Can WADA, USADA and others handle a high case load?

[PotentialPro]

I watched the Conte interview. And I am not trolling here, trust me, just looking for opinions. If as he says track and field has over 50% doping, and we push that against many sports, with the cover ups and non prosecution, can WADA and others actually work that case load?

Imagine the pendulum on prosecution is swung one way, it certainly could swing further, and virtually nobody is accused or prosecuted for doping. You could say it is pretty far that way since there is maybe a dozen or so cases in cycling that we know about. What exactly happens if the pendulum swings the other way, and tons more cases start up?

The last question is can these bodies handle the defamation cases, and the charges they ruined someone's career? That is the inevitable aspect is being attacked when they fail to prove their case.

 

[TERMINATOR]

I watched the Conte interview. And I am not trolling here, trust me, just looking for opinions. If as he says track and field has over 50% doping, and we push that against many sports, with the cover ups and non prosecution, can WADA and others actually work that case load?

Imagine the pendulum on prosecution is swung one way, it certainly could swing further, and virtually nobody is accused or prosecuted for doping. You could say it is pretty far that way since there is maybe a dozen or so cases in cycling that we know about. What exactly happens if the pendulum swings the other way, and tons more cases start up?

The last question is can these bodies handle the defamation cases, and the charges they ruined someone's career? That is the inevitable aspect is being attacked when they fail to prove their case.

Most athletes do not contest their cases and go to CAS, so yes.

 

[TERMINATOR]

The last question is can these bodies handle the defamation cases, and the charges they ruined someone's career? That is the inevitable aspect is being attacked when they fail to prove their case.

USADA/WADA has never been sued for "defamation" in 10 years of existence and tens of thousands of tests worldwide. And just because USADA/WADA loses a case doesn't mean they defamed the athlete. Getting off on a technicality does not equate to defamation.

So yes, the bodies can handle the non-existent defamation cases that will never be filed in the next 10 years.

 

[Barrus]

Most athletes do not contest their cases and go to CAS, so yes.

I doubt it, if the case load would increase that substantially, even without appeals to CAS would need a large increase in the budget of these doping agencies, I doubt that they would be able to sustain it on their current budgets and resources

 

[PotentialPro]

From an USADA Press kit:

FUNDING
As an independent, non-governmental, nonprofit organization, USADA receives funding through a grant from the United States government. The agency also has a contractual agreement with the USOC for conducting an Olympic Anti-Doping Program, testing U.S. athletes and the adjudication process for doping violations. The 2009 budget for USADA is $13.3 million, with approximately 74% from the federal government and 26% from the USOC.


I dont think they could do much of anything. They claim to test nearly 8000 times in 2007 and 2008. So between admin costs, costs of tests, then legal representation, there isnt much room for anything at all. 2-3 strung out cases could take up all money that they have, not allowing much of any other work to be done.

In 2005 after over 5000 tests, only 22 were reported as positives.

I think from what I had seen 2010 was on track for catching less than 100 cases.

I wonder how many are getting swept under the rug, like Conte is alluding to?