Football - Does the SFF promote drugs use in sports? |20 December 2019
With the intensive national campaign against drugs and all the efforts to use sports as a means of distraction from substance abuse for the youth, it is a sad reality to learn that the local football body went beyond its means to hide and protect players who have returned positive results in drugs tests.
Recently, news surfaced that 11 players of the national under-20 selection failed out-of-competition drugs tests and Sports NATION has even learned that the Seychelles Football Federation (SFF) tried to cover the situation, thus allowing the players to compete internationally, precisely at the Council of Southern Africa Football Associations (Cosafa) Men’s Under-20 Championship in Zambia.
After an initial doping test prior to the tournament, 11 players from the squad tested positive for drugs and instead of being instantly dropped from the team, they were given the chance to “cleanse” themselves.
It is beyond one’s understanding why the SFF decided to still included players who returned positive tests on the squad as they ran the risk of testing positive again if they were called up for in-competition doping control tests. Any positive result would have meant suspensions in line with the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (Wada) World Anti-doping Code.
Sports NATION also learnt that it was the SFF which brought in the kits for the tests. Isn’t it just a waste of money then that the players who returned positive tests were included on the squad for the Zambia trip?
What good has these drugs tests brought about then?
According to Gerry Sopha, the federation’s ‘independent sports journalist’ responsible to disseminate information regarding the federation, all in line with transparency, to avoid allegations and misconception, following the initial test results, the SFF decided to seek the advice of a medical professional who convinced them that the drugs in question and the amount found could be easily cleansed and removed from the players’ system.
Mr Sopha explained that the SFF went ahead with the idea and the cleansing process took place.
He also added that following the process, a second test was carried out, but according to several sources, no such tests took place prior to the team’s departure.
When asked if he could confirm, or prove whether a second test took place, Mr Sopha acknowledged that he could not and that he was only disseminating information given to him by the SFF.
Assessing the situation deeply, one would immediately conclude that such a decision on the part of the national football body is simply unacceptable, let alone irresponsible.
The action of the SFF is totally against the policy of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (Fifa) which states that there is no place for doping in sport today and the association is continuously striving to keep football free from doping and lead by example to safeguard the future success and sustainability of football around the world.
Fifa actively acknowledges its responsibility to protect players from harm and ensure equal chances for all competitors by stringent doping control regulations, data collection of positive samples, support of research, and collaboration with other organisations.
Member associations and confederations are key collaborators in the global fight against doping, rather than hiding and pushing the issue under the carpet.
Fifa introduced regular doping controls in 1966 to ensure that the results of matches in its international calendar are a fair reflection of the strength of the contenders.
The association was therefore one of the first international sports governing bodies to acknowledge the problem and introduce active measures to combat it.
Fifa’s strict Anti-Doping Regulations establish the provisions for testing and sanctions, which apply to all football competitions worldwide. The regulations are in line with the World Anti-Doping Code “the core document that harmonises anti-doping policies, rules and regulations within sport organisations and among public authorities around the world.” One of the main pillars of Fifa’s anti-doping strategy is prevention through education.
Information sessions on anti-doping are conducted during the final tournaments of all Fifa youth competitions and players are encouraged to take Fifa’s anti-doping knowledge test.
Still according to Mr Sopha, the SFF took the decision to send the team to Zambia out of fear of being fined by the Confédération Africaine de Football (Caf) if Seychelles had refrained from taking part at the last minute, and also losing the right to vote.
Was it not possible to replace those players? The results of the Seychelles selection at the tournament were far from acceptable, so, what difference would it have made if other players were picked?
What if some of the players were randomly picked for doping tests at the competition, what would have been the consequences, not only on local football, but also the joint effort in the local fight against substance abuse?
We should all act responsibly.
Roland Duval