The Electronic Telegraph Tuesday 5 June 2001 Tom Knight MARK RICHARDSON, whose battle against a doping ban became something of a cause celebre last year, is about to become a political hot potato within the International Amateur Athletic Federation. The reason is that the time is fast approaching when Britain's top 400 metres runner, who tested positive for nandrolone in October 1999, will have his plea for clemency reviewed. Nothing is straightforward where doping is concerned and Richardson's case has become more complicated than it originally appeared. The brief version of the case goes something like this. Richardson was cleared of a doping offence last summer by UK Athletics because they subscribed to the view that the positive reading was attributable to contaminated food supplements. The IAAF, however, stuck by their rule on strict liability and sent the Richardson case to an arbitration hearing which was scheduled to take place in Sydney, prior to the Olympic Games. Richardson, still technically free to compete, opted out of that hearing and went instead to the IAAF's end of season Grand Prix Final in Qatar, where he won the 400m. In March this year, when questions were being asked about the date of his arbitration hearing, it emerged that Richardson had, in fact, held his hands up three months previously and submitted himself to a two-year ban from UK Athletics. It didn't end there because part of the arrangement was that UK Athletics, on Richardson's behalf, would apply to the IAAF for his early reinstatement on the understanding that the athlete would help spread the message about the dangers of using supplements. The date being bandied about for Richardson's return - though no one is quite sure where it came from - was June. Well, here we are. Richardson has done his bit. He wrote an article in the UK Athletics newsletter, advising against the use of supplements and later this month will give a talk on the same theme at a Birmingham hotel. Next month, he will give an address at an anti-doping symposium before the World Youth Games in Hungary. Whether he is reinstated in time to compete at the World Championships in Canada in August, however, lies in the hands of the IAAF's ruling 26-man council - and they will not be easily swayed. While they accept that Richardson did not take the drug deliberately, there are some hardliners on the council who will not budge from the strict liability rule. Istvan Gyulai, the IAAF's general secretary, said: "We accepted Mark's willingness to participate in the IAAF's anti-doping fight by sharing his knowledge of what happened to him. Quite a few remarkable things have been done and it would be fair to look at his case again." Richardson is training hard, albeit with a niggling Achilles injury he sustained during his recent trip to California. The IAAF, meanwhile, will not be hurried and any pressure on them to do so will only hamper their deliberations. Richardson and British athletics will simply have to wait. Eamonn Condon www.RunnersGoal.com
