“Why are people appealing obvious suspensions” – Colm Parkinson on Diarmuid Connolly

It's on again, it's off again. He's suspended again, he's free again.

Colm Parkinson doesn't agree with Joe Brolly's latest musings. The Derry pundit claimed that any cross-examiner would have a field day with the Diarmuid Connolly case because of the 'suspicious' activity that led to the incident with the linesman being noted in the referee's report after the Carlow game. However, during The GAA Hour, another healthy debate was voiced about the Dubliner and whether or not he should be appealing his 12-week ban. A ban which was originally accepted. They're not appealing on grounds that he's innocent. Oh no, just that the CCCC shouldn't have gotten involved because the officials didn't deal with the incident at the time.

"The talk that he was being provoked the whole game... I was at the game, he was man-marked the whole game, he wasn't being provoked or targeted or assaulted off the ball. He wasn't," Wooly unloaded on the latest episode. "What happened in the incident in front of the linesman is Connolly wouldn't give the Carlow lads the ball. You see that in a hundred different games - they were rough with him, trying to get the ball back, but Connolly knew what he was doing holding onto the ball in that situation. "Then he pushes the linesman. I'd say the linesman just froze and didn't deal with it the way he should've. That's their fault."

But Brolly thinks that's grounds to clear the Dublin star.

"Connolly's clearly guilty, there's no doubt," Pakinson continued. "And he's going to say in his defence presumably that he's guilty. But he's going to get off potentially because Joe Brolly is talking about technicalities. "If that's the road we're going down, what good is that for any type of rule or punishment if Joe Brolly says he can get you off on a technicality. "Then you have Brolly comparing the situation to if the Gooch did this. Joe would surely know, being a barrister, that previous convictions are going to have an impact on the way a case is perceived in the media and the way a case is dealt with. He got the minimum ban, three months. "Gooch has an exemplary record and, if that happened to Gooch, the media probably wouldn't highlight it as much. But that's because he doesn't normally do it. Connolly has a track record so of course he's going to be dealt with a little bit differently. "The culture and the attitude of getting players off, I think, is just wrong. Why are people appealing obvious suspensions? What road are we going down? What's the point of suspensions?"

Cian Ward saw it a little differently though. Listen to the whole debate from 17:02 below or subscribe here on iTunes.