News

Imagine what it is like to open an email that tells you that you have failed a drugs test. You might have no idea how this has happened, how this substance got into your body and will be fearing that the press will pick up on this and everyone will think you are a cheat, a drugs cheat. This could be the end of your career.

The notice will inform you that a Prohibited Substance(s) was found in your Sample. It may well be something you cannot pronounce, let alone have ever heard of, but it will be on WADA’s List. It will tell you if it’s a Specified Substance (these are more likely to have been consumed or used for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance – so can be found in medicines and foods etc ) or a Non-Specified Substance (more serious substances such as anabolic androgenic steroids, EPO, some hormone and metabolic modulators, growth modulators etc) and it will set out the Anti-Doping Rules that apply and inform you that you could be facing a lengthy ban (up to four years potentially).

This is what can happen if an athlete has been exposed to a Prohibited Substance. From the National Anti-Doping Organisation’s (NADO) point of view, it doesn’t know whether the athlete has taken the Substance on purpose to gain a sporting advantage, perhaps a few months ago, and the test results are showing the last remaining traces of a Substance in the Sample.  However it could also be a minute trace of the Substance that the athlete has innocently been exposed to from a contaminated source quite recently.

There have been significant improvements in lab’s testing capability, and we are seeing more positive findings where the level of the Substance is in the nanograms/ml range (one billionth of a gram); even picograms (one trillionth).

The same Rules apply to both scenarios and if the innocent athlete isn’t careful, they could be punished as if they are a cheat.

The Rules are not straight forwards and any athlete in this position needs legal assistance. Most Player Associations and the PPF will help. It’s likely that any domestic case will involve Sport Resolutions or international ones the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Both bodies run pro bono schemes where athletes may be able to secure a free lawyer to help them. We would strongly advise athletes facing such a charge to get advice quickly.

For Specified Substances, the starting point for a ban is 2 years, unless the NADO can prove that the athlete intended to cheat. After that, the athlete can look to reduce or eliminate any ban using Fault based defences. If they can establish No Fault or Negligence, then any ban is eliminated; if No Significant Fault or Negligence (NSFN), then the ban can be reduced to zero, depending on the level of Fault or Negligence, as assessed by the Tribunal hearing the case. To unlock these Fault based defences, the athlete will need to prove how the Substance entered their body.

For the more serious Non-Specified Substances, the starting point is 4 years. The athlete can reduce this to 2 years, if they can prove that there was no intention to cheat. It is likely that again the athlete will need to prove how the Substance entered their body. After that, similar Fault based defences may be available. The only differences relate to NSFN. The reduction is from 2 years to 1 year, but there is also a special rule for Contaminated Products (typically where an athlete has taken a supplement or medicine that has been contaminated during the manufacturing process). Scientific evidence will likely be required to establish this.

The big problem with these Rules is that athletes might not be able to establish how the Substance got into their body. They may only be notified months after they gave a Sample and are then trying to remember what they did, where they were and who they were with months later.

In cases of contamination it might not just be a product that’s been contaminated, it could be environmental contamination (water that has been swam in, something on a surface that’s been touched, something in the air that’s been breathed in etc), it could be contaminated food that’s been eaten, or perhaps person to person contamination (there have been a number of kissing cases).

There are special rules for some Substances typically found in meat from certain countries where Substances like clenbuterol are fed to cattle and can be then digested by humans. In those cases, if the levels are very low, the NADO will investigate before charging the athlete and may accept that the Substance entered the body from eating contaminated meat. A similar rule applies to some diuretics.

The Rules are set to change in 2027. The special rule for Contaminated Products looks set to now cover Contaminated Sources, so will capture more ways an athlete could be contaminated but will only help reduce the ban to 1 year at best for NSFN for a Non-Specified Substance, if the athlete can establish how the Substance entered the body.

For those that establish how the Substance entered the body, for Specified Substances, the ban will be 2 years and for Non-Specified Substances, it looks like it could drop to 3 years, rather than 4 years.

The PPF and many other Player Associations have petitioned WADA to change the rules to something fairer so that there are thresholds for the most common Substances found in contamination cases. Such a rule currently applies in the UFC. It would mean that if the test results are below those thresholds, then the NADO has to prove that the athlete has intentionally taken the Substance, rather than the athlete having to prove no intention and no fault or negligence.

As things stand, unfortunately WADA has not shown a willingness to adopt the player associations recommendation, leaving a number of athletes who know they have done nothing wrong, unable to prove their innocence and losing a significant part, if not all, of their careers.

Mills & Reeve Sports Team – July 2025