Football Stars at the Sharp End of Bitter Anti-drugs Battle

Owen Gibson

From the Turks and Caicos to Dubai, the world's best beaches could this summer become the battleground for an increasingly bitter battle that threatens to split global sport. The fear of football's governing bodies, player's unions and agents is that it won't be long lenses that are bothering the likes of Wayne Rooney and Frank Lampard as they sun themselves during a summer free of international action, but the specter of missing a drug test under the new World Anti Doping Agency code.

Three day summit in Athens, Council of Europe

The World Anti-Doping Agency has issued a clear message to Fifa ­regarding its position on drugs and unannounced testing regimes in football. John Fahey, the Wada president, indicated that there would be a zero-tolerance approach despite criticism from senior figures in the sport.

"We made it abundantly clear that Fifa has no special concession on the issue of whereabouts," said Fahey. "There is no law for Fifa that is any different to any other sport around the world when it comes to the issue of testing and whereabouts."

Fahey was speaking in response to an article published in a German newspaper over the weekend that quoted Sepp Blatter, the Fifa president, describing Wada as a "police organization and that is wrong". Blatter also claimed that football is the most proactive sport in anti-doping controls.

"I read with some disappointment the article where Mr Blatter is alleged to have made a number of statements ... many of those statements were simply wrong. I've endeavoured to engage Mr Blatter and will continue to do so in the next hours. I don't propose to conduct a discussion through the media in the meantime." At the weekend's meetings football's governing body was represented by Fifa's chief medical officer, Professor Jiri Dvorak.

Fifa and Wada met last month to discuss the whereabouts issue included in the new version of the Wada code – the Data Protection Standard – introduced on 1 January this year. The controversial element has caused multiple problems for the anti-doping body, a group of 65 athletes have begun legal proceedings against Wada citing human rights infringements, and high-profile complaints from athletes such as Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal have sought to derail the new standard.

The entire scheme looked to be under threat when the European Commission announced that the whereabouts laws could contravene the domestic laws of some of their member states, but Fahey claims an amendment to the code has solved this conflict.

"What was approved this weekend was a revised standard which simply clarified the scope of the standard's application," said Fahey. "We made it very clear that nothing in the Data Protection Standard required any European country to lower its level of privacy protection, as some questioned. On the contrary, the standard provides that anti-doping organizations based in Europe must respect their national data protection laws and that those laws prevail over the standard as long as they are as rigorous as the standard."

The new amendments will come into effect on 1 June. The standard is billed by Wada as a one-year trial. Fahey said that the system will be monitored in all sports, including football, before a reassessment is due at the end of the year.

If Fifa, or any other sports governing body eligible to compete at the Olympic Games, fails to comply with Wada's standard they could be subject to International Olympic Committee sanctions including suspension from taking part in the Olympics.

The so-called "whereabouts" rules, which require a pool of elite athletes in every sport to state where they will be for an hour every day of every week, are due to be introduced to English football on July 1. It will apply to a pool of around 30 England players who, if they are not where they say they'll be at the appointed time, will be given one "strike". Three missed tests in an 18 month period will lead to an automatic ban of at least a year.

Although most of those players are already being tested regularly - England captain John Terry has already been tested 16 times this year at international, European and club level according to PFA chairman Gordon Taylor - there are fears that it wouldn't be long before a Christine Ohuruogu situation emerges with one of England's biggest footballers. The furore and impassioned argument that surrounded Rio Ferdinand's missed test in 2003 would pale into insignificance in comparison, they argue.

Agents, to whom implementation of the scheme is likely to fall outside the training ground, fear that if it is imposed to the letter of the law it could lead to a string of missed tests by footballers and could even spark legal disputes over lost earnings. The Association of Football Agents has discussed the issue, with some believing that players should be compensated if a drug test forced them to miss a personal appearance or other earning opportunity.

If it comes to pass, the new regime will be launched into an global drug testing environment that has been rocked by the row over its implementation and spiralled into a debate about human rights and privacy. A string of high profile athletes, their unions and agents have lined up to condemn the rules, and potential legal challenges in national and European courts have mounted up, forcing Wada to issue a string of statements insisting it will stand firm.

What began as a technical argument about the implementation of new doping regulations has widened into a dispute that appears to pitch International Olympic Committee president Jaques Rogge against Fifa president Sepp Blatter and threatens to splinter into a messy and protracted dispute that endangers the credibility of the global anti-doping effort.

The stakes were raised when Fifa, whose president Blatter sits on the Wada committee that drew up the rules, and Uefa came out publicly against their implementation. They argue that it should be enough that players are made available at their training grounds and point to an existing regime that sees between 25,000 and 30,000 players tested a year. Only if a player has previously tested positive or attracted suspicion, or if they are injured for a long period, should they be tested out of competition, argue the football authorities.

The two bodies said they "do not accept that controls be undertaken during the short holiday period of players, in order to respect their private life" and claimed that "both on a political and juridical level, the legality of the lack of respect of the private life of players, a fundamental element of individual liberty, can be questioned."

Since that statement, Fifa and Wada have met at the football governing body's shimmering Zurich HQ and, through a series of convoluted public statements that restated their respective positions while explicitly failing to acknowledge they were in any way backing down, appeared to be edging closer to a compact.

Such hopes were blown out of the water this week after Fifa president Sepp Blatter accused Wada of acting "as a police organisation", adding "that is wrong".

Wada has also come under fire from the European Commission, which has warned that the rules breach rules on data protection. Following this week's meeting Wada appeared to climb down, saying it would issue an "enhanced version" of the privacy standard that made it clear that national and European law still applied. Some close to the process believe that Wada's credibility has been undermined by the high profile spat. This week, a 3-day EC anti-doping conference is taking place in Athens at which the issue will be high on the agenda.

The EC has backed the verdict of a working party convened at the request of four member states including Germany to look into the data protection and privacy implications, which said it was incompatible with various elements of European law

The European Commission supports WADA's fight against doping. The fight against doping in sport is important, particularly for athletes' health and the integrity of sport. Nonetheless, the Commission insists that this fight is pursued with respect for the fundamental rights of athletes and their entourage, particularly for the right to protection of their privacy and personal data. In this light, the Commission welcomes *and shares* the Opinion of the Article 29 Working Party.

The Commission very much welcomes the willingness of WADA to discuss these issues with us at a series of forthcoming meetings over the next weeks and months, the first of which is the Athens Anti-Doping Conference.

Separately, athletes in several European countries are planning to challenge the new code through the courts, arguing that it breaches EC law on privacy and human rights. The most high profile case is in Belgium, where 65 athletes are challenging the rules in court.

Wada argues that, if there is to be an effective co-ordinated effort against drugs in sport, players must simply accept the principle of out of competition testing as one of the prices they pay for competing at the apex of their sport.

But the player's unions that have been lobbying against the new rules for almost a year sense they are gaining traction. "Sport needs a Wada, but we need a Wada that polices by consensus, not by diktat. The Wada is supposed to act for sport, not against sport," said Simon Taylor of the Professional Player's Federation. "It's made players into the enemy rather than allies. Wada has picked a fight on something that is both morally and legally very dubious. It has decided to take on the players, the European Commission, the Council of Europe and Fifa. It is a very high risk poker match and it simply doesn't have the cards. Wada is not above the law."

But Wada, while it has performed a U-turn as a result of the Commission's data protection concerns, is equally determined to hold football to the same standard as other sports. It said it was "surprised and disappointed" at football's stance and resolved to stand firm.

"One of the key principles of efficient doping control is the surprise effect and the possibility to test an athlete without advance notice on a 365 day basis," Wada president John Fahey has said. "Alleging, as Fifa and Uefa do, that testing should only take place at training grounds and not during holiday periods, ignores the reality of doping in sport. Experience has demonstrated that athletes who cheat seize every opportunity to do so and dope when they believe they won't be tested." Just look at Dwain Chambers and the other BALCO cases, say testers.

UK Sport, which has been operating the scheme for four years in some sports, say that it does all it can to make it athlete-friendly. Players, or their representatives, can select their chosen hour between 6am and 11pm by text message, fax or email and change it up to a minute before it starts. In a concession to team sports, Wada has allowed clubs to submit the times for their entire squads. The majority of their allotted times will likely be at their training ground, anyway, they say.

But Taylor, and the football authorities, say there must also be recognition football does not have a widespread problem with performance enhancing drugs. "We have always been very keen to co-operate on drug testing and we have had thousands of tests since 1978. There has not been any evidence of performance enhancing drugs and there has only been limited evidence of recreational drugs."

That view cuts little ice at Wada. Following his summit meeting with the player's unions in January, director general David Howman told the Guardian: "It's a silly conversation for anyone to say their sport hasn't got a problem. One, because it's not true. Two, because you don't know what's around the corner." As the volume and intensity of top level matches increases, and the demands on players' bodies multiply, some argue it is inevitable that a minority of players will be drawn to performance enhancing drugs. But those in football argue that top players are now playing or training for 48 weeks a year and are highly unlikely to be doping during the other four. They claim Wada should have adopted a more diplomatic and low key approach to making sure the new rules were applicable

But many athletes believe, including double Olympic swimming gold medalist Rebecca Adlington, believe it's just the latest example of football wanting to be treated as a special case. "Everybody should be on the same level whether you are a footballer or not," she said.

"We don't want to be an exception, but we do want the rules to be proportionate," says Gordon Taylor. "It's going to end up like Big Brother if we're not careful. We know where players are for 48, 50 weeks of the year. We agree they should provide whereabouts information if they are injured. But it's whether it's proportionate to have 30 players giving one hour a day, 365 days a year, three months in advance. Are we going to end up in a situation where players are followed by a camera 24 hours a day?"

In England, the FA points to the fact it conducts 1,200 out of competition tests a year - more than any other sport. It will argue that the 60 or so players currently on "one strike" for missing a test as evidence that its current regime of unannounced testing at training grounds is working. It is reluctant to speak out publicly while talks with UK Sport, the body responsible for implementing the Wada rules in this country, continue. But faced with an invidious choice between siding with anti-doping authorities, backed by the UK government, and siding with the global governing bodies to which it is afficilated, it is understood that it will back the latter.

FA insiders share the feeling that not enough care has been taken to separate team sports from individual sports. But Wada and anti-doping officials argue that the whole principle of a global anti-doping code is undermined if exceptions are made for an individual sport - especially if it is the biggest and richest sport in the world.

It is hard to see where Wada goes from here, but it insists it is not for turning, and it also has the backing of the IOC. Ultimately, it has suggested, football could end up being kicked out of the Olympics if it refuses to sign up to the new rules. On a national level, the FA has been told by UK Sport that government funding for grass roots initiatives could be affected if it doesn't co-operate.

Those close to the process sympathetic to Fifa's view doubt that the IOC would follow through with the threat. "The Olympics needs football more than football needs the Olympics," said one. They believe Fifa will stand firm Yesterday, a UK Sport spokesman said that "as far as we are concerned, we are still on track to begin testing on July 1". The mood music coming out of the FA does not tally with that view and, before Rooney and co pack for their summer holidays, something will have to give.

ends