No, BCCI, cricket in Olympics won’t mean Indian players will have to compromise on privacy

Is the Board of Control for Cricket in India standing in the way of cricket being considered for inclusion in the 2024 Olympic Games? Reports suggest the BCCI could be doing just that, although nothing has been forthcoming officially from the cricket body.

It may be noted that the International Olympic Committee has only explored the possibility of cricket coming back into the Olympics after the 1900 Paris Games. There is a long way ahead for the sport to be included.

Are the so-called objections of the BCCI, as reported in the media, strong enough to justify the Board’s reluctance to back the ICC’s bid to get cricket included in the Olympics?

Let us look at the facts.

What’s the big deal about the whereabouts clause?

Reports have said the World Anti-Doping Agency’s “whereabouts” clause could be a major bone of contention between the BCCI and the ICC, and between the ICC and IOC. The ICC became a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code in 2006. However, not until 2010 did the ICC get its whereabouts rules accepted by the BCCI and approved by Wada.

The grouse of the Indian cricketers, supported by the BCCI, was that the whereabouts rules were too intrusive and cricket needed to have its own rules that would respect the privacy of the players.

The ICC worked out a set of rules by which cricketers were to be tested at training grounds, match venues and hotels under the whereabouts rules applicable to the large majority of international players except those who had previously been sanctioned for doping offences.

Last year The Hindu reported, quoting an ICC spokesman, that the BCCI and the Indian players were very much part of the ICC whereabouts programme. But will BCCI have to sign a Wada document to accept the international body’s whereabouts rules in case cricket is included in the Olympics programme?

The BCCI won’t have anything to do with Wada

No. National federations are not required to sign anything with Wada. That task is performed by the International Federations and the National Anti-Doping Organisations.

Wada does not have a set of its own whereabouts rules that it applies to all sports and Nados. Individual international federations are authorised to frame their own whereabouts rules. National federations are expected to co-ordinate filing of whereabouts information either to the international federation or to the Nado.

But will the IOC get the whereabouts information that the ICC could be having if cricket is included in the Olympics?

Yes. Going by the Rio Olympics pattern, the IOC’s out-of-competition testing could be based on ICC’s registered testing pool (National Players Pool), which is already in operation and under which Indian players are tested.

Cricket’s return to Olympics will not, thus, mean Indian cricketers coming under Wada’s whereabouts rules and being subjected to more scrutiny that may lead to additional breach of their privacy. But isn’t there a danger of the IOC seeking information regarding other cricket players who are not on the whereabouts list of the ICC and springing a surprise visit to their homes?

That could be a possibility, though remote. The IOC normally arms itself with such an authority prior to the Olympics. Its out-of-competition testing generally begins from the opening of the Games Village, say about a month or two weeks prior to the Games.

Cricket is not a dope-affected sport

The top-five batsmen, bowlers and a wicket-keeper of India, as per One-Day International rankings, would be in the ICC whereabouts list by the time the IOC seeks, if at all, details about the additional players. It will require some imagination to believe that the IOC would be looking to test five or six Indian cricketers who are not in the top-ranking list prior to the Olympic Games and thus seek their residential addresses.

The IOC normally looks for training venues, residential locations at Olympic venues, etc. There is usually no requirement for the players to file anything with the IOC, the job being done by the National Olympic Committee, in this case the Indian Olympic Association.

Cricket is not a dope-affected sport. Wada statistics for 2015 show (2016 figures are yet to be published) that cricket had just two positive cases out of 995 samples tested (0.2%) compared to, say, football with 32,362 samples and 160 positive (0.5%), and hockey with 1,432 samples and six positive (0.4%) among team games.

Weightlifting (272 from 10,262 at 2.7%), athletics (265 from 30,308 at 0.9%) and cycling (244 from 22,652 at 0.9%) topped the charts.

The IOC cannot be expected to expend its energies in chasing our cricket stars for testing prior to the Games should the sport come back to the Olympic fold. The IOC Task Force could be expected to have its hands full keeping an eye on weightlifters, athletes and cyclists, among others.

Those trying to spread panic about Wada whereabouts rules may do well to remember that the agency already has authority to test any Indian cricketer any time anywhere in the world (subject to night-time testing restrictions) and does not require information contained in the whereabouts form.

A perceived fear of privacy

Reports have also said that the Indian players were wary of blood tests.The ICC did 406 urine sample tests in 2015, turning up a lone positive test. It did not conduct any blood test at all. The BCCI topped among the members with the highest number of tests with 176 urine samples in 2015.

Except Australia (through the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority), no other cricket association did any blood tests in 2015. Australia did nine.

Wada reported just three positive cases from 12,526 blood samples in 2015, two in cycling and one in athletics. Contrary to popular perception, urine is the most preferred matrix in dope-testing in sports. Blood is also collected, at specified events, or out of competition, for the purpose of preparing biological passport.

It has been reported that the IOC wants the ICC to ensure all top teams and players would be available to compete in the Olympics for the former to take up the case of cricket for inclusion in the Olympics. BCCI’s support to the ICC thus becomes a must.

Cricket’s inclusion in the Olympics, as and when it comes, if at all, would be of utmost importance to lesser-ranked cricketing nations because of the support they would receive from the governments.

Just because of the perceived fear of the privacy of a few star Indian cricketers being breached through some anti-doping regulations, the ICC and the BCCI should not deny the opportunity to such nations at least even if cricket’s Olympic return is of no significance to India.