Just two days after Narsingh Yadav flunked a dope test, India’s Rio Olympics preparations were dealt a further blow on Tuesday after news emerged that shot putter Inderjeet Singh has also tested positive for anabolic steroids.
Sources said that Inderjeet’s ‘A’ sample has tested positive for androsterone (of the nandralone group) and etiocholanolone, both performance-enhancing drugs, at an out-of-competition test by the National Anti Doping Agency on June 22.
Like Narsingh, Inderjeet has cried foul saying that his sample has been tampered with.
Speaking to this paper, Nada director general Navin Agarwal refused to confirm Inderjeet’s name, only saying a Rio-bound athlete had tested positive.
“One Rio-bound athlete has tested positive for anabolic steroids. I can’t tell his name right now as only the ‘A’ result has come out. Once he exercises his B sample option and appears before a disciplinary panel, would we be able to reveal the name. Some more players have also tested positive but I can’t tell whether they are Rio-bound or not,” Agarwal said.
Inderjeet, a 2014 Asian Games bronze medallist, now has seven days to get his ‘B’ sample tested.
If that also returns positive, Inderjeet faces the prospect of being banned for four years under the new Wada Code.
Meanwhile, the Athletics Federation of India has confirmed it received intimation from Nada late last evening. “It’s unfortunate. I don’t know what and where it has gone wrong. The boy has been doing reasonably well in international events,” AFI secretary general C.K. Valson said adding that the athlete never trained at the national camp. “He had in fact refused to train in the camp.”
The road ahead for Narsingh Meanwhile, Narsingh’s hopes of participation at the Rio Games now hang on convincing the Nada disciplinary panel on how the banned substance entered his body, The panel, which hears his case on Wednesday, comprises of a legal expert, a medical expert and a former sportsperson.
With Narsingh claiming that he had been ‘sabotaged’ in order to stop him from going to Rio, the onus will be on his legal team to prove ‘no fault or negligence’ on the athlete’s part under Rule 10.4 (apply in exceptional circumstances where sabotaged by competitor) and Rule 10.5.1.2 (contaminated products) of the revised 2015 World Anti Doping Agency Code.
Observers say that ‘if’ the laboratory report, asked for by the disciplinary panel, returns positive for methandienone he would have a very good chance of “getting a reprieve or walking free”.
The panel might also ask Narsingh to produce the supplement container, whose label should not have the name of methandienone, and another sealed container of same batch besides other details.
It could be noted that the fundamental of Narsingh’s case is similar to that of the high-profile case of 2011 — the top six women’s 4x400 relay athletes including Asian Games gold medallist Ashwini Akkunji, who were given one-year suspensions by the Dinesh Dayal panel.
The International Athl-etics Federation later appea-led at the Court of Arbit-ration for Sports to increase the ban to two years, which was allowed. Interestingly, the relay girls had tested for the same anabolic steroid.
However, even if Narsingh manages to convince the panel, Nada may challenge the decision before an appeal panel and vice versa. Also he would need to clear another dope test before boarding a Rio flight.
