Pubdate: 27 Nov, 1999
Source: Guardian Weekly, The (UK)
Copyright: Guardian Publications 1999
Contact:  75 Farringdon Road London U.K EC1M 3HQ
Fax: 44-171-242-0985
Website: http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/GWeekly/
Author: Duncan Mackay

MOORCROFT SET TO THROW IN TOWEL ON DRUG CASES

David Moorcroft, the chief executive of UK Athletics, has warned that the 
sport in Britain may soon not be able to afford to prosecute positive drugs 
tests as a result of the costs incurred in this year's high-profile cases 
involving Linford Christie and Dougie Walker.

Moorcroft fears that if UK Athletics continues to haemorrhage funds in the 
manner it has this year then it will go the way of its predecessor, the 
British Athletic Federation, which was forced into administration in 1997 
with debts of nearly pounds 2m mainly caused by the legal costs involved in 
the Diane Modahl affair.

"Earlier this year we set a ceiling on what we could afford to spend on 
doping issues and we've exceeded it already," said Moorcroft. "We are not 
insolvent yet but unless we keep a lid on our expenditure we may well reach 
that position. We will make it through this year but part of the reason for 
that is because we are not investing in things we would like to, such as 
development. An option we have in the future is to say we can no longer 
afford to deal with these issues and say to the International Amateur 
Athletic Federation that, reluctantly, we are unable to do anything.

"But even if we did decide to pass doping cases to the IAAF, we've still to 
deal with the current issues which could go on for years. It illustrates 
the almost impossible position governing bodies are in when they are 
dealing with doping."

British athletics has been hit by a spate of positive drug tests during the 
past 12 months. Yet the fact that UK Athletics has cleared Walker, Christie 
and Gary Cadogan of deliberately ingesting the anabolic steroid nandrolone 
has not saved them from the threat of potentially crippling costs.

The decision by the IAAF to refer all cases to arbitration means UK 
Athletics could soon be facing a bill in the region of pounds 500,000 after 
the world governing body last week agreed to a "losing-party-pays" system. 
Currently, the IAAF pays all costs when a dispute with a national body is 
referred to arbitration but in the future the loser is to bear the costs, 
often in excess of pounds 150,000 for each case.

"It's probably quite an effective way of protecting their system," said 
Moorcroft. "Even if people are innocent they will figure they cannot afford 
to run the risk of not winning."

Moorcroft remains convinced that the verdicts clearing Walker, Christie and 
Cadogan were correct but he does not believe the IAAF will endorse the 
decision to clear them. The arbitration panel, hand picked by the IAAF, is 
notorious for its hard-line stance, only once finding in the athlete's favour.

"The IAAF is very concerned about protecting its system," said Moorcroft. 
"If UK Athletics' primary concern was to protect the system then we would 
have put disciplinary panels in place to ensure they came back with guilty 
verdicts.

"That is probably the best way of protecting the system but not necessarily 
the right way. In the doping system one of the weaknesses is that somebody 
being cleared prejudices the whole structure."

This has been the worst year in the history of British athletics for drug 
scandals. In addition to the three who have tested positive for nandrolone, 
there are three other cases involving British internationals.

Carl Myerscough, the shot-putter who tested positive for a cocktail of 
banned drugs, faced a disciplinary panel yesterday and a decision is 
expected early next week; Paul Edwards, also shot-putter, is still 
contesting a positive test from 1997; and an unnamed athlete is under the 
threat of a two-year ban after testing positive for the anabolic steroid 
stanolozol earlier this season.

The fact that UK Athletics still has to hand out a ban to anyone has led to 
suggestions in the corridors of power in Monte Carlo that Britain has gone 
soft on drugs. It is an accusation rejected by Moorcroft. "In being one of 
the relatively few countries who do rigorous out-of-competition testing we 
are showing we are serious," he said. "British athletes can be tested 
anywhere abroad. There are only nine countries in the IAAF who do 
out-of-competition testing so you could say there are another 200 who are 
soft on drugs."

Moorcroft will have to defend his record this weekend when more than 300 
officials from clubs across Britain will gather in Manchester for the first 
ever annual UK Athletics Congress. How he deals with the doping issue over 
the next 12 months will determine whether the congress is staged again next 
year.

- ---
MAP posted-by: Thunder