CAS hands Ethiopian 1500m Diribe Welteji two-year ban

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

It’s obviously unsatisfying if this is the husband’s blunder most of all. Still, she has to be held accountable to some level if a doping officer went to her address and someone on her behalf blocked the test. It’s impossible for us to know if the husband went rogue or this was a tactic they agreed to beforehand, for instance. I’m OK with 2 years as a compromise here as it seems the DCO made some mistakes in their handling too.

...sabotage of the Athlete’s food or drink by a spouse, coach or other Person within the Athlete’s circle of associates (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink).

facts are facts wrote:

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

It’s obviously unsatisfying if this is the husband’s blunder most of all. Still, she has to be held accountable to some level if a doping officer went to her address and someone on her behalf blocked the test. It’s impossible for us to know if the husband went rogue or this was a tactic they agreed to beforehand, for instance. I’m OK with 2 years as a compromise here as it seems the DCO made some mistakes in their handling too.

A husband is part of the "Athlete's circle of associates", see e.g. page 70 of Wada code 2021:

...sabotage of the Athlete’s food or drink by a spouse, coach or other Person within the Athlete’s circle of associates (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink).

She got lucky with "certain technical and best practice departures" of the "Sample Collection Personnel".

Epopian for Sure wrote:

The “excuse” alone is worth a lifetime ban. Blame her husband, lol. How convenient. 🥴

When the Doping Control Officer (the “DCO”) arrived at the house of the Athlete, he was met at the gate by the Athlete’s husband. According to the DCO’s account, the Athlete’s husband informed the DCO that the Athlete would not provide a sample, stating that the DCO had arrived outside the time slot specified in the Athlete’s whereabouts information in ADAMS. Following discussions, the DCO apparently requested to speak directly with the Athlete who, according to the DCO’s version of events, then appeared and also personally declined to provide a sample, citing the same reason regarding the timing being outside her designated slot. The DCO stated that he warned the Athlete of the potential consequences of refusing to submit to doping control under the ETH-NADO Rules 2021 (the “ADR”).

facts are facts wrote:

Epopian for Sure wrote:

The “excuse” alone is worth a lifetime ban. Blame her husband, lol. How convenient. 🥴

According to the AIU (in their appeal), she and her husband refused:

When the Doping Control Officer (the “DCO”) arrived at the house of the Athlete, he was met at the gate by the Athlete’s husband. According to the DCO’s account, the Athlete’s husband informed the DCO that the Athlete would not provide a sample, stating that the DCO had arrived outside the time slot specified in the Athlete’s whereabouts information in ADAMS. Following discussions, the DCO apparently requested to speak directly with the Athlete who, according to the DCO’s version of events, then appeared and also personally declined to provide a sample, citing the same reason regarding the timing being outside her designated slot. The DCO stated that he warned the Athlete of the potential consequences of refusing to submit to doping control under the ETH-NADO Rules 2021 (the “ADR”).