Tennis Features
WADA boss "disappointed" by criticism from Nadal, Murray (Feature)
By Ignacio Naya Feb 18, 2009, 12:08 GMT
Madrid - John Fahey, chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), admitted he was 'surprised' and 'disappointed' by the criticism he got recently from top tennis players Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray concerning new rules to locate sportsmen for testing.
'It's totally surprising that they now complain about a practice that should be well-known to them,' Fahey told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa in a telephone interview from his native Australia. 'There's nothing new about out-of-competition testing.'
Surprise tests have been done for years, but the new world anti-doping code - which cami into force on January 1 - contemplates one change in the rules: athletes have to say where they are going to be for one hour each day, 365 days a year and be available for testing at the designated time and place.
That can be any time between 6 am and 11 pm, so Fahey thinks 'the revised code is less difficult for any athlete than the previous one,' in which sportsmen could be subjected to testing '24 hours a day, seven days a week.'
Should a sportsman be unavailable three times, without prior notice, with respect to the information he had given sports authorities, he is liable to sanctions for breaking anti-doping rules.
World number one tennis player Nadal has said that the rule makes him 'feel like a criminal', while world number four Murray described it as 'draconian.' Women's number one Serena Williams agreed with her male colleagues and said it was 'too much.'
Fahey said he was open to suggestions, but noted that the issue was as irrefutable as breath tests for drivers.
'There is really no alternative to this, anymore than I would suggest there is an alternative to random breath testing for drivers who may in fact have taken alcohol before they drive a vehicle. You can't have exceptions. Everybody must be open to being tested, whether you are the prime minister or president of your country or whether you are an unemployed person.'
'So it's a little disappointing to see this sort of comment, after the knowledge of this change has been around now since the decision was taken in Madrid in November 2007. And I can only presume, as I said, that the players who are saying these things do not have all the information,' the Australian said.
Fahey advised Nadal and Murray to listen to their colleague Roger Federer, who supports the new rule 'wholeheartedly and has said so publicly.'
Then, the unsatisfied sportsmen should 'talk to their own sport' to find out why they supported the new code by an overwhelming majority after 'extensive consultation' with input from governments, sports and athletes 'from around the world.'
The complaints of the Spaniard Nadal, who noted that not even his mother knows where he is sometimes, also got the support of Manchester United manager Alex Ferguson, for whom the rule is a 'logistical headache.'
Fahey noted, however, that such complaints are not justified, because any change of plan can be notified easily enough, 'by way of a text message, a fax, e-mails.'
'So if you do change plans, it's far easier to notify your whereabout than it is to change your airline tickets,' he stressed.
'It's interesting that it's those people who are at the elite level sometimes who complaint about it being a bit difficult. It's not the athletes in sports that don't pay much money, where they can't afford to have managers and secretaries and other people to make arrangements for them, including to notify their whereabouts,' Fahey said.
'Having watched that magnificent (Australian Open) final on television (...) it was very clear to me that a player such as Rafael Nadal has an entourage, he has a coach, he has a manager, he has family,' the WADA boss added. 'The whereabouts can be notified by anybody.'
The Australian defended the need for 'consistency, organization,' in the fight against doping, and he sent a clear message to dissident sportsmen by stressing that the revised code has to be supported by everyone, from governments to sports and individual professionals, 'without any arguments.'
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Tennis
- 1. US, Spain win spots in Davis Cup semi-finals
- 2. US lead France 2-1 as Austria deny Spanish sweep
- 3. RESULTS Davis Cup World Group quarter-finals
- 4. US lead France 2-1 through Bryan doubles win
- 5. US square 1-1 with France as Spain lead Austria 2-0
Older Talkback
page: 1
The guy just found out RAfa and fed have entourgae ? and he is involved in sports?
He is trying to twist the facts. Thge players say they are always on the tour and have no objection to being tested randomly on tour or even off tour. But they don't want to report where they are EVERY DAY of the year.
I don't think Rafa takes his entourage with him when he goes out with friends or his girlfriend. I think like everone they are too entitled to sown privacy. Three strikes and they are out. (Bryan brothers are on the verge now!). It seems ridiculusly unncessessary.
the drink driving analogy is also floored as the driver is driving at the time (and in many countries has to be stopped for a reason before the test). There is no suggestion of police tracking every driver and (for example) walking into a place of work and randomly testing in case a driver had a drink in their dinner hour.
It is not just that it is a ridiculous set up, it is against the European Union's bill of rights. What the WADA 'inspectors' are doing is an infringement of those rights and is not legal, in Europe at least.
Typical reaction of a guy who is a self-appointed hot shot and feels he has the power and the moral right to shove people around at will. It is good that players like Nadal and Murray speak out and object to these ridiculous rules. Mister Fahey will probably get paid a very decent sum of money. I am pretty sure he should be able to come up with a better workable alternative. I suppose he has an entourage that can help him with that.
There is no reason especially for tennis players who basically play year round, that WADA can't just do their testing during tournaments. They obviously know when a player is at a tournament. And the top players (who are most affected by this issue) are required to be at certain tournaments as it is. It would make life easier for all involved I would think. Just because these athletes have a 'privileged' lifestyle through the sport doesn't make them slaves to it. They should still have private time away from work commitments like any other employed person.
Yes Europeans, piss in a cup every morning and turn it over to the authorities. Ah such freedom, Magna Carta my ass.
The trouble WADA are trying to deal with is that there are cheats out there and most are not stupid enough to dope during a tournament. That's why you need to be able to locate people on days outside of competition. Otherwise an athlete could just say 'I'm going on holiday for a week -- mind your own business', or a marathon runner could head off to Kenya 'training' for a month without saying precisely where he is. WADA may have tipped the balance too far but where should it be?
What I can say is the WADA, US. Anti-Doping Agency and mostly any doping agency in the world are a complete charade. Take this for an example:
'SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Olympic gold medalist Antonio Pettigrew admitted publicly for the first time Thursday that he used performance-enhancing substances during a long, successful sprinting career in which he passed all drug tests.' Foxsports
- First they do not have the means to fight multi-millionar athletes that can afford top of the line drug programs that make then undetectable.
- Do governments really support detection and curbing, when they want prestige and gold medals?
- Do any sport event organizers want to have their best ticket atractions banned?!
- Would TV and sponsors pay for a lesser event?
The Greeks were doing it in Ancient Greece for nothing and do you think the boys and girls of today would not do it for multi-millions?!?
If you want to catch modern athletes for drugs you need rules that invade their privacy (and even then success is relatively infrequent). So it's really just a balance that needs to be decided, where no one will ever be happy with the resolution. As spectators, if you want to watch 'clean' sport then athletes lose personal freedoms (not all spectators really care much about clean sport). Look at cycling - everyone makes fun of all the cheating, but really its just a function of economics - people got caught (not usually through testing but busting up drug rings, a la BALCO), sponsors walked away, riders lost money and team, and the only way to get their livelihood back was to forgo privacy - so now even more cyclists are getting caught through things like their blood passport program. Rasmussen (cyclist) was on place to win the Tour de France and was kicked off the team because he reported that he was in Mexico (assuming he wouldn't get tested there) when really he was in Italy. All these athletes complaining know what the game is, if they're not involved then at least they know what other people are doing.
page: 1
Terry DavisFeb 18th, 2009 - 14:19:54
'There is really no alternative to this, anymore than I would suggest there is an alternative to random breath testing for drivers'
There are alternatives as random breath tests aren't even legal in many countries.
'athletes have to say where they are going to be for one hour each day, 365 days a year and be available for testing at the designated time and place. That can be any time between 6 am and 11 pm'
So if a player sets of from LA at 6am on a flight to Singapore his flight needs to take less than 1 hour to get there by 11pm. So it will be Impossible to give a position for that day other than somewhere in a plane at approx 30,000 feet.
3 late flights, injuries or accidents. in 18 months seems likly for most players. So I estimate the majority of top 10 players could be on drug ban by June 2011 despite passing in the region of 1000 tests and failing 0.
Report this comment