Written by 
Sport has had a long a varied history with ethics and ethical behaviour from the systematic abuse of gymnasts to the systematic doping in the peloton. Recently there seems to have been a split into two forms of ethical behaviour: not getting caught vs not doing it at all – we would all agree that these are very different behaviours.
The past (Para) Olympic cycle has been a turbulent one for high performance sport within the UK – especially with regards to ethics. In particular two behaviours from high performance sports cultures have been highlighted and reported on more than any other: athlete abuse and doping (I believe doping to be a form of athlete abuse, but that discussion is for another day).
In supporting athletes to perform to never-before-seen levels of success that catapulted the GB Olympic team up the medal to third (London, 2012) and second (Rio, 2016) there has been a split between those who have done this ethically and those who haven’t.
There are currently too many high-profile accounts of abuse within UK high performance sport to list here – six of the top performing eight Olympic sports from Rio have had reviews on their culture due to widespread allegations of athlete abuse. When challenged about their behaviour, the coaches and management that have overseen this abusive culture often speak about a mythical line between abuse and tough coaching (they always fall on the side of tough coaching!) or a grey area between playing the system and doping (it’s never doping!).
For many survivors, it is exceptionally difficult to find proof that would lead to their abusers facing criminal consequences whilst others might not be sure that the behaviours they were subjected to, was abuse. The gaslighting of a generation of athletes into believing they are cared for by their NGBs and NSOs within these abusive cultures is an upsetting by-product of a win-at-all costs policy within high performance sport. No medals = no money…although this appears to be changing under new leadership and a new policy by UK Sport.
Whilst proof is required for criminal consequences, an area that doesn’t need proof is our ethics. If we did something that we thought was ‘tough coaching’ or a ‘grey area’ in doping ethics won’t care – ethics is pretty black and white. If you’re supporting athletes being given a medical procedure, they don’t need in an effort to promote their performance, you’re unethical. Even if publicly you’re not caught whilst lying to yourself that doping or abuse was worth it – you’re not the ethical person others think you are.
Ethics don’t care if weren’t caught giving athletes unneeded thyroxine to increase recovery and training capacity – its doping.
Ethics don’t care if you weren’t caught physically manhandling your young athletes – its abuse.
Ethics don’t care if you backdated a TUE to make it look like the medication you’ve been caught giving your athletes is required – its doping.
Ethics don’t care if your relentless verbal and mental harassment of athletes was just teaching resilience – its abuse.
Ethics don’t care If you’re handing out inhalers to non-asthmatic athletes because an advantage can be made – it’s doping.
Ethics don’t care if you trial Ketones and then get athletes to sign an NDA and say they’re on their own if they fail a drugs test – it’s abuse and it’s doping.
So many people in the very top of our sports would fail a simple ethics proposal for an undergraduate degree because they wouldn’t be able to explain why any of this would be necessary on human participants. That is why so much of it is kept secret – not just because of an advantage they don’t want their opposition to know – it’s because what they’re doing is also unethical. We are finding out about key events at the top of our sports from a decade ago. Why not be truthful about what happened if it was ethical?
Increasingly a picture is emerging that some of our sports have been built on cheating and abusing to win – and not only was the reward medals, money, notoriety and power – the reward was a reduction in oversight. At the time of writing reports are emerging that WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) have opened an investigation into UKADs role in 2010 of allowing an NGB – British Cycling – to conduct their own doping tests and not release the findings.
Where was the oversight?
Although it would be excellent if all abusive coaches and management that facilitated abusive cultures were caught – at a deeper level, a lack of proof doesn’t mean the abuse didn’t happen.
If abuse happened, then it happened.
If you doped your athletes, you’re a doper.
If you abused your athletes, you’re an abuser.
The public may never find out, but you’ll know the truth about your ethics – it’s black and white.