Justin Gatlin: Villain or Victim?

"Bolt has saved his title, he's saved his reputation, he may have even saved his sport!"

That was the cry from Steve Cram, the former 1500 metre champion and current BBC chief athletics commentator. With Justin Gatlin, the veteran American sprinter and the fastest man of the year coming into the race, people around the world watched with bated breath for just over 9 seconds to see if he could secure a victory over the fastest man in history, Usain Bolt, at the World Championships in Beijing. 

Alas it wasn't to be for Gatlin, and to the relief of what seemed like almost everyone across the world including the commentators and fans alike, the people's champion Bolt ran a blistering race and crossed the line in first place to claim an amazing gold medal in the men's 100m final. And it was more of the same a couple of days later, where he again beat Gatlin to the gold medal in the men's 200m final. The elation that poured out from the BBC commentators observing the race in particular, was something I had never witnessed before, especially considering the fact that the athlete wasn't British. Not only were people ecstatic that Bolt won, they were relieved that Gatlin didn't. But why?

Usain Bolt

In order to understand the public's feeling surrounding Gatlin and Bolt, we'll have to delve into the history of athletics and into the underbelly of its darkest secrets.

The truth is, athletics has always had a problem with drugs. Despite the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) being set up in 1999 to specifically combat the issue of doping, it continues to be a long-lasting issue still affecting the current crop of athletes today. Athletics is a tough sport. Not only is it physically demanding and mentally challenging, but the increase in competition every year means that athletes are constantly seeking ways to find that slight edge over their opponent, which could make all the difference on the day between a gold and a silver medal. Whilst the majority of athletes seek to gain this edge through legitimate means, i.e. eating better and training harder for longer, others choose less legitimate means, i.e. taking drugs and other banned substances that can help improve an athlete's performance, thus giving them an unfair advantage over their competitors. 

Gatlin is one of those who opted for the less legitimate route, having been banned from athletics in 2006 for 4 years after testing positive for a banned substance.

And anyone who thought the sport's problems with drugs were a long and distant memory were given a rude awakening when just a few weeks before these World Championships in Beijing was due to commence, it was reported by The Sunday Times and a German broadcaster that 1/3 of medals (146, including 55 golds) in endurance races at the Olympics and World Championships between 2001 - 2012 were won by athletes who had recorded suspicious drug tests. Yet the IAAF, the body responsible for world athletics, had caught none of them. WADA itself said that it was "very alarmed" at the allegations of widespread drugs cheating.

As a result, the IAAF has come under heavy criticism and intense scrutiny over its failure to deal with the continuing crisis. Scientific expert Parisotto said, "Never have I seen such an alarmingly abnormal set of blood values. So many athletes (over 5,000) appear to have doped with impunity, and it is damning that the IAAF appears to have idly sat by and let this happen". 

These scathing allegations were very much threatening to quickly overshadow the World Championships in Beijing and permanently taint the reputation of athletics as a whole.

Fast forward to now and the current saga between the man who people love, and the man who people love to hate.

Why Bolt?

In Usain Bolt, athletics has a hero. He is the bright, shining light that casts a shadow over the sport's seemingly continuous problem with doping. In Bolt, athletics has proof that you can be one of the greatest athletes of all time and do it clean.  And I think when it comes down to it, that's why people were so anxious for Bolt to win the 100m and 200m finals over Gatlin and relieved when he did. It's not about vilifying an opponent and hoping they'll lose. It's about what a win for Bolt represents for the sport as a whole.

Why is it important that Bolt wins? it's important because he is a hero. Sport needs heroes, and it needs its heroes to win. Bolt gives athletics a level of positive publicity that extends beyond the sport into many different arenas and walks of life. Look no further than Twitter to find numerous congratulatory tweets to Bolt, not just from people within the sport, but from football, golf, rugby, cricket, the list goes on and on.

"People love him, he is fantastic for the sport...he transcends sport. People who don't follow athletics follow Bolt", explained Michael Johnson, the 4-time Olympic champion and former world record holder in the 200m before Bolt broke that in the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

Even Renaldo Nehemiah, Gatlin's agent concedes that Bolt is "the people's champion".

Bolt is the physical embodiment of what athletics hopes to be: honest, fun, and legendary.

Why not Gatlin?

From listening to various interviews from commentators from within the sport, it seems clear to me that there are two big problems people have with Justin Gatlin:- 1) His positive drugs tes and its repercussions on the sport as a whole, and 2) What his reintroduction to athletics means for the sport going forward.

Justin Gatlin

Now it is understandable why people don't like Justin Gatlin as a person. After all, he is a drugs cheat. But it does seem on the face of it that people are unjustly singling him out and blaming him for all that is wrong with the sport. That would be an unfair statement to make, considering he is not the only athlete that has ever been banned for testing positive for a banned substance and has subsequently been allowed back into the sport. Tyson Gay for example, who was also in the 100m final with Gatlin and Bolt, tested positive for a banned substance back in 2013 and subsequently had his Olympic 2012 silver medal removed. How come there hasn't been the furore surrounding Gay returning to the sport as there has been for Gatlin?

Renaldo, Gatlin's trainer, seems to think it's because Gatlin is the only "viable threat" to Bolt's crown. He's partly right, but I believe he's overlooked one crucial factor. It's Gatlin's lack of contrition that fills people with annoyance and frustration. Simply put, people just don't trust him. They don't trust him not to do it again because he never apologised for doing it the first time.

"Justin damaged this sport", said Michael Johnson, " and for people who love this sport like myself , it's hard for us to forgive that."

"Justin hasn't co-operated with the authorities, he hasn't shown any contrition, he hasn't given any apology and he hasn't sought at all to understand why people feel the way they do about him. And he hasn't engendered himself to the public and say hey I apologise".

In response to Renaldo's claim that Gatlin has been unjustly vilified in the press Johnson responded, "this is all Justin's fault, there is no doubt about that, this is all his fault. He did it, he was responsible, he was given the opportunity to come back into the sport and he has done nothing, zero, to engender himself back into the public and to get people to understand his situation. He hasn't even said I'm against doping in the sport and I want to do something about it."

Steve Cram also added his opinions to the debate, "Gatlin hasn't done himself any favours. Bolt is popular because of his lack of arrogance. Gatlin is unpopular because of his lack of contrition...The one thing Gatlin can probably never be is a hero."

I believe Gatlin has been made the visual scapegoat for the sport's deep-rooted problems with positive drug-testing. The battle between Gatlin and Bolt on the track represents a metaphoric battle between the troubles of athletics' past, and the hopes of where it can be in the future. It is clear that people are not completely happy or satisfied with the current rules on allowing repeat offenders back into the sport. The general societal view of forgiving an offender and rehabilitating him back into society because he has "done his time" doesn't seem to apply in the sporting arena. The fact of the matter is, people all over the world, both current and ex-athletes as well as fans alike so desperately want the sport to move on from the controversy that is constantly damaging the credibility and the reputation of the sport. People want to have trust in the athletes they see out on the field and believe that their accomplishments are legitimately fought for and won. People want to believe that it is still possible to be the greatest and be honest. Usain Bolt is the embodiment of that truth. He is the epitome of the message that athletics wishes to send out across the world and beyond. As Oliver Brown, Chief Sports Feature Writer for the Telegraph writes, "athletics, quite simply, deserves a better ambassador than Gatlin. He might well be a "good guy" to his friends, but equally he is a bothersome impediment to the sport's rehabilitation in the eyes of a jaded public".

So what now?

It is clear that people want change, and in light of the Bolt/Gatlin saga and the appointment of Lord Coe as the new IAAF President just days before the World Championships stated, it seems people are not only hopeful, but also expectant that changes regarding more stringent drug testing and rules allowing banned athletes to return to the sport will be reviewed.

Though according to the current rules athletes who have been banned for using illegal substances can return to the sport, the question is, should they be able to? Especially when they have shown no remorse for their actions and no will or desire to help change the sport for the better.

New IAAF President Lord Sebastian Coe

It's certainly a discussion that many people feel strongly about, regardless of what side of the argument they come down on. As Renaldo very poignantly put it, "if our sport can't forgive these young men and women, they why do you let them back in? And if you're not going to protect them when they're back in, are you really letting them back in the sport?"

We cannot blame Justin Gatlin or indeed anyone who has been found guilty of taking banned substances for wanting to return to the sport if the rules allow it. Instead, these are questions for the IAAF and Lord Coe to answer in regards to the future of athletics. As Steve Cram said, "things need to change in the sport, and some of those changes include whether people like Justin Gatlin deserve to come back to the sport."

So as the World Championships in Beijing slowly draws to a close, and the sun sets on the greatness that is Bolt, we look ahead to what the future has in store for the sport of athletics. Usain has announced that he will be retiring at the end of 2017, at which point we will lose one of the most popular sportsman in recent memory. Athletics is on a 2 year notice, during which time the sport will have to cultivate its new heroes, whilst finally dealing with its problems of the past once and for all.