#360view: Bach’s war on WADA casts Games cloud

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Mail
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Bach's willingness to face the media is admirable but is gradually appearing more personal than an act of duty or responsibility.

    Never mind Bolt v Gatlin or Le Clos v Phelps, Thomas Bach’s ego has ensured the pre-Olympic narrative has been firmly focused on his fued with an organisation trying to safeguard the very Games he governs.

    Even amid Zika, the spiralling cost of the Games potentially exceeding $20 billion and serious concerns over water pollution, Bach’s personal war on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) still continues to hold sway.

    The former fencer insisted on Saturday that the legacy of the Olympics has not been damaged by the Russian doping scandal and the subsequent chaos that has developed over athletes’ suitability, but Bach’s determination to go tit-for-tat with WADA has ensured it has.

    Having been forced into the uncomfortable position of potentially issuing a blanket ban to Russia in light of the McLaren Report into state-sponsored doping, he simply devolved responsibility and allowed the numerous sporting federations that fall under the IOC umbrella to clear up the mess.

    His accountability and willingness to face the media has been admirable but also ill-advised as it’s gradually appearing more personal than an act of duty or responsibility.

    With each denial and attempt to blame shift blame onto WADA for the timing of the release of their report, are we any more convinced his friendship with Vladimir Putin in no way played a part in his decision-making? Of course not. But he just cannot let anything lie.

    What’s become clear in the wake of that decision is that Bach doesn’t like being criticised. Whether it be because of personal sensitivity or because he knows deep down it was a wrong step and is doing everything he can to convince himself it wasn’t, his protests are beginning to wear a little thin and continue to cast a shadow over these Games, and the IOC itself.

    The organisation has worked hard to restore its credibility post-Salt Lake City and while Bach’s actions, of course, don’t cross the same line as the bribery that went on in the late 1990s, it remains a embarrassing sideshow that is damaging the committee. But Bach knows he can get away with trying to have the last word after each response from Sir Craig Reedie. He knows he can play the loudmouth.

    It’s the same reason Sepp Blatter and N Srinivasan clung onto power for so long – although, admittedly, it’s a little harsh to place Bach directly in the same company as that duo – because when the action starts and the noise dies down, the product they govern and ultimately represent triumphs all.

    Once Michael Phelps steps into the pool, Usain Bolt lines up at the start line or Neymar strokes a goal in from 20 yards, all this noise will be largely forgotten.

    There’s only so much scandal, controversy and poor governance the average sports fan can read about before emotions begin to change from anger to annoyance.

    It’s a sad but simple fact that the potential economic and environmental impact will be nothing more than a footnote for the next two weeks if Usain Bolt seals the ‘Triple-triple’ of a trio of sprint golds across three Games, if Michael Phelps claims another remarkable victory or the ton of other fantastic stories and achievements that will emanate from Rio de Janeiro.

    The essence of sport encourages good news, allowing Bach to briefly bask in the glow of the Olympic Spirit he has slightly diminished over the last few weeks.

    Recommended