GAA steroid free? Dont bet your house on it.
After all ,"sure,like its a results business ya know. Its win at all costs like".

joncarter (Galway) - Posts: 2692 - 09/04/2016 15:03:41    1843740

Or I was making a point and using muphry's law to make it.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts:11040 - 09/04/2016 12:46:21 1843718

Of course you were!

Brilliant post, even by your standards Ormo!

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 09/04/2016 15:29:02    1843746

ormandbannerman your quote: 'So what If theyre an amateur? What is the relevance of that'. It is a big relevance and if you are being paid then there is a significantly greater incentive to take illegal substances. I would not like to be depending on the media for reporting either as some of those fools will have you found guilty before you get a chance to prove your innocence. Of course the media are paid so their are guys out there reporting / writing who are more interested in a good story headline than the truth and we have seen that over the last few years (and a good story pays more). They have testing in professional sports and it appears to make little difference as their are always ways around being caught if you have a good bank account. I am totally opposed to players taking illegal substances but equally putting something in place which only touches the surface make little difference and helps hide the real issues.

browncows (Meath) - Posts: 2342 - 10/04/2016 11:40:55    1843860

It is a big relevance and if you are being paid then there is a significantly greater incentive to take illegal substances. I would not like to be depending on the media for reporting either as some of those fools will have you found guilty before you get a chance to prove your innocence. Of course the media are paid so their are guys out there reporting / writing who are more interested in a good story headline than the truth and we have seen that over the last few years (and a good story pays more). They have testing in professional sports and it appears to make little difference as their are always ways around being caught if you have a good bank account. I am totally opposed to players taking illegal substances but equally putting something in place which only touches the surface make little difference and helps hide the real issues.
browncows (Meath) - Posts:915 - 10/04/2016 11:40:55It has no relevance as players who are being paid don't have a greater incentive. People who take performance enhancing substances do so to win and improve their times etc. That is exactly the same in amateur sport as it is in professional sport.
There is testing in a lot more than professional sport and there always will be those who will be trying to stay one step ahead of the testers but that is why testing has to come in and keep going.
What real issues are being hidden by the introduction of drugs testing?

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 12/04/2016 10:31:04    1844543

Of course you were!
Brilliant post, even by your standards Ormo!
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9477 - 09/04/2016 15:29:02I was and its not my fault that you haven't heard of the law and quit with the name calling or you're a complete hypocrite

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 12/04/2016 10:32:10    1844545

I was and its not my fault that you haven't heard of the law and quit with the name calling or you're a complete hypocrite

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts:11053 - 12/04/2016 10:32:10

Cool Ormandello man.

Even if we give you the benefit of the doubt that you were using Muphry's Law to illustrate your point, I'm not sure that's the point of it either by the way but I'm sure you know what you're doing, it still makes you look foolish and small.

Hypocritically or not I was merely pointing out how you were coming across. Small, petty and foolish. Nothing new there I suppose.

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 12/04/2016 10:45:28    1844555

It has no relevance as players who are being paid don't have a greater incentive. People who take performance enhancing substances do so to win and improve their times etc. That is exactly the same in amateur sport as it is in professional sport.
There is testing in a lot more than professional sport and there always will be those who will be trying to stay one step ahead of the testers but that is why testing has to come in and keep going.
What real issues are being hidden by the introduction of drugs testing?

Opinion opinion opinion opinion , you trot it out as if fact ,you do it all the time , tell me where you get to make this comment , how many drug taking prefessionals were your source , most on here have the decency to state IMO however your far to up your own ars7 for that
What real issues are being hidden by the introduction of drugs testing? Allready been answered your just not accepting them , by the way you paste and copy all your replies why am I still waiting for a reply to my question which was directly aimed at yourself , I will condense it for you
Should a leaving cert student aged 17 be subjected if playing minor for his county to a drug test ?
If you cant see the difference then its definetly trees and not wood

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 12/04/2016 10:56:33    1844568

Like most instances of doping, you'll never actually catch anyone 'in competition' unless they are very negligent or just plain unlucky. Having steroids etc in your system has been in cases of 100m sprinters shown to actually make them slower, doping is more effective 'out of compeition', recovery and muscle growth / fat loss, depending on your substance of choice or goal.

Absolutely no doubt in my mind county GAA players are doping, now, if they are knowingly doing this is another thing - the amount of pre workout drinks etc these days laced with questionable substances would flag on any drugs test - for blood. I'd not sure too many GAA players would have a need for an anabolic substance owing to the nature of the game but certainly something like ephedrine would be in use and quite easily flushed out of the body with water intake.

The GAA is purely a urine test I believe, not really useful for Doping, more recreational drugs which again, can be bluffed with a high consumption of water.

GetOverTheBar (Tyrone) - Posts: 1388 - 12/04/2016 10:57:51    1844569

One of the things being missed here is that the successful dopers were part of a system , in some cases government run, they employed chemists , laboratories , they were money run professional machines , with the latest state of the Art equipment blood masking agents etc
Why? because sport generates millions , success generates millions , last night on SKY an agent stated the new Masters champion needs to stay on the practice range as Sponsors are only interested in winners , Risk and Reward , theres enough books out there particularly in cycling that reveal the whos why and hell why nots of doping ,
Would be surprised if the intelligence/network was in Ireland at any club/ county to be any were near a par on the above , doesn't mean we cant get a few feckin idiots along the way

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 12/04/2016 11:49:21    1844607

I can understand where you are coming from Damo but I just find it hard to believe that 2240 players (working on the assumption that an intercounty panel carries 35 players) are completely clean. That one player has not decided to gain an advantage, or has looked for a quick way to bulk up. Step into any gym in the country and you will see recreational gym users juicing. From where I am sitting at this moment in time there are three gyms within a 10 minute walk. In two of them I would know exactly who to speak to if I wanted to get something to help me in the gym.
The one issue I have with people discussing steroids or any peds is that they think it's a quick fix. It's not, those using need to remain very disciplined to see the full benefit of it. If a lad is juicing and his diet isn't completely clean he won't see any major benefit from it.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 12/04/2016 12:13:53    1844632

I can understand where you are coming from Damo but I just find it hard to believe that 2240 players (working on the assumption that an intercounty panel carries 35 players) are completely clean. That one player has not decided to gain an advantage, or has looked for a quick way to bulk up. Step into any gym in the country and you will see recreational gym users juicing. From where I am sitting at this moment in time there are three gyms within a 10 minute walk. In two of them I would know exactly who to speak to if I wanted to get something to help me in the gym.
The one issue I have with people discussing steroids or any peds is that they think it's a quick fix. It's not, those using need to remain very disciplined to see the full benefit of it. If a lad is juicing and his diet isn't completely clean he won't see any major benefit from it.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts:2806 - 12/04/2016 12:13:53

Totally agree Gotmilk amd Im not down playing the dangers , Im not against testing as heaven forbid if my son who plays if he was up to something for his health and well being Id want to know.
Where Im coming from is that whilst I agree in everything you say , equally on the ground Im not seeing it , Id be active enough in my own club we have a gym , its policed by good lads who intervene if a young un comes in and starts packing the kgs on , yes lads can get competitive in the gym but before fellas are allowed in they must attend run by a GPO a programme outlining the dos and donts of weights for field athletes , they must build up their core which is stretched based exercises done over months , all this before hitting weights.No short cuts and trust me all clubs are small worlds if someone was up to something it would get out very quickly , private gyms I cannot vouch for
Equally were Im coming is naming and shaming , the question Ive posed without much reply is should a 17 year old playing for county team doing leaving cert be subjected to testing , should they be named and shamed in public , what Im trying (badly ) to say is whilst we all agree we hate to see cheats in sport, our sport is unique , if we are going down the drug testing route in a more stringent way well Id be very worried about how its policed and its findings were used .
But your right it would be foolhardy to think someone isn't going to try gain an advantage .

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 12/04/2016 12:59:58    1844672

Cool Ormand
Even if we give you the benefit of the doubt that you were using Muphry's Law to illustrate your point, I'm not sure that's the point of it either by the way but I'm sure you know what you're doing, it still makes you look foolish and small.
Hypocritically or not I was merely pointing out how you were coming across. Small, petty and foolish. Nothing new there I suppose.
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9478 - 12/04/2016 10:45:28How am I being petty? If you cant see the irony of calling me small, petty and foolish yet deliberately spell my name incorrectly then you are a hypocrite.


It has no relevance as players who are being paid don't have a greater incentive. People who take performance enhancing substances do so to win and improve their times etc. That is exactly the same in amateur sport as it is in professional sport.
There is testing in a lot more than professional sport and there always will be those who will be trying to stay one step ahead of the testers but that is why testing has to come in and keep going.
What real issues are being hidden by the introduction of drugs testing?
Opinion opinion opinion opinion , you trot it out as if fact ,you do it all the time , tell me where you get to make this comment , how many drug taking prefessionals were your source , most on here have the decency to state IMO however your far to up your own **** for that
What real issues are being hidden by the introduction of drugs testing? Allready been answered your just not accepting them , by the way you paste and copy all your replies why am I still waiting for a reply to my question which was directly aimed at yourself , I will condense it for you
Should a leaving cert student aged 17 be subjected if playing minor for his county to a drug test ?
If you cant see the difference then its definetly trees and not wood
Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts:3189 - 12/04/2016 10:56:33 What are the issues then. No minors under the age of 18 should be drugs tested unless there is sufficient reason to. The decision to test athletes should not be based on age; it should be based on the level that the athlete is competing at. Minors competing at national level may be tested. And what am I not accepting?

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 12/04/2016 14:05:55    1844702

What are the issues then. No minors under the age of 18 should be drugs tested unless there is sufficient reason to. The decision to test athletes should not be based on age; it should be based on the level that the athlete is competing at. Minors competing at national level may be tested. And what am I not accepting?

There are national level competitions at under 16 , lads are no longer in academy squads they re-present the county in development squad , my son who is one is doing his junior cert , should he have to pee in a bottle ? After all it is the level he is competing at ?
What is a sufficient reason to test a minor ?

Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts: 5193 - 12/04/2016 14:25:11    1844717

Hypocritically or not I was merely pointing out how you were coming across. Small, petty and foolish. Nothing new there I suppose.
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9478 - 12/04/2016 10:45:28How am I being petty? If you cant see the irony of calling me small, petty and foolish yet deliberately spell my name incorrectly then you are a hypocrite.

Touché Ormandovski.

Thanks for pointing out my pettiness. I should really spell your name exactly as you want it spelled.

Ormo isn't it?

Or maybe by spelling your name incorrectly I'm using Muphry's Law to bring us back to are (see what I did there??!!) original discussion about your supposed use of the, now infamous, law?

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 12/04/2016 14:26:40    1844718

What are the issues then. No minors under the age of 18 should be drugs tested unless there is sufficient reason to. The decision to test athletes should not be based on age; it should be based on the level that the athlete is competing at. Minors competing at national level may be tested. And what am I not accepting?
12/04/2016 14:25:11 Damothedub (Dublin) - Posts:3196
There are national level competitions at under 16, lads are no longer in academy squads they re-present the county in development squad, my son who is one is doing his junior cert, should he have to pee in a bottle? After all it is the level he is competing at?
What is a sufficient reason to test a minor?Again what am I not accepting. What do you think is sufficient reason to test someone?


Hypocritically or not I was merely pointing out how you were coming across. Small, petty and foolish. Nothing new there I suppose.
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9478 - 12/04/2016 10:45:28How am I being petty? If you cant see the irony of calling me small, petty and foolish yet deliberately spell my name incorrectly then you are a hypocrite.
Touché Ormandovski.
Thanks for pointing out my pettiness. I should really spell your name exactly as you want it spelled.
Ormo isn't it?
Or maybe by spelling your name incorrectly I'm using Muphry's Law to bring us back to are (see what I did there??!!) original discussion about your supposed use of the, now infamous, law?
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9481 - 12/04/2016 14:26:40 You are being so ignorant and trolling. So quit being a hypocrite.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 12/04/2016 15:24:08    1844764

You are being so ignorant and trolling. So quit being a hypocrite.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts:11056 - 12/04/2016 15:24:08

Ormandinho

You made a post that made you look petty, foolish and small, it happens. Or not foolish I suppose because you were in fact, deliberately (still unconvinced that's a thing) using Muphry's Law. In anyways, it still made you look fairly ignorant yourself even it was (obviously!!!) deliberate.

Maybe I'm being a bit ignorant, that's for others to judge I suppose.

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 12/04/2016 15:35:40    1844771

Ormandinho
You made a post that made you look petty, foolish and small, it happens. Or not foolish I suppose because you were in fact, deliberately (still unconvinced that's a thing) using Muphry's Law. In anyways, it still made you look fairly ignorant yourself even it was (obviously!!!) deliberate.
Maybe I'm being a bit ignorant, that's for others to judge I suppose.
MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts:9484 - 12/04/2016 15:35:40Strange you are calling me names when you got so high on your high horse about me calling you something other than MesAmis a short while back. You complete hypocrite.
If you are unconvinced about the law google it

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 12/04/2016 20:52:53    1844950

Strange you are calling me names when you got so high on your high horse about me calling you something other than MesAmis a short while back. You complete hypocrite.
If you are unconvinced about the law google it

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts:11057 - 12/04/2016 20:52:53

You can call me what you like Ormandinho! Most people probably shorten my username, I've no issue with that.

When did say all this??

Shows us all a link there good man. If you're right then fair play but you can still call me what you like. I don't mind at all.

I've learned how to google thanks buddy. I'm just convinced that you were using it! Your post was an example of Muphry's Law alright but I just don't think that's how it works i.e. I don't think you use the law, it's more something that happens. Just like Murphy's Law. You don't use the law it just happens.

Also it stills makes you look like a small little person. This and the whole name thing. Everyone's name gets shortened on here and on many forums. Deal with it because it's always going to happen both unintentionally and intentionally (after you've thrown your toys out over it many times).

You can either deal with the name thing or not. Your choice.

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13802 - 13/04/2016 09:31:38    1844986

The GAA certainly isnt drug free. Steriods are commin enough in social and club rugby..not the elite end do much where theres alot if testing. Im sure but not certain its the same in hurling. The whole 'body conscious' movement has seen many many people try steriods and many of the same people play abit of competitive sport. Personally I think its all being blown out of proportion. Theres very very few people if any dying from steriod abuse. It improves recovery and general health aswell as performance. The whole discussion needs to be moved on. Steriods are here to stay.

bloodyban (Limerick) - Posts: 1710 - 15/04/2016 11:37:23    1845889

bloody did you ever see bigger faster stronger? Good documentary on steroids, doesnt focus on the negatives alone.

gotmilk (Fermanagh) - Posts: 4971 - 15/04/2016 20:30:14    1846048