IRFU to focus on second case

Two Irish players, not one, tested positive for prohibited substances last season in drugs tests carried out by the UK Sports Council but one of them was deemed to be a minor offence, arising out of a prescribed medicine, and was dealt with at the end of last season.

The Irish Times has learned that two unnamed Irish players are amongst the seven rugby union players to have tested positive last season. The UK Sports Council will include their cases in its Ethics and Anti-Doping 1997/98 Annual Report at Lord's Cricket ground in London this morning. This disclosure partly explains the apparent inconsistencies between the British body and the IRFU regarding the number of Irish players who tested positive last season. Even the British body accepts that the positive test, which has already been dealt with, was because of "a minor, medical complaint".

Apparently, this first case followed a European Cup match, which almost certainly means it was an Ulster player and most probably a non-international. Both the player's and his doctor's written explanation were accepted when his case was heard.

A second case involving an Irish international player, following a drugs test after a Five Nations or European Cup game last year, only came to the IRFU's attention via a phone call to the Union's offices in Lansdowne Road late on Tuesday afternoon.

A full explanation for the delay has still not materialised, though the IRFU, having checked over the matter again yesterday, remain adamant that the first they heard of the second case, involving a member of the Irish international squad, was through last Tuesday afternoon's phone call from the UK Sports Council.

Spokespersons for the Sports Council will not divulge their own explanation for the six-to-eight month delay, nor do they intend to make a statement which might readily clarify the matter. "We are an independent body whose expertise is in drug testing and we would prefer to retain our confidentiality rather than enter a slanging match."

However, Sports Council sources do say they were more concerned about the second case which came to light on Tuesday afternoon and are eager to have a clarification of the outcome to their test.

This may partly explain why the IRFU have referred this case to the independent tribunal comprising of former chief justice Tom Finlay, Dr Brendan Buckley and Dr Tony O'Neill, although union officials remain confident that the international player who tested positive will also be cleared on the grounds that he took prescribed medication for a medical complaint.

The disclosure that a second Irish player tested positive last season is bound to be raised at the IRFU's press conference in the Berkeley Court Hotel today. Nonetheless, IRFU officers will assuredly do their damnedest not to divulge the identity of either player.

"The only way he would be named publicly is if he was found guilty of any wrong-doing and a sanction was imposed on him," said union press officer John Redmond. Indeed, Redmond cited International Board regulations for retaining the player's confidentiality.

Procedure 13.3.2 of the International Board's constitution states: "In the event of a positive test result, the union concerned must take all reasonable steps to maintain confidentiality until all testing has been completed, a decision has been reached, and the person and his union have been informed. The tribunal shall determine what sanctions should be applied."

Nor will today's UK Sports Council annual report divulge the nationality of any players who tested positive last season, never mind the players own identities. Along with the number or players tested positive in each sport, it will reveal the stimulants that were taken, whether it was an anabolic agent, what the actual substance was and what action was taken that the council was aware of. The proximity of this detailed annual report would also explain their need to seek clarification of the Irish player whose case has still to be heard.

The identity of the international player about to face the independent Drugs Tribunal has remained a closely guarded secret, perhaps not extending beyond the IRFU secretary Philip Browne, the IRFU president Noel Murphy, the union's medical staff and the union's legal advisers. Indeed, it's quite likely that neither the Irish coach, Warren Gatland, nor the Irish manager, Donal Lenihan, know of the player's identity, and nor might they want to know for the time being at any rate.

Were the aforementioned Irish international who has tested positive for prohibited substances found to have taken a performance enhancing drug, then he will almost certainly face a twoyear ban.

If so, it is a punishment Gatland would agree with.

"If any Irish player was found to have taken a performance enhancing drug then the penalty handed out would be justifiable," said Gatland, prior to leaving for an International Board conference in Vancouver which he will be attending with assistant coach Philip Danaher and Irish referee Dave McHugh.

Gatland maintains that the taking of performance enhancing drugs is not a significant problem in Irish rugby, though he accepts that "once even one player is taking something then it's a problem, and there's always a chance that one or two are, although I've never seen or heard of the slightest evidence in Irish rugby."

The Irish coach believes that the players who might be tempted to take a risk would be "the players who have nearly made it but aren't quite there yet. That would be my big fear."

Gatland concedes there may be "a little bit of it going on, as with every sport in the world," and regards "regular off-season testing" as the most effective means of countering a potential drugs problem, but maintains that rugby is not as ripe for the drug peddlars' plucking as has been portrayed.

"While it's true that rugby is a bit of a power game, it also requires lots of other attributes. It's a very highly-skilled game and mentally challenging. You've got to take that into account as well."