How did hockey become top priority for NADA after it rated it at No. 12?

Representative pic_Courtesy G. Rajaraman

One of the most curious aspects of anti-doping measures being carried out this year, was the top position hockey had acquired among leading “dopey sports”. Many of us questioned the wisdom of the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) in spending its precious resources on a game that had produced just six doping cases through nine years of NADA’s existence, two of them for recreational drugs, while a sport like athletics had churned out 210 and weightlifting 197 (as per available data on the NADA website.)

But NADA had its explanations for why hockey was pushed up the ladder for more tests and, though unconvincing, we had to believe it. It will also have answers ready for overall numbers at the end of the year since it has started adding sample numbers at a furious pace though seemingly there are not many major events around. From a total of 2062 tests by July-end, it has moved to 3188 by Oct-end. Hockey will soon be dumped and athletics brought back into the top of the lists.

In his revealing report in the Indian Express dated 4 November 2018, titled “How NADA rested as athletes trained”, Mihir Vasavda quoted NADA Director-General, Navin Agarwal, as saying hockey was a “very high-risk sport”. The report went onto quote him: “Apart from the psychological impact of doping, points like probability of winning medals and popularity of game in the country are also considered. Hockey ranks very high in both, so the number of tests that were to be conducted as pretty high.”

Hockey in front

Tests up to July-end, 2018 showed hockey had provided 92 samples while athletics had two less. Even if, let us say, hockey was 92 and athletics 100, it still wouldn’t have made sense. At least to those of us who follow sports and, more importantly, follow doping and anti-doping. There were sports like weightlifting (63 samples), boxing (69) and wrestling (70) which should have been high on the “high-risk” chart but were well behind hockey at that point of time.

It was not just a matter of hockey beating athletics by two tests up to July, but several other ‘vulnerable sports’ being downgraded, from an anti-doping perspective, while keeping up this illogical chant about hockey being “high risk” that rankled.

Not unexpectedly, NADA did not keep quiet on the Indian Express report. It put out a “facts and figures” chart on its website in an apparent attempt to rebut the report point by point. It proved a futile attempt to wriggle out of the hole it had dug for itself. (These points were also discussed in a two-part blog piece here).

On hockey, this is what NADA said on its website: “Scientific assessment of various risk parameters such as strength, endurance, popularity etc, form the basis of determining the numbers to be tested. Hockey is now getting more funding in India and has become high in popularity with probability of medal winning; all these have moved it up in our risk assessment and thereby increase in the numbers to be tested.”

Now the goalposts were widened. From “probability of winning medals and popularity of the game”, the point about “funding” was added.

Since many of the arguments that the NADA DG put forward in the newspaper report centred around the regulations, guidelines and prescribed parameters of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), a set of questions were posed through e-mail to the Montreal-based agency in an effort to get a better idea about “risk assessment”.

Of course, “risk assessment” as WADA has explained in its reply to me, and as most of us knew previously, and had tweeted about, is based on Article 4.2.1 of the International Standards for Testing and Investigations.

What is 'risk assessment'

WADA quoted the rules below to re-emphasize what “risk assessment” was in a recent communication:

“As set out in Code Article 5.4, the starting point of the Test Distribution Plan must be a considered assessment, in good faith, of which Prohibited Substances and/or Prohibited Methods are most likely to be abused in the sport(s) and sport discipline(s) in question.

This assessment should take into account (at a minimum) the following information:

a) The physical and other demands of the relevant sport(s) (and/or discipline(s) within the sport(s)), considering in particular the physiological requirements of the sport(s)/sport discipline(s);

b) The possible performance-enhancing effects that doping may elicit in such sport(s)/sport discipline(s);

c) The rewards available at the different levels of the sport(s)/sport discipline(s) and/or other potential incentives for doping;

d) The history of doping in the sport(s)/sport discipline(s);

e) Available research on doping trends (e.g., peer-reviewed articles);

f) Information received/intelligence developed on possible doping practices in the sport (e.g., Athlete testimony; information from criminal investigations; and/or other intelligence developed in accordance with WADA's Guidelines for Cordinating Investigations and Sharing Anti-Doping Information and Evidence in accordance with Section 11.0 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations; and

g) The outcomes of previous test distribution planning cycles.”

NADA also probably knew these rules. But one had to pose a few specific questions to get more clarity. So, one asked and got the answers (WADA’s answers in Italics and blue):

Q: Did WADA suggest any particular grading for sports disciplines to be categorized as per “risk assessment” after it did the last audit of Indian NADO?

 The NADO was asked to focus on high risk sports and athletes participating in upcoming major events, for example the Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and World Championships.

Q: What was the order of priority suggested by WADA, if any, for sports to be considered in grading “risk assessment” as far as Indian anti-doping efforts were concerned? If no particular grading was suggested, then what was the grading provided by the Indian NADO after the WADA audit? Where did hockey figure in that grading?

 Hockey is ranked 12^th in the list of sports in India in terms of doping risk as contained in NADA’s Risk Assessment.

So, hockey was ranked 12th only in that “risk assessment” exercise. By NADA and no one else. Yet, NADA DG and his agency repeatedly tried to give the impression that hockey indeed was “high risk” and they had to consider so many factors while drawing up their priorities, all as per WADA guidelines.

NADA might have gone after hockey to boost numbers easily since the players are bunched together at one camp. But it obviously did not want to concede that point or the one about athletics and weightlifting numbers being down instead of going considerably up with Asian Games round the corner.

Q: Where did the following sports disciplines figure in that grading: Athletics, weightlifting, wrestling, boxing, cycling, swimming, powerlifting, bodybuilding?

All were identified in the top 10 sports based on the risk factors applied out of 63 sport disciplines assessed.

  

Another topic that keeps coming up these days is the number of samples being tested by NADA every year. So, it was prudent to ask the following question:

Q: Has WADA given a target of sample numbers to the Indian NADO for the year 2018? If so, how many?

WADA does not provide a target number for NADOs to meet. 

The Test Distribution Plan (TDP) should reflect the risk assessment and the level of testing among the sports and athletes identified to be “at a higher risk” than others. 

The ISTI requires that the majority of tests are conducted out of competition (OOC). Note that the TDP is a living document and not a static one, it is intended to be an ongoing process that changes based on variations within the athletes competing in the sports identified.

The TDP should be amended based on risk factors, test results, information/intelligence received, athlete performance, Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) profiles etc.

Missing RTP athletes altogether at crucial period

NADA missed testing out-of-competition plenty of athletes in its Registered Testing Pool in the run-up to the Asian Games. NADA, however, keeps denying that many were missed. It has even suggested that during the rest of the year it would complete the minimum three tests on such athletes. Like its drive towards a target of 3500 tests a year this is another farce it goes through, test RTP athletes a few times after the major championships of the season are over.

 In this context, a question was put to WADA:

 Is it all right to miss testing athletes listed in the Registered Testing Pool in out-of-competition testing altogether for a year?

Following the risk assessment outlined above, such high profile/risk athletes identified should be part of an RTP which requires the NADO to plan to test the Athletes a minimum of three times OOC per year.

The one point which WADA seemed to agree with NADA was the need to limit in-competition samples even from major championships.

Q: When WADA expects more out-of-competition tests than in-competition in a sport like athletics there is a possibility of the NADO cutting down in-competition numbers, say from 1000 to 400 in order to meet the OOC requirements which may lead to a complete mockery of testing in-competition. This is what we have started witnessing in India, either skip an athletics meet altogether or else collect just 20 or 30 samples. Would WADA suggest a remedy?

As outlined above, testing at the same event becomes predictable. Therefore, reducing test numbers at a particular event and using the resources to test an event not normally tested is a good way to spread the effectiveness of a program and to instill some levels of unpredictability to athletes.

One cannot agree with either the NADA policy or the WADA argument here. NADA has been spreading out its testing to all sorts of events in all types of sports, and when it comes to an Asian Games selection meet like this year’s Inter-State at Guwahati, if the numbers are down to 40 or 60, athletes and coaches do ask the question: But who are being tested? When adequate out-of-competition tests are also not done, and NADA keeps sending teams to test at state-level meets and college meets, this question gains a different connotation.

NADA and WADA need to understand that in the Indian context, an Olympic qualification in a majority of cases is the ultimate aim for a track and field athlete and the so-called selection trials have to be strictly put through the anti-doping grind. This should not mean that the out-of-competition testing programme could be diluted. That should remain the main plank on which NADA directs its anti-doping efforts.

With the latest developments related to WADA re-testing some of the samples it took custody of last September and five track and field athletes and a weightlifter being caught in the dope net, there is all the more reason for NADA to be more vigilant in the coming season when athletics will have the Asian championships and the World Championships in Doha.

NADA has to shed its philosophy “we don’t want to bother athletes again and again” and eventually not test them at all out-of-competition through a crucial period of their preparations. NADA needs experts to determine its RTP and Test Distribution Plan and a sincere effort to take on its primary task_keep dope cheats away.