Should he stay or should he go?
After all the hoo-ha about whether he could compete in the World Indoor Championships a while ago, there’s now even more hoo-ha about whether Dwain Chambers should be able to compete in the Olympics.
It comes down to a British Olympic Committee (BOC) rule that anyone who has been banned from sport for taking drugs cannot compete for the UK in the Olympics. It’s a rule that’s been in place since the early 90’s and was apparently introduced with the full backing of athletes (although possibly without the full backing of legality). Dwain Chambers was fully aware of this rule before he committed his offence.
The problem is that both the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) say that when an athlete has served his ban, he can compete in all competitions. Of course, the BOC were hoping that Chambers would not meet their qualifying criteria so there would be no problem. Trouble is, he ran rings round everyone else and qualified easily.
Pretty much everyone in UK sport seems to be against Chambers competing because of his past record. But he served his ban and he’s come back better than ever and is beating everyone. If you’re not going to allow athletes to serve their time and rehabilitate, then why not just ban them for life? No chance of parole.
To my mind, the Olympics are run by the IOC so their rules should apply. That means that Chambers can run. Whether the BOC rule is legal or not is a question that will be argued back and forth for quite some time to come; in the meantime we don’t have so many great athletes that we can afford to put barriers in place to stop them competing.
The state of UK Athletics
Dwain Chambers was found guilty of using performance enhancing substances and was given a two year ban from athletic competition. Having now served his ban, he’s re-entered competition (his American football career having failed due to a change in the NFA) and has been selected for the World Indoor Championships.
There has been much said about this; people like Seb Coe and Kelly Holmes saying that he should not be allowed to compete, others like John Regis saying that he’s done his time, whilst UK Athletics themselves have stated that they’ve reluctantly allowed him back into the team.
But why all this controversy? He was given a two-year ban. He served that ban. He’s now back in competition, he’s not testing positive for any banned substances and has professed that he is clean and regrets what happened. So why shouldn’t he come back? The attitude of UK Athletics is what stinks though; they’ve basically said they were forced to take him back. Sorry, but he met all the criteria for selection - open and shut case.
My message to the selectors is this: if you don’t want people competing after being banned, then ban them for life so that they have no hope of rehabilitation or any chance to redeem themselves. If you’re not going to ban them for life, but you don’t want to be in a position where you might have to select them for the team, then change your selection criteria. Until that time, Dwain Chambers is one of the best athletes this country has ever produced and is one of our best hopes for medals.
Wolfs Stuff
Wolfs Helpers
-
