Colm Parkinson unleashes passionate defence of GAA after drug test fiasco but not everyone agrees

The GAA Hour is animated this week.

In light of the recent positive drug test by Kerry footballer Brendan O'Sullivan, Colm Parkinson took exception to the footballer having his name sullied and to the narrative that has attempted to follow, claiming that there could be a culture of this in the GAA. In a lively debate between him, Cian Ward and Conán Doherty, the trio argued for and against the case for this saga to be drawn out in public and whether or not there are legs for any more discussion points. It turns out that Brendan O'Sullivan's actions in using methylhexaneamine weren't just unintentional, but seemingly fairly unfortunate too in that a batch of caffeine tablets were found to be contaminated. But you have anger and suspicion at the other side from people wondering why this story has taken over a year to come out. And whether or not the drug testing procedures in the GAA are rigorous enough. Naturally, the debate on The GAA Hour was extended.

This conversation happened at 12pm yesterday before Sport Ireland's statement clarifying the events that took place in the year between the test and the breaking of this story.

Conán: I don't think leaving it a year [to bring any of this to public knowledge] has helped. If they had just come out a year ago - they didn't even need to name Brendan O'Sullivan - they could've just said this fella has failed a drugs test and this is why. Cian: But for who, like? I don't care. Conán: So it doesn't happen again. So I don't go out and take the wrong supplement. Cian: The testers have a job to do, they do that job and the player serves the punishment or whatever it is. I don't see how the public at large are entitled to the knowledge of it. Wooly: I don't either. I don't even think the county should be named. If this is a case of a player taking performance enhancing drugs, name and shame him. Conán: But he did. He did take performance enhancing drugs. He did it unintentionally but you could now theoretically have a case - and I know we won't - where a hundred lads take the same substance and say, 'ah, I didn't know. I didn't know that was there.' That's why they should come out and say what it was: 'we've told you now, do not take this product.' Wooly: I'll accept that, name the product and say what's happened but don't name the player. But if it was unintentionally contaminated, then it's not something that would be regularly taken. How much performance enhancing elements were in it is another thing. Conán: I'm looking at a stat here from the Irish Anti-Doping Agency that says there were 97 tests done in the GAA in 2015. There are over 2,000 clubs in Ireland alone... Wooly/Cian: It's inter-county only. Conán: Exactly. Are we naive to say that this can't be a problem? I'm not saying there's a culture or a history or anything like that in the GAA, but you can't - especially when you can get them so easily over the counter in different supplements - you can't say that no-one's taking them. Wooly: But you also can't say that there is. Conán: But when something comes up, maybe we shouldn't be so quick to say, 'ah nonsense, it doesn't happen here. Move on.' Wooly: But it is nonsense because there's no evidence of it. There's never been evidence of it and we have anecdotal evidence of being involved at club level and in squads all our lives and have friends from other counties and no-one's saying anything. People tell me stuff. It's not like I've been the most strait-laced player that's ever played. I know what's going on amongst squads. Paul Kimmage is saying that this is being managed [by the GAA] rather than addressed which immediately paints the picture that there's a problem - when there's been three cases in 14 years and one is a bloody inhaler, Aidan O'Mahony, and now we have this which is unintentional. Someone tell me what the problem is. It's creating a narrative. Listen, if this was Bradley Wiggins who said it was unintentional, I wouldn't believe him because of the culture and history involved in that sport. Cian: But also because it's his job to know - that's his profession. It's his job to know what goes into his body. Wooly: And why is this 'being managed, rather than addressed'? What's being managed? Someone tell me what we need to address. There's an issue that we've created here that is not there. Conán: It goes back to leaving it a year before this comes out. Wooly: I think it was to protect the player. Conán: Perhaps. But they could've done it without naming him. Burying that sort of thing creates suspicion, then that suspicion causes a culture where people are thinking, 'if he's taking it, I'm going to take it'. Then all of a sudden, it gets away from you. I don't even know if I agree with the professionalism and amateur thing. We mentioned motive - okay, you don't have motivation to make more money by cheating but you have a motivation to win. Some body-builders have a motivation just to get bigger and look better. Wooly: You're one of 30 though. There's a culture in the GAA of not wanting to cheat, I know that's there - people fear it. Imagine being in the gym doing your one rep max in the weights and you're all pushing it out and you're all working and training really hard, killing yourself. Then you find out one of these little d**k heads in the corner is juicing up and he's blindsiding all of you. The squad would come down on him like a tonne of bricks. You'd be thrown off the squad. It's not just an individual cheating in a team sport, you're letting 30 of your brothers down. Conán: I completely agree and I'm not saying that there's any team where they're all doing it - that would never happen - but there will be individual cases even if it's just unintentional. Wooly: There hasn't been though. In 14 years, there's been three and one was an inhaler. Conán: There's been two in the last couple of years. That we know of. At county level. Wooly: They've both been reduced sentences because they were found to be unintentional. I'd be the first to jump on this and say that it's unacceptable... if you give us a little more evidence. There has to be more than this to start this narrative. Listen to the full debate below or subscribe here on iTunes.