It seems that quite a few Roarers don’t really understand just how seriously ASADA and WADA take the strict liability principle.
The principle was adopted by WADA from the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code (OMADC). The ASADA codes and principles follow the WADA codes.
The WADA Code Section two deals with violations and liability. Two of the relevant sections are:
2.1 Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample
2.1.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an antidoping violation under Article 2.1.
2.2 Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method
2.2.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.
If you want the whole story follow this link.
To show just how serious WADA/IOC and by extension ASADA are in applying the strict liability, it might be educational to look at the story of Olga Valeryevna Medvedtseva, a Russian Biathlete at the Turin Winter Olympics is 2006.
Medvedtseva won the silver in the women’s 15 km individual race, however on February 16, 2006, she was disqualified from further competition for failing a doping control test.
Medvedtseva tested positive for the stimulant carphedon. The IOC panel found her guilty, and she was expelled from the games and stripped of her medal.
Later she was banned for two years.
The head of the Russian Anti-Doping Committee said that Pyleva took an over-the-counter medication for an ankle injury, which had been prescribed by her personal doctor – who was not a team doctor – which contained carphedon.
According to its label, the medication is not forbidden and is officially recommended by its manufacturer for treating sporting related injuries.
Unfortunately the Russian manufacturer did not include the complete compound list for the medication, which is what allegedly led to this mistake.
Not only was the athlete banned but the doctor in question was also banned for two years.
Several days after the incident, the IBU (International Biathlon Union) president Anders Besseberg said in an interview that “Pyleva may and must defend her good name in law proceeding against the plant”, but ruled out any reduction of the two year disqualification from competition.
As you can see, strict liability will be enforced with zero tolerance.
All athletes do know this and whether they trust their team medicos or not, they get to carry the can if it goes wrong.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Unfortunately, I think that is where it is all heading.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Legal action is what I'm getting at. If a player has it in his contract that he will receive only A, B, C supplements and then the club gives him something else, the player is ultimately liable and will serve a suspension but may have some recourse to legal action against the club or doctor or whoever for providing him something outside that contract. If a club wants to introduce a new supplement or injection or horse vitamin they need to have it verified in the players contract, which the player manager can have checked by their own team to ensure it's legal.
Roarsome
Guest
There is precedence here, remember Warney served a ban for something his mother gave him. Also, on a community level. An analogy if you will. A man walk into a bar.......... orders a mocktail. RBT'd on the way home and is over the legal limit. Who is responsible? Obviously, we know the man is responsible for anything he drinks. The same applies to the players though, as The Sharks is a place of business, there is a legal obligation to protect your employees which is why staff have been stood down or let go. As always though, the public, club and players are on a need to know basis.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Well, "you don't understand" was a bit of a second choice. "Appear to be ignoring that" was an alternative. I am not sure, not being a lawyer, that other than taking legal action that the players can be looked after financially by the club/association. The issue is what would be deemed as receiving benefit from the sport? Look it is difficult, the reason it is so difficult because of the many many loopholes found and tried by doping cheats in the past. The cheats have shown themselves willing to find ways and means, so to try and stop all of the shenanigans one by one would be unwieldy. The result is essentially a blanket stance that leaves little doubt.
The Barry
Roar Guru
It's always good reading an article that starts "what you don't understand is..." Rabbitz I think most people understand this it's that like Brett and Oikee they think it's unfair. However I agree with you that fair or unfair won't come into it whne punishments start to be handed down. I think the players managers and agents will end up being involved in this and what supplements, vitamins, etc will be part of the standard playing contract. That way agents can verify with medical professionals or even ASADA if the list is clean and the clubs will be in breach of contract if they vary from the list. Players have ultimate accountability but they'll never have the understanding to be able to protect themselves from these situations. If the above is followed players may at least be protected financially while they serve suspensions.
oikee
Guest
That all sounds good on paper. But under these rules nobody should take any sustance given to them, even by a doctor, because how many times had we seen the Doctor not even know the substance was banned. In a perfect world all those rules would be good. But when you have sports scientists and Doctors along with health nuitrionists and even good old mum knows best, this ain't got any wheels , and you only have to look at the amount of time it takes to even catch these drug users. After the event. Armstrong, Marrion Jones, etc. They can either ban all supplements, because the trouble seems to be starting there, or pack up shop and go home. At the moment, this so-called serious world drug agencies are fishing, not really world class practices at all if you are trying to make deals with players by signing on the dotted line. Either charge them, take them all to court or pack your bags and go back to Russia. I have heard that the investigations wont be finalised for at the very least a month, (and that is just one club, Cronulla) because this professional orginisation has not got enough staff. Yeah right, real professional. I will wait for the final report. But the talk is it wont get all done until next year. ??? WTF. Let everyone understand, this is a investigation from 2011. What have they been doing, listening to phone taps. It seems very shallow to me, you either have evidence or you dont. I will say it again, this has government incompetence written all over it. A royal commission into this whole affair needs to happen, even if 6 clubs are charged, because the handling of this is not done in a professional manner, otherwise you would not have this speculation every day. Nobody has a clue what is happening, you have a club sacking staff. ? This is now a witch-hunt turned scapegoat turned every CEo for himself. No, dont try to tell me this organisation is professional, i dont believe a word of it. They like to think they are, that is about the truth of this matter.
Brett
Guest
That's ridiculous, just another example of Legislation gone mad. How can an athlete be held responsible without knowledge. The list of banned substances must be quite large, not to mention each one probably lists quantities at which it becomes a banned substance. You'd have to be a chemist to know what all of these are, and if a doctor (trained professional) tells you it's ok, or the manufacturer stuffs up and puts the wrong ingredients on the package, how the hell can you be held liable. I mean sure if the doctor says its ok to inject steroids you'll know somethings up, but half of these enhancers most people would never have heard of. ASADA is a joke!!! I'd be embarrassed to work there.