Rugby College: Rugby"s drug shame: Five top-flight players fail tests but RFU will not name ...

By

Chris Foy

PUBLISHED:

13:45, 22 October 2013

|

UPDATED:

20:51, 22 October 2013

Rugby chiefs on Tuesday night rejected claims of a cover-up and denied the game in England has a drug problem after it emerged five Aviva Premiership players returned positive samples last season.

Nobody in the top division had failed one of the 617 regular drugs tests, the RFUâ€™s third annual anti-doping report revealed, but five had failed one of the 345 tests under the Illicit Drugs Programme set up to target recreational drug-taking in the aftermath of Matt Stevensâ€™ two-year ban for cocaine use. It tests for cocaine, cannabis, ecstasy and amphetamines.

In the report published on Tuesday, the identities of the five were not divulged, as they remain anonymous on the basis of first-time offences. Had they tested positive under the World Anti-Doping Agency-approved programme, they would have faced the threat of being publicly convicted and suspended for a considerable period.

General view of an official Gilbert Premiership Rugby Matchball. Rugby Union stock picture. Rugby ball stock

In addition to the five Premiership

players, another five from National League One and below failed tests.

But Stephen Watkins, the unionâ€™s anti-doping and illicit drugs programme

manager, refuted any suggestion of a drug problem in rugby.

Watkins said: â€˜Does rugby have a drugs problem? â€œNoâ€ would be my answer

to that. I was surprised that we didnâ€™t get any positives in the first

three years (of the Illicit Drugs Programme). Iâ€™m not concerned by this.

â€˜Itâ€™s a very low number and Iâ€™m encouraged by that. Five is not that

many when you compare it across the player population (0.29 per cent).

We take a strong stance on this â€” we donâ€™t want players using drugs out

on a Saturday night. Itâ€™s not good for the image of the game or the

health of the players.â€™

The RFU are also adamant keeping the playersâ€™ names from the public was

not a means of sweeping a serious issue under the carpet.

Watkins added: â€˜The illicit programme is based much more on welfare and

the health of the game. The reason for anonymity is that itâ€™s viewed as a

health issue. If a player fails another test 18 months after failing

the first, then that will go public.

â€˜If you fail again, thatâ€™s it. Youâ€™ll be banned, fined and your name

will be in the public domain. The players have made a mistake, but they

have been treated and paid their fines. Of the players who tested

positive, nobody has indicated long-term use. They have all been

one-off, making serious errors of judgment.

â€˜Once they have gone through the treatment process, I take over and

issue a fine. An academy player will be fined Â£1,000 and a senior player

Â£5,000. The players who have all been fined view it as a massive fine, a

huge amount to pay out in one go. We then target-test them and none of

them have failed repeated testing.â€™

The Illicit Drugs Programme was set up to target recreational drug-taking in the aftermath of Matt Stevens

The Illicit Drugs Programme was set up to target recreational drug-taking in the aftermath of Matt Stevens’ two-year ban for cocaine use in 2009

The five Premiership players who tested positive out of competition

could be anyone from academy graduates to senior, first-team players,

although the indications are that most if not all of the five offenders

are in the former group.

The Illicit Drugs Programme testing last season used hair samples in 83

per cent of cases, as that shows up any substance use for three to seven

months after the offence took place.

Watkins said: â€˜Thereâ€™s absolutely no room for complacency here and I

have to point out that the RFU donâ€™t have to run the illicit drugs

programme.

â€˜We run it â€” and we are one of only a small number of governing bodies

that do â€” because we think itâ€™s a good thing to do for the health of the

game and the players.â€™

Since the RFU set up their Illicit Drugs Programme, the Australian Rugby

Union became the second national governing body to launch a scheme

above and beyond the WADA anti-doping system.

In more recent times, the England and Wales Cricket Board have adopted a similar programme.