Brianna Rollins, the Olympic gold medalist in the 100 meter hurdles, was handed a one-year doping suspension the other day. Here's the kicker, though. Rollins wasn't suspended for actually doing. Both the IAAF and USADA acknowledged this during her appeal. But she was suspended anyway, albeit for only one year instead of two. For missing three doping tests.
Before I get started, let me be really clear about something. This isn't like the drug test famously missed by Greek athletes Katerina Thanou and Kostas Kenteris right before the Athens Olympics. They intentionally missed a test (that they were almost certainly going to fail), then made up a very elaborate story about a motorcycle accident that nobody bought as their "explanation."
Rollins has admitted her mistake and accepted the suspension, which means she'll miss this summer's World Championships. She's also had her results voided since September 27 (the date of her last missed test), which is somewhat irrevelant, seeing as she hasn't competed since the Olympic final. And she'll also keep her gold medal from Rio.
She was suspended for violating the so-called "whereabouts" rule. Rollins missed one test in April and two a week apart in September. The first one was because she was traveling to a meet. She said she was going to be in California, but was on her way to Iowa for the Drake Relays. She was also traveling when she had her second and third missed tests. For the first one, she was on her way to the White House to meet President Obama. The other was because she was on her way to her hometown for "Brianna Rollins Day."
Is it just me, or do these "violations" sound incredibly dumb? She wasn't trying to avoid the testers. Any reasonable person can see that. Rollins admitted her negligence and misunderstanding of the process in her appeal. She assumed that her entry for the Drake Relays (which obviously required her traveling to Iowa) superseded her previous whereabouts entry. It did not. She had to go in and manually update it.
I'm not gonna make an excuse for her on the "Brianna Rollins Day" thing, but the White House one is totally ridiculous. The USOC and USADA obviously knew about that event was taking place. And if all Olympic gold medalists from Rio were being honored, why wouldn't she be there? In that situation, it shouldn't be incumbent upon the athlete to tell an organization that they aren't going to be at home because they'll be at that organization's event instead.
My real problem here is the whole whereabouts rule in the first place. The USADA insists that regular out-of-competition is the only way to ensure clean sport (although, that's always the case, just check out Russia). As a result, they require all athletes in the drug testing system to provide a one-hour window each day when they'll be available for a drug test. If they're traveling, they have to report it. If they have a change of plans, they need to let them know. That's where Brianna Rollins got herself into trouble.
But the fact that she's now going to be labeled as a "drug cheat" like so many others who actually are is really unsettling. Especially because the reason she was suspended is so stupid. I get it. A missed test equals a positive test, and three missed tests in the same 12-month period results in a suspension. The rules are the rules, and the rules are pretty clear. But these particular rules seem particularly invasive.
It seems like such a huge invasion of privacy that athletes need to report where they're going to be every day, just so drug-testers (aka "Big Brother") can check up on them. I forget who it was, but there was a female athlete a few years ago who told a story about when she was at a nice, fancy event, then had to go find a bathroom just so she could provide the tester with a sample then and there. And I've really got a problem with that.
The whole idea that athletes need to make themselves available anytime anywhere for a random drug test must be very uncomfortable. It comes with the territory, so they know what they're signing up for, but they should still be allowed to live their lives. I don't have to tell people where I'm going to be 24-7. Frankly, the only people that should have to are those who've been ordered to by a judge.
Random drug testing is important. I'm not denying that. And the randomness is an equally important part of the process. If the athletes get too much notice, that gives the dirty ones a chance to try and find a way to beat it, which we certainly don't want. But there needs to be a better solution than the current system, if only to prevent situations like what happened to Brianna Rollins from happening again.
So what is that solution? Maybe you do it the way the NCAA does. They get a few hours' "notice" and need to provide a sample by whatever time. It's then incumbent on the athlete to figure out where they can do it that's accredited within that time frame. If they don't do it or don't get it done in time, it counts as a positive.
That way is fair for everyone, and it still puts the burden on the athlete. We all want clean sport. But we should also want a sport where the people getting suspended for doping are the ones that are actually doping. Not those who we know aren't. Because there's a big difference between missing a test and failing one.
No comments:
Post a Comment