rule readerr wrote:
PFA would not accept testing out of work.
So UKAD changed the rules or interpretation so not to have anytime testing.
Pretty central compromise of core WADA principles.
So the effect of PFA was highly impactful.
WADA leaves it up to the sports federations and the NADOs.
Whatever UKAD and the PFA negotiate with respect to implementing out of competition testing, and who gets tested, remains compliant with the Code.
In any case, it looks like your information is not correct. It looks like the PFA enters the training location and time by default as the "1 hour" window, but if the athlete is late, or leaves early, or misses training, then the athlete specifies an alternate address and time -- which could be his/her home. Any athlete in any sport can apply the same pattern, and many likely do.
Athletics Kenya would do well to have "PAA" for Kenyan athletes that manages whereabouts as closely as the PFA does for its athletes. Rather than being a compromise of core principles, I think WADA would welcome this change that ensures accurate whereabouts.
The changed the rules to give the pretence of compliance with a core principle of anytime testing.
What is your invention of the “one hour default “?
What made up drivel!
And then more drivel that they then go to their home.
PFA refuse testing out of work time.
You are of intellectual defunct function. The PFA have nothing to do with monitoring whereabouts !
Why make such drivel up?
Have you not noticed how many footballers are at parties , wrong hotels etc etc etc ,yet no filling failures .