 |
| Courtesy of Clipart Panda |
It's all about trust. For the anti-doping system to work, all involved have to trust that the system does what it is supposed to do. That athletes and their enablers who cheat through doping are subject to the same laws, oversight, testing, and sanctions. That the alphabet agencies that oversee the anti-doping process are treating every case the same, fairly, transparently, and according to the legislation in place to police doping in sport.
The major failure in the system highlighted by the German expose is the alleged collusion to protect certain athletes from punishment for doping. In effect those who were supposed to enforce the rules became doping enablers. This is not new, back when I first started covering the issue of doping in sport in 1987 the same flaw plagued the sporting world. Those in charge of the various international and national sporting federations were lax in their enforcement of the rules.
Doriane Lambelet Coleman, a middle distance runner and lawyer who, along with Edwin Moses and Harvey Glance, attempted to rewrite the rules for anti-doping for the US track & field federation, now called USATF, said that the rules on the books in the early 1990s "looked like they were written by someone who didn't want to catch anybody." There were huge loopholes, many ways to cover up positive tests, and/or allow athletes who cheated and were caught to get away with it.
The US was not alone in this doper protectionism. The shared feeling among the sports "super powers" was that the other countries were doing it, so we have to do it. Dr. Don Catlin, who was a pioneer in drug testing within the IOC and the US compared the situation to nuclear disarmament. Neither side in this "war" was willing to "demilitarize," take away one of their most potent weapons, doping, because the other side would "win."
There was no belief that athletes who didn't dope could or would be able to compete with those who did. And no trust that those who were caught by the meager drug testing program in place at the time would be punished. As doping scandals kept erupting, the IOC knew it had to act to protect their "brand." The anti doping system was polarized. The labs would get positive tests only to see the athlete whose sample they tested continuing to compete and win medals in international competition.
Some of these cover ups were eventually exposed. The scandals generated enough momentum that the IOC was forced to act. They created WADA as an independent oversight agency charged with policing the drug testing system that, at that time didn't exist. Over the years more alphabet groups were formed within nations to act as independent testing and enforcement agencies. To take the countries' sports federations self interest in attempting to win medals and championships out of the doping business. USADA, UKAD, ASADA, and all the other domestic anti-doping agencies were created to police doping in sport.
Over that time, roughly about 20 years, trust has been established that within countries with functioning agencies would not "look the other way" when that country's star athlete was busted for doping. Athletes who doped could no longer count on sports administrators making their doping offenses "go away." The biggest problem that remained was that not every sports power had a functioning anti-doping agency. Third World countries, such as Kenya or Ethiopia, that dominated segments of sport, such as distance running, still do not have such agencies.
So rumors and innuendo continued among athletes that the African athletes' success was due to the inability of the IAAF, the international federation charged with overseeing, promoting, growing the sport, to bring the various countries in line with the WADA Code that attempts to "harmonize" the anti-doping system. To make sure that each country has, at the very least, an independent doping deterrent in place. As the other current doping scandal has exposed, Kenya is not immune from the spread of doping, but in a relatively short period of time, some progress has been made in this area.
The World Marathon Majors, a coalition of major marathons throughout the world, has funded some testing in an attempt to do what the various countries and sports federations have not been able to do, provide out of competition testing in areas with no operating anti-doping agency in place to deter athletes from doping. That the WMM has had to do this is indicative of the lack of adequate funding for the entire anti-doping industry. When Paula Radcliffe was asked what she would do if she were in charge of the anti-doping program for the IAAF she responded that she'd triple the IAAF's anti-doping budget.
The old investigative mantra of "follow the money" as a tool for examining institutional or individual shortcomings is apropos of one of the major weaknesses of the current anti-doping system. Chuck Yesalis, who has followed the ups and downs of the anti-doping movement over decades, has said that in the fight to minimize doping in sport the anti-doping forces are fighting a war where the other side has guns and they have pea shooters.
The most important asset for the anti-doping movement, however, is something money can't buy. It's trust. Trust from the public that what they are watching is not a drug riddled circus. Trust that anti-doping agencies cannot be bought or influenced to "look the other way" because a highly marketable athlete is caught doping. Trust that the sports federations and other groups with influence over the athletes are doing their jobs in policing doping, enforcing the rules.
Thus the current revelations about what has alleged to have been going on in Russia go to the core of the doping problem. They undermine the trust within the athletic community that all that can be done is being done to protect clean athletes, enabling athletes to compete on equal footing, not having to worry that the athlete next to them on the starting line is pharmacologically enhanced. The anti-doping system cannot function properly without that trust.
When Ben Johnson was caught doping in 1988, Catlin thought this would demonstrate that the testing system was one all athletes could trust. That the fact that the most marketable athlete in the then most marketable sport in the Olympic Games was busted for doping would turn the tide in the anti-doping battle. Instead, shortly after Ben was busted a mother and her son came into a pediatrician's office in the Twin Cities and asked the doctor to prescribe for her son some steroids so he could be a better wrestler. This was not an isolated incident. At least one message delivered by the Seoul Olympic bust was that "steroids work."
There were minimal disincentives to dope back then. There was no WADA. no USADA, and now that RUSADA, the Russian anti-doping agency, is implicated in the allegations swirling around the doping scandal in Russia, the anti-doping efforts will take a hit. Some trust will be lost. The challenge is to reestablish that trust. Without it the athletes will still be tempted to take "short cuts," to dope. There will continue to be doping scandals. There will continue to be parents who want the "magic potions" for their kids, and sport as we know it could morph into a modern day gladiator fest. "Entertainment" that attracts paying audiences rather than one that celebrates and showcases athletic skills.
Athletics could become a freak show of doped up individuals, replaceable parts in a traveling roadshow, a circus of sports that makes money for the owners and operators of the franchises, but treats "athletes" like indentured servants. Is this rather dystopian vision what we want our sports to become?
--by Jim Ferstle
No comments:
Post a Comment