IOC to discuss WADA

May 26, 2009
460
0
0
Late April or early May the IOC will have a conference on the workings of WADA ! It will take place in Lausanne and comes about after this week's IOC executive meeting in London .

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_15881/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=tUO4kkN4

" Things have deteriorated into a war of words," ASOIF director Andrew Ryan told the AP on Friday. "Things have reached a low point. There is a real fear that if it goes any further, then the level of cooperation will go even lower. Let's take this opportunity and have a real look at it."

De Kepper said the conference will also address the issues of illegal betting, autonomy of sports bodies and the sports calendar.

Also to be discussed is the future leadership of WADA and the successor to current President John Fahey, whose six-year term expires at the end of 2013.
 
Jan 30, 2011
802
0
0
skippy said:
Also to be discussed is the future leadership of WADA and the successor to current President John Fahey, whose six-year term expires at the end of 2013.
If he has the administrative ability, I'd like to see Ashenden take the job.

Not only a talking head, but one with real conviction and expertise.

That might be dangerous to the entrenched heads of the IOC and other sports, so it's unlikely to happen (and 2 from the same country in succession is not normal for these positions either).
 
Evaluating and re-evaluating WADA's success and role is arguably critical for a viable anti-doping effort.

By contrast, the IOC and many ISFs do not have anything approaching transparency, let alone accountability.

If WADA is an accountability arm, then transparency is required.

What is concerning, though, is that this is being led by tennis while we are in the midst of the OP trial. Also concerning is the optics with respect to the UCI.

WADA is the only policing body in the international Olympic movement. Its independence is critical. That WADA should be receiving criticism because of its independent action is not a move to maintain accountability. It is a brazen attempt to muzzle them.

Travis Tygart proved highly adept when Lance, and Floyd before him, were targeting Congressional funding. Hopefully, WADA can continue its similar success when its mandate and existence are being threatened.

There was significant concern when professional athletes were being made eligible for Olympic competition. Of the various sports, there was greater controversy over professional tennis players than others at the time. I did not understand it then. Perhaps in the aftermath of OP, and of this direct assault on WADA, the reasons for the concern are becoming more visible.

Greg was right. About many things. In this case, that the sport is corrupt. The UCI is fully compromised. Restating what the Swiss courts outlined, the UCI is corrupt and run by clowns.

No WADA would mean that there would be no hope whatsoever that cycling can hope to be clean.

If we lose WADA, or if it becomes compromised, then what? Go backwards and kick professional athletes out of the Games?

Dave.
 
Ashenden has shown the bio-passport system to be as corrupt as having no system at all. Only, the mainstream media hasn't picked the story up.

The Summer sports have to be panicing. In the scheme of Summer sports, no one, not even the UCI cares that cycling is the problem sport. What would happen if Ashenden's discoveries were applied to Track and Field or Tennis?

Judging by the following quote, they are going to slash the WADA budget to shut them up.

IOC and sports federation officials have expressed irritation with recent public statements by Fahey. They have also said nearly $500 million a year is spent each year on doping controls with few athletes being caught in the tests.

Newsflash, as the Ashenden battle shows so clearly, it's the federations hiding their dopers from testing, not WADA that is the problem. Of course, the IOC and WADA knows all of this.

Dave,
The IOC cares that this has been dragging on in the public. Professional athletes has brought in way more money, so everything is good. You've got two things happening at once.

1. IOC chops WADA budget. Less testing.
2. International Federations have taken over the role of managing the process of selecting athletes to test. No testing for people the federations like.

All signs point to less testing.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
IOC discussing WADA :D

Now that is about as farcical as what's going on with the OP court case. If anything all sport should be discussing the IOC.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
This is comical

WADA was set up to be independent. The Feds did a terrible job policing themselves. Now they are crying about not being able to cover it up like they did in the past

Everyone hates the cops. Want to know who the bad guys are? They are the ones crying about WADA
 
Aug 18, 2012
1,171
0
0
Where does the WADA blow $500 million a year on doping controls come from?

It also says their budget a year is $26 million and 100% of that surely doesn't go on controls.

When I saw the 500 tests myth debunked on here it was broken down into those by USADA/ WADA and those by the UCI.

Seems like the $500 million a year is a spin and PR figure to discredit WADA.

Edit: Just read Dirtyworks post who basically says the same thing.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Race Radio said:
This is comical

WADA was set up to be independent. The Feds did a terrible job policing themselves. Now they are crying about not being able to cover it up like they did in the past

Everyone hates the cops. Want to know who the bad guys are? They are the ones crying about WADA
Take no joy at all in saying I thought this might happen.

Much as it excites people in here who are really into the subject of doping and anti-doping(which is most of us), a war of words between WADA and a sports fed, cycling or otherwise, was always, frankly, a stupid bl**dy move.

A lot of people laughed in here, understandably really, when word got out that McQuaid and HV were writing to sports feds and ioc members. I cringed at the time, because i thought (wasn't sure, but i thought) this might be coming...

very, very depressing for the future of anti-doping...
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
that article was a poorly researched and written collection of words. nothing more.

wada is not going anywhere. it's been ingrained in sports too deep now. and the ioc will not and can not wash anyone's laundry in public.

the ioc consists mainly of dull sporting politicians and professional bureaucrats. as such, it is part of their per-programmed functions to act as if they are monitoring its procreation's accountability and so on...

as any corporate entity in the same circumstances, they will discuss and smile in the morning, play gulf in the afternoon and finally issue a worthless statement of wada's achievements with 'areas for improvement'.

as to wada leadership and budget, of course it can change. why not ?

the important thing that everyone in ioc no doubt understands is that leaning too heavily on wada would undercut their own (bloated) image of 'uncompromising fighters for higher olympic ideals' :rolleyes:

same old..
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/15/drugs-wada-organised-crime

Drugs in sport: Wada says doping and organised crime 'too big to manage'
• Wada's David Howman wants new 'sports integrity unit'
• 'If you don't think the mafia is involved here, you're in fairyland'

And Howman says athletics can become "a new UCI"

According to Wada's figures, the number of adverse or atypical findings across sport is just under 2%. But according to a study of blood samples collected after the Daegu World Athletics Championships in 2011, estimates of the prevalence of blood doping averaged 14%. "That means that it's more than what people think, that's all you can say. I would put athletics in that bunch – as a potential new UCI. That's an area where we've got to be very attentive. The IAAF, to be fair, are aware of it. They've introduced a [biological] passport and we hope they'll continue with it."
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
WADA will likely be scapegoated by IOC also. Expect Fahey and Howman to come under enormous pressure to move on.

It's either going to become a bloody battle for the integrity of sport (depending on how the sports and social media cover the "cover up") or - as IOC is hoping - it will simply be a short term bad spell that will go away. Key there is no major doping controversy, especially not in football or other major sports, in the next 3-6 months. Contain the fall out to cycling and Australia...
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Tinman said:
WADA will likely be scapegoated by IOC also. Expect Fahey and Howman to come under enormous pressure to move on.

It's either going to become a bloody battle for the integrity of sport (depending on how the sports and social media cover the "cover up") or - as IOC is hoping - it will simply be a short term bad spell that will go away. Key there is no major doping controversy, especially not in football or other major sports, in the next 3-6 months. Contain the fall out to cycling and Australia...
That horse has left the barn in the US. The pressure to clean up MLBaseball no doubt will gain media attention as they try to qualify as an Olympic sport. It would be a major promotional score for MLB to be a part of the Olympics and I can't help but feel that they may lose a few more "stars" to make the point that they are cleaner and safer than, say; the NFL. Baseball is a certifiable international attraction.
That said, the effectiveness of policing drug use seems to be minimal as reporters keep breaking the stories on ARod and others rather than consistent results from actual testing. MLB did bust a bunch of minor leaguers and the other worldly homerun chases seem to have abated but that could be temporary.
The press will be the continued source for effective pressure on the IOC. It'll take some journalists willing to go out on a ledge.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
IOC seriously seems intent upon discrediting WADA.

In the article, IOC-member Francesco Ricci Bitti (president of the ASOIF) is portraying WADA as an aggressive, non-cooperative, and non-efficient body.

http://www.spiegel.de/sport/sonst/doping-ioc-beruft-wegen-kritik-an-der-wada-sonderkonferenz-ein-a-884082.html

ITF, UCI, IAAF, IOC, and FIFA clearly have a shared goal: to have as little doping stories as possible. Is this going to be a collective campaign against WADA? If so, WADA seems chanceless.

Anybody with a more positive view on this?
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
Francesco Ricci Bitti has a vested interest as they are in charge of the ITF which has minimal to no OOC and a rampant doping problem
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
exactly.
If he, Verbruggen, and, say, Blatter, are mobilizing forces against WADA, who's gonna stick up for WADA? Tygart? Ashenden? They'll be lonely voices in a desert.
The IOC's message to WADA seems clear: back off, stop digging up dirt, etc.

By campaigning against WADA, the IOC is also giving a discrete message to e.g. the Spanish court: "if you decide to shove Puerto under the carpet, by all means go ahead, we got you covered."
 
Aug 18, 2012
1,171
0
0
If Pistorius tests positive for steroids or they use the fact he was a user as part of his defense then it could have a huge impact on this meeting.
 
sniper said:
ITF, UCI, IAAF, IOC, and FIFA clearly have a shared goal: to have as little doping stories as possible. Is this going to be a collective campaign against WADA? If so, WADA seems chanceless.

Anybody with a more positive view on this?
Not me. I'm a pessimist when it comes to this issue though.

IMHO, they are going to slash WADA's budget from both sides, (IOC+Sports Federations = most of WADA Budget) claiming WADA isn't doing a good job. This is Armstrong-level scandalous.

Given the fact Ashenden's revelations haven't made it into mass media suggests the IOC and even the UCI!!! is still safe. In exchange for silence, sports journalists get access. But, this story is so big. IOC dope testing is, again, a complete farce.

We need Anne Gripper contribute to the story. The Kimmage defense fund needs to protect her by paying legal bills for breaking more news.
 
Briant_Gumble said:
If Pistorius tests positive for steroids or they use the fact he was a user as part of his defense then it could have a huge impact on this meeting.
That could be used against him just as easily. The story is always the same, "problem athlete" without ever mentioning the IOC/Sports Federations.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
We need Anne Gripper contribute to the story.
Agree about the media.

I am really not sure about Anne Gripper - I half suspect that she was part of the attempt to protect Armstrong et al.
 
Mrs John Murphy said:
Agree about the media.

I am really not sure about Anne Gripper - I half suspect that she was part of the attempt to protect Armstrong et al.
In order to keep the job, she very likely saw/read stuff that tipped her off to how rotten the system is. If she will take the risk now and use her prior inaction to get WADA the authority to open cases and test freely going forward, then I'm willing to forgive her past role.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
Agree about the media.

I am really not sure about Anne Gripper - I half suspect that she was part of the attempt to protect Armstrong et al.
I am not sure either - but here is something to consider, while she did leave for personal reasons, she also left pretty abruptly. Perhaps she did not want to be part of what was happening in LAs return.
Also, someone who was an ex employee of the UCI wanted to talk to UCIIC.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
She left march 2010 and has spoken of the pressure they were put under to allow Armstrong to ride the TDU

I wish that someone like NYVelocity were to do a long sit down interview with her. (As they have done with others).

Gripper is the key person IMO.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
She left march 2010 and has spoken of the pressure they were put under to allow Armstrong to ride the TDU

I wish that someone like NYVelocity were to do a long sit down interview with her. (As they have done with others).

Gripper is the key person IMO.
Well we have seen from Ashenden that the UCI will attempt to silence people discussing anything substantive. It would be very interesting to hear her story, but I don't see her doing a sit down with anyone.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
to her credit, and for what it's worth, Anne's comments on the doping revelations in australia are quite the opposite of how Pat and Hein used to 'welcome' doping revelations in cycling.

''There are pros and cons to the way it was done,'' she said. ''But I don't think it was the blackest day in Australian sport. I think it was an exceptionally bright day, for not so much the athletes but for all the coaches, sports scientists and trainers who chose to do the right thing.

''The fact their colleagues who don't do the right thing are being exposed was a really good watershed moment in Australian sport.''

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/process-demands-patience-antidoping-pioneer-20130214-2eg0e.html
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY