Veteran anti-doping campaigner Sandro Donati needs no introduction. He blew the lid on Italy's state-sponsored doping system in the 1980s. He helped get blood transfusions banned by the IOC. He was Francesco Conconi's nemesis. His 1990s doping dossier, initially deep-sixed by CONI, helped usher in the hematocrit rule.
Some believe that anti-doping is a war and that all is fair in love and war, if you have to resort to falsifying test results to catch a doper it's allowed given the number of times they cleared tests. Spiking tests is fair, the end justifies the means. Others, of course, deny that such things ever go on, deny that the authorities would ever try to do such things. But what if they do, what if in this case Shcwazer - and, in the land of guilt by association, Donati - is innocent? Is this the anti-doping system we really want? Is this an anti-doping system we can be proud of?
And he advised David Walsh against going after Lance Armstrong:"The abuse has spiralled out of control. In some of the races, they are now climbing hills at speeds they used to reach on the flat! And why? Because the majority are pumped to the gills with *** like EPO, HGH and testosterone. For the good of sport, it is imperative we act immediately to stamp this out."
First and foremost, though, Donati is a coach. And as a coach he has paid for being outspoken on the subject of doping. And - it would appear - he is still paying. The Sports Integrity Initiative yesterday carried a story about Italian race walker Alex Schwazer, who is currently being coached by Donati, claiming that someone in the IAAF spiked one of his samples, causing him to be provisionally suspended during the Rio Games. CAS have scheduled a hearing of the case. You can read SII's story here."Sandro told me something important: going after Lance Armstrong couldn't be what it was all about because the bigger picture was what mattered. Cycling was far more important than one competitor and if you pursue one and become too associated with that pursuit, that is not good."
Some believe that anti-doping is a war and that all is fair in love and war, if you have to resort to falsifying test results to catch a doper it's allowed given the number of times they cleared tests. Spiking tests is fair, the end justifies the means. Others, of course, deny that such things ever go on, deny that the authorities would ever try to do such things. But what if they do, what if in this case Shcwazer - and, in the land of guilt by association, Donati - is innocent? Is this the anti-doping system we really want? Is this an anti-doping system we can be proud of?