Over the Bank Holiday weekend, athletes flocked to London to sample the Olympic Stadium for the first time. Ranging from elite performers to university students, the test event was held to establish that the capabilities of the stadium fulfilled the wish-list of LOCOG and the IOC before the Olympics kick off at the end of July. One athlete who may now be present at the Games is Dwain Chambers. Previously banned following his drugs misdemeanour, as the British Olympic Association by-law prevented athletes from competing in the Olympics. However, constant legal pressure eventually led to the case being taken to the Court of Arbitration for Sport by WADA, the global corporation dealing with doping issues, who subsequently won, allowing all British athletes who have now served their drugs bans to be eligible for the Games this summer.
Britain was one of the few countries that adopted this law, but it was one widely accepted and considered appropriate. If an athlete believes that they must enhance their performance through illegal aids then they should face the consequences when they are caught, and the punishments should be damning to deter others from following the same path. Yes, they should be banned for a period of time but if they are made to miss the Olympics, the pinnacle for all athletes, for the rest of their careers, then I imagine it has caused fewer individuals to have made attempts to cheat the system. Nowadays, with the law revoked, athletes may try substances to see if they can avoid sanctions. If they are caught, they face their two-year ban (in which they can continually train anyway) but could return for an Olympic Games in the following year or so. It is a crazy situation, and I think damning of how weak the current punishments are.
Now you may argue that other countries allow this. Well, I am not interested in other countries; I am interested in the British athletes that are representing our country this summer. I refuse to believe that if a former drug cheat wins a medal in London, then it won’t be tainted by their competitors, spectators and pundits alike because everybody is aware of their past, and so, everybody will always doubt whether their performance has also been clean. Nobody wants a cheat to win. It brings such distaste to an event. The Olympics are all about being the best you can be, therefore it should be without the use of illegal aids (and arguably some of the aids that are legal could be called into question). People aspire and are in awe of those who are able to push their body to the limits that allow them to produce such spectacular performances. To subsequently discover such a show was caused by drug use just makes everyone despondent and wary of the legality of the sport. With athletics in particular, suffering over the past decade with high-profile stars being discovered as illegal substance users (including Marion Jones who was only uncovered years after her Olympic wins), further degradation is the last thing the sport could do without now. However, WADA’s court victory opens the opportunity for more high profile cases from another proud, respected sporting powerhouse. I just hope British athletes are not lured into the sordid world of illegal performance enhancing drugs.
Another argument that has been pitched towards me is that other sports do not treat their competitors so severely following drug misuse. For example, footballers or rugby players can be banned but are then entitled to return and still compete in World Cups and the club European competitions. This is very true, but I ask you to come up with a player that has been caught and suspended for drug use in these sports and returned to a level on par with or certainly higher than the stage they were at when they were issued with the ban. Most fall to a lower level and in my opinion; this is predominantly down to high-level clubs feeling they cannot trust the player from returning to their past misdemeanours. The only exception I have thought of is Kolo Toure, but that whole incident seemed quite bizarre and Manchester City supported their players defence. But when you look at Adrian Mutu, Mark Bosnich and Matt Stevens, they never returned to the high echelons that they were performing at previously, meaning that they will never achieve the greatest achievements that can be bestowed upon them during their career. Athletes on the other hand can because their competing as individuals and so can always aim to achieve the qualifying times required in order to reach major events.
As you may have noted, I am opposed to the over-ruling that the Court of Arbitration has imposed on the BOA. I believe the initial reasoning behind the ban was just and a strong means to deter drug cheats from emerging within British Olympians. Now, I believe that more drug cheats will emerge and see if they can cheat the system, worsening the image of the sport and its integrity. Bans now need to be longer and severely hamper an athlete’s opportunity to achieve a significant title because I see no reason why they should be entitled to Olympic gold over an individual who has worked tirelessly and pushed their body to the limits whilst training, without illegal substances, in order to fulfil their dream. These are the people that spectators want to see running, jumping and throwing in the Olympic Stadium this summer. Yes, you may have served your time, but you should always be punished for undertaking a crime you willing performed, knowing that the practice was illegal. Members of the public who accrue criminal records are then unable to follow certain career paths, so athletes who cheat should also be facing lifetime preventatives within their career. Let us hope we do not now see a rise in the number of British athletes caught like Dwain Chambers was all those years ago...
No comments:
Post a Comment