabolic or otherwise!! Some salbutamol based inhalers may contain small amounts of corticosteroids, but salbutamol itself is not a steroid.
Definitely not a steriod AFS, like becotide.
It should also be noted that the doctor connected to the Kerry team would be acutely aware of a players medical condition if asthma was the issue. It would be astonishing in the extreme if he did not check out the type of inhaler being used.
An athlete can only legally use a listed substance present in medication if they have an exemption from the drug supervisory board.
Any test result would be able to determine the level found in the body. The level found would determine just how much was being consumed and be compared with the prescribed dose (if there is a prescription)
And even if there is a prescription there should be paperwork to prove that the prescription existed at the time of consumption.
.
Asthmatics beat non Asthmatics
Legalized doping from USA today
Up to 40 percent of riders have doctor's notes allowing them to use drugs often prescribed for asthma that would normally be banned. Critics decry the practice, which is allowed under World Anti-Doping Agency rules.
"This is a global joke," said Dr. Werner Franke, a German doping expert. "You'll always find a doctor who will write down a few notes that you have asthma-like difficulties in breathing.
On the 40 percent of riders in the Tour de France have doctor's notes allowing them to use drugs often prescribed for asthma
"It would be fair to have two Tours de France - one for the asthmatics and one for non-asthmatics," he said. "The funny result would be that the asthmatics would be much faster.".
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2007-07-20-3694433468_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2007-07-20-3694433468_x.htm)
I can't believe the amount of people desperately trying to sweep this on under the carpet.
It would seem you would rather have drug cheats in the gaa (though I'm not saying this fella is a cheat) than to have negative stories in the press.
Main Street you're comparing the most corrupt professional sport in the world to an amateur sport. now while there maybe a few dumb idiots out there on the juice, i don't believe for one second that is a pandemic of ashmatic steroid abuse in an amateur sport where there is little or no financial gain. The doctors on those professional teams are as corrupt as the bloody cyclists themselves as has been proven. Now I don't believe the county team doctors are in that bracket, is that what you and pints are saying?
This should never have been made public until ALL the facts of the situation are known. There is a thing called due process.
Is it april fools day already?
Just adding a different perspective to the debate.
In terms of punishment if the player in question is found guilty
will he lose his all-ireland medals??......
Or if he was a tyrone player found guilty in this years championship would he lose his all-ireland medal??
Can i get a PM as well, the curiosity is getting the better of me
booj
QuoteYou dont think there is any excuse? A player could do something as simple as take a panadol or a Lemsip and he may fail this drugs test.Do we now expect our County footballers to read every last ingredient of everything that they put into their systems now?
I dont care if its a Cavan Footballer or a Kerry footballer,this shit should never be brought to the media and whoever has highlighted it is f**king Low Lifer.This poor lad could be ruined over this if his name gets out,(which no doubt it will).Its a disgrace.
Amateurs expected to act as professionals in every way.
Yes. They've signed up to these drug regulations haven't they? If they had issues with them then they shouldn't have signed up to them, they should have been raising their concerns at the time about panadol or lemsip not now when someone is caught.
I assume these drug regulations are the same used in other sports so what's the issue?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 17, 2008, 08:54:32 PM
booj
QuoteYou dont think there is any excuse? A player could do something as simple as take a panadol or a Lemsip and he may fail this drugs test.Do we now expect our County footballers to read every last ingredient of everything that they put into their systems now?
I dont care if its a Cavan Footballer or a Kerry footballer,this shit should never be brought to the media and whoever has highlighted it is f**king Low Lifer.This poor lad could be ruined over this if his name gets out,(which no doubt it will).Its a disgrace.
Amateurs expected to act as professionals in every way.
Yes. They've signed up to these drug regulations haven't they? If they had issues with them then they shouldn't have signed up to them, they should have been raising their concerns at the time about panadol or lemsip not now when someone is caught.
I assume these drug regulations are the same used in other sports so what's the issue?
What are ya talking about Pints? Players dont sign up to Drug regulations.
This is an amateur sport,so its not like the regulations of other sports.
Quote from: INDIANA on November 17, 2008, 07:49:34 PMMain Street you're comparing the most corrupt professional sport in the world to an amateur sport. now while there maybe a few dumb idiots out there on the juice, i don't believe for one second that is a pandemic of ashmatic steroid abuse in an amateur sport where there is little or no financial gain.
I wrote accuratly enough about the process in how guilt has to be determined and proven.
Not comparing it to the TdF. Not my intention.
I have stressed from the beginning that this is a serious matter, even if it is judged at it's minimum - it's astonishing carelessness.
QuoteThe doctors on those professional teams are as corrupt as the bloody cyclists themselves as has been proven. Now I don't believe the county team doctors are in that bracket, is that what you and pints are saying?
Not at all.
The TdF story is a good one. Take it for what it is. I don't know anything about the cycling world.
QuoteThis should never have been made public until ALL the facts of the situation are known. There is a thing called due process.
Maybe so. The player has been called to face due process.
If he has not got an exemption then it is just a matter for Irish sports council to determine the level of culpability and punishment. There is no "forgot" "didnt know" "just given a few blasts" get out jail card.
QuoteWhat are ya talking about Pints? Players dont sign up to Drug regulations.
This is an amateur sport,so its not like the regulations of other sports.
The GAA signed up.
Would you rather a GAA with or without drug testing?
I didn't hear any crying about this until now, when someone is caught.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 17, 2008, 09:07:46 PM
QuoteWhat are ya talking about Pints? Players dont sign up to Drug regulations.
This is an amateur sport,so its not like the regulations of other sports.
The GAA signed up.
Would you rather a GAA with or without drug testing?
I didn't hear any crying about this until now, when someone is caught.
Yes the GAA signed up,big difference.I dont really see the need for drug-testing in the GAA no.The most players are gonna be taking is Creatine and Protein shakes and that stuff.They are widely available and have been around for years.Most Inter-County players are at it.It improves players performance and recovery,which I feel is a good thing.I havent seen any Ben Johnsons running around Croke Park lately.
The GAA's anti-doping programme is still in its infancy so in one way I reckon it's good that it will get to look at this situation, find out that it was just an error, and let everyone get one with things. Better that the system is tested with a minor inhaler case rather than a more serious case cause, let's face it, knowing the GAA what are the chances there will be some loop-hole somewhere?
It's a shame all right that it was released to the media now but perhaps it had to be seeing that a suspension was handed down? And it's not as if Frankie Sheahan has suffered because of the mix-up with him. I'm sure it will end up the same way with this player.
And something like this was bound to happen as some stage anyway.
http://www.kerrygaa.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=348&Itemid=2
QuoteCoiste Chontae Chiarrai wishes to confirm that a member of the Kerry Senior Football panel is granted a hearing in relation to medication he used for asthma following a test after the All Ireland Final. The player's asthma has been pre notified to the Sports Council since the GAA's anti doping policy came in a few years ago. Coiste Chontae Chiarrai and the player are happy to co-operate with the hearing and are confident the player will be exonerated.
Any chance of a PM ;D
Gone ahead....I'll take a PM as well. However GH's quote there from the Kerry County board suggests it's a non story.
Since this has already risen to a pretty high profile story in a matter of houses, I would like for posters to remember the rules on allegations made against players as stated in the stickies at the top of each forum page.
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=8836.0
If anybody hints at who it is without proper evidence and isn't able to back it up, the matter will be taken in a very dim view by us mods.
I trust you guys can understand why this is, and credit to the lads who posted here already know the players identity and kept it to themselves until we know more.
Does anyone else think that the GPA releasing the statement that they did may only have added fuel to the fire? The whole "we will support the player" thing almost makes it sound like there is substance to it? Why did they need to release a statement. Why not just offer the support and leave it at that?
Hopefully this is an innocent mistake.
MidLouth this is Ireland. If it is not possible for the Government to keep quiet about probably nationalising a bank, as the Indo claimed yesterday (see bank shares today as a result), then dont expect the Gaa to be able to keep a drugs story under its hat.
I agree with POG. This is a serious story and has to be seen to be well handled by the parties involved. If it is proved that there has been a breach of the rules, expect a ban.
It is not unreasonable to be concerned about Asthma treatments in sport though. Google athletes and astham and you get lots of ahits on articles hinting at abuse of otherwise socially useful drugs.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-4-2002-23798.asp (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-4-2002-23798.asp)
New IOC chief is determined to ensure cheats don't prosper, reports Kevin Mitchell.
It is some wheeze: pretend you're an asthmatic, take the drugs and do what asthma sufferers sometimes find very difficult - run fast.
But when Kim Collins tested positive for Salbutamol after winning the 100 metres in Manchester last weekend, only to be exonerated when he told officials he was, in fact, an asthmatic but his national organisation had forgotten to pass the documentation on, it was no joke for athletics.
And now Olympic and world officials have entered the argument in an attempt to clear up the confusion over one of sport's most idiotic loopholes.
Jacques Rogge, while not pointing the finger at Collins, finds it hard to believe all athletes who register as asthmatics are genuine. And the IOC president has a warning for those athletes who offer lame excuses when convicted: 'If you are caught, you will hang.'
Rogge, an orthopaedic surgeon, said, 'We have allowed for some drugs for asthmatic patients. As long as they declare it, as long as they have a medical check-up to show they are genuinely asthmatic, they can use Salbutamol, which is a very good drug. And that is perfectly legal. The problem is that too many athletes pretend that they have asthma, but that's what's happening in life.'
He did say on Friday that the levels of Salbutamol in Collins's system were within acceptable limits. But the room for confusion remains.
Dick Pound, the head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, revealed that a survey taken after the Sydney Olympics showed 'a remarkable number' of athletes registering as asthmatics.
'What the survey found was pockets of extremely brave athletes who have apparently overcome asthma,' he said, with a twist of cynicism, although he was making no comment on Collins. 'Canada, Australia, Britain and Germany were the countries mentioned.'
Rogge, meanwhile, says he is suspicious of other protestations of innocence, particularly the claims that either legal additives or samples have been spoiled.
'There are some cases of contamination, but the athletes have been warned. Athletes - and I was an athlete - we are very selfish individuals. You are so focused, you want to succeed, you are very demanding, want the best coach in the world, good training conditions, the best sparring partners, you will not compromise for anything but the best. And they will take any drug, without even checking, without asking what's in the box? I can't believe that. And, if they do, they are damn stupid. So we've warned them.'
This whole story is a sad result of the dodgy road we are going down.
Interesting case which is very similar
http://www.frankiesheahan.com/statement.asp
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on November 17, 2008, 10:05:20 PM
http://www.kerrygaa.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=348&Itemid=2
QuoteCoiste Chontae Chiarrai wishes to confirm that a member of the Kerry Senior Football panel is granted a hearing in relation to medication he used for asthma following a test after the All Ireland Final. The player's asthma has been pre notified to the Sports Council since the GAA's anti doping policy came in a few years ago. Coiste Chontae Chiarrai and the player are happy to co-operate with the hearing and are confident the player will be exonerated.
I trust that the Kerry County Board statement will hold true. Therefore, this is non story, end of!!
If there wasn't asthma involved then it would be a whole other issue, seeing as there is, no story!
I would appreciate a PM here also, if anyone knows.
Quote from: Louth Exile on November 17, 2008, 11:43:15 PM
Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on November 17, 2008, 10:05:20 PM
http://www.kerrygaa.ie/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=348&Itemid=2
QuoteCoiste Chontae Chiarrai wishes to confirm that a member of the Kerry Senior Football panel is granted a hearing in relation to medication he used for asthma following a test after the All Ireland Final. The player's asthma has been pre notified to the Sports Council since the GAA's anti doping policy came in a few years ago. Coiste Chontae Chiarrai and the player are happy to co-operate with the hearing and are confident the player will be exonerated.
I trust that the Kerry County Board statement will hold true. Therefore, this is non story, end of!!
If there wasn't asthma involved then it would be a whole other issue, seeing as there is, no story!
No story here lads - move on
Quote
From 2001 when the GAA originally signed up to it
http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2001/0710/gaa.html
that's me corrected then! Lads, in all fairness comparing a Kerry footballer to the likes of cyclists and sprinters iis a little harsh. These are quys who are part of a team, not part of a solo event. To me, it is a matter of the player/doctor/management not declaring the inhaler or not filling out the forms correctly. While I'm not naive enough to think that every GAA player is squeaky clean, I think this is more down to a mistake. The media reporting is a bit much IMO. This is the type of story which could blacken a players name (and his career) never mind any ban that he faces.
Quote from: highking on November 17, 2008, 11:53:35 PM
I would appreciate a PM here also, if anyone knows.
Why?? So you can know which one of the Kerry lads has Asthma ::)
because of the amatuer nature of te GAA the player should never be named but he should be Quietly withdrawn from what ever panel he is on and not given a jersey again as Frankie sheehan should never have been picked for munster rugby again . I now associate Munster with Drug Cheats and it belittles their achievements. esp the way they rallied around him and tried to brush it all under the carpet much like the o'connor lynch kuertain stories all claimed it was a mistake .Fair play to Cathal lombard at least he said Fair cop when he was caught out being a cheating bastard.
Quote from: rosnarun on November 18, 2008, 12:44:15 AM
because of the amatuer nature of te GAA the player should never be named but he should be Quietly withdrawn from what ever panel he is on and not given a jersey again as Frankie sheehan should never have been picked for munster rugby again . I now associate Munster with Drug Cheats and it belittles their achievements. esp the way they rallied around him and tried to brush it all under the carpet much like the o'connor lynch kuertain stories all claimed it was a mistake .Fair play to Cathal lombard at least he said Fair cop when he was caught out being a cheating b**tard.
You're having a laugh I hope ?
Quote from: rosnarun on November 18, 2008, 12:44:15 AM
because of the amatuer nature of the GAA the player should never be named but he should be Quietly withdrawn from what ever panel he is on and not given a jersey again as Frankie sheehan should never have been picked for munster rugby again . I now associate Munster with Drug Cheats and it belittles their achievements. esp the way they rallied around him and tried to brush it all under the carpet much like the o'connor lynch kuertain stories all claimed it was a mistake .Fair play to Cathal lombard at least he said Fair cop when he was caught out being a cheating b**tard.
A bit harsh, try to see it from the other side. what if he was was astmatic. Im astmatic and play county and have to use inhales to contorl my asthma. I thought drugs testing was only used for pro athletes, and while county lads get a few quid, its not enough to play football and hurling full time. Im unsure what to make of this, It might make me reconsider taking that epo....
As for the munster rugby, how many of them fella's are teaching, brick laying, the day after a major game, its a different sport and should be treated as should.
The player was revealed on Vincent Browne's show and is being revealed in Tuesday's Irish Times (currently online). I think they should have waited until they had investigated it further. The Irish Times might have trouble getting interviews off Kerry players in the future.
Can't find it in the Irish Times online?
Quote from: stephenite on November 18, 2008, 01:52:20 AM
Can't find it in the Irish Times online?
nor me, article about the PR of Cork was awful
Found it - link below.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2008/1118/1226700697226.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2008/1118/1226700697226.html)
* As this information is already published online from a reputable source I see no problem in posting the link - if anyone wants me to remove the link, let me know.
QuoteAs for the munster rugby, how many of them fella's are teaching, brick laying, the day after a major game, its a different sport and should be treated as so
and thats why i did not want him named . the only way to save sport is absoute accountability as they do in athletis . if something is in your system its your responsibility.
uinder that system there can be no excuse. if the lad made a mistake its tough but we need to look out for the greater good here.
Its a disgrace that he has been named . this could be a very serious black mark against him in his chosen career. .
i still say a quiet ban would have been the best thing and and we could still have got the message across how serious braking Drug rules are taken with out undue hardship to an amateur player
So according to the Irish Star it was O'Mahoney then?
Personally I think its a load of balls!
If the lad has asthma, the lad has asthma. I wouldnt have thought it would have enhanced his performance in any way!
This could be a tricky one!
From what I heard on the radio this morning it's probably one of 2 situations:
1. They measured more than 2000ng (I think that's what they said) in his sample which is the level above which you cannot have only inhaled it, and his authorisation to use that product was submitted to the authorities correctly.
2. Notification of his need for that inhaler WASN'T submitted properly and they measured ANY level of it.
O'Mahony was named on 2fm and is a known asthmatic - so much ado about nothing.
It probably is much ado about nothing, the guidelines need to be set out more clearly so that players are totally clear what they can or cannot take. There are drugs out there with nasty side effects such as uncharacteristic aggression and general narkiness, lord knows we dont need that.
It doesn't matter if he's an astmatic or not. If he is and he has declared the drug, he is allowed to take a regular dose of it no problem. The problem comes if he takes a few extra puffs of the inhaler before a game. This exceeds the stated dose and is therefore considered illegal. You might think that a couple of puffs shouldn't make a difference, but those are the rules and he would know them. If he does have a higher dose in his body it would be seen as giving him an unfair advantage.
On the subject of asthma in athletes, there was a guy on the radio last night saying how the number of athletes claiming to be asthmatic has shot up over the last while, pretty much doubling from olympics to olympics. It seems most aren't but can get away with taking inhalers etc 'cos they claim to be asthmatic.
Quote from: man in black on November 18, 2008, 09:10:50 AM
It probably is much ado about nothing, the guidelines need to be set out more clearly so that players are totally clear what they can or cannot take. There are drugs out there with nasty side effects such as uncharacteristic aggression and general narkiness, lord knows we dont need that.
Any drugs to make you fall over after a wee tap on the face?
O´Mahoney has a good explanation. He has been asthmatic since he was a boy and is one of those who has been able to play at the highest level despite it. He has an exemption to use asthma medicine
At the time of him giving a urine sample he would have been asked 'are you taking any medication' he would have answered yes.
If all that is so, then it is mainly a questions that the levels found in his system are consistent with prescribed use.
At the very worst, he has a bit too much in his system which is quite normal, then his doctor will explain how that happened.
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
I'd be surprised if he didn't give permission Seanie - and he's dead right. Trying to cover up his name only serves to heighten suspicion and headlines, he's got a pretty savvy solicitor in his corner
Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
I would question why an amateur body signs up to relatively stringent rules such as these. Afaik it was a requirement by the sports council (or whatever they're called) in order to be eligible for govt handouts - but why? The GAA as an almost totally indigenous sporting organisation really have no need to be seen to be adopting best practice in this area imo.
Canavan: Anti-doping rules unfair on the GAA Gaelic Games
By Paddy Heaney
18/11/2008
PETER Canavan has questioned the GAA's involvement with the Irish Sport Council's anti-doping code following the suspension of a Kerry player who failed a drugs test due to the use of salbutamol.
Salbutamol is a commonly prescribed treatment for asthma, but it is a banned substance, and GAA players are only allowed to take the drug under strictly controlled guidelines. Canavan, an asthma sufferer throughout his illustrious playing career with Tyrone, believes the GAA's amateur footballers and hurlers shouldn't be subjected to the Sport Council's rigorous anti-doping code.
"I don't think it is fair. There is a list of medications that fall under the remit of banned substances. Some of those substances are things like aspirin. Asking amateurs to be aware of all these things seems a bit much," he said.
The Tyrone legend revealed he continued to use inhalers after the GAA signed up to the anti-doping code in 2001.
"We were told that we had to let the team doctor Seamus Cassidy know what we were taking, no matter how trivial it was. At the start of the year, I would have told him what I was taking so it was okay for me to take it. But we knew how strict it all was. I could have been taking a certain inhaler, but if I changed that inhaler, and the doctor wasn't aware of that change, I would have been liable to a suspension."
Ireland rugby player Frankie Sheahan had a similar problem with salbutamol five years ago and was initially suspended for two years. The ban was reduced to three months on appeal when the Munster hooker claimed he had forgotten to properly inform authorities that he was using a Ventolin inhaler to combat his asthma.
The authorities in Croke Park were not keen to subject GAA players to drug testing in 2001. However, the GAA was informed that the association would not receive any state funding that came through the Irish Sports Council unless they subscribed to the anti-doping code.
The players' grant scheme that was brokered by the GPA last year falls under the type of aid that wouldn't be administered unless inter-county footballers and hurlers took part in the random post-match testing. But Canavan argued that different provisions should be made for amateur sportsmen.
"It's okay for professionals but the GAA is an amateur sport," he said.
"The Tyrone lads had to wait for two-and-a-half hours after the All-Ireland final until someone had finished giving a sample. Sometimes you would ask yourself, 'What is going on?' I think it's all a bit severe for amateur players."
The GAA confirmed yesterday that a player has been provisionally suspended following a failed drugs test.
A statement released from Croke Park said: "A sample recently provided by one of its players as part of the Irish Sport's Council's anti-doping programme has revealed an adverse analytical finding regarding the therapeutic use of salbutamol which will require the player to show that the result was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled salbutamol.
"In accordance with the provisions of the Irish Anti-Doping rules, the GAA are obliged to provisionally suspend the player involved pending the outcome of a hearing of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee. A date for this meeting has not yet been scheduled."
The player who failed the test has not been named, but last night the Kerry County Board confirmed a member of the county football panel was involved and that the rest took place after the All-Ireland final against Tyrone. The Kerry statement continued: "The player's asthma has been pre-notified to the Sports Council since the GAA's anti-doping policy came in a few years ago. Coiste Chontae Chiarrai and the player are happy to co-operate with the hearing and are confident the player will be exonerated."
The GPA has confirmed the Kerry man is a member of the players' body and that they have "made contact with the individual in question to inform him that our support services are available to him throughout the process which will now ensue".
Quote from: ONeill on November 18, 2008, 10:26:14 AM
"It's okay for professionals but the GAA is an amateur sport," he said.
Where do you draw the line here?
When the players took the money IMHO they changed their amateur status themselves
The deal on doping was done between the Sports Council and the GAA - before grants were even an issue. If the GAA wanted to continue to receive funding from the Sport Council (i.e.) the Government they had to sign up to doping. It has feck all to do with the GPA and grants, as far as I'm aware.
Maybe I'm wrong, anyone able to confirm?
QuoteAccording to Dr Joe Cumiskey, formerly medical officer to the Olympic Council of Ireland and an international authority on doping in sport, the use of salbutamol is a continuing concern for the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada).
Although there are genuine cases of asthma among elite athletes - O'Mahony is said by team-mates to have been taking medication for asthma since long before his senior career - the incidence of the condition is disproportionately widespread in the international sports community.
"The figures show that 1.7 per cent of athletes declared with asthma at the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984," said Cumiskey. "That had risen to 3.6 by Atlanta in 1996 and 5.5 in Sydney in 2000. By this year in Beijing that was up to 8.5 per cent; yet 17 per cent of medallists were declared asthmatics.
"Salbutamol is a stimulant and used to dilate the bronchi in the airwaves. That's its main use. If used in high doses it does have an anabolic effect. If there's a presence over a certain level in the urine then it's considered that it's being used for anabolic effect and not for broncho-dilatory effects. There is a cut-off point.
"You can get a therapeutic use exemption for using the drug if you have established asthma and provided you register before you take the drug and not afterwards."
So it is amazing how many asthmatics are in the elite athletic population compared to normal population. From reading that article it's well known that O'Mahoney has been an asthmatic for years so lets hope it was an oversight of some sort.
I thought the linking of funding via the Sports Council was the reason the GAA signed the code nothing to do with grants
O'Mahony was a doubt for the final all week with the flu and while he played, he was not in tipp top shape.
The day was also tough on asthmatics; consequently, it seems O'Mahony took a few extra puffs of his inhaler.
The word from home is that all the documentation was correct so O'Mahony should be fine.
What is not fine is the leaking of the story before the hearing to clear/convict O'Mahony.
It appears the 'leak' did not come from the Kerry side.
Statement from O'Mahoney via his solicitor said he was a long standing asthmatic and confident that levels found would be consistent with therapeutic use and hearing would go in his favour.
Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
Here here!!
Shame on RTE. I have only read the last few posts of this thread and like RTE i'm sure it deserves no more of my attention.
What difference does it make if he is professional or amateur?
If it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
Quote"It's okay for professionals but the GAA is an amateur sport," he said.
"The Tyrone lads had to wait for two-and-a-half hours after the All-Ireland final until someone had finished giving a sample. Sometimes you would ask yourself, 'What is going on?' I think it's all a bit severe for amateur players."
Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with this statement I think its the inevitable result of the players grants, which are pay for play, that the GPA have pushed for. You can't run with the hare and hunt with the hound. We're either amateur or we're not. great player and all as he was and much as I admire him there's no consistency from the great man in his articles. The players are "professional" when it suits other arguments.
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 11:25:53 AM
What difference does it make if he is professional or amateur?
If it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
I agree,was going to make the same point myself
Quote from: Declan on November 18, 2008, 10:43:44 AM
So it is amazing how many asthmatics are in the elite athletic population compared to normal population.
But... there has been a massive upswing in those afflicted with asthma in the non-sporting populace at large over recent decades, so the rise in sporting figures with asthma is a mirror on that. What may be more of an issue is the relatively higher number of asthmatic (Olympic) medal winners versus the percentage of overall participants with asthma, and what that discrepancy
could be put down to.
It's a disgrace the way O'Mahony was named - € 2500 shouldn't be the issue in the form a so called grant. O'Mahony is an amateur and shoudn't have to be subjected to this rubbish.
And remember shit sticks !
If this was a Rugby Discussion Board & it was the first high profile case then there might be a similar furore over it. The same applies to RTE, it is the first high profile case within the GAA.
If all the documentation is in place he has nothing to worry about & I sincerely hopes he gets cleared.
Like others, I would like to know how the case got out. Was it leaked or did he bring it into the public domain?
he should be banned for life
first the diving now this!!!!
Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
Quote from: full back on November 18, 2008, 10:33:30 AM
Quote from: ONeill on November 18, 2008, 10:26:14 AM
"It's okay for professionals but the GAA is an amateur sport," he said.
Where do you draw the line here?
When the players took the money IMHO they changed their amateur status themselves
The players may have taken money, but the amount of money does not warrant a change in status. When fellas are paid enough to concentrate fully on hurling or football, them i would deem the sport professional. This testing business should feck of out of GAA sport and who signed up for it hang there heads in shame, then resign they have ruined a good fellas name.
Im sadden that the press have when at a story like this, I would expect this of the english press but not of the Irish.
Quote from: youngfella on November 18, 2008, 11:43:47 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Its an absolute disgrace that an amateur player has been named in this way.
Quote from: full back on November 18, 2008, 10:33:30 AM
Quote from: ONeill on November 18, 2008, 10:26:14 AM
"It's okay for professionals but the GAA is an amateur sport," he said.
Where do you draw the line here?
When the players took the money IMHO they changed their amateur status themselves
I would expect this of the english press but not of the Irish.
Is there a difference ?
QuoteIf it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
Actually it was worse the Sunday Tribune and Niall Francais in particular went to town on Frankie Sheehan a couple of years ago.
I'm a different opinion to most on this.
If he failed the test he deserved to be named. Makes no difference whatsoever that he is an amateur. He knows the rules that are required to be met to play intercounty football. But he also deserves the chance to clear his name. Many asthma sufferers have been tested, only he has failed. There are questions that need to be answered, and hopefully there are answers that will fully clear him. But if he took more than allowed then he'd deserve any ban he'd get.
I am totally against those posters who say intercounty GAA should not be subject to drug testing. Of course it should be. Makes no difference if its amateur, there can be no room for drugs in our sport.
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 11:25:53 AM
What difference does it make if he is professional or amateur?
If it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
To my mind, the distinction between amateur and professional makes all the difference. If he were professional and the gaa imposed these regulations on him, then it would be totally remiss of him to be tested positive for a banned substance and all would be within their rights to go to town on him. As an amateur he gives up his time to play a sport to the best of his ability and receives little or no financial reward for it, whilst these substances are banned and he has been caught contravening the rules, we should ask ourselves whether or not the rules should be there in place in the first place? Imo they shouldn't, if it were for health reasons, perhaps they should be guidelines, but it's not, the rules are there to keep the sports council happy, I don't understand why the sports council feel that the gaa need sign up to these?
In this instance I feel that O'Mahony has and will receive far much abuse for his dive during the summer than he will for testing positive for salbutamol.
What happens when a player is found to have tested positive for a recreational drug? He will be villified by the media and his employment and career may be put at risk, not to mention the possibility of criminal prosecution, is that fair? Do we have the right make such demands of amateur sportsmen?
Quote from: Hound on November 18, 2008, 12:04:09 PMI am totally against those posters who say intercounty GAA should not be subject to drug testing. Of course it should be. Makes no difference if its amateur, there can be no room for drugs in our sport.
[/b]
Yeah, cos testing has proven so effective amongst professionals
:D :D :D :D :D :D
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:12:37 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 11:25:53 AM
What difference does it make if he is professional or amateur?
If it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
To my mind, the distinction between amateur and professional makes all the difference. If he were professional and the gaa imposed these regulations on him, then it would be totally remiss of him to be tested positive for a banned substance and all would be within their rights to go to town on him. As an amateur he gives up his time to play a sport to the best of his ability and receives little or no financial reward for it, whilst these substances are banned and he has been caught contravening the rules, we should ask ourselves whether or not the rules should be there in place in the first place? Imo they shouldn't, if it were for health reasons, perhaps they should be guidelines, but it's not, the rules are there to keep the sports council happy, I don't understand why the sports council feel that the gaa need sign up to these?
In this instance I feel that O'Mahony has and will receive far much abuse for his dive during the summer than he will for testing positive for salbutamol.
What happens when a player is found to have tested positive for a recreational drug? He will be villified by the media and his employment and career may be put at risk, not to mention the possibility of criminal prosecution, is that fair? Do we have the right make such demands of amateur sportsmen?
Me thinks not !
So you would prefer if there was no testing at all? Allow players/teams to use what ever they want! All becasue they are amateur.
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:12:37 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 11:25:53 AM
What difference does it make if he is professional or amateur?
If it was a rugby palyer in the exact same circumstances ( asmatic since a kid etc) would the outcry here be the same?
To my mind, the distinction between amateur and professional makes all the difference. If he were professional and the gaa imposed these regulations on him, then it would be totally remiss of him to be tested positive for a banned substance and all would be within their rights to go to town on him. As an amateur he gives up his time to play a sport to the best of his ability and receives little or no financial reward for it, whilst these substances are banned and he has been caught contravening the rules, we should ask ourselves whether or not the rules should be there in place in the first place? Imo they shouldn't, if it were for health reasons, perhaps they should be guidelines, but it's not, the rules are there to keep the sports council happy, I don't understand why the sports council feel that the gaa need sign up to these?
In this instance I feel that O'Mahony has and will receive far much abuse for his dive during the summer than he will for testing positive for salbutamol.
What happens when a player is found to have tested positive for a recreational drug? He will be villified by the media and his employment and career may be put at risk, not to mention the possibility of criminal prosecution, is that fair? Do we have the right make such demands of amateur sportsmen?
Exactly,what happens if someone is tested for a recreational drug,Then he would definitely be ruined.GAA players should not be treated the same way as professionals.Next thing will be they will be looking to test Club Players.Where will it end?
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 12:30:34 PM
So you would prefer if there was no testing at all? Allow players/teams to use what ever they want! All becasue they are amateur.
Yes, inform the players of the health risks (if any) of using substances as proscribed by the IOC etc, and leave it at that.
If a team doctor put a team on superduper supplement programme and the lads turned into superfit/fast/strong monsters you would have no issue with this? Nobody would know they were on it. It could be dangerous for the opposition if these players were so much bigger and stronger as well as having an obvious fitness/stamina advantage. But hey let them do what they want as they are amatuers
GAA player are always spoke about as role models but only it seems when it is for good.
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:42:20 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 12:30:34 PM
So you would prefer if there was no testing at all? Allow players/teams to use what ever they want! All becasue they are amateur.
Yes, inform the players of the health risks (if any) of using substances as proscribed by the IOC etc, and leave it at that.
So it's OK for a clean amateur to have to be competing against a 'dirty' amateur (in your book), despite the massive personal sacrifices that clean individual may be making in pursuit of sporting excellence, only to be beaten because the opposing individual took performance-enhancing drugs (and not referring to O'Mahony here)?
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:13:48 PM
Quote from: Hound on November 18, 2008, 12:04:09 PMI am totally against those posters who say intercounty GAA should not be subject to drug testing. Of course it should be. Makes no difference if its amateur, there can be no room for drugs in our sport.
[/b]
Yeah, cos testing has proven so effective amongst professionals
:D :D :D :D :D :D
Genius.
I think the player in question will be exonerated.
However, many many players turn to a weights program over the winter months. And i would be shocked if there was not more inter county players "experimenting" or being introduced to some performance enhancing products.
If he asthma and the enhaler has this drug there is nothing much he can do about it. Lots of club players use inhalers, I wonder what percentage of them would fail a drugs test. If the drug found was nandrolin or something like that then that would be a different matter.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:42:20 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 12:30:34 PM
So you would prefer if there was no testing at all? Allow players/teams to use what ever they want! All becasue they are amateur.
Yes, inform the players of the health risks (if any) of using substances as proscribed by the IOC etc, and leave it at that.
So it's OK for a clean amateur to have to be competing against a 'dirty' amateur (in your book), despite the massive personal sacrifices that clean individual may be making in pursuit of sporting excellence, only to be beaten because the opposing individual took performance-enhancing drugs (and not referring to O'Mahony here)?
If there are health issues associated with the performance enhancing substances, who is making the sacrifice, if there aren't why ban them? If it's about people competing on a level playing field, do you think that happens at the moment? Would you accept that a Tyrone footballer has a better opportunity to compete at the highest level than a Tipp footballer?
Quote from: Hound on November 18, 2008, 01:26:40 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:13:48 PM
Quote from: Hound on November 18, 2008, 12:04:09 PMI am totally against those posters who say intercounty GAA should not be subject to drug testing. Of course it should be. Makes no difference if its amateur, there can be no room for drugs in our sport.
[/b]
Yeah, cos testing has proven so effective amongst professionals
:D :D :D :D :D :D
Genius.
Finally someone who sees sense ;)
Quote from: Maiden1 on November 18, 2008, 02:46:39 PM
If he asthma and the enhaler has this drug there is nothing much he can do about it. Lots of club players use inhalers, I wonder what percentage of them would fail a drugs test. If the drug found was nandrolin or something like that then that would be a different matter.
I wonder what percentage would be found to have taken recreational drugs - or would usage amongst the population as a whole not be reflected amongst gaa club players?
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 02:56:27 PM
Quote from: Maiden1 on November 18, 2008, 02:46:39 PM
If he asthma and the enhaler has this drug there is nothing much he can do about it. Lots of club players use inhalers, I wonder what percentage of them would fail a drugs test. If the drug found was nandrolin or something like that then that would be a different matter.
I wonder what percentage would be found to have taken recreational drugs - or would usage amongst the population as a whole not be reflected amongst gaa club players?
Very few I'd say.
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 02:56:27 PM
Quote from: Maiden1 on November 18, 2008, 02:46:39 PM
If he asthma and the enhaler has this drug there is nothing much he can do about it. Lots of club players use inhalers, I wonder what percentage of them would fail a drugs test. If the drug found was nandrolin or something like that then that would be a different matter.
I wonder what percentage would be found to have taken recreational drugs - or would usage amongst the population as a whole not be reflected amongst gaa club players?
Would the alcohol consumption figures for IC players be lower than the population as a whole? I'd guess it would be so is it safe to assume that the usage of illegal drugs (recreational?!) would be lower as well?
There are health issues with almost every drug legal or illegal, some stuff you can buy over the counter some you cant ( depending on how much you take) so i don't know where you are coming from. It is purely down to performance enhancing that i would be concerned. Why dint you compare similar teams, say Tyrone and Kerry. Suppose Kerry, after been pissed off getting beat by Tyrone, put their players on a programme and they become invincible for th e next 5 years. Would you be happy if the only way Tyrone/Armagh/Derry/Dublin whoever have to compete would be to take performance enhancing drugs? We will end up with a full forward line of straight from the WWF
DO you think that the only reason the drugs are banned are because of health issues to the athlete.
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 02:50:51 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 12:42:20 PM
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 12:30:34 PM
So you would prefer if there was no testing at all? Allow players/teams to use what ever they want! All becasue they are amateur.
Yes, inform the players of the health risks (if any) of using substances as proscribed by the IOC etc, and leave it at that.
So it's OK for a clean amateur to have to be competing against a 'dirty' amateur (in your book), despite the massive personal sacrifices that clean individual may be making in pursuit of sporting excellence, only to be beaten because the opposing individual took performance-enhancing drugs (and not referring to O'Mahony here)?
If there are health issues associated with the performance enhancing substances, who is making the sacrifice, if there aren't why ban them? If it's about people competing on a level playing field, do you think that happens at the moment? Would you accept that a Tyrone footballer has a better opportunity to compete at the highest level than a Tipp footballer?
Completely beside the point, and something of a smokescreen. From your answer, I take it that what you're trying to say is that it's OK to cheat, just as long as there's an element of risk in the performance-enhancing drug, which is by no means a given in every case. And Tyrone haven't cheated with drugs (or any other way, despite your personal personal perspective :P) to excel over the likes of Tipp.
So, now all we need are regulations to enforce the element of risk in the drug, and if it isn't high enough, the cheating athlete should be sanctioned, otherwise it's fine. Great.
QuoteSuppose Kerry, after been pissed off getting beat by Tyrone, put their players on a programme and they become invincible for th e next 5 years.
Pretending such a wonder drug existed there are 2 scenarios:
1. There are no health risks to undergoing the invincibility programme, thus every team in the country (with the exception of the Kilkenny footballers) undergoes the programme, thus negating the competitive advantage Kerry had in year one, there are plenty of precedents for this type of behaviour.
2. There are potential health risks, so any player with half a brain refuses to undergo the invincibility programme and the negative press surrounding the rest means that it's not worth anybody's while undergoing the programme.
QuoteDO you think that the only reason the drugs are banned are because of health issues to the athlete.
I do actually, if not why are they banned? Why are substances such as creatine (which may well have health risks btw) and sports rehydration drinks allowed then? Why are some teams allowed to go to La Manga for training whilst others get to go to Bundoran? Why do some teams get dietary kits delivered to their homes on a regular basis, whilst others get a hang sandwich after training?
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 04:18:28 PMAnd Tyrone haven't cheated with drugs (or any other way, despite your personal personal perspective :P) to excel over the likes of Tipp.
Ah now, Fear, now you're just losing all credibility ;)
Quote from: Maiden1 on November 18, 2008, 02:46:39 PM
If he asthma and the enhaler has this drug there is nothing much he can do about it. Lots of club players use inhalers, I wonder what percentage of them would fail a drugs test. If the drug found was nandrolin or something like that then that would be a different matter.
It's perfectly ok to use these inhalers if you have properly notified Croke Park that it is prescribed to you. Thereafter, a positive result would need an abnormally high level of a stimulent to appear - no the level likely from a few extra puffs on an inhaler.
most likely scenario here is that AOM has not fully informed Croke park that he is prescribed the inhaler and therefore trace levels of stimulent constitute a positive test.
EDIT - apologies, i think i've duplicated RMDrive's post
I dont think this is a big deal, if o mahony genuinely has asthma there is no need for the GAA to overreact to this. Besides there is a lack of common sense in what is banned and what isnt. For example, heroin or cocaine couldnt be further from performance enhancing and are banned while lucozade advertises as improving performance by 33% and isnt banned.
Yes, but the athlete must be dealt with according to international convention on these things surely?
by that code, frankie sheehan's 3 month ban seems appropriate
Bogball
I dont know where to start really, you are linking county board spending with taking performancing enhancing drugs.
Are you seriously saying that you would be in be favour of no regulation and let player take whatever drugs they want??
You go on about health risks but i fail to see the point, there are health risks for every drug ( legal or not).
In fairness there has to be some level of drug testing, my issue is the question of the innuendo. They could have stated that a player had tested positive who has been an asmatic since a kid, that puts a different complexion on it , rather than banner headlines of "failing a drugs test"
There are a few gobshites with no testing who would push the boundaries , which could lead to more. We'd be naive to think otherwise. Welsh amateur rugby is rampant with steroid abuse due to years of no testing. But a known ashmatic shouldn't have his name dragged through the mud like this its not fair. And anyone who thinks there are a lot of rational 20 year olds developing sudden forms of asthma to play inter county football for no finanicial reward are kidding themselves. Perfectly clear explanation to me.
Quote from: ludermor on November 18, 2008, 05:41:51 PM
Bogball
I dont know where to start really, you are linking county board spending with taking performancing enhancing drugs.
Are you seriously saying that you would be in be favour of no regulation and let player take whatever drugs they want??
You go on about health risks but i fail to see the point, there are health risks for every drug ( legal or not).
I'm trying to point out that some of you seem to think it is a level playing field when really it is far from it, why are some things allowed when other things are banned? Why do we allow collective training when not all teams can afford it, why do we allow some teams to use private gyms free of charge with individually tailored programmes etc when not every team has access to such facilities?
And yes, if players want to use legally available drugs let them, I really don't care if they can enhance their performance or not - why should an individual have to think twice before he takes a painkiller just because he participates in an amateur sport every sunday? It's nonsense imo, total nonsense.
As for health risks etc, many of the proscribed drugs are so because use in the wrong situation can lead to health problems, or at least I've always been led to believe this is the reaons for proscription - if we explain the risks to players, they can decide themselves whether the risk is worth the gain, in a skill sport like gaa sports one would assume they would feel that the risk is not worth the gain - especially since there is no monetary reward.
Finally, I just think it's wrong that we feel that players should have to abide by these rules which impact on every facet of their lives and that by virtue of being an inter county player they have to put their lives under scrutiny that the rest of us don't.
Quote from: Bogball XV on November 18, 2008, 05:11:57 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 04:18:28 PMAnd Tyrone haven't cheated with drugs (or any other way, despite your personal personal perspective :P) to excel over the likes of Tipp.
Ah now, Fear, now you're just losing all credibility ;)
>:( ;)
Anyways, to sum up BBXV: you think it's OK to cheat, you equate training very hard, applying oneself in an honest way, and putting in the hard slog with popping a pill for instant athletic improvement with no work or effort necessary.
Good luck with your addiction :P
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 09:20:10 PMAnyways, to sum up BBXV: you think it's OK to cheat, you equate training very hard, applying oneself in an honest way, and putting in the hard slog with popping a pill for instant athletic improvement with no work or effort necessary.
Good luck with your addiction :P
Shit Fear, if I could find one of them I'd be popping it alright :D
Ps, I don't agree with your summation at all, but I hear you - time to leave it ;)
If all is as it seems and the player had notified people he was on the inhaler then this whole episide is a disgrace. I have no time for drug takers anfd if he is telling the Truth this is not a drug case and heads must roll as the mans name has been Libels for all time as we all know ' there no smoke without fire '. this is nothing like the muster Rugby case as Sheehan Cheated and remembered he was an asmatic after he got the ban . and got his ban reduced with a good lawyer.
Whoi ever leaked this to the Press should be taken out and shot
Is there no one out there that can see that O'Mahoney went to the media and gave permission for them to name him. All this talk about media being a disgrace and should be shot is crazy. It makes far more sense that as he is innocent he'd get his name out there as quickly as possible as opposed to trying to cover it up - that just creates more suspicion
Tell me about it!!
I said the same thing in response to Seanie yesterday evening myself - but people are still coming calling the media a disgrace, so just re-iterating ;)
Fair point stephenite (et al.), neither O'Mahony nor his solicitor (who were both interviewed today) made any mention of the fact that his identity is now known, much less being critical of it.
Looks like he'll be OK, as should be the case.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 18, 2008, 11:50:41 PM
Fair point stephenite (et al.), neither O'Mahony nor his solicitor (who were both interviewed today) made any mention of the fact that his identity is now known, much less being critical of it.
Looks like he'll be OK, as should be the case.
he didn't have a lot of choice the dogs on the board we barking his and many other names before he came out yesterday.
Wasnt he better to go to a sympathethic Irish Times than have one of the english rags expose him in the morning .
but a supposed negative test which had clearance should never have been reported in the 1st place. Im not blaming the media but Whoever announced the test in the first place.
The biggest obstacle facing O'Mahony won't be that his level of salbutamol was over 1000 but how it was so far over 1000. It was a very high figure even when you add in flu, dehydration, stress and other factors.
Quote from: rosnarun on November 18, 2008, 10:50:29 PM
If all is as it seems and the player had notified people he was on the inhaler then this whole episide is a disgrace. I have no time for drug takers anfd if he is telling the Truth this is not a drug case and heads must roll as the mans name has been Libels for all time as we all know ' there no smoke without fire '. this is nothing like the muster Rugby case as Sheehan Cheated and remembered he was an asmatic after he got the ban . and got his ban reduced with a good lawyer.
Whoi ever leaked this to the Press should be taken out and shot
I belive O'Mahoney has engaged the services of that same good lawyer.
Quote from: blanketattack on November 19, 2008, 02:27:37 AM
The biggest obstacle facing O'Mahony won't be that his level of salbutamol was over 1000 but how it was so far over 1000. It was a very high figure even when you add in flu, dehydration, stress and other factors.
I heard yesterday that his level was very low (RTE radio 1 yesterday evening) and got the impression that it was within "inhale-able" levels. I took it that this meant there was a question over his authorisation to use it??? Confused!
SHAMEFUL
on 19/11/2008 08:21:14
WARNING to asthmatics: don't try to seek relief; it could land you with a minimum ban of two years from the sport of your choice.
Warning to GAA players: don't think that because you're part of a local sport played for free in your spare time, you won't be treated like highly paid professionals in several areas of your life.
Warning to the rest of us: reclaim the sporting world before it's taken over by bureaucratic terrorists.
Kerry's Aidan O'Mahony stands suspended at present, faced with the prospect of proving his innocence for taking a substance designed to ease an asthma condition from which he has suffered for years.
It's his right as an individual to do so, yet he is been treated like a drug cheat by a shameful system.
The carefully crafted words describing the situation in which he finds himself for inhaling Salbutamol around All-Ireland final time read like something from an old-style Soviet manual.
"Adverse findings" indeed. What's definitely found to be adverse here is that a person can be treated so appallingly badly. In most criminal investigations, there's a presumption of innocence until proven guilty, but in the case of an amateur footballer -- giving freely of his own time -- it's the other way around. How bizarre and unfair is that?
Does anybody seriously believe that O'Mahony took the asthma remedy for anything other than relief? Many top medics insist that, irrespective of how much Salbutamol was administered, it wouldn't enhance performance in any way, but the World Anti-Doping Agency disagrees -- hence it's inclusion on the 'dodgy' list.
It's not actually banned and can be taken perfectly legally under the Therapeutic Use Exemption, which allows a certain amount to be inhaled. Problems arise when those limits are exceeded.
Whether that's the basis of the case against O'Mahony remains to be seen, but meanwhile he has been identified as the first GAA person to fail a dope test.
The GAA would never admit it but they were effectively bullied into signing up to the anti-doping regulations in 2001. Basically, they were told that if they declined, they would lose government funding.
They were also conscious of the need to be seen to operate a policy of full co-operation with anti-doping agencies, lest they be accused of creating a safe haven for cheats. So they signed up, and while they got some minor concessions in terms of how the regulations applied it wasn't anywhere near enough to balance the books between what should be expected of amateurs, who have a life outside sport, and full-timers.
In an ideal world GAA players would be aware of every detail of the regulations but, unlike their professional colleagues in other sports, they work (or study) for most of the week. Of course team doctors advise them to be careful, but inevitably mistakes will be made amid the hectic lifestyle players lead, especially in the playing season.
When that happens, they are entitled to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty, which is not the situation at present. That's why, when the O'Mahony case runs its course, the GAA must do a new deal on drug-testing and, equally importantly, on what happens afterwards.
As Dr Pat Duggan pointed out in this paper yesterday, a sympathetic approach should be taken when dealing with individuals whose lives don't revolve around training and sport on a full-time basis.
Given how stringent the anti-doping regulations are, only a complete fool would attempt to beat them while operating as a part-time sportsperson.
As for the notion that a player might use an asthma remedy in an attempt to boost performance, it's too daft to even contemplate. Still, it hasn't stopped O'Mahony being suspended and facing a hearing.
One of the bizarre ironies of the situation is that the dope tester who took the sample, the couriers who carried it, the laboratory experts who processed it, and virtually everybody else involved are all professionals.
Isn't it great to see one amateur sportsman providing so much gainful employment? As for his good name, well let him and his advisers fight for it. After all, the system, however flawed, has to be upheld.
No, it bloody doesn't. Which is why after this case is over, the GAA must seek a whole range of derogations from over-strict regulations when it shows that all O'Mahony did was seek relief from asthma.
However mad the world has become, that can never be an offence.
Where did that come from Reillers?
I never heard a word of complaint about these drug regulations before and now when someone fails a test there's an awful amount of crying about amateur players and Jesus H Christ there's people who don't care if there are drug cheats.
Bogball if a county started to win all around them and it became very apparent it wasn't down to just hard work would you have the same point of view?
I'm actually embarrassed by the crying and whinging on this thread and it would appear that a lot of you would be perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to drug cheats.
Keep taking the tablets :D
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 07:55:09 PM
Where did that come from Reillers?
I never heard a word of complaint about these drug regulations before and now when someone fails a test there's an awful amount of crying about amateur players and Jesus H Christ there's people who don't care if there are drug cheats.
Bogball if a county started to win all around them and it became very apparent it wasn't down to just hard work would you have the same point of view?
I'm actually embarrassed by the crying and whinging on this thread and it would appear that a lot of you would be perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to drug cheats.
Great Article Reillers,
Jesus your easily embarassed Pints.Nobody is turning a blind eye to what happened.O Mahoney is Innocent until proven guilty,so he is not a Drug Cheat.Drug testing was forced upon the GAA.There has never been a drug problem in the GAA,Who the f**k ever heard of this Salbutamol before,now all of a sudden anybody who takes it is a Drug cheat.Inter-County players are not paid to check every f**king ingredient that passes through their system.They have enough on their plate with their Full-Time jobs earning a weeks pay. Hopefully after this fiasco, common sense will prevail and there will be seperate guidelines and rules drawn up for the GAA,An amateur association.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 07:55:09 PM
Where did that come from Reillers?
I never heard a word of complaint about these drug regulations before and now when someone fails a test there's an awful amount of crying about amateur players and Jesus H Christ there's people who don't care if there are drug cheats.
Bogball if a county started to win all around them and it became very apparent it wasn't down to just hard work would you have the same point of view?
I'm actually embarrassed by the crying and whinging on this thread and it would appear that a lot of you would be perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to drug cheats.
Cheating? Are ya taking the piss??
Wanting to BREATH is cheating?? Salbutamol is a drug in enhalers. It has little if no effect and usually the affect is a bad one. Dizzyness, tiring, jumpy sometimes. It affect is no more then water. You can't say, no one can say that he took the drug for anything other then wanting relief from asthma, so he could breath and we're punishing him for that. You think that's right??
So now, we're putting up a barrier between players and atshma sufferers.
It's one thing with pros, who have things clearly put for them. But these are amatuers with hectics lives, mistakes happen.
I remember the Cork Waterford game last season or the one before that, but Brian Murphy had been sick, bed bound for a week and he played the match, the physio had to come out with his inhaller about 3 times before he was taken off.
So what about lads with Salbutamol in their inhalers. Sorry lads I know ya want to be able to breath BUT..
It's a joke.
QuoteJesus your easily embarassed Pints.Nobody is turning a blind eye to what happened.
Have you read the thread? There's a number of people who don't want it mentioned.
Quote.Drug testing was forced upon the GAA.
Where's your evidence for this? 7 years ago it came in? I haven't heard a complaint about it until now, why?
QuoteWho the f**k ever heard of this Salbutamol before,now all of a sudden anybody who takes it is a Drug cheat.
Yes, anyone who uses salbutamol - quite a large proportion of the population I imagine - is a drug cheat ::) ::) ::)
Don't be such a drama queen.
Same to you Reillers, you can argue your case without a hysterical response filled with nonsense and trying to misrepresent what people are saying.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 09:30:16 PM
QuoteJesus your easily embarassed Pints.Nobody is turning a blind eye to what happened.
Have you read the thread? There's a number of people who don't want it mentioned.
Quote.Drug testing was forced upon the GAA.
Where's your evidence for this? 7 years ago it came in? I haven't heard a complaint about it until now, why?
QuoteWho the f**k ever heard of this Salbutamol before,now all of a sudden anybody who takes it is a Drug cheat.
Yes, anyone who uses salbutamol - quite a large proportion of the population I imagine - is a drug cheat ::) ::) ::)
Don't be such a drama queen.
Same to you Reillers, you can argue your case without a hysterical response filled with nonsense and trying to misrepresent what people are saying.
The GAA was forced to bring it by the govt. back in 2001, if they didn't they'd loose funding.
Till now nothings come up.
And Never heard of salbutamol, Frankie Sheahan was banned for 2 months becuase of the same reason, he first got a 2 year ban but it was brought down. The amount of media attention it got, it, the ban, pissed off a lot of people. They've a right to breath.
Now answer me how is taking a salbutamol cheating when it doesn't do anything.
He took it for relief and relief only, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
QuoteNow answer me how is taking a salbutamol cheating when it doesn't do anything.
I'm not a medical expert, are you?
Why weren't you yapping about this in 2001?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 10:08:40 PM
QuoteNow answer me how is taking a salbutamol cheating when it doesn't do anything.
I'm not a medical expert, are you?
Why weren't you yapping about this in 2001?
Are you serious.
Answer me. Salbutamol has side affects of dizzyness, tiredness, even in some cases nausea. It makes you tired, twitchy, it puts off your reflexes in some cases if you're not used to it.
So answer me, how is taking it cheating?
Reillers, again, I'm not a medical expert so I can't discuss the affects of Salbutamol, are you a medical expert?
What I do find interesting though is posts from Bud and Mainstreet in this thread providing evidence that suggests Salbutamol would be advantageous.
I'll ask again, why weren't you crying in 2001?
Would you be prepared to throw away the grants to take all the inhalers you wanted?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 10:08:40 PM
QuoteNow answer me how is taking a salbutamol cheating when it doesn't do anything.
I'm not a medical expert, are you?
Why weren't you yapping about this in 2001?
No room to breathe for asthma sufferersWednesday November 19 2008[/b]
GAA stars with asthma may be forced out of the game because of stringent new rules governing Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUE).
As Kerry star Aidan O'Mahony prepares his case against a positive dope test that revealed adverse levels of Salbutamol in his system on the day of the All-Ireland final against Tyrone,
doctors across a wide range of sports will meet in Dublin on Saturday to hear how the new rules -- applicable from January 1 -- will tighten protocols for asthma sufferers.Dr Philip Carolan, chairman of the Gaelic Games Doctors Association and the incoming dean of the faculty of sport at the Royal College of Surgeons, says his understanding of the new rules, which seeks to harmonise WADA guidelines across all sports and countries, is that it will make it harder for sufferers of asthma to obtain TUEs .
He even predicted that some players, who won't gain exemption under the new system, may have to relinquish inter-county careers rather than risk playing without clearance for use of substances contained in inhalers."We have yet to ascertain what the seminar on Saturday will fully advise, but from what I gather, some form of respiratory testing -- as opposed to just doctor's clearance -- will be required from next year onwards," explained Dr Carolan.
"That will leave things a lot more difficult for those who suffer from asthma. To undergo such tests, players will have to be free of medication at the time, which is hardly ideal. I'd be worried that it could put off asthma sufferers from playing high-level sport, including Gaelic games."I'm on the anti-doping committee at the faculty of sports medicine in the Royal College of Surgeons and there are issues and concerns with all of this which we have been discussing on an ongoing basis," continued Dr Carolan.
Change
"Problems arise when a player is drafted into the squad late in a season or when team doctors changes from year to year in accordance with a change of manager."
The chairman of the Irish Asthma Society's medical advisory council, Dr Pat Manning, a respiratory consultant, said he too was aware that respiratory testing could be introduced in the near future but wasn't sure if it would be that detrimental.
"There are various forms of tests that we use, from exercise and breathing challenges to a methacholine challenge. We understand that regulation is going to go beyond just accepting a medical diagnosis on the basis of symptoms. I'm not sure if this would be detrimental however."
Dr Manning said Salbutamol, at the core of the controversy involving O'Mahony, was a "good drug to use in the case of an emergency as a reliever of asthma symptoms and as a prevention of exercise-induced asthma." But he did warn that over-use could be dangerous.
He also admitted it would be a "plausible" explanation for higher than normal levels of Salbutamol to be found in the system if he had been suffering from symptoms of flu in the week of the game.
"Obviously, if he had symptoms of flu, it could be a very reasonable explanation for a higher than normal reading, but we'll obviously have to await the outcome of the hearing to know that," he said.
O'Mahony was a doubt in the lead-up to the game and was considered to have performed below his normal standards as he struggled with the warmer conditions, especially when shadowing Tyrone's man of the match, Sean Cavanagh.
Almost
one in five young teens have been diagnosed with asthma in Ireland since 2000 according to Dr Manning, but the society would never discourage participation in sport.
An average of two to three members of a 30-man GAA inter-county squad seek TUEs from the Irish Sports Council (ISC) every year.
Last year, the ISC cleared 526 abbreviated and 155 standard TUEs from participants across a wide range of sports, from athletics to swimming, Gaelic games, rugby and soccer. A small percentage of standard TUE requests were rejected.
Dr Carolan said he was surprised and worried that O'Mahony's name had got into the public domain so quickly and said it was a disturbing development for any GAA player.
"I feel sorry for the player in question that due process has not been observed in that regard."
O'Mahony will receive results from his 'B' sample in the coming days but he has already begun preparing his defence, which he is confident of being successful with.
O'Mahony yesterday issued a statement through his solicitor Paul Derham -- the man who successfully helped Frankie Sheahan to have a two-year ban pared back to three months in 2003 -- outlining how he was an asthma sufferer since childhood and had a Therapeutic Use Exemption for the four years he has been an inter-county footballer and which he renews annually.
Suffered
"I have suffered from asthma since childhood, I notified the Gaelic Athletic Association and the Irish Sports Council with regard to my asthmatic condition and the use of Salbutamol by way of inhaler to treat this condition and I obtained from the Irish Sports Council a Therapeutic Use Exemption," explained O'Mahony in the statement."I was randomly tested after the All-Ireland final on the 21st of September, 2008. A concentration of Salbutamol was shown in my sample and I must now show to the Gaelic Athletic Association/Irish Sports Council that this finding was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol, and I and my medical advisors are absolutely satisfied that the level of Salbutamol in my sample is wholly consistent with my therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol.
"I would be happy to meet with the press to give further detail once my hearing has been concluded and it would not be appropriate to give any further detail until after the hearing."
This is what we're fighting. One in Five teens have it. Two to Three members of a 30 man panel. But the rules for an amateur sport are getting strickter, it's not like they're pros and are doing anything else but the sport, these lads have work and families and study to do and take care of, GAA on top of that, and when these tests are done, they've to be FREE of any medication at the time. It's a joke.
What are you fighting here pints, what are you fighting exactly?? It's not cheating, it's having the right to breath. Nothing else.
Nobody was yapping about it Pints because there was no problem with anything.There still isnt a problem apart the fact that an Amateur association is being being expected to adhere to the same set of guidelines as Professional sports.And yes it was forced on the GAA,It was a directive from the Irish Sports Council or else Funding and Grants would have been cut.The GAA had been motoring along just grand without any drug-testing for 120 years.Now a storm in a teacup over nothing and all of a sudden these Sports Council Guidelines have to be adhered to or we'l end up with Ben Johnson and Waterford Crystal and Michele Smith all in Croke Park on All-Ireland Final day.I DONT THINK SO.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 10:23:27 PM
Reillers, again, I'm not a medical expert so I can't discuss the affects of Salbutamol, are you a medical expert?
What I do find interesting though is posts from Bud and Mainstreet in this thread providing evidence that suggests Salbutamol would be advantageous.
I'll ask again, why weren't you crying in 2001?
Would you be prepared to throw away the grants to take all the inhalers you wanted?
It didn't come up in 2001 now did it, but I was pretty pissed in 2003 when Frankie Sheahan got baned for it, thankfully it was reduced to 3 months, buit still.
What advantages..according to Wikipedia..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salbutamol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salbutamol)
Side Effects / Health Consequences * Tachycardia (rapid heart rate)
* Shakiness, nervousness
* Hyperkinesis
* Insomnia
* Nausea and Vomiting
* Reactive bronchospasm
* Drowsiness
* Aggression
* Agitation
* Allergic reaction
* Anxiety
* Back Pain
* Excitement
* Fluid Retention and Swelling
* Flushing
* General Bodily Discomfort
* Headache
* Heart Palpitations
* Heartburn
* Hives
* Hyperactivity
* Hypertension
* Increased Appetite
* Increased Difficulty Breathing
* Indigestion
* Insomnia, especially in children
* Irritability
* Lightheadedness
* Muscle Cramps
* Muscle tremor
* Nasal Inflammation
* Nervousness
* Nightmares
* Nosebleed
* Rash
* Throat irritation
* Tooth Discoloration
* Tremors
* Unusual Taste
* Urinary Problems
* Weakness
* Wheezing
* Xerostomia (dry mouth)
Where's the advantages there??
You know it's a wonder why more people aren't taking it. ::) ::)
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 09:22:15 PM
Cheating? Are ya taking the piss??
Wanting to BREATH is cheating?? Salbutamol is a drug in enhalers. It has little if no effect and usually the affect is a bad one. Dizzyness, tiring, jumpy sometimes. It affect is no more then water. You can't say, no one can say that he took the drug for anything other then wanting relief from asthma, so he could breath and we're punishing him for that. You think that's right??
So now, we're putting up a barrier between players and atshma sufferers.
It's incorrect to say that Salbutamol does not deliver a performance dividend:
Salbutamol: Ergogenic effects of salbutamolThe International Olympic Committee's high index of suspicion over the use of inhaled beta2- adrenergic agonists for the prevention and treatment of exercise-induced asthma is fully justified, if the results of a new study from the Netherlands are anything to go by.
This study of the effects of supra-therapeutic doses of inhaled salbutamol on endurance cycling in non-asthmatic athletes found the drug enhanced performance to a significant degree – enough to give users a real advantage in competitive events.
In a double-blind, randomised cross-over study, 16 athletes performed two trials – at least four days apart – in which they had to perform a certain amount of work as fast as possible on a cycle ergometer, 30 minutes after inhaling either 800µg salbutamol or placebo. In the second trial the conditions were reversed, with those taking placebo switched to the active drug, and vice versa. Performance times were recorded and a range of blood and respiratory measurements were taken before and after exercise.
The most important finding was that average performance time on salbutamol was reduced by 82.7 seconds – 3,927.6 seconds (65 minutes), compared with 4,010.2 seconds, a difference of just under 2%. As the researchers point out: 'The relevance of a more than 1-minute improvement in an approximately 1-hour time trial for competitive events is obvious.'
They can offer no explanation for this increase in performance, which was not explained by changes in plasma concentrations of free fatty acids, glycerol, lactate and potassium during exercise, or by changes in ventilatory parameters at rest and after exercise.
The significance of the study is that it is the first to show that inhalation of a supra-therapeutic dose of salbutamol improves time trial performance in non-asthmatic athletes, with previous studies showing no effects on endurance performance.
Why, then, did this one produce a positive result? The researchers suggest that their protocol for measuring endurance performance – performing a given amount of work as fast as possible – may be more sensitive than the time-to-exhaustion tests used in previous trials. Additionally, it seems that at the end of this type of trial subjects perform a 'finishing kick' which is absent during time-to-exhaustion tests.
'It is possible,' they conclude, 'that salbutamol specifically improves this finishing kick.'Sourced Here (http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/salbutamol.html)
Though I do not believe O'Mahony is guilty here, and that the use of it was purely therapeutic since the lad is most definitely asthmatic (and does need it to help him breathe), but let's not be blind to the raw facts.
Reillers (from the article)
Quote
"We have yet to ascertain what the seminar on Saturday will fully advise, but from what I gather, some form of respiratory testing -- as opposed to just doctor's clearance -- will be required from next year onwards," explained Dr Carolan.
I dont understand what the issue is? A player needs to go and get a test to get an exemption. What's the problem with this?
boo
QuoteNobody was yapping about it Pints because there was no problem with anything.There still isnt a problem apart the fact that an Amateur association is being being expected to adhere to the same set of guidelines as Professional sports.And yes it was forced on the GAA,It was a directive from the Irish Sports Council or else Funding and Grants would have been cut.The GAA had been motoring along just grand without any drug-testing for 120 years.Now a storm in a teacup over nothing and all of a sudden these Sports Council Guidelines have to be adhered to or we'l end up with Ben Johnson and Waterford Crystal and Michele Smith all in Croke Park on All-Ireland Final day.I DONT THINK SO.
Yous didn't start yapping until someone failed the text. I dont think there were drugs 100 years ago. The sport's council guidelines had to be adhered to since 2001. I welcome them.
I'm sorry, I mean this in the niceist way possible, but what the hell is your problem.
IT's not cheating. What the hell is your problem. It's not cheating. It's called breathing. It's used in emergency cases when it gets so bad.
Ya nobody was complaining about it when nobody failed it, why would we go on about it if there wasn't a problem.
It's not something you take to improve your preformances, it's used in emergency cases. It opens up the airways quicker then normal ones do. But it wears off, in like a day.
People aren't taking it for the piss, to get high or to enhance their preformances. They are taking it so then can breath. How is that wrong??
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 10:40:33 PM
It's not something you take to improve your preformances, it's used in emergency cases. It opens up the airways quicker then normal ones do. But it wears off, in like a day.
People aren't taking it for the piss, to get high or to enhance their preformances. They are taking it so then can breath. How is that wrong??
Listen, I agree with what you are saying in some parts - but what part of the factual information concerning the illicit use of salbutamol as a performance enhancing drug (and Im not saying it was used that way in O'Mahoneys case) are you either ignoring or do not understand?
Reference yourself back to FoSB s post.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on November 19, 2008, 10:30:35 PM
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 09:22:15 PM
Cheating? Are ya taking the piss??
Wanting to BREATH is cheating?? Salbutamol is a drug in enhalers. It has little if no effect and usually the affect is a bad one. Dizzyness, tiring, jumpy sometimes. It affect is no more then water. You can't say, no one can say that he took the drug for anything other then wanting relief from asthma, so he could breath and we're punishing him for that. You think that's right??
So now, we're putting up a barrier between players and atshma sufferers.
It's incorrect to say that Salbutamol does not deliver a performance dividend:
Salbutamol: Ergogenic effects of salbutamol
The International Olympic Committee's high index of suspicion over the use of inhaled beta2- adrenergic agonists for the prevention and treatment of exercise-induced asthma is fully justified, if the results of a new study from the Netherlands are anything to go by.
This study of the effects of supra-therapeutic doses of inhaled salbutamol on endurance cycling in non-asthmatic athletes found the drug enhanced performance to a significant degree – enough to give users a real advantage in competitive events.
In a double-blind, randomised cross-over study, 16 athletes performed two trials – at least four days apart – in which they had to perform a certain amount of work as fast as possible on a cycle ergometer, 30 minutes after inhaling either 800µg salbutamol or placebo. In the second trial the conditions were reversed, with those taking placebo switched to the active drug, and vice versa. Performance times were recorded and a range of blood and respiratory measurements were taken before and after exercise.
The most important finding was that average performance time on salbutamol was reduced by 82.7 seconds – 3,927.6 seconds (65 minutes), compared with 4,010.2 seconds, a difference of just under 2%. As the researchers point out: 'The relevance of a more than 1-minute improvement in an approximately 1-hour time trial for competitive events is obvious.'
They can offer no explanation for this increase in performance, which was not explained by changes in plasma concentrations of free fatty acids, glycerol, lactate and potassium during exercise, or by changes in ventilatory parameters at rest and after exercise.
The significance of the study is that it is the first to show that inhalation of a supra-therapeutic dose of salbutamol improves time trial performance in non-asthmatic athletes, with previous studies showing no effects on endurance performance.
Why, then, did this one produce a positive result? The researchers suggest that their protocol for measuring endurance performance – performing a given amount of work as fast as possible – may be more sensitive than the time-to-exhaustion tests used in previous trials. Additionally, it seems that at the end of this type of trial subjects perform a 'finishing kick' which is absent during time-to-exhaustion tests.
'It is possible,' they conclude, 'that salbutamol specifically improves this finishing kick.'
Sourced Here (http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/salbutamol.html)
Though I do not believe O'Mahony is guilty here, and that the use of it was purely therapeutic since the lad is most definitely asthmatic (and does need it to help him breathe), but let's not be blind to the raw facts.
From another site .
19 November 2008
GAA asthmatics could be forced out of the game because of strict new rules governing Therapeutic Use Exemptions.
As Kerry's Aidan O'Mahony prepares for his GAA's anti-doping tribunal after traces of salbutamol were found in a urine sample he provided after the All-Ireland final, doctors across a wide range of sports will meet in Dublin on Saturday to hear how the new rules, which come into effect on January 1, will tighten protocols for asthma sufferers.
The chairman of the Gaelic Games Doctors Association, Dr Philip Carolan, says the new rules, which seek to harmonise WADA guidelines across all sports and counties, will make it harder for asthmatics to obtain TUEs, and has predicted that some players may have to end their inter-county careers rather than risk playing without clearance for use of substances such as salbutamol contained in inhalers.
"We have yet to ascertain what the seminar on Saturday will fully advise, but from what I gather, some form of respiratory testing - as opposed to just doctor's clearance - will be required from next year onwards," he said.
"That will leave things a lot more difficult for those who suffer from asthma. To undergo such tests, players will have to be free of medication at the time, which is hardly ideal. I'd be worried that it could put off asthma sufferers from playing high-level sport, including Gaelic games.
"I'm on the anti-doping committee at the faculty of sports medicine in the Royal College of Surgeons and there are issues and concerns with all of this which we have been discussing on an ongoing basis," he added.
"Problems arise when a player is drafted into the squad late in a season or when team doctors changes from year to year in accordance with a change of manager."
I understand it all right, but it doesn't enhance preformance. I know lads who feel pretty crappy after using their enhalers with it in it. It's one thing to read the facts, it's another thing to see it at work.
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 10:46:53 PM
I understand it all right, but it doesn't enhance preformance. I know lads who feel pretty crappy after using their enhalers with it in it. It's one thing to read the facts, it's another thing to see it at work.
You see Im going to have to call that bullshit. Youve mentioned the side effects a few times and if it was
that bad a drug - it wouldnt be on the market.
As a salbutamol user - I have never encountered any of those side effects, and the drug becomes a welcome relief from the misery of feeling oxygen hungry.
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 10:46:53 PM
I understand it all right, but it doesn't enhance preformance. I know lads who feel pretty crappy after using their enhalers with it in it. It's one thing to read the facts, it's another thing to see it at work.
So you knowing a few lads who take it makes you more of an expert on it's side affects than actually medically trained experts?
::)
Quote from: Puckoon on November 19, 2008, 10:48:30 PM
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 10:46:53 PM
I understand it all right, but it doesn't enhance preformance. I know lads who feel pretty crappy after using their enhalers with it in it. It's one thing to read the facts, it's another thing to see it at work.
You see Im going to have to call that bullshit. Youve mentioned the side effects a few times and if it was that bad a drug - it wouldnt be on the market.
As a salbutamol user - I have never encountered any of those side effects, and the drug becomes a welcome relief from the misery of feeling oxygen hungry.
Really, I'm sorry now, but one of my mates has one of the enhalers with it, and he feels dizy every time he uses it, maybe it's just him..he does have one or two things that could contribute to that besides the enhaler, so it really could be just him. It's works very quickly, but it has the one or two sideaffects a long with it, it's different for everyone though. My brother uses one, he had to change his enhaler not so long ago because it got worse, and he's fine with it, wasn't when he first got it again, it made him fierce drowsy.
I didn't come up with the sideaffects, that's from Wiki, hardly my fault. Like Pints said I'm not a doctor.
Pints you still haven't told me the problem.
No one in their right mind can think that this was taken to enhance the preformance.
You're acting like it's steroids they're taking. What advantages are there?
Quote from: Reillers on November 19, 2008, 11:03:09 PM
You're acting like it's steroids they're taking. What advantages are there?
These are set out in the articles already posted on this thread. ::)
speaking for myself pints, i have been giving out about this since the gaa signed up for it, but was told that it was a requirement in order to receive funding, my point was that, especially with regards to the irish govt, the gaa could easily have told them they weren't accepting the sports councils orders and that the govt could easily circumvent the sports council if there was a will to do so - however, if the players have signed up to this too as part of the grants scheme, then they do have a responsibility to adhere to it. My problem is with amateur players being expected to adhere to this sort of crap.
QuoteDo you feel it is right that Amateur players should have to adhere to the same guidelines as professional athletes?or do you think that if O Mahoney is found innocent that the GAA should look at changing the guidelines on Drug testing?
I welcome drug testing in the GAA.
Why would the GAA look at changing the guidelines?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 11:41:04 PM
QuoteDo you feel it is right that Amateur players should have to adhere to the same guidelines as professional athletes?or do you think that if O Mahoney is found innocent that the GAA should look at changing the guidelines on Drug testing?
I welcome drug testing in the GAA.
Why would the GAA look at changing the guidelines?
If one in every five people suffer from Asthma,thats about 6 for every County panel.Are we gonna deny them their right to play Gaelic or Hurling and use an Inhaler(or Paracetemol or lemsip) at the ame time?? something has to change.The reason why nobody was giving out until now is because its only now that people realise that the processes are flawed for an Amateur organsiation.
Quote from: boojangles on November 19, 2008, 11:47:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 11:41:04 PM
QuoteDo you feel it is right that Amateur players should have to adhere to the same guidelines as professional athletes?or do you think that if O Mahoney is found innocent that the GAA should look at changing the guidelines on Drug testing?
I welcome drug testing in the GAA.
Why would the GAA look at changing the guidelines?
If one in every five people suffer from Asthma,thats about 6 for every County panel.Are we gonna deny them their right to play Gaelic or Hurling and use an Inhaler(or Paracetemol or lemsip) at the ame time?? something has to change.The reason why nobody was giving out until now is because its only now that people realise that the processes are flawed for an Amateur organsiation.
Nobody is denying anyone a use of an inhaler, if needed.
The levels of professionalism that exist within intercounty GAA are (quite rightly) superb. There is no way that it is too difficult for a player to inform the team Dr during the course of the season what medication he/she is taking.
Are you suggesting that that is too much to adhere to?
Surely if there are no problems with players taking illegal substances for the purposes of performance enhancing - then this is no big deal?
County teams have 2-3 meetings a week for close to 8 months in most cases. Surely half an hour can be set aside to clear up any medication paperwork?
i think the main problem with the inhaler is that it can be used to cover up traces of more potent drugs . think our belle michelle and the whiskey no one ws sugessting urine 70% whiskey helped her performance
Quote from: Puckoon on November 19, 2008, 11:51:38 PM
The levels of professionalism that exist within intercounty GAA are (quite rightly) superb. There is no way that it is too difficult for a player to inform the team Dr during the course of the season what medication he/she is taking.
Are you suggesting that that is too much to adhere to?
Surely if there are no problems with players taking illegal substances for the purposes of performance enhancing - then this is no big deal?
County teams have 2-3 meetings a week for close to 8 months in most cases. Surely half an hour can be set aside to clear up any medication paperwork?
But the GAA was informed of what he was taking. It's not illegal, but more then I think 3 puffs means you're over the limit of it. Which, is fine, but if you're sick, if you've the flue, more then 3 can be needed.
Quote from: rosnarun on November 20, 2008, 12:20:56 AM
i think the main problem with the inhaler is that it can be used to cover up traces of more potent drugs . think our belle michelle and the whiskey no one ws sugessting urine 70% whiskey helped her performance
just what the hell are you saying now rosnarun ;D
Remember where michelle is now - hint, check out this link and input the appropriate surname:
http://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 11:49:48 PM
Quote from: boojangles on November 19, 2008, 11:47:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on November 19, 2008, 11:41:04 PM
QuoteDo you feel it is right that Amateur players should have to adhere to the same guidelines as professional athletes?or do you think that if O Mahoney is found innocent that the GAA should look at changing the guidelines on Drug testing?
I welcome drug testing in the GAA.
Why would the GAA look at changing the guidelines?
If one in every five people suffer from Asthma,thats about 6 for every County panel.Are we gonna deny them their right to play Gaelic or Hurling and use an Inhaler(or Paracetemol or lemsip) at the ame time?? something has to change.The reason why nobody was giving out until now is because its only now that people realise that the processes are flawed for an Amateur organsiation.
Nobody is denying anyone a use of an inhaler, if needed.
GAA has become so profesional in everything but name, that we forget that these lads have lives outside of the GAA, pretty busy working lives, between families, work, study, training..etc. Hectic lives.
We're making it harder and harder for lads with asthma to compete in and rules and regulations are getting more strict.
It's professional in all but name, but it's still amateur. Now drug testing is good, it keeps out the cheaters. Things like steroids and such real drugs that actually enhance preformances should be kept the same.
But not the likes of what we're arguing about now. We're arguing about how many puffs he had of an inhaller. It's ridiculous.
I dont think anyone is arguing that Reillers -
At the end of the day, if we are going to have an anti doping system in place, it cant be filled with loopholes like the association's rule book.
Rules need to be set out and adhered to.
O'Mahoney will be able to prove his innocence and he will be fine. If another asthmatic, or county team set up cant get their players registered with the association and the sports council of ireland, and somewhere down the line this season or next season one of them incurs a ban - well it was just stupidity or a laxadasical attitude that got them there.
If teams can bond in la manga for a week, and organise passports and fllghts and so on, they can get together for 30 minutes and register a players medications.
Does anyone know what % of atheltes (track & field, boxing cycling swimming etc) are professional in ireland? Id say a very tiny % but they all abide by international drug testing. Why should GAA players be any different? I dont buy the dramatic replies bout the right to breath! If they register the inhalers they can use them, what is the big deal?
At what level does, say a long jumper, become subject to international drug testing?
i've run "competitive" races for my local running club in the past - races in which lads who had run in european championships and major european events were runnin - and noone ever mentioned drug testing to me?
I feel great sympathy for O Mahony and hope that all his required details are in order. If a medical required inhaler can get an amateur player suspended then we are certainly heading down the wrong road.
Quote from: rrhf on November 20, 2008, 01:51:39 PM
I feel great sympathy for O Mahony and hope that all his required details are in order. If a medical required inhaler can get an amateur player suspended then we are certainly heading down the wrong road.
Can I ask what you have the problem with?
Is it that a medically required inhaler could get a player suspended?
or
Is it that an amateur player could get suspended?
Do you believe that (for example) professional cyclists should be allowed to take any level of salbutamol they like?
Or should amateur players be allowed to take as much as they like while professionals should only take a defined amount?
* Gaelic Games are our National Sports, are in the National interest and receive Government grants.
* They are heavily sponsored and there is a responsibility to those sponsors once you take their money.
* People have been known to cheat whether they are Amateur or Professional.
Therefore it is important our games are clean and that is why it is correct that the Gaa are part of the ISC drug testing.
Of course being part of that can have some nasty side effects. I am pretty sure that this case is a non-event and has been badly handled and hopefully lessons will be learned quickly.
There are medics quoted here as saying this drug is not performance enhancing and dismiss the IOC opinion of it. It should be noted that some of the quoted medics work for pharmaceutical companies while the IOC drugs decision makers also happen to be medics. The IOC ones have less of a vested interest.
BTW Reillers steroids don't directly improve performance, they help you grow. That growth enhances performance. If I run (or even walk these days) I will be out of breath, if you give me something that delays that shortage of breath it improves my performance.
That is not to say treatment for asthma should be banned in sportspeople, it shouldn't. I am merely agreeing that it should be closely monitored.
GREAT NEWS
The GAA have confirmed that the temporary suspension imposed on Kerry GAA player Aidan O Mahony for a doping offence has been lifted pending a full hearing of his case.
O Mahoney was suspended following an intial finding that the level of the asthma related drug salbutamol which is injested through the use of an inhaler exceeded the permissable levels in a test carried out in the wake of this year's All-Ireland final.
GAA statement in full.
In a statement issued by the GAA, the Association confirmed that following a preliminary hearing by the Chair of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee, the provisional suspension imposed on one of its players in relation to an alleged anti-doping offence has been lifted, pending a full hearing of the Committee. A date for this meeting has yet to be scheduled.
Quote from: orangeman on November 21, 2008, 02:24:54 PM
GREAT NEWS
The GAA have confirmed that the temporary suspension imposed on Kerry GAA player Aidan O Mahony for a doping offence has been lifted pending a full hearing of his case.
O Mahoney was suspended following an intial finding that the level of the asthma related drug salbutamol which is injested through the use of an inhaler exceeded the permissable levels in a test carried out in the wake of this year's All-Ireland final.
GAA statement in full.
In a statement issued by the GAA, the Association confirmed that following a preliminary hearing by the Chair of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee, the provisional suspension imposed on one of its players in relation to an alleged anti-doping offence has been lifted, pending a full hearing of the Committee. A date for this meeting has yet to be scheduled.
Just found out last night that I know this guy.
Good stuff Rois. Maybe you can find out for Seán Cavanagh if he's allowed to take a Lemsip.
:D
No prob, pass all queries through to me, I'll give him a shout.
Ye know what though, when I found this out last night, I reflected on the strength of the GAA machine. This guy, a prominent professional in his field, despite being horribly busy, gives his time voluntarily for this. He's Belfast-based and was obliged to go to Croker a few times this week after hours. It kinda fuels my anti-professionalism feelings. So many people are incredibly enthusiastic about the GAA - you'd have to wonder how long this enthusiasm will last if we go any further down the professionalism line.
I'm not looking for a debate by the way, just recording my reaction.
Quote from: Rois on November 21, 2008, 03:11:49 PM
No prob, pass all queries through to me, I'll give him a shout.
Ye know what though, when I found this out last night, I reflected on the strength of the GAA machine. This guy, a prominent professional in his field, despite being horribly busy, gives his time voluntarily for this. He's Belfast-based and was obliged to go to Croker a few times this week after hours. It kinda fuels my anti-professionalism feelings. So many people are incredibly enthusiastic about the GAA - you'd have to wonder how long this enthusiasm will last if we go any further down the professionalism line.
I'm not looking for a debate by the way, just recording my reaction.
That's the question a lot of people are asking themselves.
Quote from: Rois on November 21, 2008, 03:11:49 PM
Ye know what though, when I found this out last night, I reflected on the strength of the GAA machine. This guy, a prominent professional in his field, despite being horribly busy, gives his time voluntarily for this. He's Belfast-based and was obliged to go to Croker a few times this week after hours. It kinda fuels my anti-professionalism feelings. So many people are incredibly enthusiastic about the GAA - you'd have to wonder how long this enthusiasm will last if we go any further down the professionalism line.
Fair play to him - he's one of thousands who do similar every week.
when do you expect this professionalosm line to be embarked on and if you think it has already, how far to you envisage it going?
Quote from: Uladh on November 21, 2008, 03:54:15 PM
when do you expect this professionalosm line to be embarked on and if you think it has already, how far to you envisage it going?
Quote from: Rois on November 21, 2008, 03:11:49 PM
I'm not looking for a debate by the way, just recording my reaction.
Great news, common sense at last.
Great news regarding Aidan O Mahoney. Id be expecting a statement from the GPA regarding this issue and the threat to the Grants very shortly. Id imagine that alot of players have been shocked by the recent developments regarding the Drug-testing. I think its obvious that the whole process(from players to team doctors to the overall legislation) needs a re-think.
The hearing into Aidan O'Mahony's positive drugs test will be held in Dublin on Wednesday 17 December.
Kerry star O'Mahony failed a drugs test after this year's All-Ireland final after being found to have an increased level of salbutamol in his system.
Kerry chairman Jerome Conway is pleased that the player has been given the opportunity to clear his name.
"I have every confidence O'Mahony will be cleared of any misdemeanour. He has our full backing," said Conway.
The GAA had lifted the provisional suspension imposed on O'Mahony for a doping offence pending a full hearing of the case.
The Kerry captain was suspended following an initial finding that the level of the asthma-related drug salbutamol exceeded permitted levels.
O'Mahony uses an inhaler to treat his asthma condition and he has denied any wrongdoing and vowed to clear his name.
Kerry officials have indicated that they are confident that O'Mahony will be cleared of any offence.
Salbutamol is a widely-used treatment for asthma through an inhaler but players are only allowed to take the drug under controlled guidelines.
O'Mahony has enlisted the solicitor who represented rugby player Frankie Sheahan in a similar case in 2003.
In accordance with the provisions of the Irish Anti-Doping Rules, the GAA were obliged to provisionally suspend the player involved pending the outcome of a hearing of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee.
The finding will require the player to show that the result was the consequence of the therapeutic use of inhaled Salbutamol.
Sheahan had a similar problem with Salbutamol and had a two-year ban slapped on him.
However, the ban was reduced to three months on appeal, and he was also fined 5000 euros.
The Munster hooker claimed he had forgotten to properly inform authorities that he was using a Ventolin inhaler to combat his asthma.
Ignoring that the w4nkers at BBC have said he is a hooker, if is as simple as it sounds I hope it turns out ok for him
Quote from: full back on December 11, 2008, 10:40:33 PM
Ignoring that the w4nkers at BBC have said he is a hooker, if is as simple as it sounds I hope it turns out ok for him
They were referring to Frankie Sheahan (by way of comparison), the Munster rugby player?
Exactly, Sheehan is the hooker, not O'Mahoney. Not everything the BBC writes is rubbish :D
Anyone know why it was put off until January
Fcuk sake, Im sure the player doesnt want this hanging over his head over the festive period.......
Aidan O'Mahony's battle against a doping ban looks set to run into the new year.
The Kerry footballer's hearing in front of the GAA's Anti-Doping Committee was adjourned in the early hours of this morning.
No conclusion was reached and the panel will reconvene again in January.
High levels of sabutamol were found in the defender's system following a random drugs test after this year's All-Ireland Football Final.
Aidan O'Mahony will be reprimanded but won't serve any suspension after the anti-doping committee ruled that his use of the drug salbutamol was for medical purposes only and there was no effort on his part to enhance his performance.
In the first case of its kind for the GAA, the Kerry football captain failed a drugs test after the All Ireland final in September 2008 between Kerry and Tyrone.
He was found to have high levels of the drug salbutamol which is used by asthmatics.
GAA Press Release
22nd January 2008
The GAA have confirmed that the Anti-Doping Hearing's Committee have delivered their decision in relation to an adverse analytical finding on a sample provided by Kerry player Aidan O Mahony in the aftermath of the 2008 All Ireland football final and that the Kerry player will not incur any suspension arising from the matter. The Hearing's Committee have imposed a sanction of a reprimand on Mr O'Mahony in line with the provisions of the 2009 Irish Anti-Doping Rules.
The Committee found that the levels of salbutamol in Mr O Mahony's sample were consistent with the inhalation of the substance and that its use was not intended to enhance his sporting performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance. The Hearing's Committee considered that that the dose inhaled was in excess of that authorised on the Therapeutic Use Exemption Form submitted in relation to the player and hence have opted to reprimand the player in this context. The full text of the decision is attached.
President of the GAA, Mr Nickey Brennan said he was glad the matter had now been finalised. He thanked the members of the Anti-Doping Hearings Committee, who he said had given of their time voluntarily. He said they had been extremely professional in their approach throughout and had shown enormous sensitivity and consideration in the context of the matter.
He went on to say that it had been a very difficult time for Aidan O Mahony and that the findings of the Committee should emphasise to all inter-county players, county team doctors and those involved in any way with County teams the importance of strict adherence to the provisions of the Anti-Doping Rules in relation to asthmatics in particular. He said it was important to note that the Committee had emphasised that their decision to issue a reprimand should not be interpreted as casting any aspersion on Aidan O Mahony's integrity and he said he looked forward to seeing Aidan in the Kerry colours for the forthcoming Allianz National Leagues.
The members of the GAA's Anti- Doping Hearing's Committee on this occasion were Adrian Colton QC (Chairman), Dr Pat O'Neill and former GAA President Sean Mc Cague. The Rules of the GAA with regard to Anti-Doping are stated in Rule 14 (Official Guide 2008) and in effect are the Irish Anti-Doping Rules as adopted by the Irish Sports Council. The rules can be downloaded at www.irishsportscouncil.ie
I wish i could say i am comfortable with the outcome here, but i'm not.
How many other sports would have just waved their finger at the naughty boy in question and sent him on his merry way?
If he has effectively been exonerated, why has he been reprimanded? According to the article on rte.ie, he informed the GAA and testing authorities that he was taking the drug - that being the case, why should he accept a reprimand? If he does, it smacks of wrongdoing and having gotten away with it. If he doesn't accept it, where does that leave the authorities?
Can of worms waiting to be opened here?
QuoteThe Committee found that the levels of salbutamol in Mr O Mahony's sample were consistent with the inhalation of the substance and that its use was not intended to enhance his sporting performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance.
I'm confused - Are they saying yes he broke the rules but its a slap on the wrist and that this is allowed under the 2009 Irish anti-Doping Rules??? Does it set a precedence for other lads who inadvertently do the same or does it leave the door open for people to take advantage/cheat?
Quote from: carnaross on January 22, 2009, 02:26:00 PM
If he has effectively been exonerated, why has he been reprimanded? According to the article on rte.ie, he informed the GAA and testing authorities that he was taking the drug - that being the case, why should he accept a reprimand? If he does, it smacks of wrongdoing and having gotten away with it. If he doesn't accept it, where does that leave the authorities?
Can of worms waiting to be opened here?
Definitely something not right here - If I had not broken any rules, I sure as hell wouldn't be accepting a reprimand.
Seems to be a balls of a decision they say the Aom is not guilty but yet reprimand him. If i was Aom i wouldn't be too happy with the decision
It clearly states that he exceeded the limits that he was allowed.
It then goes on to say they believed it was an honest mistake so they will not impose full sanctions, but are going to carry out some sort of reprimand. What is so difficult to understand? :-\
QuoteIt then goes on to say they believed it was an honest mistake
I'm sure it was but does it not leave the door open for other less scrupulous individuals to use the same excuse or am I reading too much into it? The law of unintended consequences and all that
I know they've had a few meetings on this - my take on it is much like Doohicky - each case is judged differently. I see it as a sort of suspended sentence? So if someone else does it with the intention of doing it - impose "sentence".
Uladh, he's an amateur not a professional, thats the difference for me. I don't believe that any GAA player uses an asthma inhaler for doping purposes. its far easier to use other substances that wouldn't be detected. On that basis its an honest mistake in my view. And the evidence that points to the substance in question as being performance enhancing is contradictatory depending on what study you read.
Seems a fair enough decision. I'd say himself and other who take the same medication will just be more careful in future as to dosage, not sure how easy that is to calibrate though, when other factors (like illness, dehydration etc. in this case) are taken into account.
Seem like he got a fair hearing (even if the chair was a Tyroneman, if I am not mistaken ;))
Quote from: Uladh on January 22, 2009, 02:17:58 PM
I wish i could say i am comfortable with the outcome here, but i'm not.
How many other sports would have just waved their finger at the naughty boy in question and sent him on his merry way?
I agree
It sets a dangerous precedent IMO
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 04:55:05 PM
Uladh, he's an amateur not a professional, thats the difference for me. I don't believe that any GAA player uses an asthma inhaler for doping purposes. its far easier to use other substances that wouldn't be detected. On that basis its an honest mistake in my view. And the evidence that points to the substance in question as being performance enhancing is contradictatory depending on what study you read.
I disagree on three points here ..
1. Rules are in place and must be adhered to. The GAA signed up to the rules (and sold their soul), and as a member he must abide. Things are either black or white or we end up with the mess T&F is in and Baseball and the NFL. Black and white. Anything else will lead to long drawn out court cases down the line.
2. Whether he is professional or not is irrelevant. Whether amateurs should be tested or not is a completely different argument - and it should have been debated at the time - but it wasn't.
3. Salbutamol does have some benefits - is it a massive benefit - no, but does it have some benefit and this is sufficient to suggest banning. And it may be used to mask and 'confuse' the use of other chemicals.
I want to say I don't think Aidan O'Mahony intended to do wrong - but he did and should have paid the price.
I also think the GAA had a wonderful opportunity to make one clear cut decision and ban O'Mahony, send a message out loud and clear - it's black or white, test positive and you're banned and put an end to anyone who fails a test thinking of trying to appeal to courts or even arguing. Now it's grey, so the first guy to test (for a more effective drug) will appeal and try and get off.
Typical GAA fudgery.
Hang on there J..
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
Hang on there J..
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
I'm not really arguing the O'Mahony case per se ... it's the fact someone 'failed a drugs test' - whether technically or not and now has been let off.
If someone makes a mistake - fills out wrong forms or forgets to tell a tester where they are or takes the wrong medicine etc etc - it doesn't matter - they broke the terms of the test. The rules are there for a reason.
Why?
Because the next guilty person will try and use the O'Mahony case to get off and we'll have the DRA and CCCCCC trying to sort these out too in time.
I just think the wrong message was sent out and I think we'll pay in time.
To be perfectly honest I don't think GAA players should be tested in the first place - but like I say that's another story. It's two wrongs and rights and all that.Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
Hang onSo why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
You see you can't judge every case differently.
The rules are rules - either that or we'll have a mess.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think there was intent - but remember even in a court of law - Ignorance is not a defence.
Quote from: JMohan on January 22, 2009, 06:33:16 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 04:55:05 PM
Uladh, he's an amateur not a professional, thats the difference for me. I don't believe that any GAA player uses an asthma inhaler for doping purposes. its far easier to use other substances that wouldn't be detected. On that basis its an honest mistake in my view. And the evidence that points to the substance in question as being performance enhancing is contradictatory depending on what study you read.
I disagree on three points here ..
1. Rules are in place and must be adhered to. The GAA signed up to the rules (and sold their soul), and as a member he must abide. Things are either black or white or we end up with the mess T&F is in and Baseball and the NFL. Black and white. Anything else will lead to long drawn out court cases down the line.
2. Whether he is professional or not is irrelevant. Whether amateurs should be tested or not is a completely different argument - and it should have been debated at the time - but it wasn't.
3. Salbutamol does have some benefits - is it a massive benefit - no, but does it have some benefit and this is sufficient to suggest banning. And it may be used to mask and 'confuse' the use of other chemicals.
I want to say I don't think Aidan O'Mahony intended to do wrong - but he did and should have paid the price.
I also think the GAA had a wonderful opportunity to make one clear cut decision and ban O'Mahony, send a message out loud and clear - it's black or white, test positive and you're banned and put an end to anyone who fails a test thinking of trying to appeal to courts or even arguing. Now it's grey, so the first guy to test (for a more effective drug) will appeal and try and get off.
Typical GAA fudgery.
1- You're not comparing like with like in my view. Baseball is a million dollar industry in a sport where steroids are actively promoted. I not suggesting an easy approach, but this is a simple enough mistake to me. I've relations who've suffered from asthma, unless you know its effects on a hot dry day, its hard to understand where O Mahony is coming from.
2- I believe the issue of amateur is very relevent. There was no due process in this case. He was named in the media before the testing was complete. Thats a disgrace in my view.
3- It has very limited aerobic benefit for an asthma sufferer ( a lifelong one), and it certainly wouldn't be used to mask other substances. There are easier masking agents anyone could take that are virtually undetectable. I doubt very much salbutomol is the first port of call in that department.
4- I don't agree about the fudgery, I believe the GPA should never have signed up to the Grants considering the demands on diet and medicines that every player can/cannot take. This is not professional sport where meals are prepared by qualified chefs to players on a daily basis. You would be putting asthma suffereer's health at risk by playing sport using your definition. You can't just discard them from the sport. Its nigh on impossible to quantify the effects of dehydration and sickness on one's dose.
Again we disagree ...
:D
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 10:45:07 PM
Quote from: JMohan on January 22, 2009, 06:33:16 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 04:55:05 PM
Uladh, he's an amateur not a professional, thats the difference for me. I don't believe that any GAA player uses an asthma inhaler for doping purposes. its far easier to use other substances that wouldn't be detected. On that basis its an honest mistake in my view. And the evidence that points to the substance in question as being performance enhancing is contradictatory depending on what study you read.
I disagree on three points here ..
1. Rules are in place and must be adhered to. The GAA signed up to the rules (and sold their soul), and as a member he must abide. Things are either black or white or we end up with the mess T&F is in and Baseball and the NFL. Black and white. Anything else will lead to long drawn out court cases down the line.
2. Whether he is professional or not is irrelevant. Whether amateurs should be tested or not is a completely different argument - and it should have been debated at the time - but it wasn't.
3. Salbutamol does have some benefits - is it a massive benefit - no, but does it have some benefit and this is sufficient to suggest banning. And it may be used to mask and 'confuse' the use of other chemicals.
I want to say I don't think Aidan O'Mahony intended to do wrong - but he did and should have paid the price.
I also think the GAA had a wonderful opportunity to make one clear cut decision and ban O'Mahony, send a message out loud and clear - it's black or white, test positive and you're banned and put an end to anyone who fails a test thinking of trying to appeal to courts or even arguing. Now it's grey, so the first guy to test (for a more effective drug) will appeal and try and get off.
Typical GAA fudgery.
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 10:45:07 PM
1- You're not comparing like with like in my view. Baseball is a million dollar industry in a sport where steroids are actively promoted. I not suggesting an easy approach, but this is a simple enough mistake to me. I've relations who've suffered from asthma, unless you know its effects on a hot dry day, its hard to understand where O Mahony is coming from.
With respect - that's not the point.
The point is that whether it's asthma medication or whatever - it must be notified to doping control. This is the issue - not whether or not he should be allowed use it.
Simple mistake or not - I repeat - ignorance is not a defence.
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 10:45:07 PM
2- I believe the issue of amateur is very relevent. There was no due process in this case. He was named in the media before the testing was complete. Thats a disgrace in my view.
Those are two completely separate issues here don't confuse them ...
A. - Being Amateur is irrelevant makes no difference to being tested, everyone world wide, amateur and professional who have have signed up to this agree to the rules.
B. - Being named in the media - Who named him? Did he or the Kerry CB name, themselves? Regardless that's nothing to do with pro v amateur. Nor does it have any effect on the outcome.
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 10:45:07 PM
3- It has very limited aerobic benefit for an asthma sufferer ( a lifelong one), and it certainly wouldn't be used to mask other substances. There are easier masking agents anyone could take that are virtually undetectable. I doubt very much salbutomol is the first port of call in that department.
Again we're off point - he broke the rules in place to catch doping and keep sport clean.
The fact is has some benefit is why it's banned - the degree of intent or limit is irrelevant.
Quote from: INDIANA on January 22, 2009, 10:45:07 PM
4- I don't agree about the fudgery, I believe the GPA should never have signed up to the Grants considering the demands on diet and medicines that every player can/cannot take. This is not professional sport where meals are prepared by qualified chefs to players on a daily basis. You would be putting asthma suffereer's health at risk by playing sport using your definition. You can't just discard them from the sport. Its nigh on impossible to quantify the effects of dehydration and sickness on one's dose.
I agree with you on the GPA point - which is past now. The GAA and GPA just saw grants and were hungry for money.
But you are very wrong and ill informed on a number of points here ...
- Most professional soccer players have only one meal prepared by the kitchen staff in any professional team - the rest of the time it's their responsibility
- If you think that WADA are putting sport people and athletes across the world at risk of illness then you're making a very foolish statement IMO and forgetting about hundreds of thousands of athletes across the world playing many sports. It's not about putting players health at risk - it's about tidying up sport and making sure it's a level and honest playing field... but more importantly it's about making sure players and athletes do not use anything that may put an athletes health at risk.
- Dehydration and sickness do not as a rule affect the specific gravity of the degree of chemical as these are considered in the testing process. Don't you think that's be thought of by at least one Olympic athlete by now?
On the issue of asthma - people think it's harmless ...
Well how come approx 10% of a countries population have asthma but more than 20% of Olympic athletes claim to have it?
- It's widely known that athletes use it to enhance breathing and endurance - even to a small degree. In fact it's widely known how athletes manage to convince doctors to declare them asthmatics for this very reason too.
THATS why salbutamol must be declared.
Finally and once again - the point is not - was he cheating/doping/is asthma a serious medical condition/amateur vs professional /was he spiked etc etc .... NO .... the point is simple - there are rules in place to prevent doping and catch cheating and he broke them and should have been punished.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
Quote from: tyssam5 on January 22, 2009, 05:43:32 PM
Seem like he got a fair hearing (even if the chair was a Tyroneman, if I am not mistaken ;))
A founder member of Club Tyrone in fact.
Quote from: Hound on January 23, 2009, 08:33:11 AM
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
I would really really like to think the result would have stood. Tyrone's main legal counsel (the above chair) is already involved so they'd have to look elsewhere to drive the legal protests.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
I'll accept this - however it's a thin line between cold symptoms and then a few extra puffs for added benefit.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
We're not dealing with olympic Athletes J Mohan or anywhere near it. Thats where you and I differ. There is a world of difference in my opinion between a lifelong asthma sufferer and someone who is an Olympic athlete and develops asthma at 21/22, where its obvious they are doping. The fact that WADA is incapable of making that distinction says an awful lot about them and maybe why the likes of professional cycling in particular are totten to the core with banned substances when the authorities can't even make that distinction.
If a Gaa player developed a case at 22/23 similar to a lot of Olympic athletes, then I 'd agree with you. But I don't in this instance, its very much an honest mistake for someone who was suffering from an a cold as certified by his team doctor at the time.
Quote from: Hound on January 23, 2009, 08:33:11 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
Sorry Hound, I don't know what I was thinking, I meant filled in the RIGHT forms. And I have to disagree with JMohan about the black and white of a case such as this. If steroids were found, then by all means throw the book, but where it is prescribed medication, for a known and notified reason, then there has to be lattitude for common sense. Even WADA have downgraded Salbutemol (sp) because of this.
Quote from: INDIANA on January 23, 2009, 09:12:14 AM
We're not dealing with olympic Athletes J Mohan or anywhere near it. Thats where you and I differ. There is a world of difference in my opinion between a lifelong asthma sufferer and someone who is an Olympic athlete and develops asthma at 21/22, where its obvious they are doping. The fact that WADA is incapable of making that distinction says an awful lot about them and maybe why the likes of professional cycling in particular are totten to the core with banned substances when the authorities can't even make that distinction.
If a Gaa player developed a case at 22/23 similar to a lot of Olympic athletes, then I 'd agree with you. But I don't in this instance, its very much an honest mistake for someone who was suffering from an a cold as certified by his team doctor at the time.
You're not arguing the correct point.
You see - this is where most of the GAA world sleep walked into this ...
We signed up to drug testing
We have to abide by the rules
Crying about not being Olympic athletes means nothing in terms of drug testing.
Furthermore - stop thinking of Olympic athletes and Tour deFrance athletes - they are also the local athletes (hundreds) in T&F clubs across the country who compete currently under these rules and conditions.
Fair or not doesn't enter into this - we agreed (or were bought with) to the rules for a few hundred euros per player and thus have to live with it now.
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 23, 2009, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: Hound on January 23, 2009, 08:33:11 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
Sorry Hound, I don't know what I was thinking, I meant filled in the RIGHT forms. And I have to disagree with JMohan about the black and white of a case such as this. If steroids were found, then by all means throw the book, but where it is prescribed medication, for a known and notified reason, then there has to be lattitude for common sense. Even WADA have downgraded Salbutemol (sp) because of this.
I agree it's harsh - but once more - we agreed to this.
EVERY other athlete under these rules must agree to it - why should we be different?
The reason they are so stringent is that once you make a grey area athletes jump into it and try and get right up close to the line and get away with it. I'm not going to list all the examples - but we've many cases - even in our own small but sullied history of doping in Ireland.
Quote from: JMohan on January 23, 2009, 11:06:39 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 23, 2009, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: Hound on January 23, 2009, 08:33:11 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
Sorry Hound, I don't know what I was thinking, I meant filled in the RIGHT forms. And I have to disagree with JMohan about the black and white of a case such as this. If steroids were found, then by all means throw the book, but where it is prescribed medication, for a known and notified reason, then there has to be lattitude for common sense. Even WADA have downgraded Salbutemol (sp) because of this.
I agree it's harsh - but once more - we agreed to this.
EVERY other athlete under these rules must agree to it - why should we be different?
The reason they are so stringent is that once you make a grey area athletes jump into it and try and get right up close to the line and get away with it. I'm not going to list all the examples - but we've many cases - even in our own small but sullied history of doping in Ireland.
I understand where you are coming from J, but even WADA have downgraded this particular drug, so I don't see any issue in using common sense when dealing with it. The Sports Council of Ireland have agreed with the decision themselves.
On Morning Ireland this morning, a medic implied that the Sports Council hadn't acknowledged receipt of O'Mahony's forms, and in fact don't acknowledge anyone's 'exclusion' forms, so team doctors don't and can't know what players can and can't take. Oh, they don't acknowledge the forms, becuase it would be too expensive to do so - and the breakdown of the system's the GAA's fault??
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 23, 2009, 01:11:51 PM
Quote from: JMohan on January 23, 2009, 11:06:39 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 23, 2009, 09:33:51 AM
Quote from: Hound on January 23, 2009, 08:33:11 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on January 22, 2009, 07:59:54 PM
You say that you accept that Aidan O'Mahony didn't mean to do wrong, so I assume you accept that he had informed the authorities of the asthma situation and filled out the wrong forms? The panel decided he had used the inhaler in good faith, and the high levels were attributed to inhaler usage, rather than something more sinister.
So why should he be punished? I agree rules are rules, but each case should be judged on it's merits, and in this case I think 'fair play' was obviously done. If it was mandatory sentencing, then you'd be punishing a lad for having the flu and asthma. That'd be wrong in my eyes.
AZ, there was nothing in the ruling that I noticed about him filling out forms wrong. The fact is he took more than he was allowed. In my opinion it was because he had cold/flu symptoms and went OTT on the inhaling.
He has been found guily of cheating - but quite clearly in the opinion of the judges it was inadvertant cheating. There was a range of sanctions open to them having found him guilty, from a reprimand to a 2 year ban. The most lenient sentence was chosen.
It seems to me to have been a fair process and a fair and open result. Of course in my view its only today that we should have discovered the name of the person found guilty.
I wonder what the repurcussions would have been had Kerry beaten Tyrone? Would the result have stood? Would the Tyrone County Board have sought a replay???
Sorry Hound, I don't know what I was thinking, I meant filled in the RIGHT forms. And I have to disagree with JMohan about the black and white of a case such as this. If steroids were found, then by all means throw the book, but where it is prescribed medication, for a known and notified reason, then there has to be lattitude for common sense. Even WADA have downgraded Salbutemol (sp) because of this.
I agree it's harsh - but once more - we agreed to this.
EVERY other athlete under these rules must agree to it - why should we be different?
The reason they are so stringent is that once you make a grey area athletes jump into it and try and get right up close to the line and get away with it. I'm not going to list all the examples - but we've many cases - even in our own small but sullied history of doping in Ireland.
I understand where you are coming from J, but even WADA have downgraded this particular drug, so I don't see any issue in using common sense when dealing with it. The Sports Council of Ireland have agreed with the decision themselves.
In an ideal world common sense would be applied - but we're dealing with sport where people will use any available means to cheat.
Once you bring in ambiguity then you have people pulling strokes for people. It's black and white for a very good reason.
As for the Sports Council - they I'm sure would rather not have to test hundred of GAA players each year and potentially have this issue with a few hundred asthmatics.
Quote from: Billys Boots on January 23, 2009, 01:30:01 PM
On Morning Ireland this morning, a medic implied that the Sports Council hadn't acknowledged receipt of O'Mahony's forms, and in fact don't acknowledge anyone's 'exclusion' forms, so team doctors don't and can't know what players can and can't take. Oh, they don't acknowledge the forms, becuase it would be too expensive to do so - and the breakdown of the system's the GAA's fault??
This is why drug testing will never work fully - It costs way too much.
Think of all the drugs or options an athlete has? Thousands.
Even Wada only test for a select few - so you can still get away with it if you're smart....
Quote from: Billys Boots on January 23, 2009, 01:30:01 PM
On Morning Ireland this morning, a medic implied that the Sports Council hadn't acknowledged receipt of O'Mahony's forms, and in fact don't acknowledge anyone's 'exclusion' forms, so team doctors don't and can't know what players can and can't take. Oh, they don't acknowledge the forms, becuase it would be too expensive to do so - and the breakdown of the system's the GAA's fault??
I don't understand your point, shouldn't the player CC his team doctor on any forms like that? It doesn't sound hard.