Column

The cricket world waits with bated breath for the outcome of Sunday’s talks between the examples, both within the country and outside, of the fight against drug use in sport with a positive gesture at this juncture — but only if the ICC agrees to take the remedial issue with Wada to the next level. This is something other federations controlling team sports like football, basketball, baseball etc also have on their agenda (but have otherwise agreed in principle and the ICC on the ‘whereabouts’ clause of the World Anti Doping Agency. If the protesting Indian players get the support from its board, other countries will follow suit and the ICC will be left clutching at straws.

More importantly, this could also jeopardise the quest to push for a place in the Olympics — now that the T20 format has become exciting and logistically acceptable — in the new future. Should Tendulkar and Dhoni then help in resolving this imbroglio? I believe they should give their nod to the ‘whereabouts’ clause — silly and invasive as it is in many ways - but only if the ICC agrees to pursue the matter further with Wada to remedy the contentious aspect of the

While the BCCI will stand behind its players (who wants to kill the golden goose?), it may find itself being isolated in the international sports community if the players are adamant. Tendulkar and Dhoni are the two most powerful entities in Indian cricket and their words will be both balm and buffer for the BCCI, which finds itself in a merry pickle as a signatory to the ICC’s Anti-Doping Code.

The ‘whereabouts’ clause is contentious and has divided the sporting world down the middle. What it means is that players registered with Wada by the national association (in the case of cricket, the Integrated Registered Testing Pool comprising 11 players) will inform Wada of where they will be for 365 days so that they can be randomly tested any time. This is draconian in a sense because it puts a sportsperson under constant surveillance, like a criminal.

Interestingly, it has not stopped some of the most eminent personalities in sport from accepting it. For instance, while Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray have contested this (though submitting to tests thereafter), Roger Federer has accepted it wholeheartedly. There have been dissenting and assenting voices from sundry other sports to suggest that the arguments, pro and con, are not unambiguous.

At a personal level, one of my biggest disappointments was to discover that Ben Johnson was a drug cheat. As witness to his record-breaking 100m dash in the 1988 Olympics, I believed I had watched one of the greatest feats of all time. Yet, I haven’t succumbed to cynicism because despite such obstacles, sport is perhaps the only facet of our existence which still reinforces the value of idealism, makes its pursuit worth the while for our race.

Tendulkar and Dhoni would serve lling team sports like football, basketball, baseball etc also have on their agenda (but have otherwise agreed in principle to go with Wada) and it mas excellent examples, both within the country and outside, of the fight against drug use in sport with a positive gesture at this juncture — but only if the ICC agrees to take the remedial issue with Wada to the next level. This is something other federations controlling team sports like football, basketball, baseball etc also have on their agenda (but have otherwise agreed in principle examples, both within the country and outside, of the fight amples, both within the country and outside, of the fight.