Says Abhinav Bindra during the two-month off season
Monday, August 10, 2009
‘WADA may not even test cricketers’
He has been tested by World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) agents on two occasions during the ‘off season’ and between 15 to 20 times during the tournaments. He didn’t make fuss giving his ‘whereabouts’ to the WADA, just as he didn’t make any fuss when he won India’s only individual Olympic gold medal ever. Abhinav Bindra, in conversation with Anupam Pratihary, demystifies the WADA’s ‘whereabouts clause’ that Indian cricket players are still grappling with.
How intrusive is the ‘whereabouts clause’?
Since the chances are that a player may be tested just once or twice in a period of two months, I think it’s not intrusive. It’s something that players can accept even if they find it irritating.
Indian players are saying they play cricket for 9-10 months in a year, so they want to be left alone for two months, which the WADA’s ‘whereabouts clause’ won’t allow. What’s your take?
What I want to say is that ‘whereabouts clause’ does not reveal players’ whereabouts. It only allows the WADA agents to locate the player and conduct the dope test. It’s all done very discreetly, so the cricketers should not worry on that count. Moreover, it’s quite possible that they may not be tested at all in those two months or at best once or twice. There is also every possibility that all the players may not be tested in that period as it is a random test. So, I feel cricketers should not feel skeptical about it. It’s just a matter of getting used to it.
Do you think Indian players should sign it?
See it is done for a bigger cause to keep the cheats away from the system, right! It’s not about whether our players are doping. It’s a system in place to prevent players to take undue advantage by using performance enhancing drugs. If our players accept WADA, it will help cricket to fight doping if it’s happening in the game.
Right now Indian players are not willing to join the folds of WADA. Do you think there is a middle of the road solution where the WADA can call players at one centre such as National Cricket Academy during the off season and test them?
That’s not the issue here. You cannot have different rules for different sports. Rules are rules and it should be universally applicable. Moreover, I feel the ‘whereabouts clause’ will not be that much of a problem for our players.
Do you think joining WADA is a necessity?
Joining the WADA is one of the prerequisites to become an associate member of International Olympic Committee (IOC). Since International Cricket Council (ICC) has joined the IOC as one of the associate members it becomes necessary to join the WADA. However, if the ICC decides to stay away from Olympic Games, they can have their own anti-doping agency and regulations.
Do you think this whole controversy is misplaced?
I don’t know whether it is misplaced or not but irrespective of whether the WADA’s clause is good or bad it can be accepted for the greater cause of keeping the game clean.
