Justin Gatlin was the Olympic Champion, World Champion and world record-holder at 100m and he was not spared.
Yes, but he wasn't at the level of Armstrong, King Carl, or Bolt. Interestingly:
Armstrong was popped but only after his retirement, although he already tested positive in 1999;
King Carl had - by his own admission - at least three positive tests covered up;
and Bolt was part of the Jamaican sprinter team during their clenbuterol scandal - which was also kept silent initially, and handled against the "regular protocols":
The report uncovered that the International Olympic Committee and the World Anti-Doping Agency failed to follow their regular protocols after finding the banned steroid clenbuterol in several samples provided by Jamaican athletes, including “the Caribbean island's male sprinters,” who competed in the 2008 Olympics
However, ARD’s investigation (video below) disputed the suggestion that the Jamaican positives were caused by contaminated meat due to preparations by both the IOC and the Jamaican team. Ángel Heredia, a former discus thrower and developer of performance-enhancing drugs who now runs an athlete nutrition and conditioning company, told reporters that he was “a hundred percent” sure that Jamaican male sprinters had used clenbuterol at Beijing 2008, as Jamaican coaches had asked him how to use it.
I would argue that the era prior to the creation of independent anti doping agencies was very different and silent bans or quiet punishments very much did take place.
That is a bygone era. To illustrate how different it was in that day, Regina Jacobs tested positive at the American trials in 1995 and then quietly withdrew from the world championships, citing illness. Eleven years on, Gatlin, a massively more notable figure than Jacobs ever was, returned a positive test at the Kansas Relays, for which he was properly sanctioned.
As for your citation of clenbuterol in Jamaica samples at the Olympic Games in 2008, it was found in such a minuscule concentration that incidental consumption of animal products containing clenbuterol was ruled to be far and away the likely source.
"However, although the IOC and WADA may be using such ‘common sense’, clenbuterol remains classified as an anabolic agent and is therefore not a ‘specified substance’ under WADA’s Prohibited List. This means that there is no excuse for an AAF, however small."
Bygone era ("prior to the creation of independent anti doping agencies")? Nope:
Diack's IAAF scandal went into the 2010s. So did RUSADA.
The Kenyan secrets stopped in 2023.
The American and German secrets are ongoing.
All well after the creation of independent anti doping agencies.
OP: The example for a cover-up is of course Liliya. See for example
Senior athletics officials accused of extorting money from Liliya Shobukhova to cover up her doping violations are facing life bans at three-day disciplinary hearing
"The senior athletics officials accused of extorting €450,000 (£330,000) from the Russian marathon runner Liliya Shobukhova to cover up her doping violations will face the possibility of life bans from the sport when a three-day disciplinary hearing into their conduct begins on Wednesday."
That wasn't even a silent ban, it was just nothing.
I am regurgitating a comment which I left in another thread, because I think it would be an interesting topic for discussion.
Can someone actually enlighten me. Is there any evidence that so-called "silent bans" actually exist in T&F? I am not talking about not disclosing provisional suspensions which are under appeal. Reasonable people can disagree on this but I think, on balance, it is kosher since athletes, like anyone else, should be entitled to the presumption of innocence. Can anyone point to a specific case where an athlete has been banned, unsuccessfully exhausted their right to an appeal, and had the ban kept secret? I keep on seeing people referring to these "silent bans" and it seems like conventional wisdom on these message boards that they exist, but do we have any actual concrete evidence of this?
This forum is both great and not-so-great, as there are so many topics per day that sometimes you can miss a discussion that would interest you, as it gets shoved off the front page into oblivion.
In your case, I shared the following link when it came out in May.
The doping case of canoeist Martin Hiller, whose name was not published by the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) for data protection reasons after he was found guilty in a final doping verdict, is an eye-opener. According to ARD research, there may be more than 100 other dopers from at least 18 Olympic sports federations whose names have never been made public in the past five years
Situation is the same in all EU countries. Privacy laws prevent NADOs from announcing suspensions.
I am regurgitating a comment which I left in another thread, because I think it would be an interesting topic for discussion.
Can someone actually enlighten me. Is there any evidence that so-called "silent bans" actually exist in T&F? I am not talking about not disclosing provisional suspensions which are under appeal. Reasonable people can disagree on this but I think, on balance, it is kosher since athletes, like anyone else, should be entitled to the presumption of innocence. Can anyone point to a specific case where an athlete has been banned, unsuccessfully exhausted their right to an appeal, and had the ban kept secret? I keep on seeing people referring to these "silent bans" and it seems like conventional wisdom on these message boards that they exist, but do we have any actual concrete evidence of this?
Good thread, as the term is thrown around a lot, often from anonymous posters who would have no real way of knowing (as it is allegedly silent!), short of investigative journalism or some other public leak of information. While some bans are not disclosed publicly, it is hard to accept every anonymous allegation as accurate, rather than conspiracy.
Note that neither the WADA Code, nor the WA ADR requires public disclosures of Provisional Suspensions. It is optional: "After notice has been provided to the Athlete ... in accordance with the International Standard for Results Management, and to the applicable Anti-Doping Organizations in accordance with Article 14.1.2, the identity of any Athlete ... who is notified of a potential anti-doping rule violation, the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method and nature of the violation involved, and whether the Athlete ... is subject to a Provisional Suspension may be Publicly Disclosed by the Anti-Doping Organization with Results Management responsibility."
Note also that final determinations of rule violations are required to be publicly disclosed, within 20 days of the final outcome, but there are still exceptions: "Where Public Disclosure as required by Article 14.3.2 would result in a breach of other applicable laws" and "where the Athlete ... who has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation is a Minor, Protected Person or Recreational Athlete."
Since the WADA Code (and WADA compliant international federation rules and national rules) is essentially a contract between parties, it is still subject to applicable confidentiality laws, and tries to provide maximize transparency to the extent provided by applicable laws.
"However, although the IOC and WADA may be using such ‘common sense’, clenbuterol remains classified as an anabolic agent and is therefore not a ‘specified substance’ under WADA’s Prohibited List. This means that there is no excuse for an AAF, however small."
Bygone era ("prior to the creation of independent anti doping agencies")? Nope:
Diack's IAAF scandal went into the 2010s. So did RUSADA.
The Kenyan secrets stopped in 2023.
The American and German secrets are ongoing.
All well after the creation of independent anti doping agencies.
OP: The example for a cover-up is of course Liliya. See for example
"The senior athletics officials accused of extorting €450,000 (£330,000) from the Russian marathon runner Liliya Shobukhova to cover up her doping violations will face the possibility of life bans from the sport when a three-day disciplinary hearing into their conduct begins on Wednesday."
That wasn't even a silent ban, it was just nothing.
We all the knew the Russians were getting away with it by some means. The arrangement was only possible with deep corruption from Diack and a willing federation. Contrast that with Gatlin, for whom no favours were possible.
The Athletics Integrity Unit now functions completely independent of World Athletics as to negate the possibility of another Diack Mutko scandal.
Not sure about silent bans but some countries testing athletes and not sending the ones that failed? That was the eastern blocs operating procedure for a decade. I expect that the places buying athletes operate under similiar rules today.
Kipchoge, Rupp an Ingebrigsten are some of the more famous runners to benefit from them.
They're well known by inner-circle industry men
Source: "trust me bro".
I am sick of this bollox. I could 100% be persuaded that silent bans are a thing and am happy to concede that one or two users have posted compelling evidence in this thread.
But can we stop with this "everyone knows" nonsense, you may as well be telling me that the moon is made of cheese.
The type of "silent ban" that I referenced is the biggest and most real silent ban. It's not just an interesting point of discussion. You are referencing some type of "official silent ban" protocol that is adopted by either testing agencies or federations, which is, in fact ludicrous.
You can't actually have a silent ban using the definition you are listing in your 3 points because those are incomplete. If it isn't opened up and released fully to the sporting world, the competitors, and everyone involved in the sport, fans included, it really isn't a ban. It's something else.
The full force and weight of the guilt, positive test, and sanctions, both official and unofficial haven't come to bear on the head of the "positive testee."
My example is more of the type of thing that would be a secret sworn to a very few. If a GIANT star(face of the sport type) was popped, they would keep something like that to less than 5 people. THAT is a silent ban.
If you have followed the sport for 45 years, and kept your ear to the ground, like me. You would have heard the same stories about the type of cover-up I referenced from all the many vantage points that I have, high school AA, NCAA D1 AA, Olympic Trials Qualifier, Pro Track and Road Runner, Division 1 Coach, Olympic Athlete Coach, etc.
What I am saying to you is that there are people know who, with what, when, and where these truths happened, but they aren't talking. In some cases we are talking about peoples legacies in the sport. It's the way business is done, which at the end of the day, is what we are talking about.
This looks like pure conspiracy. Maybe the reason "We Missed it!" is because the stories you have heard are just stories that people tell each other, which grow over time.
We have seen exceptions like Russia, but even then, there were several whistleblowers who were not silent.
If I'm wrong, why don't you share with us some of the stories of the biggest legacies which have been kept silent -- as well as how many degrees away you are from these legacies?
It's not exactly a silent ban, but USADA has allowed doping athletes to continue competing on condition that they turn informant. WADA doesn't agree with this approach but Travis Tygart just does whatever he wants.
It's not exactly a silent ban, but USADA has allowed doping athletes to continue competing on condition that they turn informant. WADA doesn't agree with this approach but Travis Tygart just does whatever he wants.
Yes, High hopes got it right - Travis Tygart just does whatever he wants. Seems to be an American thing - tons of examples from our recent Presidents from both sides.
It's good to be King - a shame that Tygart can stay in power forever.
Yes, High hopes got it right - Travis Tygart just does whatever he wants. Seems to be an American thing - tons of examples from our recent Presidents from both sides.
It's good to be King - a shame that Tygart can stay in power forever.
Not just Tygart. WADA gives a lot of power and discretion to all anti-doping agencies. And as we have seen, also with China and Russia, they are not always able or willing to enforce their own Code.
I'm going sideways here on a golf story, so skip the post if you'd like...
I had a friend who played some events on the PGA Tour. I still laugh about him telling me that Dustin Johnson failed a test for cocaine (all the players knew it and were talking about it in the locker room at an event) and, because the PGA Tour did not announce failed tests at the time, he was going to claim that he injured his back lifting a jet ski to cover for the tournaments he would miss. Then, sure enough, he announced that "injury" and was out for awhile. We learned later that he failed one test for marijuana and twice for coke.
While "silent bans" were the policy of the PGA Tour at the time, it was a lesson that the athletes likely know what's up and it will leak.
If Track and Field does silent bans, they would have to keep that silent from the athletes and certainly from that athletes main competitors.
Interesting point with ADAK, thank you. "The Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya was formed under section 5 on 22nd April 2016 through the Anti-. Doping Act No. 5 of 2016"
2016? Wow. That's even worse than I thought.
Let's see:
"WADA was established on 10 November 1999"
"USADA began operations on October 1, 2000"
"NADA Germany was founded in July 2002"
"The French Anti-Doping Agency is an independent public authority formed in 2006"
"In 2009, UKAD was formed as the UK's first independent National Anti-Doping Organisation (NADO)"
"The Ethiopian National Anti-Doping Office which has been officially established by Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Council of Minister’s Regulations No. 400/2017"
Kipchoge, Rupp an Ingebrigsten are some of the more famous runners to benefit from them.
They're well known by inner-circle industry men
Wasn’t that pole vaulter Demi Payne serving a ban, and we didn’t know about it until it was halfway through or almost over? I’m too laze to look it up, but that’s how I remember it.
They definitely exist. They’re probably less obvious in running, but I wonder if time served in the offseason of other sports counts.
Interesting point with ADAK, thank you. "The Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya was formed under section 5 on 22nd April 2016 through the Anti-. Doping Act No. 5 of 2016"
2016? Wow. That's even worse than I thought.
Let's see:
"WADA was established on 10 November 1999"
"USADA began operations on October 1, 2000"
"NADA Germany was founded in July 2002"
"The French Anti-Doping Agency is an independent public authority formed in 2006"
"In 2009, UKAD was formed as the UK's first independent National Anti-Doping Organisation (NADO)"
"The Ethiopian National Anti-Doping Office which has been officially established by Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Council of Minister’s Regulations No. 400/2017"
....
All athletes are subject to in-competition testing. In-competition urine tests still catch by far the most dopers.
In July 2005, WADA helped form a regional RADO in East Africa which covered Kenya and Ethiopia:
"The African Zone V Regional Anti-Doping Organization (RADO) was established in July 2005 with the assistance of the World Anti- Doping Agency (WADA) and support of the Commonwealth Secretariat. It was pioneered by National Olympic Committees and Government representatives from Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. It was domiciled and functioned under the National Olympic Committee of Kenya. Later Rwanda, Burundi Somalia and Sierra Leone later joined the RADO to make the membership eleven 11 countries."
