Athletics rocked by doping storm
UK ANTI-DOPING have launched an astonishing attack on crisis-hit UK Athletics, effectively accusing the governing body of not abiding by antidoping rules because of their failure to share information relating to Mo Farah’s former coach Alberto Salazar in 2015.
It is unprecedented for the UK’s antidoping body to be so critical of such a main-stream governing body and it represents a new nadir for UKA, beset by criticism over its use of Salazar — who is now banned from the sport for doping offences — its thyroid screening programme and the botched appointment of a new chief executive.
UKAD have taken the extraordinary step of reminding UKA ‘that they are bound by the National Anti-Doping Policy’. Any federation in breach of the national anti-doping policy would be ineligible for UK Sport funding.
UKAD’s intervention came on the back of Friday’s release of a 130-page independent report into how UKA handled their response to damning allegations against Salazar in a BBC Panorama programme broadcast in 2015.
UKAD have been angered by the publication within that report of an executive summary of the review undertaken in 2015 by a three-strong UKA performance oversight committee, which was working to determine if Farah could continue training under Salazar.
UKAD’s irritation stems from their claim that they have repeatedly asked, without success, for full disclosure of the review and its supporting documents, which include 38 interviews and might shine a brighter light on what was going on at the now defunct Nike Oregon Project, where Farah trained between 2011 and 2017. It appears that UKAD want to review the data to see if any anti-doping violations took place.
There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on behalf of Farah.
UKAD chief executive Nicole Sapstead said yesterday: ‘Following the release of UK Athletics’ independent report, we note that UK Athletics has taken the decision to publish the executive summary of the original internal review that was conducted in 2015 by UKA’s Performance Oversight Committee.
‘We have repeatedly requested that UK Athletics share this POC review with us in its entirety as there could be information included that is of interest to us.
‘As the John Mehrzad QC independent review states only an edited PowerPoint summary of this report has been shown to us. We remind UKA that they are bound by the National Anti-Doping Policy.
‘We now call again on UKA to hand over this review in full, including the associated supporting reports and documents.’
Salazar was banned for four years for anti-doping violations last October and the past association continues to cast a serious shadow over UKA, who followed their review in 2015 with an announcement that they had ‘no concern’ about Farah working with the coach.
UKA insisted that they had been in constant contact with UKAD and that UKAD only requested the full report last month. UKA said: ‘Any implication by anyone that UKA is being obstructive in this matter or in any way failing in its duties, is wholly wrong and inaccurate.
‘As recently as March 20 at 14:30 UKA’s lawyers received correspondence from UKAD’s in-house legal team setting out a framework and reassurances of confidentiality to enable UKA to share documents containing sensitive information within the 2015 POC review, which UKA have been advised needs specific consents. This was in response to a letter dated 3 March 2020 from UKA lawyers to UKAD.
‘UKA and UKAD have been addressing this cooperatively, to enable access to relevant documents in compliance with legal duties.
‘Today’s release was not mentioned in UKAD’s comprehensive letter of the previous day, nor were UKA informed by UKAD before being notified by journalists this afternoon that a release had been circulated under embargo.
‘No reason was received from UKAD as to why there had been a change from 1430 yesterday to less than 24 hours later, or what that was.’
The review published on Friday has detailed the divide within the organisation in the aftermath of Panorama’s 2015 allegations about practises at the Nike Oregon Project (NOP).
One passage discussed how any desire to sever ties with Salazar was opposed by Neil Black, who left his role as performance director after Salazar’s verdict in October, and Barry Fudge, who remains as the UKA head of endurance.
The report read: ‘Black said that he had not seen and was not aware of any wrongdoing concerning the NOP and Farah.
‘He also greatly admired Salazar and had not personally seen any evidence to support the allegations levelled by Panorama. Indeed, so strongly did Black and Fudge feel about the issue, that they indicated that their positions would be “untenable” if there was a knee-jerk severing of the relationship with Salazar.’