Kayon Raynor could not have been more explosive if he had dropped an actual bomb on Jamaicans both at home and in the Diaspora when he disclosed news about the adverse finding from the urine test on the country’s most decorated sprinter Veronica Campbell Brown on TVJ’s prime time newscast last Thursday evening. His report may well be the news story of the year. It certainly blew away other potential big news events on the national and regional agenda like Bolt’s sensational 200 metres race in Oslo, the six-year ban imposed on 400-metre female athlete Dominique Blake, and wicketkeeper Denesh Ramdin’s fine and suspension by the International Cricket Council.

How Raynor came by this story was one of the big questions which followed the disclosure. He certainly seems to have established a direct link to credible sources in recent years on WADA-related information. No one appeared to doubt his story; even when it was not confirmed by the JAAA for at least the first 12 hours after it broke.

In effect, within hours of Rayon’s scoop, word was out that the individual in question was not a local-based athlete. Hence, by process of deduction, there were only three names, including VCB’s, that came under the microscope. Although no names were being called, hers was the one that appeared to fit the projected scenario described in those early reports.

I monitored sports news from the more popular online international sources in the first 24 hours after Rayon’s report and nothing appeared. Then, between Friday night and Saturday morning, the floodgates opened. The first unflattering story seen online was by the BBC. Perhaps predictably, the UK Independent newspaper report was even more sensational under the headline: “Usain Bolt’s Jamaica teammate Veronica Campbell Brown fails drug test.” The story itself was riddled with inaccuracies in an apparent attempt to add substance to the scandal from their perspective. The misleading information includes an assertion that “two of the Jamaica’s top female athletes failed dope tests thereby plunging the country into a major drug scandal”. Also, that Blake had lost an appeal against a 6-year ban. I guess it was convenient, within this context, to list Dominique Blake as a top athlete, even when she herself is unlikely to make such a claim. It is to be noted also that the ban had only just been imposed and there is still no news as yet about whether she plans to appeal.

I was however relieved to note that in several of the comments posted online, readers confirm that they are by no means passive receivers of information. One of the interesting comments posted chides the paper for twisting the story to implicate Usain Bolt and suggests that it could well have been written from an entirely different angle: “Jamaica’s Anti-Doping Agency One of the Best in the World.” In another comment, a reader noted that all the adverse tests as reported were conducted on Jamaican soil, suggesting that there is no attempt to conceal such findings. Such instructive observations deserve much more attention nationally as well as globally. Despite the growing list of Jamaicans who have received an adverse result, all the clear-cut cases are foreign-based athletes, caught on local soil in JADA’s drug-testing web.

Some will misguidedly point to the four local-based athletes whose samples returned a positive result in 2010. We can disregard the subsequent case against Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, as the substance involved was neither a performance enhancer nor a masking agent. Regarding the four other athletes, it is difficult to accept that the sentence imposed by the then newly established disciplinary tribunal was fair and/or just. At the time JADCO may have been on an image-building crusade that targeted WADA. One merely has to recall that the athletes concerned were initially exonerated, only to have JADCO in an unprecedented move — at least in the global track and field arena — appeal the result deemed in favour of its own nationals and follow this up by replacing the tribunal members. Based on all the evidence seen I remain unconvinced that these athletes were guilty of knowingly ingesting a performance-enhancing substance. That controversial case remains the sole blot on local-based athletes. This is one reason that for years I have advocated for an aggressive public-education programme, beyond what now exists, specifically targeting our overseas-based athletes. While local-based athletes should also be targeted, it is reasonable to conclude that they are less at risk of adverse influence by those who promote the benefits of drug use, as these athletes are constantly under the supervision of local sports administrators with vested patriotic interests.

Interestingly too, all the athletes involved had run in meets at which they were tested before and/or since being caught at a meet in Jamaica. While I do concede that this is a strong argument in favour of Jamaica’s drug-testing programme, the country does not seem to be scoring any PR points. Additionally, this situation does raise a question about our reliance on the WADA lab in Canada where all our samples are sent.

One has to wonder about the suspicions expressed by the former WADA chief, Dick Pound, who to the best of my knowledge is based in Canada. This is not to suggest that the findings would not still be adverse, but I am uncomfortable with depending on the services of a lab that may be exposed to the influence of someone who has shown such a clear bias against Jamaica’s anti-doping programme and/or athletes. Pound may now feel vindicated. That, for me, is one of the most bitter medicines in this regrettable scenario.

While most Jamaicans remain in shock, a report published in the Sunday Observer, under the byline of sports journalist Paul Reid, brought a glimmer of hope by suggesting that the whole episode is being blown out of proportion. I have no way of supporting Reid’s suggestion, except to say that he has long been credited for having usually reliable sources. I must confess that it is quite unusual for me to be hanging on to suggestions of hope offered in a story attributed to an unnamed “reliable” source, who apparently must remain confidential. There is also a growing public sentiment even in media circles that VCB has a credible defence, which may be what Paul Reid alludes to in his report on Sunday. Perhaps significantly, his Monday morning “down this road before” story was more guarded. We will see.

Undoubtedly, whatever the outcome, Jamaica’s pristine reputation in track and field is irreparably damaged. One hopes that VCB herself will not be compelled to retire under such a negative cloud, although it is unlikely she will evolve without being scarred. My small suggestion to her is that, whatever the IAAF’s ruling, she invites WADA to retest all her stored samples in an attempt to affirm her claims of a drug-free career to date. Such a move may also bring some comfort to her legions of fans who have been rallying in her support in recent days.

It is certainly heartening to observe that VCB is getting an outpouring of love and support from Jamaicans everywhere, which is as it should be. She has carried the national flag with distinction for so long that she deserves no less. This is all the more reason why it is unthinkable that she could have deliberately chosen to sully her great name and place in history at this twilight stage of her career.

Ramdin’s Dilemma

In the wake of the VCB episode not much attention seems to be given to the punishment meted out to the West Indies wicketkeeper Dinesh Ramdin for “breaching the Code of Conduct”. This was a shocking development especially given the pristine reputation of the West Indies cricket team historically for fairness even beyond the call of duty. The curious thing about the Ramdin episode, though, is that the earliest reports carried in local newspapers did not spell out the specific action for which he was being penalised. Readers were left to guess, which admittedly was not difficult for genuine fans of the game. The first full report I can recall seeing was sourced from a foreign-based media house. I wonder why this was the case?