Men of Influence magazine


The fact he was an IAAF vice-president for eight years before taking over from Lamine Diack – now under investigation by French prosecutors for accepting bribes to cover up doping – has led many to question whether he was either complicit in the wrongdoing, or, as he insists, just ignorant of it.

Either way, it does not reflect well on a man who must now somehow rebuild trust in his sport. The last thing Coe needs is to appear like track and field’s version of Fifa’s Michel Platini or cycling’s Pat McQuaid – an insider tarnished by association.

Those close to Coe say his role as vice-president involved just a few meetings a year at the IAAF, that for most of that time he was far too busy organising the London 2012 Olympics to be across all that was going on in Monaco and he is genuinely stunned and horrified by what has been exposed.

They also point out the criminal investigation into extortion allegations restricts what he can say and he should be judged on what he does now he is in power, rather than during his election campaign, when winning votes was the priority.

All this may be true. But others make the point Coe has not helped himself. Why, they ask, did he lavish praise on his “spiritual” leader Diack in August when he succeeded him, despite plenty of warning signs – the outgoing president’s son (along with other senior IAAF officials) had stood down last December, already under investigation by the IAAF’s own ethics committee.

Why did he describe media reports of a cover-up as “a declaration of war”, and pour scorn on the “so-called experts” used by German broadcaster ARD and the Sunday Times to analyse leaked blood samples?

Coe has said “it was not a criticism of any journalism or any media, it was simply a reaction to the selective use of data to call into question the reputation of clean athletes”.

But why does he continue to refuse an interview with Hajo Seppelt, the German investigative journalist who exposed the scandal?

And why – when the IAAF had already charged several senior officials (including its anti-doping chief), and when it was already widely known that Wada’s report would be terrible news for Russia – did he tell the BBC’s Sportsweek programme on Sunday he would rather not ban countries – before hearing the full commission report?

He was then forced into a humiliating U-turn the following evening, when a windswept Coe arrived at TV studios in Millbank, Westminster, and was put through a series of media grillings.

During a long and overwhelmingly successful career as an athlete, politician and administrator, Coe has faced plenty of challenges, from chairing Fifa’s ethics committee to advising former Conservative party leader William Hague. But nothing quite like this. The aura appears to have gone. The judgment seems, at times, to be missing.

Despite concerns over a potential conflict of interest, Coe continues to refuse to give up his £100,000-a-year role as a special ambassador for sportswear giant Nike. Coe insists the arrangement is merely to support a corporate social responsibility project. And it is important to note the IAAF presidency is an unpaid role, so he has to earn a living elsewhere.

But it does not help that Nike supplies Russian athletes with their kit, or that Coe appears to have a permanent parking bay at the company’s headquarters. It does not help that their leading coach Alberto Salazar is under investigation by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) over alleged doping violations, which he denies. It does not help that they sponsor two-time doper, US sprinter Justin Gatlin. It does not help that Eugene, a city with close links to the company, was awarded the 2021 athletics World Championships without a vote.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *