What’s wrong with the Gatlin nomination?

It has been widely publicized that former Olympic 100m champion American Justin Gatlin was one of ten athletes nominated for the IAAF 2014 Male Athlete of the Year Award. Based on his impressive performances on the track this season, Gatlin is rightfully deserving of this nomination. His 2014 dream season included an undefeated season where he went 17 for 17 in all of his races and along the way setting personal best and world-leading times of 9.77 and 19.68 seconds in the 100m and 200m, respectively.  Gatlin for his part seem to have fun along the way, silencing the crowd at the Jamaica International in Kingston and running a superb 2^nd leg for the victorious USA 4x100m relay at the USA versus the World encounter at the Penn Relays in Philadelphia in April. The question is:  despite these superb performances, should he have been nominated for IAAF 2014 Male Athlete of the Year Award? Prior Violations Yes, we are fully aware of Gatlin’s questionable past in which he served a four-year suspension back in 2006 for having high levels of testosterone in his body. He was reinstated in 2010 and has been competing since that time. That was Gatlin’s second offense, as in 2001, Gatlin was banned from international competition for two years after testing positive for amphetamines. Gatlin appealed the first suspension on the grounds that the positive test had been due to medication that he had been taking since his childhood, when he was diagnosed with attention deficit disorder. The appeal resulted in an early reinstatement by the IAAF. Gatlin served his suspensions, was reinstated and allowed to compete in top athletics events including the Olympics and the World Championships. So why is his nomination being questioned? Here we have an athlete who makes his living by plying his trade on the track and field circuit. He was given the green light to competing and represents his country. He works hard to improve his skillset on the track, where it is very competitive and has stayed clean. Should that not be enough?  If he is allowed to compete and he does well, why shouldn’t he be recognized, even for the prestigious award of IAAF 2014 Male Athlete of the Year Award? Victim of His Own Success Perhaps Gatlin is a victim of his own success. Having a questionable past and now running faster than he has ever run, in his early thirties, is a recipe for his own undoing. Perhaps the success of the 100 and 200m world record-holder Usain Bolt has inadvertently masked this nomination issue. The limited appearance of Bolt, the Jamaican superstar on the circuit this season had paved the way for other athletes to step-up. Gatlin took advantage of the opportunity and now he is paying the price by having his nomination questioned. Yes, I am aware of his questionable past. But why should his nomination for IAAF 2014 Male Athlete of the Year be questioned? Then there is the “lasting effect debate” study that was conducted by two researchers in Europe, Dr. Cristóbal Belda-Iniesta and Dr. Jo Bruusgaard. Belda-Iniesta is the head of the Biomarkers and Experimental Therapeutics for Cancer Group at Madrid’s University Hospital. His research on cancer markers has led to novel ways to identify doping even years after the fact. The study shows that athletes can benefit from using banned substances long after reinstatement [See the link below for the article by Trevor Connor- An analysis of the long-term effects of performance-enhancing drugs”]. In essence, it can be argued that Gatlin may be benefitting from past use of banned substance. More Transparency We cannot have it both ways. We cannot allow an athlete to compete at the highest level of competition, winning medals for his country, contributing to the success of his country’s relay team, BUT he should not be recognized for his individual success. There is something definitely wrong with that picture. Perhaps, there needs to be a written rule to address this situation so those athletes who are in Gatlin’s situation are fully aware of it. The rule should explicitly state that athletes who are sanctioned for using banned substances are disqualified from nomination for global recognitions or awards.  Would this disqualification be applicable to only individual recognition and not team recognition? If Gatlin is a member of a world-record relay team, should his contribution to the team be qualified and footnoted? Wouldn’t this, in a sense, diminish the quality of this world record? Back to the situation at hand, based on his performance this season, Gatlin should be the front-runner for the Male athlete of the year award. Again, I am not denying his questionable past. The fact is Gatlin is allowed to compete and he is taking advantage of his opportunity The good thing about this situation is that Gatlin’s success this season has forced us to re-examine and may eventual lead to adjusting the rules to provide a high degree of transparency so as to allow athletes a somewhat fair opportunity for redemption. As it stands now, the message is:  if you have been sanctioned for using banned substance, when you are reinstated, you can do well, but just not exceptionally well, because you will not be recognized for individual success. Reference http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/02/training-center/an-analysis-of-the-long-term-effects-of-performance-enhancing-drugs_317590   Like us on  Facebook Follow us on Twitter