ICC's anti-doping policy August 2, 2009

BCCI backs players on anti-doping

Cricinfo staff
48

The Indian board has backed its players and rejected the contentious 'whereabouts' clause in the amended World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) code, which was implemented by the ICC from January 1, as it was "unreasonable". This decision was taken at a meeting of the BCCI's working committee in Mumbai on Sunday and places the ICC in a difficult position.

The ICC's executive board, of which India is a member, will now discuss the issue to find a way forward. A resolution would ideally have to be reached before the start of the next ICC event, the Champions Trophy in September in South Africa, where India is one of the eight participating teams. International players from all countries in the ICC's anti-dope testing pool have agreed to abide by the code, despite privacy and practicality concerns about the 'whereabouts' clause, except the 11 from India. The code prescribes stringent penalties in case of default (see box).

MS Dhoni, Harbhajan Singh and Yuvraj Singh, who were present at the BCCI meeting, maintained that security concerns remained if they had to reveal their location in advance for an hour every day for the next three months to facilitate out-of-competition testing, as mandated by the 'whereabouts' norm in the amended WADA code.

In response to these concerns that were expressed earlier too, the ICC had promised to implement a "reasonable" testing programme that will be conducted around matches, and not on holidays or when players are on vacation. The ICC had also sent its company lawyer to address the BCCI's concerns on the WADA system during the Sunday meeting. But an Indian board official told Cricinfo that Iain Higgins, the lawyer, was not called upon at all by the BCCI's working committee.

Shashank Manohar, the BCCI president, said the board did not have a problem with dope testing but only with the system of keeping checks when the players are not engaged in training camps or playing matches. Manohar said the BCCI would suggest to the ICC that instead of players revealing their whereabouts information in advance, the governing body should consult the Indian board which will ensure that the player will be available within 24 hours at the required location for testing.

The suggestion, however, is unlikely to lead to a solution as the WADA, which is an independent anti-doping watchdog set up by the International Olympic Committee, has made it clear in a recent statement that no exemption to the code will be granted to any federation. If the Indian board refuses to budge on the issue, the ICC will have to consider pulling out of the WADA umbrella, which will undermine its fight to ensure a clean sport, its credibility and reputation on the world stage, and rule out cricket from global multi-sport events such as Asian Games and Olympics.

"We believe the clause with regard to whereabouts of cricketers is unreasonable for three reasons," Manohar said. "Firstly, some Indian cricketers have security cover, and when you have a security cover, you cannot disclose your whereabouts to a third person. Secondly, the privacy of individuals cannot be invaded. Third, the constitution of India gives a guarantee to every citizen regarding his privacy which cannot be invaded. We can appreciate players being tested even when they are not playing. But if ICC or WADA want to test the players, they can inform the board which will get the players at the required location within 24 hours. This is our suggestion."

Manohar claimed that though the anti-doping code has been in discussion since 2006, when the ICC became a WADA signatory, and the amended version was approved by the ICC board last year, the testing system, including the whereabouts clause, was never deliberated upon in any of the governing body's meetings.

Asked what the ICC would do next, Manohar, who represents India on the governing body's board, said, "The implications of this decision would be decided after we write to the ICC. Today, it would be jumping the gun."

Brian Murgatroyd, the ICC spokesperson, said the ICC and BCCI were committed to finding a practical solution. "We are aware of the issues of concerns, and we are confident they can be adhered to everyone's satisfaction. The matter will now be considered by ICC board," he said.

Top Curve
The WADA penalty
  • The ICC's new WADA code requires players to inform ICC 90 days in advance (each quarter) a location and time that they will be available each day in that quarter for testing. If the player is not in the location at the time specified, he/she will have a strike recorded against his name. Three such strikes and the player will have breached the code and can face penalties up to a two-year ban.
Bottom Curve

The Federation of International Cricketers' Associations (FICA), of which India is not a member, has warned that if the ICC did not penalise India's players for failing to submit to the new anti-doping norms in time, it would ensure that players from all other countries would be relieved from similar obligations.

Concerns about the 'whereabouts' clause in the amended WADA code is not a cricket-specific issue and has been treated as a matter of concern in other sports, particularly team sports such as football. FIFA, football's governing body, is still not completely WADA-compliant due to similar concerns and has suggested that only players they deem as high-risk be included in the testing pool. Tennis stars such as Rafael Nadal and Serena Williams have also spoken out against revealing whereabouts information in advance. There is a meeting of world player associations, including FICA, in London in early September with WADA to discuss these concerns. The ICC will also raise these concerns with WADA at a review meeting this year-end.

Another Indian board official said after Sunday's meeting that the ICC will have to renegotiate the issue with WADA. "The ICC have to take up a dialogue with WADA," Rajiv Shukla, a BCCI vice-president, said. "Football players also declined to sign the clause and the FIFA is engaged in negotiation with WADA, so that would be the case of ICC also," Shukla said.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • 1948 on August 7, 2009, 14:57 GMT

    it is time to the Indian players &bcci to go through the Doping issue ,why they are not accepting to do the Doping test for players ,there is nothing wrong in doing doping test,all the world teams accepted that ,why Indian players are not ready to sign it is rediculous this issue should be solved as soon as possible

  • tbc1 on August 5, 2009, 23:30 GMT

    I don't think I've ever felt better disposed towards Harbajhan et al., or the BCCI, than I do over this issue. WADA struts and frets its' hour on the global sporting stage, affecting to be the supreme guarantor of sporting integrity, whilst displaying an unseemly relish in forcing submission from every sport it encounters. It does bear reiteration that FIFA, the governing, and actually potent and relevant, body in the most prosperous sport on the planet, have accepted only a part of WADA's prescriptions. I hope technology would permit for a compromise whereby the continued integrity of the Indian players could be assured, without providing WADA with undue control over players. If no compromise is forthcoming, I would rather see a code peculiar to the rhythms, cadences and idiosyncrasies of cricket instituted, than see cricket abased befpre WADA.

  • Avid.Cricket.Watcher on August 5, 2009, 9:51 GMT

    I really do hope the BCCI work constructively with the other boards, ICC and WADA. For the sake of world cricket's reputation as well as Indian cricket's. Even though I concur that top cricketers' security is a real issue in India. The KEY policy objective should be dope testing without (significant) notice at any time of the year; NOT knowledge of player whereabouts year-round. If BCCI's current suggestion (to produce cricketers for WADA testing at 24 hr's notice) is unacceptable (though it sounds reasonable), then maybe they should request ICC and WADA to allow the whereabouts info to be stored exclusively with India's Home Ministry (sort of a homeland security ministry), which would relay it to WADA (say a day before desired testing date) once they decide which individuals are to be tested (surely that final selection should be largely independent of information about players location). Can't all parties contribute some innovativeness and a little flexibility?

  • Sampdoria on August 5, 2009, 6:14 GMT

    I think most of the 'amused' commentators seem to forget 2 important points.

    - Indian fans may be fanatical about the game but some of them are completely violent lunatics as well when the team loses. Still this isn't as big a concern as the second factor.

    - Everyone seems to also have a Goldfish memory on the well planned terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan team. So the Indian cricketers have to play sitting duck for the tech-savvy terrorists. Is WADA even noticing that?

    All the other Indian sports "stars" from other sports in India are bantering about there being no issue - sure there isn't! No one even knows them! I wonder who will be going after them! "There he is, the sharp shooting champion!"

    Once again, the cricketers are not at all against the drug testing, its about security. Just because they have God status hence a high-liability status unlike their Australian/English peers, they cant be blamed for that.

  • UmeshD on August 4, 2009, 21:20 GMT

    I find this whole issue amusing than anything else. It's hard to digest that in this era of technological advances, there is no technological solution that can meet both sides concerns !! If 571 sporting bodies have accepted this, why is WADA willing to discuss the issue in sept with various players bodies ? On BCCI's part, it seems more of a political gains issue than anything else. BCCI is taking exactly opposite stand to what Indian govt does these days and it's not hard to understand why.

  • Geraldine on August 4, 2009, 20:18 GMT

    The "privacy" issue is a joke because these players have put themselves in the spotlight and are famous by their own choice. Playing cricket at this level is a great privilege. No one is being forced to play cricket, but if you do, you have to abide by the ICC rules and regulations, just as if you choose to fly on an airplane you agree to submit yourself to an invasive search even though it violates the fourth amendment.

    It is almost inevitable that WADA will reject this idea, because if it makes an exception for cricket, other sports will demand the same.

    Ultimately it will come down, once again, to how much the BCCI wants to flex its muscle. I can't imagine South African, or Australian Cricket demanding that the ICC pull out of WADA, but it won't surprise me when the BCCI do.

  • BobKoomr on August 4, 2009, 14:42 GMT

    Why not solve the problem technologically? If they aren't all that administratively inclined, why can't they be handed out GPS enabled devices that can only be traceable by WADA agents? That way security and all this whingeing will come to a complete end.

  • popcorn on August 4, 2009, 9:51 GMT

    Indian Cricketeres have grown too big for their boots - in fact they are not worthy of the superstar status. It is only in India that cultism is practised. That is why these cricketers do not know the meaning of humility.They are not even worth an ounce of Tiger Woods or Roger Federer who have accepted the WADA norms.It is time BCCI and these whimsical cricketers are put in their place. I do hope ICC takes a tough stand and bans the Indian Cricket Team from participating in the fothcoming Champions Trophy.If BCCI thinks ICC needs their money and revenues from TV rights, they can go jump in the lake. We are happy watching The Ashes and other world events for which we pay Cable Operators.

  • phaniram on August 4, 2009, 3:39 GMT

    I do not understand Why do people make so much fuss about BCCI using its money power.If it has the power then let it flaunt it. previously it has saved our cricketers in the same way when some of the match referees were biased in their verdicts.

    More over it has just reported the objection of its players as it is the intermediary between ICC and the players.

    It has also shown an alternative to resolving the conflict by saying that the players will be available for testing in 24 hours at one of WADA approved labs. It has certainly not specified any pre conditions for testing. So whats wrong in its stance?

    Some of the players are facing high risk from certain groups and it is reasonable on their part to avoid specifying their where abouts as long as they will be available for testing within 24 hours whenver WADA feels it should test a player.

    As the effect of drugs wont dissapear within a day it would not jeopardise the results of the tests

  • Rooboy on August 4, 2009, 1:16 GMT

    So the BCCI thinks different rules and special treatment should apply to the indian team. What's new?! This is their attitude on every issue!

  • 1948 on August 7, 2009, 14:57 GMT

    it is time to the Indian players &bcci to go through the Doping issue ,why they are not accepting to do the Doping test for players ,there is nothing wrong in doing doping test,all the world teams accepted that ,why Indian players are not ready to sign it is rediculous this issue should be solved as soon as possible

  • tbc1 on August 5, 2009, 23:30 GMT

    I don't think I've ever felt better disposed towards Harbajhan et al., or the BCCI, than I do over this issue. WADA struts and frets its' hour on the global sporting stage, affecting to be the supreme guarantor of sporting integrity, whilst displaying an unseemly relish in forcing submission from every sport it encounters. It does bear reiteration that FIFA, the governing, and actually potent and relevant, body in the most prosperous sport on the planet, have accepted only a part of WADA's prescriptions. I hope technology would permit for a compromise whereby the continued integrity of the Indian players could be assured, without providing WADA with undue control over players. If no compromise is forthcoming, I would rather see a code peculiar to the rhythms, cadences and idiosyncrasies of cricket instituted, than see cricket abased befpre WADA.

  • Avid.Cricket.Watcher on August 5, 2009, 9:51 GMT

    I really do hope the BCCI work constructively with the other boards, ICC and WADA. For the sake of world cricket's reputation as well as Indian cricket's. Even though I concur that top cricketers' security is a real issue in India. The KEY policy objective should be dope testing without (significant) notice at any time of the year; NOT knowledge of player whereabouts year-round. If BCCI's current suggestion (to produce cricketers for WADA testing at 24 hr's notice) is unacceptable (though it sounds reasonable), then maybe they should request ICC and WADA to allow the whereabouts info to be stored exclusively with India's Home Ministry (sort of a homeland security ministry), which would relay it to WADA (say a day before desired testing date) once they decide which individuals are to be tested (surely that final selection should be largely independent of information about players location). Can't all parties contribute some innovativeness and a little flexibility?

  • Sampdoria on August 5, 2009, 6:14 GMT

    I think most of the 'amused' commentators seem to forget 2 important points.

    - Indian fans may be fanatical about the game but some of them are completely violent lunatics as well when the team loses. Still this isn't as big a concern as the second factor.

    - Everyone seems to also have a Goldfish memory on the well planned terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan team. So the Indian cricketers have to play sitting duck for the tech-savvy terrorists. Is WADA even noticing that?

    All the other Indian sports "stars" from other sports in India are bantering about there being no issue - sure there isn't! No one even knows them! I wonder who will be going after them! "There he is, the sharp shooting champion!"

    Once again, the cricketers are not at all against the drug testing, its about security. Just because they have God status hence a high-liability status unlike their Australian/English peers, they cant be blamed for that.

  • UmeshD on August 4, 2009, 21:20 GMT

    I find this whole issue amusing than anything else. It's hard to digest that in this era of technological advances, there is no technological solution that can meet both sides concerns !! If 571 sporting bodies have accepted this, why is WADA willing to discuss the issue in sept with various players bodies ? On BCCI's part, it seems more of a political gains issue than anything else. BCCI is taking exactly opposite stand to what Indian govt does these days and it's not hard to understand why.

  • Geraldine on August 4, 2009, 20:18 GMT

    The "privacy" issue is a joke because these players have put themselves in the spotlight and are famous by their own choice. Playing cricket at this level is a great privilege. No one is being forced to play cricket, but if you do, you have to abide by the ICC rules and regulations, just as if you choose to fly on an airplane you agree to submit yourself to an invasive search even though it violates the fourth amendment.

    It is almost inevitable that WADA will reject this idea, because if it makes an exception for cricket, other sports will demand the same.

    Ultimately it will come down, once again, to how much the BCCI wants to flex its muscle. I can't imagine South African, or Australian Cricket demanding that the ICC pull out of WADA, but it won't surprise me when the BCCI do.

  • BobKoomr on August 4, 2009, 14:42 GMT

    Why not solve the problem technologically? If they aren't all that administratively inclined, why can't they be handed out GPS enabled devices that can only be traceable by WADA agents? That way security and all this whingeing will come to a complete end.

  • popcorn on August 4, 2009, 9:51 GMT

    Indian Cricketeres have grown too big for their boots - in fact they are not worthy of the superstar status. It is only in India that cultism is practised. That is why these cricketers do not know the meaning of humility.They are not even worth an ounce of Tiger Woods or Roger Federer who have accepted the WADA norms.It is time BCCI and these whimsical cricketers are put in their place. I do hope ICC takes a tough stand and bans the Indian Cricket Team from participating in the fothcoming Champions Trophy.If BCCI thinks ICC needs their money and revenues from TV rights, they can go jump in the lake. We are happy watching The Ashes and other world events for which we pay Cable Operators.

  • phaniram on August 4, 2009, 3:39 GMT

    I do not understand Why do people make so much fuss about BCCI using its money power.If it has the power then let it flaunt it. previously it has saved our cricketers in the same way when some of the match referees were biased in their verdicts.

    More over it has just reported the objection of its players as it is the intermediary between ICC and the players.

    It has also shown an alternative to resolving the conflict by saying that the players will be available for testing in 24 hours at one of WADA approved labs. It has certainly not specified any pre conditions for testing. So whats wrong in its stance?

    Some of the players are facing high risk from certain groups and it is reasonable on their part to avoid specifying their where abouts as long as they will be available for testing within 24 hours whenver WADA feels it should test a player.

    As the effect of drugs wont dissapear within a day it would not jeopardise the results of the tests

  • Rooboy on August 4, 2009, 1:16 GMT

    So the BCCI thinks different rules and special treatment should apply to the indian team. What's new?! This is their attitude on every issue!

  • TwitterJitter on August 3, 2009, 18:09 GMT

    My comment is on the sports minister of India. Why the heck does India need a sports minister? What the hell is he accomplishing other than eating into tax payers money? If there is a mechanism needed for funding other sports let there be a department of no more than 10-15 bureaucrats who will receive the annual budget plans from different sports organisations and propose a budget for different sports based on overall allocation available for the year and have the budget reviewed and approved by prime minister. The position of sports minister is an unnecessary position which is basically waste of tax payers money - not just for his salary and perks but all the associated security costs and other stuff. There is absolutely no return on that investment and something we can happily do away with.

  • HundredPercentBarcelonista on August 3, 2009, 17:10 GMT

    I'm well aware of the threat to the lives of some cricketers. But the fact remains that at certain times these guys do go out in public without any security cover, especially when they're on tour. There are athletes from other countries who are even bigger targets than our cricketers. In fact, the ones from countries where inner city crime is rampant could get attacked any time. You have got to have faith in WADA's ability to ensure the confidentiality of any information you provide them. I'm really disappointed to see people like Tendulkar and Dhoni not seeing the bigger picture for the sport of cricket. This issue will come back to haunt the sport more than match-fixing.

  • nymt2 on August 3, 2009, 9:19 GMT

    Indian Cricketers have said that, they don't have any problem with dope testing during the seasons. Well there must be some scientific reason behind it, for testing off season. No one is scientist here, but logically it seems like if a player is doping off season, and WADA wants to test him randomly, he can delay the test simply if WADA doesn't know where he is, and may be in 15-30 days, tests can't conclude. Security concerns, its like questioning the credibility of a world recognized organization. I can't believe that players can party, they get out of hotel without informing securities, but they have problem of security here.

    Most important thing is if Cricket is to make it to Olympics in 2020, then it has to comply by WADA standards, and as a cricket fan, from neutral perspective thats the way forward. So BCCI may get ICC to abolish WADA, but that will only bring cricket down and hinder it from becoming a global sports. BTW I am an Indian. Player is not bigger than Game.

  • NumberXI on August 3, 2009, 9:14 GMT

    FIFA, UEFA and FIFPro (the last of which is the official professional footballers' association) are not "not compliant". They have officially stated that their position is to reject the requirements of the whereabouts clause, which also means that they do not intend to ask soccer players to comply. Also, there appears to be at least one case pending against WADA for "invasion or privacy" for this particular requirement. What then makes the protest by Indian cricketers such a big deal that everyone is pretending as if they are doing the cause of anti-doping such great harm? I suspect people are merely reacting to them being Indian cricketers and not associated with FIFA or UEFA or FIFPro, because then a different rule would probably apply.

  • nymt2 on August 3, 2009, 9:11 GMT

    Few people commented on my post. Well lets see this logically.WADA is accepted by 571 Sporting bodies, and 191 countries. If WADA's rules affect the right of an Individual, then it affects Europe and USA more, as their laws for freedom are much more liberal than in India. Indian Athletes have already signed WADA clause, they don't seem to have any problems. WADA rules are same for any one, they are not changed or modified for Cricketers or India. Lets face it, Cricket is not a global sports, Football, Tennis, Olympics are, with their star sportsmen, no one has problem. Isn't Roger Federer supposed to be more busy than M S Dhoni, but he seems to have no problem. What about his privacy. If WADA is to perform random tests in off season, then how can they find sporstmen, without knowing where they are. They can be in another country all together.

  • Pratik_vodka on August 3, 2009, 7:52 GMT

    well here most Anti BCCI / or just that the people who cant take BBCI muscle power any more. Well true BCCI does flex its money power like any other money minting organization in sports in the world. Its a branch of Capitalism, where money gives you that power. Buth thats beside the point. Some people need to get their facts straight. Not all sports are WADA compliant neither are all players/sportsmen. BCCI/Indian crickters are not the first one to raise this issue. And certainly not the first indians either, its just that what indian cricketers do makes news faster on cricinfo/indian media.This WADA clause is already under consultation/review around the world, and also WADA is not fully recognized yet by all sports as some still follow their own anti doping bodies/ rules. Also if some have not complained about this issue doesnt make it right. The rule is under review and is certain to change with the kind of opposition its faced around the world and not only indian cricketers.

  • ravioli on August 3, 2009, 6:32 GMT

    Okay - HundredPercentBarcelonista, I don't agree with you that the security concerns for reasons of confidentiality are daft or invalid. Yes, the WADA is a shining example of a sporting body (no sarcasm, seriously) but it isn't 2 WADA nominees who will be the only ones with access to this information. WADA is going to get the whereabouts information from 2 ICC-nominated personnel. There are going to be just too many people who will know the whereabouts of star players for security to be effective - and if you are going to deny that cricket in the subcontinent faces security threats on a level with Israeli athletes, then you are just sticking your head in the sand. I'd be interested to know how the information about Israeli athletes is submitted and managed. I don't think Cricket is a special case, any more than other team sports or non-athletics / non-track and field sports are special cases. Just that a little more thought needs to go into how the information is submitted and managed.

  • vimalan on August 3, 2009, 1:59 GMT

    this has got to be one of the most ridiculous rules devised ever..why should someone inform their whereabouts that too for continuous 90 days..what logic this WADA is talking about ?

  • Earth-kar on August 2, 2009, 21:49 GMT

    Its quite ridiculous to expect any sports person to reveal their schedule for one hour for 90 days! I mean its a joke and hard to believe that this is the only means of random testing that one can think of. I am not sure if knowing the 90 day schedule brings any kind of randomness to a testing process but if it is a security concern, the decision makers would be foolish not to address it. A small note to nymt2 - if cricketers have raised a security concern, or for that matter anyone raises such a concern, and u find it laughable or a bluff without a reason; then I am thankful that you are not a part of any board. You knowing that the players go for parties/ad shoots with escorts is not the same as you knowing what they are going to do, where for 1 hr the next 90 days. Also if Phelps or Beckham have agreed to this clause, it doesnt make it right and you obviously arent following the issue when you say no one else has problems because even the football/tennis worlds have cited issues

  • TwitterJitter on August 2, 2009, 21:33 GMT

    Are other professional sports like major league baseball and national football league WADA compliant or do they have their own drug testing policies in place? I would think that it is the latter but I would like someone to shed some light on this. To the best of knowledge, I don't think that NFL, NBA,MLB or NHL are WADA compliant. From the information I gathered each of them have their own drug testing policies in place but not that of WADA.

  • HundredPercentBarcelonista on August 2, 2009, 20:51 GMT

    It will be great when 10 years down the line people will find out that their favourite cricketers were juicing up. It's pathetic - but not surprising - that most people have no idea how serious a problem doping is. WADA isn't full of loose-mouthed dimwits who will breach confidentiality agreements. Besides, the body doesn't insist on a hard and 90-day fast schedule. It's not too difficult to send an email or leave a text message updating a change of plan. If Phil Hughes can get his manager to tweet about his exclusion I'm sure our precious Indian cricketers can make peace with WADA's rules. As for players' security, I've seen Indian cricketers loitering about the streets of Wellington without and guards.

  • promal on August 2, 2009, 19:40 GMT

    Why the hell do we Indians fuss so much??? If you want to be anti doping, then you better comply with WADA. This is again an issue of BCCI flexing its muscles and knowing that even by rejecting the WADA code, it is the ICC and not they that will have to back down. I think that's ridiculous and India should just be banned from all ICC competitions unless and until they approve WADA. All this nonsense about security and invading privacy is nonsense; the information is not going to be public knowledge. And thousands of athletes are doing it worldwide; why are the Indian cricketers throwing up such a fuss? The fact that FIFA or whoever else is doing the same is no excuse. In my opinion, the refusal of Indian players to sign the WADA code makes them look guilty, even if they aren't. Right from when they start earning their bloody millions, our cricketers think they are above every other person and organisation in the world. Shame on them!

  • pkorion8 on August 2, 2009, 17:39 GMT

    I believe that is the right move taken by BCCI and Indian players, rules should be made for sports in a way that it doesnt collide and indulge into one's personal life.If i was playing in Pakistani team, i wouldnt have accepted this unless required changes were made.This is my personal view on the situation.

  • TellasisPatel on August 2, 2009, 17:07 GMT

    Nobody would like to plan and confidently disclose to others three months in advance where he/she will be on a given day, unless they will be in their office or hospital. This WADA rule does not make much sense, so I commend and applaud Indian cricketers to stand up and object to it. Personal security is also a legitimate concern for certain players more than most. This WADA rule, designed to help testing officials but not the players, should be thrown out. TellasiaPatel Hickory, NC, USA

  • Rastus on August 2, 2009, 17:00 GMT

    Who gives a toss about these WADA rules. Good for the Indians for standing up against this ridiculous board. Who in their right mind would know or even tell someone where they are 90 days in advance. Cricket has been doing fine on its own without being involved in the world of cheats. Cricket is a special case and should stand firm against WADA. The ICC signed up for this nonsense without really thinking of the consequences and should now pull out that there are genuine concerns about WADA's policies.

  • Rezaul on August 2, 2009, 16:49 GMT

    I dont understand why Indian players and BCCI are going against the WADA policy. The policy is to ensure clean sports image. Now, if BCCI does not want to sign its players in this agreement then it will only put themselves in a dangerous situation. ICC has to react sharply. Because ICC is an international body, which has nothing to comply with only a single member's wish. BCCI and its players are making too much about the issue. Again, the intention of this policy is not to harm security rather manage the clean image of cricket. And, I believe predicting the next 90 days of any super star is also possible. So, this has very little thing to do with security concern. Ponting, KP, Sangakara, Yunus, Smith, etc players are also super star and they signed the agreement, because they want cricket to be clean and remain gentleman's game. If Indian players do not sign the agreement then we will think that they consider themselves above cricket, which should not be!<Arzoo-USA>

  • KT007 on August 2, 2009, 15:24 GMT

    ABP235 please read the location requirements. If you change the location then all you need to do is send an SMS. Obviously you do not understand how doping enhances performance. Read about them before commenting on effective period of doping .Security is a valid concern. Privacy is not a concern. Its part of being a big star in the game. You get big bucks for being a star and with that comes restrictions. When most of the other cricketers accept the conditions then why not Indians? WADA is a third party administrator and India accepted the proposal at ICC. Why change it now. Why cant the BCCI do a better job at looking at language of the proposal before endorsing it? To me clean cricket is better than dope heads playing it. So stop the whining and get on with it. There are mechanisms to protect the cricketers. Doesn't having bodyguards around you all the time take away your privacy?

  • jakefrep on August 2, 2009, 15:02 GMT

    WADA - an entity composed of people who can't play sports committed to making life miserable for those who can. It's about time athletes stood up to WADA's increasingly excessive and dubiously effective policies.

  • Melsangy on August 2, 2009, 14:56 GMT

    I see lot of pro and anti Indian player comment here. Most of the players in different sports are earning millions of basis of their skill and hard work and not on someone's charity. If one will apply logic here in the clauses provided by WADA it is obvious that WADA want's to know who is doing what in sports at any given time. WADA was deveoped by International Olympic Committee in 1999 and its closed practise to test any player in world provides no statistical validation of their tests. The recently updated whereabout clause of WADA violates Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The same way it violate the Indian Penal Code Article 21 of constitution about individual privacy. So all those jealous posters against Indians should bear in mind that Indians are not suppose to sign any thing that is against their constitution. @nymt2: You seems more upset because you dont have any reasoning for your arguments and Michael Phelps dont earn more than Indian Players on top.

  • ShehzadKhan on August 2, 2009, 14:28 GMT

    I would just want to ask what the rest of the Indian sportsmen doing? like hockey players etc. All of them must have had signed such contracts. BCCI and its players seem to think that they are larger than anyone, any rule, etc.

  • ABP235 on August 2, 2009, 12:28 GMT

    It appears only India and Indians read contracts/codes properly and others just follow like dumb fools. How on earth you can predict where you will be in each of the next 90 days!! what a load of rubbish!! Whether you are a celebrity or not, the question is not of privacy, security or anything like that. The question is of logic and common sense! Who has to grow up? I think it should be WADA or ICC who has to grow up and not BCCI or Indian cricketers. By the way, this is one of the very few things that I will support BCCI or Indian cricketers for!! If the issue is, drugs enhance player performances, then isnt checking before a match sufficient? Are they trying to say that you can take drugs on a certain day and benefit from it for a match played in 2-3 months time? I think that is more cow dung on so much junk that ICC has brought to the table. ICC badly needs a professional and logical lawyer to help them out who should also understand CRICKET as a game.

  • rahulsaxena on August 2, 2009, 12:18 GMT

    BCCI has taken the right stand. The safety and security of our cricketers is of paramount importance to us. And every cricket playing nation has a problem with this rule and we've stood up for the entire cricketing community like a responsible member. You should stop criticizing the BCCI

  • Salahuddin25 on August 2, 2009, 11:47 GMT

    Thats correct why the cricketers need to sign that WHERRABOUTS thats his personal matter.How come the players can inform WADA next 90days where they will be?Thats ridiculous.I don't agree with this cluase and interfare there personal life without freedom.If WADA want then let the WADA provide the players one personal security so then then can keep an eye on them.

  • nymt2 on August 2, 2009, 11:30 GMT

    well this is just laughable here. I think David Beckham or Micheal Phelps would be earning 100 times more than Indian Cricketers, and WADA is connected to every sport. So how come only these egoistic cricketers have problem with WADA rules, and none others. What about other legendary cricketers from other countries. And terrorist threats, security concerns, you gotta be kidding me. Most of Celebrity Cricketers in India spend their time in off season in shooting ADs, parties, and stuff. They are escorted by commandos where ever they go, so thats a bluff. Privacy, well if you are paid billions, then you have to sacrifice something. No Indian player is a member of FICA, neither is there any players organization in India, says so much about their holiness.

    I guess ICC should take a firm stand and don't allow them to participate in Champions Trophy, come what may. Thats the only way to get their heads right. But as usual BCCI will flex its money power......

  • Pratik_vodka on August 2, 2009, 11:19 GMT

    First lets be clear on this Indian cricketers didnt reject the idea because that they cheat and donot want to get caught or something. i am sure they as willing as any other sportmen in the world to adhere to international anti doping/ non-cheating in sports. But the whole debate is about the practicality of things. Will it be practical to be at a certain time and certain place and know it advance. And incase you default three times you are banned for 2 years. These are impractical not only for cricketers but any world sportsman.Get better laws and ways to catch cheaters in sports. Just because administrators dont have better governing laws doesnt mean sprotmen have to suffer. There is corruption in sports administratoin as well, will administrators tell their where abouts to all everysingle day of the year. to catch criminals should all law abiding citizens give away right to privacy? Get better ways of catching criminals and not just make laws for the heck of it !

  • menelaus on August 2, 2009, 9:58 GMT

    Grow up cricketers. The only way anti-doping works is by random testing in and out of competition. That's how the cheats get caught. Cricket isn't any more special than any other sport. The best anti-doping agencies have great experience at dong this work. Much evidence exists of how athletes try to avoid testers. Cricketers will be the same if they get the chance. No sport has been drug free. Cricket will be the same, in fact already is. If you want drugfree sport, then you must have the the best testing regime possible. Invest in the labs and the testing staff and buy into the international protocols.

  • RaghuramanR on August 2, 2009, 9:48 GMT

    // No way would I put myself to the inconvenience of a "whereabouts" clause.

    If 'I' were to be a cricket player contracted by BCCI, which in turn is obliged to ICC, then I SHOULD be willing to comply with the rules of ICC. If 'I' were to be a simple netizen and cricket spectator, I dont have to convey my 'whereabouts' to anyone, forget ICC or BCCI. Period. There is a price to pay for being a 'public' figure, say sportsman or actor or politician. No point in complaining about inconvenience of 'whereabouts' clause. Can people who make a fuss say the same about actors or politicians, who are even give Z+ security, that they can go wherever they want without informing anyone?

  • Daiya on August 2, 2009, 9:30 GMT

    Wow it says "EACH DAY IN THAT QUARTER". That is crazy. Initially when reading it I thought "Whats the big dea??l...just 1 day for an hour in a 90 day period is not a problem" but then I realized that it means they have to dedicate an hour each day to a specific location which is just ridiculous. For an international team that travels as much as a cricket team does, it is not viable to dedicate 1 hour just in case some1 comes along to test them. I am astonished that only India have raised this issue. I would have expected a country like Aussie to reject such action. I think that every athlete should reject this clause. The consequences are great, if the ICC rejects the drug testing, but there is no way that such a requirement can hold for long.

  • SJ_NR on August 2, 2009, 9:21 GMT

    For once, a very sensible stand by BCCI. Why should I disclose to all and sundry where I will be at a particular time? Should I say I will be washing my backside between 0630 and 0635, making love etc.? They are taking this testing too far. Again, I would like the players to stay firm and not budge an inch from their stand. What does ICC gain from making cricket an Olympic game? They have not been able to spread far and wide when they are in control, and I don't see the game spreading with the IOC and WADA in control either. First, let us clean up the ICC of its Thuglaqian decision making. All else will fall into place,

  • atulcricket on August 2, 2009, 9:11 GMT

    Its ridiculous clause to know whereabouts of a player as when on holidays who plans every move and place to go one week in advance.They will always be in pressure to update their whereabouts on every change of plan and penalized if they forget to do so. Players are playing cricket 9-10 months in a year and ICC already knows FTP then why don't they conduct doping tests at that time as they know whereabouts of the players. I am surprised to see response of FICA as they are telling that yes this clause is not good but Indian players should be penalized. How hypocritical that is?? when they don't have enough guts to stand up for the wrong thing, they don't want anybody else to stand up for that and want them penalized. I don't understand why they are so jealous of Indian players??

  • scritty on August 2, 2009, 8:52 GMT

    No way would I put myself to the inconvenience of a "whereabouts" clause. I would not do any job theat insisted on such draconian measures. Glad the Indian players refused it. It's an infringement of human rights. Well done !!

  • dinuhebbar on August 2, 2009, 8:41 GMT

    It is not clear why some international guidelines are needed to be blindly followed even though they infringe with not only with individual privacy but also with national security issues. There must be some way out of this situation. Another ridiculous issue is the threat of FICA to ICC to take action on Indian players. Well, it was a mistake on their part for signing on the dotted lines without looking at the implications.

  • sam_ten2000 on August 2, 2009, 8:31 GMT

    good decision by BCCI, u cnt take away sum1s fundamental rights .

  • rnarayan on August 2, 2009, 8:26 GMT

    What rubbish! Firstly, Nr Mnohar, The Prime Minister has security cover and his whereabouts are known. Sure, the constitution guarantees privacy, but India's is not special in this. The BCCI employs these guys. Most employers want to know where key employees are even when on holiday. Are all these companies breaking the law?! I think the best way of putting these guys in their place is to exclude India from the Champions Trophy if they don't comply. Of course it won't happen.

  • anmn on August 2, 2009, 8:13 GMT

    WADA is the culprit here. ICC did not make an intelligent decision to submit, when such an irritant clause is not corrected. ICC seem too eager to join a broken-bandwagon. ICC should fight for their "sponsors", BCCI - Indian cricketers - Indian public, and ensure WADA resolves this amiably, instead of trying to arm-twist Indian Players into submission. ICC should learn to work with cricketers. Remember, administration exists for cricketers, and not other way about. Kudos to Indian cricketers for standing up against to a clause, which everyone agrees is not good, but no one wants to resolve. As my professor said, "just because everyone buys torn jeans, means you have to do the same". All sportsmen must aggregate, follow Indians' lead, and impress WADA to do the right thing. I can only see WADA and ICC as initiators of this irritant situation.

  • TheRightGame on August 2, 2009, 7:48 GMT

    Good on the Indian players. What kind of dumb policy is this? Its a clear invasion of player privacy. Even FIFA has not signed this dumb contract with WADA then why is ICC so eager?

  • RaghuramanR on August 2, 2009, 7:20 GMT

    I think a simple issue is being blown out of proportion. BCCI has to simply find one person whom it can entrust with knowing the details of the players whereabouts. There can be a non-disclosure agreement between the player and BCCI, so that the information is not 'broadcast' to the world. Player can inform BCCI about his whereabouts even by SMS and if he is 'out of town', he can just SMS the same. If the player cannot even trust the BCCI, then there is no option but to quit/retire. If the player does not WANT to disclose the details even to BCCI, then it is logical that he should quit. I think India or for that matter, Asian cricket playing nations always look for ways to stretch or circumvent the rules, whether it is chucking or doping. If they feel that some rule is against 'credibility' of the game, they can raise it in ICC, instead of making noises and even worse, circumventing. BCCI cannot be treated an exemption to the rule. Period.

  • RaghuramanR on August 2, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    It all boils down to the non-cricketing contracts which the players sign and how much of it is clear to them. Is it a case of personal intrusion or lack of awareness about their non-cricketing schedule? If cricket schedules are really as hectic as they claim, then it becomes all the more easier for them to give their whereabout details. I do not think that ICC is getting too much into privacy of its players. It will through the boards that ICC may get the details. So there can be a 'non-disclosure' agreement between the individual board and player, so that information is not 'leaked' out to all and sundry. If the player does not even want to tell the board, forget ICC, well it is a different ball game ;)

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • RaghuramanR on August 2, 2009, 6:54 GMT

    It all boils down to the non-cricketing contracts which the players sign and how much of it is clear to them. Is it a case of personal intrusion or lack of awareness about their non-cricketing schedule? If cricket schedules are really as hectic as they claim, then it becomes all the more easier for them to give their whereabout details. I do not think that ICC is getting too much into privacy of its players. It will through the boards that ICC may get the details. So there can be a 'non-disclosure' agreement between the individual board and player, so that information is not 'leaked' out to all and sundry. If the player does not even want to tell the board, forget ICC, well it is a different ball game ;)

  • RaghuramanR on August 2, 2009, 7:20 GMT

    I think a simple issue is being blown out of proportion. BCCI has to simply find one person whom it can entrust with knowing the details of the players whereabouts. There can be a non-disclosure agreement between the player and BCCI, so that the information is not 'broadcast' to the world. Player can inform BCCI about his whereabouts even by SMS and if he is 'out of town', he can just SMS the same. If the player cannot even trust the BCCI, then there is no option but to quit/retire. If the player does not WANT to disclose the details even to BCCI, then it is logical that he should quit. I think India or for that matter, Asian cricket playing nations always look for ways to stretch or circumvent the rules, whether it is chucking or doping. If they feel that some rule is against 'credibility' of the game, they can raise it in ICC, instead of making noises and even worse, circumventing. BCCI cannot be treated an exemption to the rule. Period.

  • TheRightGame on August 2, 2009, 7:48 GMT

    Good on the Indian players. What kind of dumb policy is this? Its a clear invasion of player privacy. Even FIFA has not signed this dumb contract with WADA then why is ICC so eager?

  • anmn on August 2, 2009, 8:13 GMT

    WADA is the culprit here. ICC did not make an intelligent decision to submit, when such an irritant clause is not corrected. ICC seem too eager to join a broken-bandwagon. ICC should fight for their "sponsors", BCCI - Indian cricketers - Indian public, and ensure WADA resolves this amiably, instead of trying to arm-twist Indian Players into submission. ICC should learn to work with cricketers. Remember, administration exists for cricketers, and not other way about. Kudos to Indian cricketers for standing up against to a clause, which everyone agrees is not good, but no one wants to resolve. As my professor said, "just because everyone buys torn jeans, means you have to do the same". All sportsmen must aggregate, follow Indians' lead, and impress WADA to do the right thing. I can only see WADA and ICC as initiators of this irritant situation.

  • rnarayan on August 2, 2009, 8:26 GMT

    What rubbish! Firstly, Nr Mnohar, The Prime Minister has security cover and his whereabouts are known. Sure, the constitution guarantees privacy, but India's is not special in this. The BCCI employs these guys. Most employers want to know where key employees are even when on holiday. Are all these companies breaking the law?! I think the best way of putting these guys in their place is to exclude India from the Champions Trophy if they don't comply. Of course it won't happen.

  • sam_ten2000 on August 2, 2009, 8:31 GMT

    good decision by BCCI, u cnt take away sum1s fundamental rights .

  • dinuhebbar on August 2, 2009, 8:41 GMT

    It is not clear why some international guidelines are needed to be blindly followed even though they infringe with not only with individual privacy but also with national security issues. There must be some way out of this situation. Another ridiculous issue is the threat of FICA to ICC to take action on Indian players. Well, it was a mistake on their part for signing on the dotted lines without looking at the implications.

  • scritty on August 2, 2009, 8:52 GMT

    No way would I put myself to the inconvenience of a "whereabouts" clause. I would not do any job theat insisted on such draconian measures. Glad the Indian players refused it. It's an infringement of human rights. Well done !!

  • atulcricket on August 2, 2009, 9:11 GMT

    Its ridiculous clause to know whereabouts of a player as when on holidays who plans every move and place to go one week in advance.They will always be in pressure to update their whereabouts on every change of plan and penalized if they forget to do so. Players are playing cricket 9-10 months in a year and ICC already knows FTP then why don't they conduct doping tests at that time as they know whereabouts of the players. I am surprised to see response of FICA as they are telling that yes this clause is not good but Indian players should be penalized. How hypocritical that is?? when they don't have enough guts to stand up for the wrong thing, they don't want anybody else to stand up for that and want them penalized. I don't understand why they are so jealous of Indian players??

  • SJ_NR on August 2, 2009, 9:21 GMT

    For once, a very sensible stand by BCCI. Why should I disclose to all and sundry where I will be at a particular time? Should I say I will be washing my backside between 0630 and 0635, making love etc.? They are taking this testing too far. Again, I would like the players to stay firm and not budge an inch from their stand. What does ICC gain from making cricket an Olympic game? They have not been able to spread far and wide when they are in control, and I don't see the game spreading with the IOC and WADA in control either. First, let us clean up the ICC of its Thuglaqian decision making. All else will fall into place,