Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The ‘outing’ of Tejbir Singh, the first-ever dope case in Indian hockey, has raised another, equally dangerous trend: the art of covering-up. Rather than come clean and place the facts on the table, Indian hockey officials have gone into denial — which only raises the chances of more such cases cropping up.
The IHF has, in a unique feat of ball-juggling, treated the case in two very different ways: owning up to it and denying. Withdrawing Tejbir from the Madrid squad — on the advice of the Sports Authority of India, which conducted the test — was a tacit admission of guilt, lest Tejbir test positive in the tournament random doping system.
Tejbir, a forward in the India senior team, was sent back from the Olympic qualifiers in Madrid in early March. He confirmed today that he had tested positive in a dope test conducted before the team left India. Others tested at the time were Arjun Halappa, Ignace Tirkey and Bimal Lakra.
If the ‘B’ sample test also confirms the presence of the banned drug, Tejbir could earn the dubious distinction of being the first Indian hockey player to test positive for a banned drug.
The International Hockey Federation’s anti-doping rules say players testing positive for a steroid are liable to be suspended for upto two years. Rules also require the national federations to forward any positive test to the game’s world governing body for action.
The normal procedure is for the dope testing laboratory to submit the test report — without decoding the name of the offending athlete — to the SAI Executive Director (Teams), in this case former India captain MP Ganesh.
The ED then informs the federation concerned and they have to inform the player of the action being taken against him: punishment or, if he questions the result, a test of his B sample.
Why the IHF can have its cake and eat it too is because of one important loophole in the whole process: the SAI dope testing laboratory in Delhi is not internationally recognised. So the FIH will not recognise the fact that Tejbir has tested positive, which is why the IHF doesn’t need to report it.
Yet the lab acts as an alarm, warning officials that their wards are tainted and need to be cleaned up.
Tejbir told PTI he’d been administered an injection by a doctor in Amritsar for an injury he’d sustained during the Nehru Hockey tournament, a month before the Olympic qualifiers and it could be responsible for his positive test.
The news has come out more than two months after the test, raising speculation that the IHF may have tried to hush up things in the Olympic year. At the very least, it is guilty of reacting to the reports in a confused and contradictory manner.
Consider the following:
• When Tejbir was sent home from Madrid, coach Rajinder Singh’s explanation was that he’d suffered a hamstring injury. However, none of Tejbir’s teammates were aware of it — one had told this reporter that they weren’t even informed that Tejbir was being sent home. ‘‘We came to know only on the day he was leaving the hotel to catch his flight.’’
•When contacted by PTI today, IHF president KPS Gill said he was not aware about any player testing positive. ‘‘I have not been in Delhi for a long time and I am not aware of such a development. We will look into the matter’’, Gill is quoted by PTI as saying.
However, Gill knew at least three weeks ago, when this reporter contacted him in late March after hearing of Tejbir’s case. His response was confusing. First he said the IHF had not received any letter from SAI (which carries out dope tests) regarding Tejbir. Then Gill changed tack: ‘‘Sometimes the body level goes up and it shows positive. If need be we will get it tested again.’’
•IHF secretary-general K Jothikumaran less elusive. While he had, three weeks ago, said he knew nothing about the case (‘‘Ask Rajinder, he is the chief coach’’), he was clear today: he simply said he would ‘‘not react’’.
Tejbir is the one consistent strain in this whole sorry issue: he has maintained, for the past month, that he has not been informed about the test report by either the IHF or SAI.
What should the IHF do now? Owned up to the test and conduct an internal inquiry to find out how widespread is drug usage among hockey players. What is it likely to do? Dig its head deeper into the sand.
