Performance Enhancing Drugs In Sport

1.0 Introduction

For the past few decades doping in sport has become a major issue, it resulted in many people using a banned substance to enhance their athletic ability on the playing field. The Australian Law and policy states that if the individual uses a banned substance then anything won during the use of that substance is removed effective immediately. The purpose of this report is to outline the use of drugs in sport. The use of performance enhancing drugs is illegal and will always be illegal, but some people are arguing that doping in sport is acceptable and good to use, because other people have an unfair advantage over other competitors because of the ‘gear’ they use. Australian Law and Anti-Doping organisation’s such as ASADA helps

Their role is to make Australia’s sporting culture free from doping; with the athletes performance is based on their talent, courage and determination (Asada, 2015). Athletes who take the banned supplements are at risk of committing an anti-doping rule violation (Asada, 2015). Because they take the banned substance, they will be automatically banned from that specific sport. The Court of Arbitration for Spot (CAS) is an association liberated to any sports organisation which provides services in order to simplify the settlement of any sports related disagreements through the negotiation by any means of practical rules adapted to the specific needs of sports around the world (TAS-CAS, 2015).

4.0 Investigation

- Check sentence structure

PROBLEM ABOUT STRICT LIABILITY There have been many cases when strict liability has been a problem including the case with a 16-year-old gymnast, whose medal was taken off her after she had taken two cold tablets. Another case using strict liability in the right way is case about Lance Armstrong, who was found out to have been taking performance-enhancing drugs for many years after being caught, and was effectively banned for life (Biography, 2015). The problem with strict liability is that it is just too harsh on the competitor that may have not even taken the illicit substances

By using the banned substance the person who is caught using it will be automatically suspended or even banned. Some of the weaknesses can include that not all banned substance are on the prohibited list and someone can using a prohibited substance without getting caught, such as Lance Armstrong, for many years Lance was using a banned substance and won many races before they caught him. The rule of strict liability should be change because of the harsh repercussions after using a banned substance without knowing that it is the specified substance. Current anti-doping agencies have set their rules about strict liability and that is should never be removed, however some agencies feel like the rule about strict liability should be gone because of the harsh repercussions about the subject in hand. The principle on strict liability should be removed because of the harsh outcomes of this rule, such as the 16 year old gymnast who won gold at the Olympics and was soon after taken of her because the night before she had taken two cold tablets. The prohibited list must only include substances that can actually enhance someone’s performance of the field or track, after the person who is accused of using a banned substance and in fact are saying that they didn't use any type of substance WADA should provide evidence that they of in fact using the