No, as classy a champion as Rafael Nadal was during the trophy presentation of the Australian Open 2009, the title of this article has nothing to do with what he said to a tearful Roger Federer standing behind him as the losing finalist. As a matter of fact, even though he said it during the tournament, it had nothing to do with it.
It was a short, accurate, and powerful sentence: "It's a disgrace!"
The new code from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) imposed on professional athletes identified by their international federations is precisely what Rafa called it: a disgrace!
Will WADA hear it? Considering Rafa is currently one of the most popular athletes on the planet, uncontested world number one in tennis, and the vice president of the ATP Players' Council, they should!
According the new rule, Rafa, along with other high-performance athletes from a variety of sports, is forced to designate an hour each day, for all 365 days of the year, during which he must reveal where he will be located.
Or else!
If he happens not to be found where he claimed he would be, oh let's say on September 3rd, and that happens two more times in a designated 18-month period, he is considered, or rather in this Gestapo-like system, he is "assumed" to have violated anti-doping rules and becomes a target of sanctions. How pathetic!
I wonder if WADA people know ahead of time where they will be at each hour of everyday, let alone a day several months into the future. I wonder if they are human enough to face the possibility that their daily schedule that they planned ahead of time, may change by that time, or even as early as the schedule of tomorrow. What if the tire on the car blows and one of them is not at the movie theater for a 2 PM matinee as they planned before? It's perfectly possible, right?
Personally, I may plan to read a book at the local bookstore tomorrow evening, but if my daughter asks me to take her to a kids show at the local park, you bet that I will be changing my plans. Now what? If I was under the same regulations, there goes one of my three chances. Oh boy! I have two left, I better be careful. Do I feel like a criminal, or what?
It does not stop there. The anti-doping agents may surprise you with a visit at the spot you designated for that hour to make sure that you are true to your word, or should we say, to "discipline and punish" as the title of the famous book about the history of surveillance and compliance by Michel Foucault.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to Rafa. He has already had a visit by anti-doping agents once this month at 8 AM on a Saturday morning at his home in the island of Mallorca, Spain. He designated 7 AM for his time because he felt "that is the only time when I am sure I will be there." That morning, he was trying to get some sleep because he had a Friday night out with his friends. The nice and courteous agents made sure that he was there, and that he did not get his sleep!
And during the tournaments, he better be in his hotel room at 7 AM. Oh, and he must also predict which hotel he is staying at, 365 days into the future. What if he decides to change hotels? Or if the hotel previously designated is closed by the time of the tournament? Read on.
Keep talking, Rafa, nobody could put it better: "Even my mother or my uncle do not know where I am sometimes, so having to send a message or to be scared all day in case there is a last-minute change seems to me to be a complete exaggeration." What he is talking about is the addendum to the rule that in case there is a change of plans, the players can notify the authorities by text, e-mail, or fax. Hurray!
Stuart Miller, the head of the anti-doping program of the International Tennis Federation (ITF), says, "This should not be a problem." Yes, Stuart! Easy as stopping by a soft drink machine and getting a Pepsi, right? Can someone ask Stuart if he never, ever forgets to send an important e-mail, if he never forgets to notify someone when he had a change of plans, or if he ever forgot to call his wife at a time that he said he would? And if there does not happen to be an 18-month period during which he repeated the same mistake twice more? Can someone ask him if he is human?
So now, the ATP player, in the middle of his busy schedule and traveling, is supposed to predict where he will be for an hour all the way to the end of the year, notify the authorities of the details, and for each day that he may not be there, he is supposed to notify them again, and in case he has to change his plans several times in the last few days, he has to notify them all those several times. Easy as sticking a few coins in the machine and getting the soda, isn't it, Stuart?
So let's say Rafa, who designated his hotel as Hotel X in Rome during the Italian Open, happens to run into flight trouble the evening before. While he is at the airport and trying to figure out what flight to catch the next day and trying to figure out where to stay an extra night in the current town where he is located, packing and unpacking, is supposed to remember to notify the authorities of his change of plans and give them the name of the hotel in the current town, instead of the hotel in Rome, since he will be there at 7 AM the next morning due to flight trouble. Oh, and if his flight leaves at 7 AM, he is supposed to designate "in the air somewhere on the way to Rome." And he is supposed to remember to do that.
Now, Rafa is a bad example actually because one may say, "Rafa has an entourage, what are they there for?" It's true, but the point is still valid. Not everyone is Rafa, most players travel alone and do all their planning by themselves, and sometimes in the middle of a mayhem, finding an internet connection, a fax machine, or sending a text message is the last thing on their mind.
Well, Mike Bryan, half of the Bryan duo, the best doubles team in the world, happens to be human. The kind that Stuart Miller seems to ignore. He has already missed two dates in January, as of the 28th. He said that the possibility of a third is "a little scary." Long road ahead, Mike. Good luck!
So Rafa seems to share the opinion of 65 other athletes who are already appealing to the Belgian courts about this ridiculous decision. Again, he puts it elegantly, "I think it shows a lack of respect and privacy."
The sad thing is that this decision by WADA is probably triggered by doping scandals in certain sports, tennis not being one of them. Tragically, the pitiful "blanket" practice shows its ugly head again.
An agent of Octagon, a firm that represents athletes, said, "You almost have to think of WADA as your mother, father, girlfriend, and boyfriend." No kidding! Except that as Rafa said, even your closest relatives may not know where you are located, at a designated hour of each day. Let's go a step further; you may choose, in a free society, not to let even your closest relatives know ahead of time where you will be at a designated hour tomorrow, let alone every day for the next 12 months. But the world and the society, as Stuart Miller sees them, do not seem to be free ones.
Never mind a mother, father, boyfriend, or a girlfriend. It seems like the likes of Stuart Miller and WADA want to sleep in your bed! Rafa sent a clear message: it's a disgrace! Again, well said, Rafa!
February 5, 2009
Jackie Romagnano:
Wouldn’t call it a disgrace. i’d call it totally ridiculous.Seems like these power-mad people with a modicum of authority over a small number of people have way too much free time on their hands if they are dreaming up rules and regulations as stupid and impractical as these. Actually, the thought that crosses my mind at the moment is..”what were they on when they came up with this idea?!” ..or is that being too sarcastic given the tragedy of dopping?
February 5, 2009
Captain:
I would get all the athletes to send WADA 30 text messages each per day updating their locations (only the last one sent at the last minute has to be the actual location) Let’s see how many personnel WADA has assigned to tracking down these athletes.
As a matter of fact, this rule becomes self defeating if every athlete just gives them a bogus location up front and then text their real location in everyday to WADA 5 mins before their designated hour because there is no way WADA can send anyone to visit them with 5 mins notice.
February 6, 2009
Yekta Aslan:
This is really funny. It is even against human rights. I belive WADA will change this rule prettey soon.
February 7, 2009
nada:
Shine a light and watch the cock roaches run.
February 7, 2009
Betty:
Why is it a disgrace to ask tennis players to comply with more stringent anti-doping measures? Are disgraced athletes like Marion Jones and those Tour de France winners subseqently stripped of their titles ancient history already? If guys like Nadal and Murray had wanted a normal life, then they must have chosen the wrong profession. I say stop behaving like spoilt brats; respect the sport, respect the sponsors who fork out huge sums of money, and respect the folks who follow the game and support the players. Save your energy and spend it on helping to clean up the sport.
February 7, 2009
Laura:
If a player have nothing to hide the Wada’s antidoping rules shoudn’t be a problem. Why do you think Nadal and Murray are against this rules??? Federer on the other hand agrees with Wada.
February 8, 2009
Mert Ertunga:
Thanks for the comments..
Laura and Betty,
I don’t think any player has a problem with anti doping measures. It’s the way that is conducted that is self-defeating. Betty, the answer to your question in the beginning is in the article. And what happened to Murray is confirmation that it is absurd. Laura, a player criticising a rule does not make them automatically guilty. Both Murray and Nadal throughout their careers have been tested regularly and have never ben found in violation.
Mert E.
February 8, 2009
Betty:
Mert: Thanks for your response. No, I’m not convinced still that it’s a disgrace. Everyone involved in professional sport knows how difficult it is to catch the cheaters. They also know how important it is to protect the integrity of the sport (or there’ll be no sport). The new rule was discussed for 18 months. So it involves a bit more hassle. So what? These top athletes don’t get to where they are by being undisciplined, do they? As for Murray’s rant about being inconvenienced while he’s on holiday. It’s pathetic. I say grow up. It’s not the athletes’ mothers or uncles who fork out the generous rewards (richly deserved, I hope). If you want the accolade, the huge prize money, the handsome cheque for writing about the first 20 or so years of your life, then act responsible, do what is good for the sport and be a worthwhile role model for the younger generation of athletes and viewers.
February 8, 2009
Betty:
Mert: On a lighter note, let me share a joke (kind of a joke) with you. My husband is a journalist who’s covered several Olympics. He’s so skeptical that he thinks we might as well get two versions of the summer olympics every 4 years - one for the clean athletes and the other where everything and anything goes! The latter to be sponsored by pharmaceutical companies (big and small), of course. It’d be a lot fun. We’d see “athletes” who never tire performing feats and stunts never before imagined possible.
February 8, 2009
Mert Ertunga:
Betty,
The pharmaceutical sponsored approach is hilarious, hahaha. Thank your husband for making me smile on this otherwise gloomy day.
On the subject, I also believe tennis is getting an unfair sahre of the “drug” schizophrenia. I can see this rule being necessary for some sports, but I think for tennis it’s uncalled for. I must still agree with Nadal and Murray. I don’t see why they can’t just make unexpected drug testing during tournaments instead of this tedious, self-defeating process.
Mert
February 8, 2009
Betty:
Mert: Good to hear that you had a good laugh. Regarding any unfairness towards tennis, well, tennis players are no different from other athletes in terms of how they might benefit from certain drugs or procedures widely known or not. The fact that few have been caught doesn’t mean it is not a problem. (And if it is as clean as you think it is, then long may the authorities keep vigilant and keep it clean!) As regards unexpected testing during tournaments, you are obviously more trusting than I am. During tournaments is when athletes expect to be tested and it’d take a really desperate or foolish athlete to risk it. It’s the off season and the times when the athletes are relatively off guard that are the important times when testing should be conducted. Finally (and I think I’ve said more than enough) I don’t believe any athlete who’s been trained since childhood to compete should have a problem coping with so-called intrusive measures. That should be part of what they call life on tour. And top athletes like Nadal and Murray who are looked after by a huge entourage shouldn’t have any problem making sure they comply with the tedious procedures, should they? (Btw, has Nadal complained about pics of him and his girlfriend frolicking on the beach being intrusive? Don’t think I heard any.)
February 8, 2009
Mert Ertunga:
Betty,
I think the conversation revolves around whether athletes should accept intrusion or not. Actually, it should be around whether this particular rule is reasonable or not, that is what the article was about. Criticising a particular rule does not automatically signify that you are against the general idea. I don’t think the players think that by choosing to play professional sports they should get some sort of special treatment where they are not subject to anti-doping rules.
I don’t have a problem with anti-doping measures. But I do think calling them “spoiled brats” is appropriate for criticising this rule (nor do I se the relation with the picture taking incident, that is a different issue).
It’s simply unreasonable to expect everyone to designate an hour for the next 365 days, then try to notify authorities in the middle of their hectic schedule (remember most players are a one-man show, without an entourage), and let alone notify several times in case of changes. Couple that with the “automatic assumption of rule violation” in case they are not where they said they would be 100+ days ago, is just absurd.
The off-season in tennis is only 7 weeks (go ahead and schedule once a week tests during those 7 weeks if necessary, the off-season argument does not apply here, you can’t justify a year long application of a silly rule just because of the fear of seven weeks). The rest of the year they are in-season. It’s much more effective to have surprise drug tests then the current impossible-to-implement system.
Mert E.
February 8, 2009
Betty:
Mert: I promise (for my own sake, as I’m actually burning the midnite oil) this will be my last post. We might agree to disagree but I appreciate your courtesy.
The revised rule requires athletes to make their whereabouts known over a 3-month period, not 365 days at a stretch. I’ve read reports that the William sisters and Bryan brothers have no problem with it. And here’s what I found on the BBC site.
“The basis of the system is that athletes provide their national anti-doping organisation with a list of where they will be for one hour of every day over three months to enable the collection of random samples.
“Although the system has been in place for several years, the most recent guidelines have proved controversial for the greater demands they make on those being tested…
“Wada’s 2009 code specifies that athletes must be available seven rather than five days a week and that they are present for the whole of the hour, not just part of it.
“The times of day between which they can specify their location have also been restricted.
“UK Sport, the national anti-doping organisation, has given its backing to the new measures.
“‘While I do have some sympathy for the fairly small number of athletes who are required to meet these requirements, I would think that it’s a small price to pay for clean athletes to help us drive cheats out of sport,’ said director of Drug-Free Sport Andy Parkinson.
“‘Without it we might as well pack up, go home and let the cheats win.’….”
Cheers and thanks again for your replies.
February 8, 2009
Mert Ertunga:
Hi Betty,
No worries on my part, I always enjoy a good discussion, and this one is excellent.
About the three-month reporting, yes now this is being explicitly stated, prior to today, articles stated “for a year”. It is nevertheless a minor poijt, and it does not change my attitude towards it. Even three months is too much to expect. Antoher part that is bothersome is that he player is subject to sanctions if he can’t get around to declaring the correct hours and is in violation three times in 18 months. A player can be considered in violation of anti-doping rules, without ever having used dope. If it’s called anti-doping measures, something is not right.
But anyways, I enjoyed it in case you don’t respond. Please keep your comments coming in my future articles and feel free to contact me by email.
Best wishes
Mert E
March 13, 2009
Peter Wan:
i went to brook highland academy
March 13, 2009
Peter Wan:
mert what is your email?
mine is [email protected]
~you used to be a uab womens coach
July 3, 2009
karine:
please stop calling this guy “rafa” why???
spanish are suspects especially fuentes customers…
don’t know about nadal but why is he so angry ?