Do you think Dwain Chambers should represent Britain?

He has admitted taking performance-enhancing drugs and he has served a two-year ban for the offence, but Dwain Chambers's return to the track has caused ructions throughout UK Athletics (UKA) who feel they had no choice but to select him for the Great Britain team to run at the World Indoor Championships in Valencia despite being opposed to the idea.

Chambers, who won the 60 metres at the trials on Sunday, feels he is being treated like a "leper", saying: "Yes, I did something wrong, I did the crime - but I've done my time and moved on."

Hasn't he got a point? Isn't that what punishments are for: to re-educate the offender and ensure they learn their lesson? Do criminals not get released from prison after they have completed their sentence? So why should it be any different for an athlete, who has done nothing worse than cheat and then come clean about it?

Or does Chambers represent a deep flaw in the sporting system? Is he exploiting a loophole that is denying up-and-coming athletes their chance? Do we really want a cheat representing our nation? And should UKA have taken a firmer stand, not picked him for the team and fought the inevitable High Court writ that Chambers's lawyers had been instructed to file had this been the scenario?

Vote in our poll and send your comments - your voice counts.

Opinion Polls & Market Research

Comments

[David Clark]

He has served his sentence and should be allowed to run. There is a witch hunt going on that is turning me off athletics sadly. Does this mean that we should keep people out of society (in prison forever) once they have served their time in prison?

[StefD]

Chambers has been pillarised more than a murderer or rapist. He's been punished enough. He's served his time and if he wants to prove what a natural athlete he really, then UK athletics should get behind him and use him as a role model. How many athletes do we hold in high esteem but have actually escaped being caught? We'll never know.

[David Matthews]

Must be allowed to run. If the ban were to be extended he should have been informed at the outset and given the chance to train for 2 years in a different career. If there is concern about whether he has used drugs during the 2 years, arrangements should have been made for testing during that time. It is unlikely that no-one knew he was training for a return.

[James Charters]

He should be allowed to run, he has served his ban and we all know that he is the most talented british sprinter for a decade. The UKA must stick to the moral laws of selection ie. you pick the best person , if this is tampered with you end up with situations like the S.A. rugby team where a certain number of black players must be selected to fill quotas. These decisions don't protect sport, they leave the spectator feeling cheated , this is only one step ahead of fixed football match and should never be resorted to.

Was it just me or was the UKA statement on announcing Chambers would run absolutely shocking . It was more akin to a playground bullying than a proffesional statement, a cynical character assanation that verged on the libelous . The people in charge at UKA have presided over a massively underachieving squad for years , now all they can do is jump on the first high horse that rides by, regardless of who they trample on to get there. Pathetic.

[Ben]

I think the comparison between a criminal that has served his time is not relevant. In Dwaine's case we should take into account the permenent damage he's done to the sport and our counry's reputatation. How aggrieved would we have felt if Ben Jonson had come back and won gold after his ban. He's only one man - so what if he's not allowed to compete again! I'm not an avid follower of athletics but as a keen cycling fan, I feel I'll never be able to enjoy the Tour de France as much as I did when I was a young lad because of the irrepairable damage done to this event by dopers like Dwaine. Sport should be fun and clean.

[Allan Asante]

I think the question should be, should Dwain be allowed to run at all, country or local/international circuit?

He has stated that he needs to earn a living, and that this form of work (sprinting) is what he devoted himself to doing. The problem stems from the fact that cheating in this environment doesn't simply deprive others of monetary benefit, you also deprive others of the adulation, the glory, and achievement upon which you cannot put a price.

At the highest levels of the sport you are representing a nation, and the damage that is caused cannot simply be repaired with a ban.

Because of the short span of an atheletics career, 10 years possibly at top level, the lost opportunities can not be simply retrieved. No one wants to win and hand me down Olympic gold, because you have been robbed of all that goes with it.

In reality we need a policy that says if you are clearly proven to have cheated, then you are banned full stop. This seems harsh, but sends the correct message showing how highly we regard the emphasis of achievement and glory that no other type of event can bring i.e. the dedication, unseen sweat and tears for a single moment to be the Olympic best.

Dwain is now in a place where people feel that the ban given did not fully measure the damage caused.

In some respects it does appear unfair, as no other atheletes (marion jones aside) appear to have been punished in such a public way,
along with the fact that he was stripped of titles, records and earnings.

Dwain feels that he has served the time required, repented and is now rehabilitated, and wants to be given a fresh chance. The problem though is that by only being given a two year ban, and with legalities not fully in place, people will not allow the stigma to leave, and it is being reported that the other tracks hosting atheletic meets will not invite him, and so he will find it very difficult to make a living in atheletics, so really is there any point in him coming back?

With the rules as they stand at present, he should be allowed to run for GB, but GB Atheletics need to sort this out asap. It's no good saying that 'none of the people on the panel wanted him to run for GB, but we have to any way', simply get the new framework in place and as it is clear Dwain will do what he can to run again, for himself or country.

[J.V.Cooper]

A brilliant system, take drugs, build your body to be a super athlete. Then confess, whine on about how sorry you are, serve a short sentence for taking the drugs. Then get back into athletics, win everything with your drug built muscles. Take the prize money and run, while boasting how clean you are now.

[Paul]

He should have been banned for life. Leopards dont change their spots after all.

[Stephen]

I though that he had already ran in a championship for GB since serving his ban (Europeans or something)? If so why the up-roar now?

[Abid]

Dwain Chamnbers shoudl be allowed to represent GB. It's stinks that all these athletes are speaking out against him, how many of them have not taken supplements (legal or otherwise)to improve themselves? Anyway Dwain admitted the crime, served the time. Everyone deserves a second chance. Let him prove that dope free he can be as good, if not better then when he was running juiced up....

[Tim]

I think the authorities are being disgusting hypocritical here. Carl Myerscough, the GB shot putter, was also caught doping but has been allowed back into the fold with minimum fuss.
Chambers has served his ban and furthermore unlike alot of athletes when he was caught he gave no excuses and accepted he had done wrong.
If he is now racing clean of drugs then why should he be banned from competing? Should he not be allowed to start again?
I also happen to think that his coming back to the sport and winning is actually a great example for all aspiring athletes because it shows that you dont need the drugs to win.

[Adam Goff]

I Beleive that he deserves to compete again as he has done his time, i beleive he is in the wrong but i think that he has done his time.

Adam xx

[george gaskin]

i think he should be able to race because he has already served his punishment and everyone deserves a second chance xx

[Richard Helm]

Lets be honest, whoever does not realise that all the top sportsman arn't on the "juice" is very naive. Rugby,cycling the governor of california!! there all on it they just do it in the closed season or injuries.
Can anyone remeber when linford christie tested positive! that was brushed under the carpet give him a break we forgave Rio

[Peter Wigglesworth]

'Medication', increasingly sophisticated,has been in sport a long time. What was happening in eastern European countries in the sixties and making the Olympics professional opened the door to drugs in athletics on a world-wide scale. It's business with muscles and it was inevitable.
Some sports commentators should report on the history and the circumstances of drugs in sport because this issue is not one that concerns the athletes alone - it is a socio-commercial issue as big as any.
However, do not rule out that in time some drugs will become so much part of everyday life that taking them in sport will only reflect life. It will simply require time before there is a census of legislation and control to stop this being the issue it is to day issue.
In the meantime, Chambers has served his ban, which is an achievement. Some athelets would give up and seek a new life. He has proved his competitive edge knowing that if he 'blips' he is finished.
It is the noise and the baiting that is interesting.
Of course, he should run for GB - that is the current position.

[Dave]

What sort of example does this set for aspiring sprinters? By this example, building your body up for years with illegal performance-enhancing drugs, then having two years 'clean' and you'd still be allowed to compete against people who'd never injected anything in their life. Bottom line, he's a cheat and it stinks.

[Brendan McCafferty]

Yes, they handed out a ban he served it and now he is free to compete. If he is keeping others out or preventing them from having an opportunity then its because is faster. I think they are making a huge fuss over nothing, if they didnt want him to race again then they should have handed out a different fine.

[Philip Sutherland]

Chambers is a cheat. That should be the end of him. He's going to keep cheating and staying ahead of testing until he's retired. He and all others found guilty of drug cheating must go. Or else legalise it all tomorrow. No middle ground.

[Simon Carter]

If he is allowed to compete and do well, he will tarnish British sport because cynics will say he is still doping (particularly as he is on record as saying that a clean athlete can't beat a doped athlete, and that the dopers will always stay ahead of the testers).

If he is allowed to compete and does badly, then it sends the message to young athletes that you need to dope to succeed.

Either way, Britain loses. He made his bed, and he should lie in it.

[Ian Jones]

Drug cheats should only be allowed to compete with clean athletes if it can be shown they have procured no physiological benefit from using the drugs. Chambers used THG which I believe would leave a lasting positive effect.
He should not be competing with clean athletes

[Dean]

The rules state he is allowed to run, therefore he should.

If, in future, they do not wish that athletes returning from a ban should compete then the rules should be changed.

[David Stelfox]

Dwain Chambers should definately be allowed to run for GB. He made a mistake and has been punished. In any other form of life people are given second chances why should this be any different in athletics. He should be allowed to show the world that he has changed and prove he can win races without the needs for drugs. And who better to now go round and teach younger athletes of the pitfalls of drugs in sport.