Tags:
Journalism of Courage
It’s a shining example of how to crack down on doping in sports — but one, going by history, that will never be followed in India. Despite the firm opposition of one of the world’s most powerful sporting clubs, the English football authorities won their case against Rio Ferdinand and saw him being handed an eight-month ban.
It’s important to note the characters affected: The national team, the champion club and the most expensive English footballer. The FA went all out, knowing it was the opportunity to set an example (and knowing that Ferdinand would miss playing for England in Euro 2004). When was the last time you saw that in Indian sport?
It’s not just United that the FA were standing up to; it was the community of footballers, including those who play for England, and a large number of influential journalists. Yet stand up to them, and stand by their decision, the FA — and FIFA — did.
Similarly, earlier this year, Shane Warne was banned for 12 months after testing positive for a banned diuretic just before the World Cup in South Africa.
Closer home, the Chinese have created a tough domestic system to net the guilty so that national humiliation will be avoided at the international stage.
In contrast, the anti-doping system in India exists only on paper and under the influence of powerful cliques, functioning on public funds but without so far a single prominent catch. The usual explanation for that trotted out by officials, when pressed for a quote, is that obviously top Indian sportsmen don’t do dope.
That is, of course, patently untrue, as the same officials will concede off the record. And as independent tests, conducted professionally, will reveal. Last year, three top Indian sportspersons were caught in international competitions: Weightlifters Madaswamy and Satheesha Rai at the Commonwealth Games and Sunita Rani at the Asian Games. Sunita was acquitted, but only because of a mistrial.
Just how serious an issue doping is considered in India can be seen from the fact that Sunita’s let-off was not followed up with any inquiry. Indeed, a few months later, her coach Renu Kohli was given the Dronacharya award.
Lest it be said that the Amateur Athletic Federation of India (AAFI), Sunita’s parent body, was acting in her defence, it should be mentioned that as long as she was under a cloud, no official came out in her support. Once the Salwan inquiry — set up to probe the issue — brought out discrepancies in the report of the Busan lab, the AAFI took the credit for getting back Sunita’s gold medal.
If the AAFI was at all interested in curbing doping, however, they would have launched an inquiry into the sudden death of Ajit Bhaduria, the champion discus-thrower who died of a ‘heart-attack’ at the age of 32 in September 2000. The death shocked the sports medicine fraternity, which was sceptical of any heart disease being the cause of death, and there was sufficient ground for the sports ministry and the AAFI to order an inquiry into the possibility of a link to anabolic steroids.
Or the death of international lifter Anil Sood death in 1984 from testicular cancer — with steroids, allegedly used in his playing days, being suspected as the main cause.
For want of finances, there isn’t much our sporting system can copy from those abroad. But determination and resolve cost little — and the price to pay for ignoring them is much more than we can afford.
