BUDAPEST. The main topic of discussion at the World Championships in Budapest has been the incident from Thursday evening Tobi Amusan.
The Athletics Integrity Unit, the independent anti-doping body of the International Association of Athletics Federations, suspended Amusan from competition a month ago. According to the AIU, doping testers had failed to reach the Nigerian athlete three times during the year.
According to the rules, an athlete is basically banned from competition for two years if he misses three doping tests.
On Thursday evening, the case took a new turn. AIU announced that the dominant ME woman in the 100-meter hurdles is still free to compete. There has been no other official information about the decision other than the fact that AIU’s own disciplinary committee ended up releasing Amusan with a majority decision.
The AIU may also take the case to the International Court of Appeal for Sport, CAS.
However, a spokesperson for the Nigerian team confirmed to Urheilu on Friday that Amusan is on his way from Paris to Budapest.
How many tests done?
It is not the first time that athletics is in a situation where, just before the start of the Games, the participation of individual star athletes is at stake due to doping suspicions.
The numbers of doping tests are not public information, with one exception.
In the United States, the country’s anti-doping agency, Usada, has published the annual test numbers of athletes since 2013. In addition, Usada breaks down the numbers into three-month chunks: January-March, April-June, and so on.
For example, about Amusan’s American competitors performing in Budapest Nia Ali has given Usada six since last October, Kendra Harrison four and Masai Russell three doping samples. These are only tests performed by USADA, on top of which AIU has been able to perform its own tests.
In addition, Ali, who competed hard in Europe, has probably given several doping tests to the anti-doping office of each organizing country in connection with the games.
Green light for the US model
Perhaps. Likely. Probably.
Why is transparency conspicuous by its absence in anti-doping activities when the conversation turns to the number of doping tests?
Athletes’ health information is naturally a matter of privacy protection, but the test numbers do not contain personally aggravating information – at least in the opinion of Usada.
Should the rest of the world follow the United States’ lead?
When Urheilu asked five Finnish athletics influencers about it, they all gave the green light to the publication of doping test numbers.
– Yes, openness is evident from the US model. I think it’s a working practice, Sports Federation GM Jani Tanskanen said to Urheilu at the Kaleva Games.
Director of coaching and training at SUL Jarkko Finni reminded that athletes cannot influence the number of tests performed on them.
– It must be remembered that the number of tests does not correlate with suspicions. If athlete X has been tested 60 times and athlete Y four times, it must also not be the case that doubts about purity arise because Y has not been tested as much as the others.
– However, I am in favor of information on the number of tests being available, Finni said.
Member of the board of the International Athletics Federation Antti Pihlakoski said that he supports the American model of making tests public. However, he estimates that publishing the tests would face legislative obstacles in many countries.
The last Finn to win a World Cup medal Tero Pitkämäki told Urheilull also voted in favor of publishing the test numbers.
– Testing must be transparent. I definitely support it, Pitkämäki messaged and told about his own test numbers.
Managed numerous medalists in prize competitions Jukka Härkönen was stronger in his position than Pitkämäki. He is in favor of transparency, but emphasizes that unfinished cases should under no circumstances be handled as has been done in the case of Amusan.
– Testing must definitely be an open endeavor. If unfinished cases are published every once in a while, as in the case of Amusan, the rest of the test activity must also be transparent.
It’s as open as hell as being told that an athlete has three missed tests, but then the decision is overturned, says Härkönen, referring to the handling of the Amusan case.
Suek and the chairman of WA on different lines
In Finland, the Finnish sports ethics center Suek is responsible for anti-doping work. Its general secretary Teemu Japisson did not warm to the idea of making test numbers public.
Japisson justified Suek’s position with the tactical dimension and the athletes’ privacy protection.
– We don’t want to tell you how we allocate tests during the year. One difference compared to Usada is that Usada only tests top athletes, while in Finland the testing is more extensive.
– Usada’s practice says that you can act in another way in the rules of the World Anti-Doping Agency. All the people you listed are very smart people. If they are asked if the test numbers can be made public, of course they can spontaneously say that they can. But I’m not sure if they’ve thought about all the implications of publishing, Japisson said.
Japisson received support for his vision from the president of the International Association of Athletics Federations, World Athletics From Sebastian Coe. On Thursday, Urheilu asked Coe for his personal opinion on whether, for example, the Athletics Integrity Unit should follow USADA’s example and publish the number of tests per athlete.
– I’m not sure if the publication of test numbers necessarily serves athletes, let alone those who follow athletics. I am satisfied that doping testing is no longer equal to the number of tests performed.
– We lived far too long in a time when it was considered great that 30,000 tests were done in athletics. But if 90 percent of them were rubbish and not targeted, the number of tests becomes meaningless, Coe said at an international press conference in Budapest’s World Cup arena.
Like Japisson, Coe emphasized the protection of athletes’ privacy.
– Privacy is an important issue in a world where privacy is on the verge of disappearing in many places. That’s why I’m satisfied with the current operating model.