DOPING IN SPORT

Created and Presented by Timothy von Behren

DOPING: using a substance or
method which is potentially harmful to
an athletes health and/or capable of
enhancing performance
The WADA was created in 1999
The WADC was created in 2004
Revised in 2009
Articles 2 and 10 most relevant to doping cases

Purpose:
1. Make (-) outweigh (+) to discourage future doping
2. Preserve fundamental right of athlete to participate in doping-
free sport (contract law)
3. Make life for professional athletes suck (ergo the issue)
ARTICLE 2: Anti-Doping Rule Violations
Article 2.1 The presence of Prohibited Substance or its
Metabolites or Markers in an Athletes bodily Specimen

Article 2.2 Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance

or a Prohibited Method

Article 2.3 hiding from the Doping Control official

Article 2.4 Violation of requirement to be available for Out-of-

Competition Testing

Article 2.5 Tampering with the Specimen is a VERY BAD IDEA!!

ARTICLE 10: Sanctions On Individuals
Article 10.7 Disqualification of Results in
Competitions Subsequent to Sample Collection
Medals, points, and prizes

Article 10.8 Commencement of Ineligibility Period

Not necessarily date of sample collection!!

Article 10.9 Status During Ineligibility

4-year special rule
Other KEY Players
International Olympic Committee (IOC)
Supreme authority and leader of fight against doping

Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

Legally decides all Olympic related disputes, including doping
cases
Lose precedent due to jurisprudence evolution
Why?
The Physicians Fault: A Truly
Exceptional Circumstance?
At any rate other than in the most exceptional cases, for
the purposes of determining whether a no-fault defense
succeeds, the fault of an advisor such as a physician
must be attributed to the player even if the player is not
personally at fault: otherwise the fight against doping in
sport would be seriously undermined.

SOURCE: Niggli, O., & Sieveking, J. (2006). Selected Case Law

Rendered Under the World Anti-Doping Code. Jusletter, 1-11.
 Player v. ITF
PROBLEMS
1. Not communicating with physician
2. Physician not specialized in sports medicine
3. Failure to report current medications at time of test

OUTCOMES
1. Found Negligent barred from Article 10.5 (COMING SOON!!)
2. 2-year suspension
3. Forfeiture of medals, points, and prizes (Article 10.7)

SOURCE: Player v. International Tennis Federation, 1488 A. (CAS 2008).

 Specified Substances: Applicability
Prohibited List
Ingest drugs on list be sanctioned
Less severe sanctions for substances covered under Article 10.3

How can athletes benefit from reduced sanctions under Article

10.3?
1 Substance must be specified within Prohibited List
2 Athlete must show that there was no intent to increase
performance (BURDEN ON ATHLETE!!)
3 Athlete must demonstrate how substance entered system

SANCTIONS ineligibility periods CASE SCENARIO

ARTICLE 1st Violation 2nd Violation 3rd Violation

Article 10.2 2 years lifetime
Article 10.3 0 to 1 years 2 years lifetime
 The Proportionality Principle
circumstances that are truly exceptional ONLY

Thank you Articles 10.5.1 and I suppose 10.5.2 EX:

1. No Fault or Negligence 2-year ineligibility GONE

(Requires Duty of Utmost Caution)

2. No Significant Fault or Negligence 2-year ineligibility

reduced to 1 year
3. Negligence Tough. Luck.

Will my age or professional situation qualify me to use Article10.5?

REVIEW: If I sustain a gunshot wound and am prescribed

medication while hospitalized, does Article 10.5.1 or 10.5.2 apply if
I test positive for a drug on the Prohibited Substances List?
 Thompson v. USADA
PROBLEM:
Failure to comply to USADA Whereabouts Policy (Article 2.4)
Must be a nation testing pool athlete
Must violate 3 times within 18 months
CONGRATUATIONS Thompson

OUTCOME:
Minimum 1-year suspension under Article 10.3.3
Now called Article 10.4.3 because suspension can be eliminated completely

Forfeiture of all medals, points, and prizes (Article 10.7)

SOURCE: Thompson v. United States Anti-Doping Agency, 12 JENF. (AAA 2012).

 The Whereabouts Controversy
2009 WADC update requires
professional athletes to provide
exact whereabouts 1 hour per
day, 7 days per week
Must be submitted 3 months in advance
Earliest time availability moved from 5:00
AM to 6:00 AM
Bose, M. (2009, February 19). BBC Sport: Athletes air issues over testing.
Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/front_page/7892590.stm
 The Case of
Cannabis
15 ng/ml LIMIT (scientifically established)
Recreational use v. performance enhancement

Marijuana as an ergolytic drug

1. Increased HR + decreased SV = reduced max performance
2. Respiratory tract infection + bronchitis + lung cancer = less O2 for
performance
Marijuana as an ergogenic drug
1. Euphoric effect
2. Anxiety reduction during performance

SOURCE: University of Washington Alcohol & Drug Abuse Institute

 FINAL Comments
Suspected athletes have unsuccessfully argued that the
sealed containers used to store and transport doping
samples could be opened undetectably
Up to this point, convincing contrary evidence has consistently been
presented in answer to these claims

Should WADA concern itself less with whether or not an

athlete exercised his/her duty of utmost caution and
more with whether or not an athlete used prohibited
substances intentionally or not?

Has the individual freedom of athletes been compromised

too much to promote the right of all professional athletes
to participate in doping-free sport?
 Works Cited
Bose, M. (2009, February 19). BBC Sport: Athletes air issues over testing. Retrieved
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/front_page/7892590. stm

Czarnota, P. A. (2012). The World Anti-Doping Code, the Athletes Duty of Utmost
Caution, and the Elimination of Cheating. Marquette Sports Law Review, 23, 45-73.

McLaren, R. H. (2006). CAS Doping Jurisprudence: What Can We Learn, International

Sports Law Review, 1, 4-22.

Niggli, O., & Sieveking, J. (2006). Selected Case Law Rendered Under the World Anti-
Doping Code. Jusletter, 1-11.

Player v. International Tennis Federation, 1488 A. (CAS 2008).

Thompson v. United States Anti-Doping Agency, 12 JENF. (AAA 2012).

World Anti-Doping Association, (2010). WADA rules for international federations:

Models of best practice (Version 5.0) World Anti-Doping Association.