Sponsored by
In defence of Christine Ohuruogu
I write in reply to James Shield's article about Christine Ohuruogu and her great victory in the 400m final in Beijing.
While I can understand some of your feelings I take large issue with other parts of your article.
Christine took the issue of drug testing very seriously indeed and has done ever since.
She is a staunch supporter of the anti doping campaign and one thing that must be made clear is that she has not once failed a drugs test.
You ask for soul searching, what you either are obviously not aware of or have decided that it spoils your argument to mention is that there was so much soul searching in the anti doping authorities that they changed the procedures for spot checks because they did not work and were causing the issues themselves.
For what it's worth when Christine missed her tests the structure was far too rigid for those training athletes.
You had to provide to the anti doping agency an itinerary for a month ahead where you would be for an hour every day.
You were not able to change this on the day itself even if you turned up to the stadium to find that you could not train there (stadiums don't always book things a month in advance), if you had to go to the doctors and the only time was when you said you would be at the track then tough, if you were injured and were taken away from the stadium then tough you missed the test.
If you could not produce urine within the hour time slot you missed your test (if you have ever spoken to an athlete after training or events it can sometimes take a number of hours of drinking solidly before passing urine).
If you missed 3 test period you were banned. Not 3 tests in 12 months or 18 months, 3 tests period. You could miss 2 in a year then 7
years later miss another and you were banned.
These rules have now been changed. You can text a hotline if you have had to move your training somewhere else.
The doping agency then have to check this hotline if they find you are not where you said you would be to see if you have had to move. The one hour urine rule has been altered.
Ohourugu is not a Greek sprinter who is in a completely different country avoiding the World anti doping agency.
She fell foul of the British system which was different to any other country's and which was admitted by the British to be too strong.
Soul searching? She had a year where she couldn't earn a penny, no sponsorship, no insurance, no lottery money.
She risked missing the world championships and at the time missing the Olympics.
The BOA heard her case and allowed her back, they believe it was wrong and surely they are the people who matter here, they have the experience and knowledge of the system, they stood up against Dwain Chambers and yet allowed Christine back in without too much of a fight surely acknowledging issues with the system.
She apologised profusely for missing them she took the blame and the system was changed while they admitted it was too harsh.
I would think this would be enough even for the "self-appointed, self-righteous inhabitants of cyber space" of which newspaper journalists can also be added as your article proves.
In a time when sport is disappearing from our schools, were children are being pilloried for being obese or simply overweight we should not be turning away someone like Christine who fell foul of rules that have now been changed.
You can sit at home and write about this type of thing all too easily without understanding the situation and I am sure next week the same will happen again with another sportsman or team.
Her mistake changed an outdated rigid system that many athletes were about to fall foul of (oh yes, there were umpteen high profile athletes in the last chance saloon on 2 missed tests because the system was rubbish).
You are able to write whatever you wish, that is your ability in a paper especially a local one it is unlikely she will ever read. Her right to reply is curtailed by this.
But the fact that it misses umpteen issues around the missed tests is poor to say the least.
It is your right to not like her though or not praise what she has done but don't look down on those who do or wish to praise her, she is a clean athlete, she has never tested positive for a banned substance and she is an Olympic and World Champion something we dont have enough of.
Remember she does not have to appease you but the authorities.
If they believe she has served her time and her punishment then that is their decision.
They have to pass strict guidlines for funding and shehas and sohas the governing bodies of the sports.
For you to sit in judgment on her like a self appointed judge and jury saying that her apologies are not enough when you quite obviously don't even know the system I find to be poor work and simply fishing for some controversy and sensationalism.
Richard Pitchfork
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Sheffield
Friday 10 February 2012
Today
Fog
Temperature: -6 C to 0 C
Wind Speed: 14 mph
Wind direction: South east
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: -2 C to -1 C
Wind Speed: 9 mph
Wind direction: South west
