OTHER SPORT

COE: CHAMBERS BAN MUST STAY

Dwain Chambers: Legal battle

Friday July 4,2008

By Express Reporter

Lord Coe has defended the right of the British Olympic Association to impose a lifetime Games ban on Dwain Chambers.

Former European 100m champion Chambers, who has served a two-year drugs ban, filed papers in the High Court yesterday seeking to overturn the ban. He wants to compete in next month’s Beijing Games after comfortably running a qualifying time.

“A governing body of a sport, or a sports organisation, has to do whatever it thinks is necessary to maintain the integrity of the sport. That should not be challenged,” said Coe, twice Olympic 1500m champion and London 2012 organising committee chairman. “The sadness of it is that we are going to be inevitably in a six-week period of stuff that we shouldn’t be. We can’t ignore it.”

A governing body of a sport, or a sports organisation, has to do whatever it thinks is necessary to maintain the integrity of the sport. That should not be challenged

Lord Coe

Chambers claims the lifetime ban imposed is unenforcable and an unreasonable restraint of trade, but Coe said: “I’ve heard for far too many years that the primary concern is for the athlete. It’s not. It is for the well-being of the sport. If you don’t do that, the athletes can go home. We’re protecting 99 per cent of athletes who chose to do it for the right reasons.”

A BOA statement read: “In the interests of the British Olympic movement and the athletes who aspire to line up at an Olympic Games and our youngsters looking for Olympic glory in London, the BOA confirms that it will vigorously defend its ban on drug cheats who have brought themselves and their sports into disrepute.”

Chambers’ legal team – led by specialist sports barrister Jonathan Crystal – know they will not succeed on any mitigating circumstances grounds, but hope to convince the court the BOA bylaw is unfair. Their statement read: “Mr Chambers claims that the bylaw goes further than is reasonable for protecting the interests of BOA and the public, and that it is inherently unfair and unreasonable.”