The Dwain Chambers Saga

Heading into the London Olympics, one of the great sagas revolved around British sprinter Dwain Chambers.  Chambers is one of the host nation's best track & field athletes.  He has the second-fastest time ever for a British man in the 100 meters.  He won a silver in the event at the 1999 World Championships and gold in the 60 meters at the 2010 World Indoor Championships. 

Even though he's 34, Chambers would be a legitimate medal contender in both the 100 and 4x100 relay in London.  Except for one slight problem.  He's not eligible for the British Olympic team.  The reason?  A two-year drug suspension he served from 2003-05 that caused him to miss the Athens Olympics.  Under British Olympic Association rules, any athlete who's been suspended for a doping violation is banned from the Olympics for life. 

Chambers isn't the only athlete who's been effected by this rule, but he's the only one who was smart enough to challenge it.  It's a good thing he did.  Because he won.  The Court of Arbitration for Sport announced its ruling on the Dwain Chambers case today.  They basically said that the BOA bylaw isn't compliant with World Anti-Doping Agency code and, therefore, cannot be enforced.  Dwain Chambers is free to compete in London.

The Chambers ruling is similar to the decision the CAS reached in October regarding American sprinter LaShawn Merritt (among others).  In that case, Merritt (more specifically, the USOC) challenged an IOC rule that banned any athlete that received a doping suspension of six months or longer from the next Games.  In both cases, the CAS decision said basically the same thing.  It's not an eligibility issue.  It's a disciplinary saction.  And in these cases, it's double jeopardy.  Athletes were being punished a second time for the same offense.

I agree with the CAS decisions.  If an athlete misses an Olympics because they're in the midst of serving a doping suspension, it's their own fault.  But once that ban is served, that should be the end of it.  You shouldn't have to keep paying for the same mistake over and over again.  And that's exactly what these Olympic bans were doing.  In my opinion, if you're eligible for competition, it should be without restrictions.  Past transgressions should be irrelevant.  Yes, the Olympics are the most important competition in the world.  All the more reason why they should be there.  If they qualify for the Olympics, don't they deserve the opportunity to prove they're the best?

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for doping suspensions. If you do the crime, you've gotta do the time. If you do it again, you have to pay the consequences. Even if that means a lifetime ban. Doping is serious and it needs to be taken seriously. Especially when it comes to the Olympics, the greatest event in all of sports.

But not every doping offense is the same.  Some athletes are out there deliberately trying to cheat.  Others aren't.  They might've failed a drug test for any number of reasons.  Back in 2000, Andreea Raducan received a ban and was stripped of her gold medal in the gymnastics all-around because her coach gave her an over-the-counter cold medicine that just happened to be on the list of banned substances (and isn't anymore).  Was she trying to cheat?  Absolutely not!  If she were British, Raducan would be subject to a lifetime Olympic ban because of that "offense."  And in that hypothetical situation, the punishment certainly wouldn't fit the crime.  It would be way too harsh. 

While I get what the BOA was trying to do, there wouldn't be any leeway.  Under the now-overturned rule, the athlete who received a six-month ban for inadvertently taking something banned would've received the same penalty as someone who was banned two years for deliberately cheating.  You can't tell me that's just.

As it is, Dwain Chambers is eligible for the 2012 Olympics.  But that doesn't mean the British team has to choose him.  Maybe that's the solution here.  Just because an athlete's allowed to compete in the Olympics doesn't mean they automatically get to.  First they have to qualify.  Then they have to be selected. 

Dwain Chambers did his crime.  He also served his punishment.  He deserves the chance to represent the host country at the London Games as much as any other British athlete.  If he doesn't make the team, so be it.  If he does, think about the story of redemption it could be.  All Dwain Chambers wanted was that chance.  Forgive me for saying so, but I think he deserves it.