The man who brought down Lance Armstrong said last night that Justin Gatlin, the two-time drug offender, should be presumed innocent as he prepares to take on Usain Bolt in the world championships in Beijing.
Travis Tygart, chief executive of the US Anti-Doping Agency (Usada), also defended the decision to halve Tyson Gay’s doping ban in return for inform-ation that led to an eight-year suspension for Jon Drummond, his coach.
The men’s 100 metres begins tomorrow and could be dominated by those who have served doping bans. Bolt said this summer that Gay should have been kicked out of the sport and damned his reduced ban as “the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard”.
Gatlin, meanwhile, is the fastest man in the world this year over 100 metres, with a time of 9.74sec. Gay and Bolt are joint sixth fastest. Bolt has said that he has no problem with Gatlin, because he served a four-year ban, and Tygart has some sympathy with that view.
He said: “When you have done your time, you deserve to be seen as clean and entitled to the presumption of innocence. But what Justin Gatlin shows is that, even if you have the right to compete under the rules, your legacy is for ever tainted.”
Advertisement
Gatlin has insisted that he did nothing wrong. An independent American Arbitration Association panel accepted that he was not at fault for his first violation in 2001, which was due to medication for attention deficit disorder. He blamed his second offence in 2006 on a rogue trainer sabotaging him but, like Gay, assisted the authorities and had an eight-year ban halved.
Lord Coe, the newly elected IAAF president, has questioned the “dog-ate-my-homework” and “anti-ageing cream” excuses and said that he would need to be convinced by the quality of information from whistleblowers.
However, Tygart suggested that people had forgotten that Gay had admitted to using a suspect product a year before he tested positive in 2013. That meant that he returned his 2012 Olympic 4 x 100 metres relay medal, as well as withdrawing from the 2013 world championships.
“If he didn’t co-operate, he would have got a two-year suspension from the date of the test,” Tygart said. “He would have competed in the world championships and held on to a tainted Olympic medal.
“Not only did he return the medal and get a year ban, he lost all his results from the year before his test. He effectively received a two-year suspension. It was punitive.”
Advertisement
Tygart added that both the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) and the IAAF could have appealed against the one-year sanction if they felt that it was unduly lenient. “He could have just done what other athletes do and fail to come in and be truthful,” he said.
Anyone believing that Tygart’s words are symptomatic of a blind-eye approach should remember that he was the man who brought the case against Armstrong, despite being told that it was “career suicide”. He met Armstrong this year and says that he is prepared to discuss the possibility of a reduction in his lifetime ban if he provides substantial assistance.
Tygart said that he welcomed Coe’s pledge to set up an independent anti-doping unit in Monaco as a “no-brainer”. Citing cycling’s problems, he said: “Who in their right mind wants to bring a case against Lance Armstrong? It’s hard for a sport to bring a case against someone you’ve invested millions of dollars in.”
A year of allegations and scandals has created a perception of corruption around these world championships. “If sports organisations or countries can get away with not being aggressive or covering things up, as the allegations suggest, then clean athletes will either leave sport or they will decide to dope,” Tygart said.
“You hear about Russia and Kenya and it’s frustrating. Clean athletes are watching and demanding more.”
Advertisement
America has had a leading role in this slew of scandal too. Usada is investigating the claims made against Alberto Salazar, head of the Nike Oregon Project and coach of Mo Farah. Tygart said that he hoped for a conclusion soon. “We appreciate all those who have been willing to come in and talk to us under oath on the record,” he said. “Trust me, we are working diligently. We’re here to get to the truth.”
Farah has already spoken to Usada, but Tygart admitted to being frustrated by not having the power to subpoena other witnesses.
It is a murky backdrop to athletics’ showpiece. Coe is an advocate of life bans, but since Wednesday’s election has been accused of trying to deny the drug problem.
On the eve of the biggest race for two years, Tygart was unequivocal. He said: “Clean athletes need to be reassured that the system will protect their rights and that comfort has to be given by leaders of the IAAF.”