The Norwegian club has urged stricter anti-doping regulations after a remarkable situation in which a footballer from their women’s team ingested an illegal substance from artificial turf infill in an artificial pitch.
Precedent-Setting Decision Exposes External Dangers
A lengthy process ended this week when Wada did not challenge the decision of Anti-Doping Norway that the individual was faultless. However this unprecedented situation has highlighted the potential dangers to footballers of environmental exposure to illegal materials and introduced the likelihood of more issues emerging around the thousands artificial playing fields in Europe.
The Match and Shocking Finding
The thought of a banned substance was far from on anyone’s minds when the team played against LSK Kvinner at the venue in Lillestrøm, outside Oslo, this spring. But a regular doping test found four players from both teams had submitted samples with the illegal material DMBA. One of the samples, from the Vålerenga player, was above the acceptable limit of the defined amount.
Probe and Finding
This started an investigation that confused authorities from each side and Adno, which discovered no shared factors in food, beverages or additional products consumed by the players affected. The affected player, who has decided to be anonymous, shared the anxiety resulting from learning she was accused of a violation. “That was an awful time,” she said. “That was a deeply distressing situation and it was hard to comprehend what was going on.”
The player was allowed to keep playing while the case proceeded. She feels the shadow it created may have affected her results and was extremely happy when a surroundings probe, which wrapped up during the summer, finally discovered the unusual cause.
Cause Found
The investigation found, upon examining environmental samples and substances from multiple sites within the facility, that the rubber crumb – commonly called synthetic material – on the field had included the stimulant, which had been passed on to the players through contact. This compound is a synthetic material that stimulates the central nervous system and is at times included in health aids, even though it is illegal in the country and the European Union. It was known, by scientific analysis, to be a compound that may appear from the decomposition of the tyre material and there is some disappointment that this went unnoticed in the initial probe.
Innocent Determined
The individual was found to have borne no responsibility in the pioneering situation in top-level competition where surrounding factors has been leading to a suspected doping offence. “I consistently believed I hadn’t violated any rules and I’m grateful Adno for identifying the cause to LSK-Hallen,” she said.
“Still, the case and ruling feel somewhat arbitrary. Unless the investigation could find the source as the origin, my situation would have been much more difficult. As an athlete who is very cautious, obey all guidelines and yet find yourself involved in such a situation, it reveals how exposed you are as an athlete.”
Ongoing Issues
The surfaces are not deemed to pose a health risk to individuals but worries have been expressed before about their role in environmental contamination. Beginning that year, synthetic material will be banned in Europe. Following the Vålerenga case, the national association recommended that indoor fixtures be relocated outside. There are roughly many hundreds similar synthetic surfaces in Norway and they are also prevalent in the United Kingdom, notably at local clubs. A universal guideline does not exist to guarantee synthetic pitches are without compounds illegal in athletics.
Demands for Reform
The club are urging regulations to be strengthened to accept that a violation is not always traceable to the individual’s behaviour, deliberate or accidental. International regulations are founded on “complete accountability”. Those are detailed in article 2.1 of Wada’s anti-doping code, which reads: “Officials do not need that deliberation, responsibility, carelessness or intentional consumption by the player be shown to determine a positive test.”
The CEO, the Vålerenga CEO, remarked: “Environmental factors must be high on the radar going ahead. It’s about developing a complete picture of what surrounding conditions might cause a violation. Doping control has to develop and these situations should be a much larger part of the elements that are reviewed.”
Future Implications
There is a worry that, given that the danger of DMBA pollution via fields has been highlighted, in theory any future player to test positive for the same reason would not be able to be found innocent. Officials further questions if the investigation would have been as thorough if just a few individuals had tested positive including DMBA during the game.
Looking Ahead
The exonerated player said: “With luck future players in a situation like mine will have improved rights going forward. Policies in their current form could cause {an innocent athlete|a blameless player|a
