Critically evaluate the methods adopted by sports governing bodies to ensure its anti doping commitment is achieved.

Authors Avatar

Doping has been recognised as one of sports major issues. The IOC issued a press release from Lausanne on 8th July 1999 wherein it stated:

“The IOC wishes to reiterate its total commitment to the fight against doping, with the aim of protecting and preserving fair play in sport. Any declarations which go against these principles are both wrong and misplaced.”

Critically evaluate the methods adopted by sports governing bodies to ensure this commitment is achieved.

Sports governing bodies have been trying to eliminate cheating from sport for many years.  Eliminating cheats from sport has proved to be a very complicated area, with the development in technology it would be thought that governing bodies would have developed techniques for identifying cheats. But the increase in financial rewards for professional athletes to win has meant that they are even keener to achieve success. Sometimes this is achieved through pure hard work and commitment but in a small minority of cases this isn’t enough and athletes turn to banned substances to enhance their performance.

This is a very difficult area as there is constant scrutiny in cases where the decisions made turns out to be wrong. This could be due to the amount of money in professional sports, which had led to cases of litigation when the tests have been wrong.

        Many governing bodies initially set up a contract system between athletes and officials so that there was a regulatory system based around doping. This idea was criticised by both the professional bodies and agents because it was seen to be imposing unfair sanctions on athletes without proper legal advice.

        A more systematic approach has now been adopted in order to combat drugs and doping in sport. There are rules set up both inside competitive events e.g. Olympics, World Championships, national leagues etc, but there are also rules that are in practice outside competitions when athletes are in training for major sporting events e.g. out-of-competition testing.

        If an athlete is tested positive for drugs then the athlete always has the choice for it to be re-tested so that competitors and officials can see the re-test and prove its validity, this is a positive action because it allow competitors to appeal if they feel that the test has been done unfairly, there has been a mistake or rules haven’t been followed properly. National governing bodies have a system of appeal that allows competitors to lodge complaints against decisions, if they aren’t satisfied with the answers they received. If they aren’t satisfied by this decision they can appeal to international governing bodies to have their appeal heard again and a new decision given if felt this is appropriate.

                There is a presumption made that any IOC accredited laboratory will have carried out the tests with appropriate care and followed certain established procedures.

International appeals are normally heard in front of three members from various council related to the athlete’s sport. They hear all the evidence relating to the banned substance from the prosecution, they then allow the athlete the chance to present a case as to why the substance has been found present in their test; if there are legitimate reasons as to why it was there.

        In terms of swimming and most other sports when a drug test is carried out, samples are split into two and preserved as ‘sample A’ and ‘sample B’. Sample A is tested at an IOC recognised laboratory and sample B isn’t touched until the outcome of A is known. If sample A is negative then nothing further is done with sample B, but if sample A is positive then the athlete is likely to be temporarily suspended until a further test is done on sample B.

Join now!

        This could be seen as being unfair on the athlete as they haven’t had the opportunity to present their case as to why they had tested positive to a banned substance. Test B could confirm their innocence but if hasn’t yet been tested by this point they are still banned and alleged to be guilty. Test B could prove their innocence but in the majority of cases this tends not to be the case, sample B just confirms the banned substance found in the athletes’ body.

        This method doesn’t follow the idea that is prominent in English Law ...

This is a preview of the whole essay