Athletics Integrity Unit File Appeal Over Knighton Doping Case
The Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) has filed an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) after American sprinter Erriyon Knighton was cleared of a doping offence earlier this year, allowing him to compete in the Paris Olympics.
The 20-year-old tested positive for the banned substance trenbolone in March, but avoided a ban after an independent arbitrator ruled that the substance likely entered his system through contaminated meat.
This decision cleared Knighton, the 200m world silver medalist, to compete in the U.S. Olympic trials in June, where he qualified for the Olympics and ultimately finished fourth in the men's 200m final in Paris.
The AIU, which is responsible for managing integrity issues in athletics, is challenging the ruling that found Knighton had no fault or negligence in the case. In a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), the AIU said, "This appeal is against the decision of an arbitration tribunal in the United States that the athlete established no fault or negligence."
The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) acknowledged the AIU's right to appeal, with its Chief Executive, Travis Tygart, pointing to what he called a "bad rule" by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Tygart explained that trenbolone is a known livestock enhancer and has been found in the meat supply, which likely led to the positive test in Knighton's case.
"We have advocated for the rules around contamination to formally change for years, and WADA has refused to act swiftly," Tygart said.
This appeal is the latest development in a broader conflict between USADA and WADA, particularly concerning cases of contamination. The two organisations have been at odds since the controversy involving 23 Chinese swimmers who tested positive for a banned substance before the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 but were still allowed to compete.
WADA has been criticised by USADA for its handling of such cases, with Tygart previously calling for sanctions against Chinese athletes involved in the controversy.
WADA had hinted earlier in the year that it might appeal the Knighton case to CAS, and a spokesperson for the organisation suggested that Tygart might have responded differently if the case involved a Chinese athlete.
This ongoing tension underscores the complex and often argumentative relationship between national and global anti-doping bodies, especially when it comes to cases involving unintentional ingestion of banned substances.
As the case moves to CAS, Knighton's future in athletics hangs in the balance, with the outcome likely to have significant implications not just for him, but for how doping cases involving contamination are handled globally.
The decision could also prompt further debate and potential changes to anti-doping regulations, particularly around the issue of contaminated meat leading to positive tests.
