Undercover wrote:
I think I should clarify a few points that have been made as this is turning into a witch hunt, when the underlying issue is UKA/UKAD taking steps to cover up a positive from a 'nobody':
- this is not a wind up or gossip
- the athlete in question knew that he was taking a performance enhancing inhaler that he didn't require at all
- the said athletes coach and training group were fully UNAWARE what the athlete was doing. As soon as said coach was informed of the news, all ties were cut immediately.
- the said athlete has improved his PB further this year, despite failing the test 12 months ago
- the Belgian authorities were thorough in seeking disciplinary action against the athlete from UKAD. However, UKA manipulated the advice a medical test, which shows whether or not a patient needs this medication, bringing the results into the 'grey zone'. Whereby the conclusion provided by the test conductors stated the athlete might need the specific inhaler on certain grounds. Despite the first set of results/conclusion showing that the said athlete would never need to take this inhaler
- UKAD have since turned a blind eye to a member of the said athletes group trying to get answers on why a ban never happened and why this wasn't made public knowledge
The question that bothers me about this case is why are UKA covering for a good domestic athlete who will probably never go to a major games?
I am aware of what appears to be a systematic use of TUEs by UKA at the moment. Did they believe this case may be the straw that broke the camels back? IE the substance in question is the new meldonium?
Brojos - if you want more background on this please let me know where to email. This needs to be investigated further as it is hard to imagine this is the only case of it's kind in recent times.
Great thread, thanks for blowing the whistle.
Sounds like you made a few enemies in the process though