World Olympians Want ‘Fully Independent Testing’ & Anti-Doping Out Of Fed Hands

worldolympiansassociation

In a three-point plan, the World Olympians Association has joined the chorus of those calling for anti-doping services to be taken away from sports federations in favour of placing the whole realm into the hands of a truly independent organisation

All SwimVortex articles are placed in our archive after five days, the library of content available to subscribers.
Log In Register

Comments

Markus B.

Well, I used to say testing was only done to keep a good reputation for the big money sports business.

Maybe there is hope now and some things will start to change.

My wish:
1. Install a truly efficient anti doping test regime
2. Introduce a “One doping offence – Forever banned from competition” policy
3. At the same time delete ALL existing world records and start from scratch

commonwombat

Positively splendid, M. Bouzou ……. but can you please answer one vital question ?

Who is going to going to fund this operation; and I mean the day to day operations/pay the wages of the operational testers not just fund “Head Office” ?

Let us SEE the nuts and bolts of your plan, M.Bouzou …… if it does actually exist beyond this press release. I have no issue with what you think SHOULD be done but what about some hard detail on HOW to make it work ?

This is not a personal aspersion on M.Bouzou but we read so many statements on what should be done but how about some substance on how they are going to make it all a viable reality and a sustainable one. ?

To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw via Alfred P Doolittle “I’m waiting to hear, I’m wanting to hear !”

Craig Lord

CW – the alternative is to open the medicine cupboard; followed by the death of sport and guaranteed abuse of young people far and wide. The question is – what is your solution?

commonwombat

TBH, the whole issue of defining WHAT IS a PED has to be part of the solution.

WADA, or whatever entity eventually emerges from the mire, MUST have their science “nailed down” before acting. The meldonium farce has punctured major holes in WADA’s credibilty.

The Prohibited List must always be open to scrutiny and reassessment, both for additions and removals. Have your science right before either takes place. The entire process of how said judgements are made, the inputs and who makes these judgements has to be open to question and the ongoing protocols transperant.

Having a completely independent policing body and having its operations funded by the stakeholders sounds wonderful in concept …… but what about the governance of this policing body ?

Who determines who heads up said organisation if we are taking all the intended stakeholders out of said equation ? To whom are THEY accountable ? Who is going to be “policing the policeman” ?

There is also the reality that a number of likely major stakeholders are currently under a cloud and THEIR survival/futures are currently “speculative”.

Is WADA the right vehicle for such a task going forward ? Of that, I am not certain. I certainly do not believe them to be irrevocably compromised unless the fall-out of the Russian imbroglio or others provides clear evidence to that effect.

I sure as hell don’t have all the answers, only some thoughts. I just think we need to see some substance (some “how we seek to go about it”) rather than just “campaign speeches”. Maybe I’m just “fed up to here” with the methane being produced by the current AUS federal election, US Presidential guff + Brexit hooha !

Craig Lord

CW, the frustration is understandable but I think the debate has to move on to precisely that – solution seeking. On Meldonium, there’s been no suggestion from WADA and other experts that the substance should be removed from the banned substances list. (the duration of detectability should, of course, have been researched beforehand if a deadline and dateline is what you wish to set). Your questions are valid. There are, of course, in industry, telecoms, healthcare, and many other realms watchdog and ombudsman roles that work well and are framed in law. That is something sport has needed for a long time – and not only in areas of doping.

commonwombat

Exactly, Craig. I do not question the sincerity or motives of (almost) everyone who makes these statements.

The question of an ombudsman certainly crossed my mind and such an entity has frequently been an effective one in many industries with a “qualifier”, namely as long as their “terms of reference are sufficient to be legitimately effective and they are adequately resourced.

These are also generally if not exclusively domestic entities; hard to think of too many international ones … or effective international ones. Not insurmountable but certainly some issues in getting something legitimately workable off the ground.

Yozhik

Под лежачий камень вода не течет.
Bravo, CW. If you can speak as passionately as you write you have to be a leader of some movement. People will follow you. At the same time I have to agree with Mr. Lord that such criticism of any innocent or politically based attempts to make some changes is actually a conscious choice of doing nothing awaiting for the repetition of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Doing nothing is not a position of accepting the status quo. There is no such thing with the sport and surrounding it business. Doing nothing means helping things of getting worse. We have to welcome any attempts of making things better. Is it naive? No. There is two facts that we have to remember. The sport is the civilized form of one of the basic feature of living creature – the competition of physical abilities. It will never gone. And secondly the Humanity have realised long time ago that for the sake of the progress and prosperity despite the fact that outcome of competition can look brutal the competition by itself should be fair. Look at the stocks or mercantile exchanges. By long history of averaging different rules and approaches this business was made more or less fair from the view of the majority of participants. I think that when we stop to full ourselves and treat the pro sport as any other business the the acceptable fair business equilibrium will be found soon. As far as it remains political tool we will have all this dirt that comes with it.
Who will policing the policeman? The answer to this question was found long time ago. It is – you, me, Mr.Lord etc . The transparency and free journalism is the way to stop corruption.

Craig Lord

Well writ, Yozhik

Craig Lord

Yes, CW, not an easy journey but certainly very possible and very necessary

commonwombat

Its certainly possible ….. and necessary but IS there the necessary WILL to see what would be be a messy and laborious process through ? Or will the consensus be one for sticking band-aids on existing structures ?

We certainly don’t have answers at this point and its almost certainly going to be delayed, in part, by the uncertain future of so many major stakeholders such as IAAF, FIFA, potentially the IOC …. who knows maybe FINA & UCI.

Yozhik, you make the pronouncement that WE, the fans, are the ultimate policemen. Forgive me but I disagree. We, the general public, are not the policemen but rather we are the ultimate judge, jury and executioners.

Our verdicts or sentence will most likely take the form of ever heightened DISinterest in these sports leading to loss of revenue from either spectator/television ratings leading inevitably to loss of events, corporate support, TV rights revenue as well as public support for public $$$ spent on sport. Indeed, this is already a reality in many countries.

Craig Lord

I agree with the scenarios you paint, CW… the will will indeed need to be there but there are signs off late that give rise to optimism; a big journey ahead but the recent resolve, including the decisions of the past week (notwithstanding the imperfection of them) show a certain new resilience of attitude. What motivates that and where it will lead to remains to be seen.

commonwombat

Certainly, Craig. There are omens both positive and negative to be found.

I do feel however that the issue of the “punters” voting with their feet and with their wallets may be most telling. Some may be merely transfer to other sports meaning just a transfer of custom/$$ to another sector of the sports market but a significant percentage may be lost for good no matter which/how many houses may be put back in order

Craig Lord

Yes, as you suggest, CW, that shift has already taken place.

Leave a comment

Post a comment with your SwimVortex Account. Don't have a SwimVortex Account, Sign Up?

(*) Fields are required!
×