Australian sport’s “blackest day” has left more questions than answers

On 7th February 2013, Australia – and the wider sporting world – was rocked by the release of a report from the Australian Crime Commission that called doping in Australian sport ‘widespread’. That Thursday was described as “the blackest day in Australian sport” by the former head of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Richard Ings, with a dramatic press conference leaving little doubt in the mind of anyone who saw it that the consequences would be equally far-reaching. Since the press conference, however, the saga has rumbled on far less convincingly, leading to criticism of ASADA’s handling of the issues.

What happened next?

Little has been heard of the scandal – outside Australia – since the announcement, as the reality is that very little that is newsworthy has actually happened yet. The report identified a number of unnamed Australian Football League (AFL) and National Rugby League (NRL) clubs as those suspected of administering performance-enhancing peptides to their players, with a focus on the substance AOD–9604. The drug has only been banned since 2011 and the University of Adelaide’s Professor Gary Wittert, who has conducted several studies on it, has said that he “cannot understand why athletes are taking it” due to evidence suggesting it has no positive effect on muscle building or weight loss.

Since February, progress with the investigation has been painstakingly slow. The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment Bill was introduced in an effort to encourage witness cooperation with the investigation, while in August an AFL team – the Essendon Bombers – was suspended from the competition’s finals series and fined $2,000,000 for its role. The club’s head coach also received a one-year suspension. Later, an NRL player – Sandor Earl – was stood-down from the competition after admitting to charges relating to the drug CJC-1295, which he then said a sport’s scientist had advised him to take.

Pushing the boundaries

Considering the ‘widespread’ claim, little else has been revealed. The investigations are continuing; however, the public remains confused by the long-winded nature of the process and the lack of answers, especially considering the bombastic and confident original claims. Questions over the validity of practices that are clearly pushing the boundaries but are not necessarily illegal have also been raised. As an example, some Manly Sea Eagles players have openly used the practice of injecting calf’s blood into their muscles to aid injury recovery. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) allows this if injected into tissue or muscle, but not if injected intravenously.

Impact of the investigations

While the AFL and NRL seasons have now concluded, having been played out under the cloud of the investigations, frustration has grown. The Australian Rugby League (ARL) Commission chairman, John Grant, has said that he expects a report from ASADA “reasonably soon”, but admitted the process could stretch into 2014 and that the organisation had told the anti-doping commission that “we need to accelerate this”. ASADA is unable to name any of those players under investigation in order to protect their privacy. Interestingly, by May, a 121% increase in the number of website visitors to ASADA’s Check Your Substances resource had been recorded, along with a 91% increase in the number of people accessing online anti-doping education in Australia. This suggests that the saga’s legacy could eventually be a positive one, if only because athletes learn the dangers of failing to question the drugs and supplements they take.