THE anchorman in Britain's gold-medal Olympic relay team, Mark Lewis-Francis, was convicted of a doping offence yesterday, writes .
Though the former world junior champion pleaded that cannabis was in his system as a result of passive smoking, he was stripped of the silver medal he won in the 60 metres at the European Indoor Championships in Madrid where he ran second to Athens relay colleague Jason Gardener.
He received a public warning, but escaped suspension as it was a first offence and cannabis is not considered to be performance-enhancing. He could have been suspended for a year, but remains free to compete. A further cannabis offence would bring a two-year ban.
It is the second time in 19 months that a UK sprinter has forfeited a championship medal because of a doping offence.
European 100m champion Dwain Chambers was suspended for two years when a designer steroid was found in his system. He lost his gold, and Britain forfeited relay silver.
"I do not smoke cannabis, " said the 22-year-old Lewis-Francis who waived his right to a disciplinary hearing. "My only explanation is that I may, without realising it, have been in the presence of people who were smoking cannabis and that I passively inhaled their smoke. I have not knowingly taken this substance, and have not attained any performance-enhancing benefits."
Last year his Birchfield clubmate, Jonathan Moore, also escaped a ban, after a positive test for cannabis in Belgium.
Moore, who won World and Commonwealth youth triple jump titles, also blamed passive smoking and received a public warning.
The same defence was offered by Ross Rebagliati, Canadian winner of the 1998 Olympic snowboard title. He kept his gold medal after the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled there was a loophole in the rules. There was no agreement between the IOC and ski federation on tests for marijuana.
Last year, the Olympic 200m runner-up Bernard Williams and World 200m champion John Capel (both USA) also received public warnings but no ban for the same offence.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article