THE International Olympic Committee has betrayed athletes with a cowardly and perverse decision which succours drug cheats and strikes a devastating blow against anti-doping initiatives.

We are talking about their failure to strip the USA of the women's 4x400 metres Olympic gold medal from Athens, in 2004, despite a member of the squad being guilty of a doping offence.

Typically, the IOC is attempting to blame an innocent party: the International Association of Athletics Federations.

Caught in the middle of a dispute involving the IOC, IAAF, US Olympic Committee and US Anti-Doping Agency, UK Athletics and British Olympic Association, is the GB quartet which finished fourth, and who, following the suspension of one of the winning American team, should now be upgraded to bronze.

It includes Glasgow's Lee McConnell, Donna Fraser, Cath Murphy, and Chrissie Ohuruogu, plus Helen Karagounis, who ran in the heat.

Crystal Cox ran as an alternate in Athens in the 4 x 400m before Monique Hennagan and DeeDee Trotter (fourth and fifth in the individual event) were drafted in for the final, which the US won by more than a second from Russia with Jamaica third. Britain were fourth, just 0.12 behind.

The IOC announced on Friday that they consider the relay issue closed. "Crystal Cox had her medal withdrawn but the rest of the team will retain their medals," they said following an executive board meeting. "The IAAF is responsible for . . . amending results of their competition where appropriate – in this case the time limit has now expired, and the results and medal allocations stay as they are."

Yet the Cox case – fallout from the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative scandal which brought down Marion Jones and Dwain Chambers among others – was raised by USADA in January 2010, and the IAAF is privately seething that the IOC is trying to blame them. "The IOC decides on any disqualification of Olympic results, and requests us to change them accordingly," a spokesman told me yesterday.

The IOC did this when striking out US Olympic relay victories in 2000 (4x100m, when Jones was exposed, and 4x400m when Jerome Young and Antonio Pettigrew defaulted). Herald Sport has seen IOC documentation to this effect, signed by IOC vice president Thomas Bach. So it was no surprise when the IAAF emphasised: "Responsibility for the decision on the 2004 medals needs to be taken by the IOC, whereas the impression at present seems to link this decision to the IAAF."

USADA announced on January 29, 2010, that Cox had accepted a four-year ban for drug use "over a period from 2001 through 2004".

The IAAF confirm rules in force since March 1, 2004, "allow us to disqualify an entire team if one of the said team has been convicted of a doping offence". But since this is IOC jurisdiction, they can't act.

Athletes are required to sign an "Acceptance of Sanction" form. Cox's indicates she used banned performance-enhancing drugs "between 2001 and 2004". Not "through" as USADA stated.

Yet if Cox was not using after March 1, 2004, how can the IOC strip her of the medal? And having done so, how can they permit the gold medal which she facilitated to stand, having disqualified the two US quartets from Sydney?

Their inconsistency beggars belief.

Innocent athletes have been ill-served by the IOC and a system designed to protect them. Athletes have been betrayed by the very organisation they rely on to preserve a level playing field. It is Kafka-esque.

UK Athletics say they'd had some email dialogue with the IOC, but none before McConnell and her colleagues learned as a result of an internet story. Team-mate Murphy has since asked UKA to suggest the best way forward.

"It's not just about the medal, but the overall fight against drug cheats," adds McConnell. "The punishment is so light as it is. What deterrent is there if they allow this to stand?"

For the IOC to say the matter is time-barred is ludicrous. Time-barring relates to raising an action, and not to concluding it. USOC put the ball in play by saying Cox was guilty of a doping offence, and the IOC endorsed this by stripping her of the gold medal – all within the eight-year statute of limitations.

The IOC themselves delayed matters. On February 7, 2010, they established a disciplinary commission to look at the relay issue. The panel was announced by vice president Bach, and included fellow executive board members Denis Oswald and Frankie Fredericks. This is all a matter of record.

They took submissions, yet apparently held no hearing, waiting 18 months before attempting to pin the delay on the IAAF. And when USADA offered to help bring evidence before the commission, the IOC declared the case closed.

Why? Are they in such thrall to the US Olympic Commitee? Do they fear a backlash from US-based sponsors? The IOC is compromising its fading integrity by failing to take appropriate action on dope cheats.