Corruption in International Athletics Governing

Bodies: An analysis of British athletes’

Experiences

Thomas J. Smith

33371349

BSc (Hons) Sports Events Management

27th March 2015

i

Synopsis

This study investigates the views of international British athletes in order to understand and

explore their experiences of the international since competing, and how this has influenced

their opinions on corruption in athletics.

The aim is to critically analyse the extent of athletes influence on governance of international

athletics governing bodies and their knowledge around the topic of corruption exploring

whether international athletes are aware of their position of power in these organisations and

the implications of corruption on elite British athletes.

The review of secondary sources looks at academic literature mentioning historical context of

corruption in the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and International Association of

Athletics Federations (IAAF) and the implications sports corruption has on athletics,

including performance enhancing drugs and how it is governed by the Court of Arbitration

for Sport and the World Anti-Doping Agency. The literature review then explores corruption

as a social issue and the importance of accountability and transparency in international sport

governance. The third sub-section focuses on the importance of athlete commissions and

athlete representation in international and British athletics governance to the integrity of the

sport. The final sub-section applies how British governing bodies, British Athletics and UK

Anti-Doping manages issues of corruption and doping.

The primary research was then formulated of semi-structured interviews with 5 former and

current British athletes. The interview questions were based on the topics discussed in the

literature review.

The project’s findings concluded that corruption is an international issue rather than a British

one. Athletes are isolated from decision-making power despite being a valuable stakeholder

for International Non-Government Sports Organisations. Their opinions on corruption,

specifically doping, aren’t reflected in international governance by administrators and policy

makers.

Recommendations from the study include introducing an independent ethics organisation and

independent doping body. Other industry recommendations include linking athletes’

commissions and representatives and executive committee members. The researcher

recommends further study into the power relations of stakeholder groups, athletes in

particular.

ii

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank the athletes for agreeing to take part in my study. I really valued your

enthusiasm for the topic and sharing your knowledge experiences with me.

I would also like to thank the university staff, particularly Nicola McCollough, Dr. Kate

Dashper and Dr. Thomas Fletcher for their guidance.

Finally thank you to my parents Bev and Paul for your over-whelming support and

understanding throughout my time at University, I am eternally grateful.

iii

List of abbreviations

BOA – The British Olympic Committee

CAS – The Court of Arbitration

EC – European Commission

FBI – Federal Bureau of Intelligence

IAAF – The International Association of Athletics Federation

ILTF – International Lawn Tennis Federation

IMF – International Monetary Fund

INGSO is an umbrella term for international non-governmental sport organisations

OECD – Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

SLOC – Salt Lake Organising Committee

TOP – The Olympic Partner programme

UKA – United Kingdom Athletics

UNEP – United Nations Development Programme

USADA – United States Anti-Doping Agency

USOC – United States Olympic Committee

WADA – The World Anti-Doping Agency

WADC – Wold Anti-Doping Code

iv

Table of Contents

Synopsis....................................................................................................................................................................................... i

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................................................. ii

List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................................................ iii

1. Introduction & Context .................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Aim & Objectives.......................................................................................................................................................... 2

2. Literature Review............................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1. Chapter Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2. International Govern ing Bodies ................................................................................................................................. 3

2.2.1 IOC .................................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2.2 IAAF ................................................................................................................................................................. 5

2.2.3 WADA & CAS ............................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.4 Commercialisation of the Olympics ........................................................................................................... 7

2.3. Corruption in Sports Governance .............................................................................................................................. 8

2.3.1 Macro-social Corruption................................................................................................................................ 8

2.3.2 Accountability and Transparency ................................................................................................................ 9

2.3.3 Case study: 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympic bid .......................................................................... 10

2.4. Athlete Commissions and Representation ............................................................................................................. 12

2.4.1 IOC Athletes’ Commission ......................................................................................................................... 12

2.4.2 IAAF Athletes’ Commission ...................................................................................................................... 12

2.4.3 British Olympic Association Athletes’ Commission.............................................................................. 13

2.4.4 WADA Athletes’ Commission................................................................................................................... 13

2.4.5 Athlete Representation................................................................................................................................. 13

2.5 Athletics Governance in the UK ............................................................................................................................... 15

2.5.1 UKA ................................................................................................................................................................ 15

2.5.2 British Anti-Doping...................................................................................................................................... 15

2.6 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 16

3. Methodology ...................................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.1 Chapter Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.2 Research Process ......................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Clarify ing the Research Topic................................................................................................................................... 20

3.4 Conducting Literature Review .................................................................................................................................. 20

3.5 Research Approach ..................................................................................................................................................... 20

3.6 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................................................ 21

3.6.1 Interv iews ....................................................................................................................................................... 21

v

3.7 Qualitative Research ................................................................................................................................................... 23

3.7 Phenomenology ........................................................................................................................................................... 23

3.7 Sampling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 24

3.7 Pilot Interview.............................................................................................................................................................. 24

3.8 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................... 25

3.9 Ethics & Access ........................................................................................................................................................... 25

3.10 Research Limitations ............................................................................................................................................... 26

3.11 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 26

4. Discussion & Findings ..................................................................................................................................................... 27

4.1 Chapter Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 27

4.2 Corruption in International Athletics Governance................................................................................................. 27

4.4 Doping ........................................................................................................................................................................... 31

4.5 Athlete Representation & Athlete Commissions ................................................................................................... 33

4.1 Additional Study Limitations .................................................................................................................................... 36

4.1 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 37

5. Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 38

5.2 Chapter Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 38

5.2 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................. 38

5.3 Recomendations........................................................................................................................................................... 39

5.5.1 Industry ........................................................................................................................................................... 39

5.2.2 Academia ........................................................................................................................................................ 40

5. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................................................... 41

5.2 Appendix A .................................................................................................................................................................. 44

5.2 Appendix B................................................................................................................................................................... 45

5.2 Appendix C................................................................................................................................................................... 46

5.2 Appendix D .................................................................................................................................................................. 45

5.2 Appendix E ................................................................................................................................................................... 48

5.2 Appendix F ................................................................................................................................................................... 50

5.2 Appendix G .................................................................................................................................................................. 51

5. References .......................................................................................................................................................................... 54

1

Introduction & Context

1.1 Introduction

Sport is susceptible to corruption, undermining the societal values that sport possesses, such

as ‘Olympism’ and sportsmanship (Schenk, 2011). Corruption has become a contemporary

issue in athletics governing bodies such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and

the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), and has been increasingly in

the public eye since the emergence of the Salt Lake City bidding scandal in 1998-1999

(Lenskyj, 2000, Girginov & Parry, 2005, Horne & Whannel, 2012).

The Olympic bidding process has changed dramatically in the last 25 years with the

emergence of allegations of corruption in the Salt Lake City bid during 1998-1999 against the

United States Olympic Committee and Salt Lake Organising Committee (SLOC) (Lenskyj,

2000). Intense scrutiny has resulted in a number of reforms leading to the establishment of

various committees and commissions yet little evidence of fundamental change (Lenskyj &

Wagg, 2012).

The commercialisation of international athletics and the Olympics into a globalised entity

controlled by financial gain is seen as instigating dishonesty and corruption in International

Non-Government Sports Organisations (INGSO’s) (Katwala, 2000, Tomlinson, 2005).

One particular problem athletics has faced is banned performance enhancing drugs and is a

topical issue in athletics world with current IAAF president Lamine Diack describing the

problem as a ‘crisis’ for the sport (Guardian, 2015). Ritchie (cited in Lenskj & Wagg, 2012)

notes the extent of the problem;

“No other single issue in sport is thought to pose a greater thought to the integrity of

the sport.”

(2012:410)

The first International non-government sport organisations (INGSO’s) were established at the

end of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century to preserve the integrity of sport

because politicians don’t always have the best interests of sport in mind (Geeraert et al.,

2013).

2

Athletes have become an increasingly important stakeholder in athletics governance in the

development of sport policies and decisions in athlete commissions (Thibault et al, 2010).

Athlete commissions have been outlined as a catalyst for achieving transparent sport

governance in athletics and preserving the integrity of the sport (Thibault et al, 2010,

Geeraert et al, 2014).

This research can be rationalised because of the lack of research that has been conducted into

how athlete commissions can benefit athletics governance, at both international and national

governing body level. This project intends to widen the topic of how athletes view corruption

and how governing bodies deal with the issue in the quest for ‘good governance’ and social

justice.

1.2 Aim & Objectives

Aim:

To critically analyse the extent of athletes influence on governance of international athletics

governing bodies and their knowledge around the topic of corruption exploring whether

international athletes are aware of their position of power in these organisations and the

implications of corruption on elite athletes.

Objectives of the study:

1. Investigate athlete’s views of corruption in international athletics governing bodies.

2. Investigate the implications of corruption on the sport of athletics, the athletes and sport

governance.

3. To explore allegations of corruption against international governing bodies using external

publications and contemporary academic literature to theorise and contextualise my research.

4. Explore British athletes’ experiences of corruption & associated issues since competing

internationally and the implications they have had in a wider context.

5. Analyse the importance of athlete commissions to good governance in international

athletics governing bodies.

3

2. Literature Review

2.1 Chapter Introduction

This chapter evaluates the secondary sources including academic journals, books and others

to provide a firm base for the research project. Setting a historical background into Olympic

and athletics governance contextualise the primary research, discussion, recommendations

and conclusions.

2.2 International Governing Bodies

Governance is defined by Kooiman (1993, cited in Geeraert et al., 2013, p.281) as ‘societal

activities which make a purposeful effort to guide, steer, control, or manage societies’. The

quest for ‘good governance’ in sports organisations has been come later than other

organisations, due to sport governance’s uniqueness and self-autonomy in comparison to

other forms (Geeraert et al, 2013), despite the early emergence of sport bodies;

“Sport was at the forefront of globalising processes – some of the first international

bodies were sport-related ones such as the IOC, the IAAF and the ILTF.”

(Horne & Whannel, 2012)

2.2.1 The IOC

The International Olympic Committee is the global governing body for the Olympic Games

looking over and coordinating with 27 international sports federations, including the

International Association of Athletics Federations. Founded in 1894, the IOC is comprised of

111 members appointed by the organisation (delegated, not elected) that represent the IOC in

their countries promoting interests of the IOC and of the Olympic movement in the countries

and organisations of the Olympic movement which they serve. (Wagner, 2014, IOC, 2004

cited in Horne & Whannel, 2012 p.29).

Chatzigianni (2006) cynically defines the IOC is a hierarchical and bureaucratic organisation

designed to promote Olympic ideals and stage the Olympic Games. Mason (2006) describes

the IOC as exclusionary, with reference to the organisations gender inequality; only 12 of its

116 members are women.

Chatzigianni (2006) writes in favour of the International Olympic Committee by supporting

the reactive nature of the organisations former president Juan Antonio de Samaranch during

4

the Salt Lake City corruption allegations. Sugden & Tomlinson (2012) take an interpretivist

perspective, suggesting that the IOC took action because of the allegations to protect the

Olympic brand because of media scrutiny rather than the moral motives which it may have

already been aware of prior to public knowingness. Chatzigianni (2006) contextualises how

an organisation can adapt to political and social pressure to maintain public image. Critics

describe the introduction of the IOC ethics commission and WADA as a ‘put-up job’

(MacAloon, 2011, p.294).

Mason et al. (2006:67) state the implications of the IOC having an ‘unfavourab le image’;

“…lower numbers of television viewers and, consequently, lower revenues for the

media corporations from advertisers. This would invariably affect the value of

broadcasting rights for future Olympic Games and thus impact an important revenue

source for the IOC.”

Sugden and Tomlinson (2012) support this, concluding that putting the image of the Olympic

movement ahead of the best interests of sport (doping, transparency and regulated

governance) was of serious concern to potential host cities and governments (Sugden &

Tomlinson, 2012).

Chatzigianni (2006, p.99) uses WADA as an example of how the IOC has ‘safeguarded its

universal status’ and Sugden and Tomlinson believe that WADA has been successful in

developing an international policy regime tackling doping. Since Chatzigianni, and Sugden

and Tomlinson’s work was published an investigation undertaken by a German journalist

found evidence suggesting that 99% of Russian Olympic athletes are involved with doping,

questioning WADA’s credibility, as it stems from the IOC. Sebastian Coe has suggested that

there should be an independent drug-testing governing body to address questions of

legitimacy (Independent, 2014). This is backed by Howman (2013, p.247) who suggests an

individual sports integrity agency similar to WADA’s governance to regulate doping, betting,

bribery, and corruption.

Jennings (2011) is a stern critic of the IOC and uses emotive language to demonise those in

positions of power within both organisations, branding Samaranch a ‘card-carrying facist’

(2011, p.390). His journalistic views are supported by strong evidence despite the

intentionally bias blending of fact and non-academic language.

5

The author clearly plays a significant role in attempting to expose the flaws of the IOC and its

associates. He is keen to share with the reader how the organisation attempts to censor

negative press to maintain the Olympic image. Although it is debatable whether Jennings

(2011) has broadcasted his articles to the general public enough to put pressure on the IOC

for organisational change.

2.2.2 The IAAF

The International Association of Athletics Federations, formerly the International Amateur

Athletics Federation, changed its name for a number of reasons; to alleviate issues around

amateurism in the sport and to establish a ‘structural basis’ to facilitate sports

commercialisation and commodification through athlete professionalism (Horne & Whannel,

2012, p.77). The IAAF consists of 213 members and is the rights holder for the World

Championships, World Indoor Championships, Cross Country World Championships and

Half-Marathon Championships (Tomlinson, 2010).

2.2.3 WADA & CAS

Doping has been a contentious issue in modern athletics. The morality and devotion to fair

play of the sport are questioned by athletes that take performance enhancing drugs. McLaren

(2008:34) notes the impact of doping in sport on future elite competition;

“Not only does doping tarnish fair play, but it also creates scepticism whenever an

athlete is able to perform at a high ability and surpass past benchmarks; eyebrows

are almost always raised with doubts centered on doping.”

For international doping governance, there are two established organisations; The World

Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). WADA was set

up as collaboration between the Olympic movement and public authorities with the main

purpose of creating “a comprehensive approach to fight doping in sport” (Wendt, 2012

page).

WADA have become a fundamental catalyst in anti-doping policy-making, collaborating

with governments and non-governmental organisations (Sugden & Tomlinson, 2012). In

November 2014 the German government made performance-enhancing doping a criminal

offence, which affects foreign athletes caught doping in Germany, and has urged other

nations to follow suit (sportindustry.co.za, 2014). One of Katwala’s (2000) guidelines for

6

modern sport governance is cooperation between different governing bodies. Howman (2013,

p.348) highlights the importance of introducing government prosecution to give ‘statutory

teeth’ to sanctions.

There is inconsistency across international doping governance, clear when Germany’s

criminalisation of performance-enhancing doping is compared to Kenya that did not have a

national doping governing body prior to 2015, but the set-up of Anti-Doping Agency of

Kenya (ADAK) and an increase of three percent in WADA’s budget from 2015 is step in the

right direction (WADA, 2014).

The World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) was established as one of WADA’s first actions,

coming into force in 2004 it became the most established reference document for all major

international sport events.

The WADC’s introduction helped clarify a systematic process for the Court of Arbitration.

The Court of Arbitration is a sport-specific, independent authority (TAS/CAS, 2014). CAS

was formed to resolve international sport-related disputes, in particular acting as a court of

appeal for doping cases (Sugden & Tomlinson, 2012, TAS/CAS, 2014), for example WADA

is governed by 50% public authorities and 50% sports governing bodies such as the IOC

(Howman, 2013, p.245) Although Jarvie (2006, p.126) cynically theorises that CAS was

established to ‘forestall intervention from external law’.

On the other hand, Hamilton (2010, p.220) describes the IOC’s set-up of WADA and the

Court of Arbitration for Sport ‘great efforts’ to combat doping in sport. Furthermore, Wendt

(2012) believes WADA have been highly successful given the time period since it’s set-up in

1999 stating that

“WADA’s authority to lead a globalised harmonised approach in the war against

doping has now been firmly recognised and solidified”

(Wendt, 2012:169).

Generally, research into doping organisations has focused on the IOC’s role described by

Lenskj (2012, p.570) as the ‘supreme governing body of sport’ which he references to the

political position of the IOC since the Olympics adopted the capitalist culture whereby the

IOC had political power influencing global anti-doping policy, especially considering

7

WADA wasn’t set up until 1999 (Wagner, 2011). This was first illustrated at the Los Angeles

1984 summer Olympics and described by Sugden & Tomlinson;

“The most compelling and fundamental change is the way the Olympics have moved

steadily and inexorably away from being an amateur, peoples’, sporting festival

towards a state-choreographed, commercially driven, internationally controlled,

media mega-event”

(Sugden and Tomlinson, 2012:243).

4 years on from the Los Angeles games at the Seoul Olympics, the hundred metres suffered

from multiple doping cases, described by one journalist as ‘the most tainted race in sport’.

Six of the eight runners having been associated with doping related offences since (Scott-

Elliot, 2013).

2.2.4 Commercialisation of the Olympics

Jennings’ article (2011) illustrates the importance of the commercialisation of sport and

capitalist culture for international organisations like the IAAF and the IOC. Particularly

financially for individual members and the organisation as a whole, and the importance of

maintaining the Olympic image through sponsorship and broadcasting which has made the

IOC one of the most successful organisations of the 20th Century (Horne & Whannel, 2012).

This has no sign of slowing up, with an Olympic broadcasting channel commissioned by the

IOC, decided by a unanimous decision by committee members in 2014 (Owen, 2014).

The aim of providing a global channel is to provide footage from the extensive Olympic

archive and broadcast Olympic and non-Olympic sports that receive little mainstream

coverage (Owen, 2014). Broadcasting rights are the biggest revenue source (47%) suggesting

the IOC would like to expand this area and benefit from the numerous partners the IOC have,

with £105 million coming from TV rights and TOP sponsorship programme sales. The

corporate revenue stream symbolises the gravity of sport globalisation and commercialisation

which can be seen as positive for world sport because of its increasing popularity and

reinvestment (Owen, 2014). Although Jarvie (2006) argues that trans-national corporations

are associated more with corruption and corporatism than providing a positive social role,

which is supported by Katwala (2000).

8

The use of the Olympics and international athletics events as a commercial commodity is

acclaimed by some authors and criticised by others. Tomlinson (2005, p.4) is particularly

critical, describing the combination of sponsorship and television revenues as ‘potent’, in

contrast.

Simson & Jennings (1992) solution is to re-establish the amateur ideal of the Olympics,

which is seen by Guttman (1994, p.177) as ‘naïve’ stating that the only answer was to ‘open

the Olympics up to the world’s best athletes’.

2.3 Corruption in sport governance

Corruption can be defined as;

“the use of a position by its occupant in such a way as to fulfil tasks required of the

occupant by the employing institution in a manner consciously different to the

objectives of that institution. Such activity results from a desire for advantages for the

occupant of the position”

(Maennig 2005:189).

Maennig (2005) illustrates how corruption and bribery have been a timeless issue for

international sport governance with modern examples the IOC has faced in the late 20 th

century and early 21st century; the 1998-1999 Salt Lake City bidding scandal, 2002 figure-

skating, Olympic boxing in Seoul 1988.

2.3.1 Macro-social Corruption

In Numerato’s (2009) analysis of the macro-social aspect of sports corruption he identifies

that those that take part in such activities are often about a political, commercial or financial

outcome using the media as a catalyst, with little emphasis on influencing the sporting result.

Corruption at the highest level in the Olympic movement isn’t solely an IOC issue but also

affects National Olympic Committee’s; Numerato (2009) views on macro-social corruption

are supported with examples of public corruption in Italian sport governing bodies in 2006

(with reference to the Italian Olympic Committee). Numerato uses a combination of

academic literature and qualitative primary research including statements from athletes and

sports fans which provide a broader perspective of how sport corruption is viewed.

9

MacAloon (2011) is critical of Juan Antonio de Samaranch’s actions as IOC president and

the IOC as an organisation by making suggestions there is much still much to be done;

including administrative reforms, financial transparency and barriers in the bidding process.

However he still acknowledges the ‘success’ of the Hodler rules and IOC ethics commission

and in previous work shows a romantic idealist view on the philosophy of the Olympic

movement (MacAloon, 1981). MacAloon’s initial criticism is supported by Lenskyj and

Wagg that condemn the leadership of the IOC:

“in a rigidly hierarchical organisation such as the IOC, leaders who fail to set high

ethical standards and whose public behaviour is characterised by hyperbole and

hypocrisy make it difficult, if not impossible for well-intentioned Olympic

administrators further down the ladder to bring about any positive changes”

(MacAloon, 2012:571).

The hierarchy of power and leadership in the IOC is an example of the sports corruption

culture cycle which has made international sport governance toxic. Numerato (2008, cited in

Numerato 2009 p.264) theorises this cycle;

“By portraying corruption as an acceptable form of social behaviour can reinforce a

systematic diffusion of corruption”.

This study could contradict Lenskyj and Wagg (2012) by viewing administrators in a lower

position of power are just as susceptible to corruption as those above.

In contrast to Lenskyj, Guttman (1994, p.172) praises Antonio Samaranch for his

contribution to the democratisation of the Olympic movement. It should be noted that

Guttman’s book was published in 1994 and doesn’t take into account the Salt Lake City

bidding scandal which is acknowledged by Lenskyj (2000, 2012) and other authors (Girginov

& Parry, 2005, Horne & Whannel, 2012).

2.3.2 Accountability and Transparency

Katwala (2000) identifies that greater transparency is one of major steps needed toward

modernising sport governance. Hamilton (2010, p.223) suggests that the IOC does not accept

accountability for allegations of corruption during the bidding process for the 1996 Summer

Olympic Games by stating that there is no acknowledgement by the IOC of any wrongdoing

in any public documentation to date.

10

By not accepting responsibility for wrongdoing it has struggled to convince people outside

the IOC of its democratic governance and accept its Olympic ideology, in which doping has

been a catalyst in the mistrust from the general public, according to Horne and Whannel

(2012, p.163).

In research undertaken by Geeraert et al. into sports governing bodies’ accountability which

finds that 77% of the organisations in the study can be found in Switzerland (2013, p.18). A

suggested explanation for this is the lenient legal system which provides protection from both

internal and external examination and has low taxation regulations allowing organisations to

keep more revenue than they would in other countries. This contradicts the IOC’s stance on

self-governance in an external publication by the organisation ‘Basic Universal Principles of

Good Governance’ with a specific section on accountability and transparency (IOC, 2008).

Non-transparency and non-accountability ultimately promotes corruption (O’Higgins, 2006,

p.238).

Geeraert (2014) identifies key principles of good governance through international

institutions including United Nations Development Programme, European Commission,

World Bank, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the

International Monetary Fund; such as accountability, efficiency, effectiveness, predictability,

sound financial management, fighting corruption and transparency.

The IAAF may not appear as opaque to many but the IAAF has shown a façade of ignorance

when faced with the task of investigating and dealing with corruption not dissimilar in

management to the IOC which The son of the IAAF president, Papa Massata Diack asked for

$4.5m via bank transfer and a further payment of $440,000 in the build-up to Doha’s failed

bid to win the right to host the 2017 world championships. Despite these allegations Doha

successfully won the rights to host the 2019 event. Former athlete and IAAF Spanish

representative José Maria Odriozola commented on Doha’s success; “all they have is money.”

(Rowbottom, 2014). Lenskj & Wagg (2012, p.572) denotes the reason why unexpected host

selections are made by international sports organisations as giving the ‘developing world’ the

chance to host mega-events, when in fact power and money were influential.

2.3.3 Case study: 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympic bid

In 1994-1995 figure-heads in the SLOC were found to have bribed IOC members to vote for

Salt Lake City to host the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. A total of $2 million was paid by the

11

SLOC in the form of travel, real estate, medical operations, cash payments, residency permits

and university tuition fees paid for children of some IOC delegates (Maenning, 2005, p.195).

Hosting an event the size of the Olympics brings potential benefits such as economic growth

and establishing national identity on the international community, therefore host city

candidates are willing to go to extreme lengths to secure the Games (Girginov & Parry,

2004). Horne & Whannel (2012) point out that there has been an underestimation of the costs

of mega-events like the Olympics and IAAF World Championships. The Hodler-rules were

adopted by the IOC in February 1994 to address the issue of financial cost for bidding cities,

not corruption in the bidding process according to the IOC ad hoc commission, which

Lenskyj is notably less than convinced about (1999, cited in Lenskyj, 2000).

In 1998 a number of commissions were made as a result of the Salt Lake Organising

Committee allegations by the IOC, the US Olympic Committee and Utah’s Board of Ethics.

The incidents were investigated by the Federal Beareau of Intelligence (FBI). The IOC

formed an ad hoc commission led by IOC Canadian member Richard Pound to investigate

and make recommendations. A week after the ad hoc commission was initiated, the SLOC

instructed its internal ethics board to investigate the bidding process which Lenskyj views as

‘toothless’ (2000, p.14). Lenskyj (2000) is a scathing critic of the IOC before and after the

Salt Lake City bidding scandal.

By taking a realist view of sporting bodies, of the IOC in particular, Lenskyj (2000) fails to

acknowledge the benefits of the delivering sport through globalisation processes for a more

liberal society, some of which are outlined by Horne & Whannel (2012, p.38); increased

involvement in physical activity, employment and civil engagement such as volunteering. A

neo-liberal perspective should be taken into account, like MacAloon’s speculative appraisal

of IOC successes (Jarvie, 2006).

Since the Salt Lake City allegations, what Girginov and Parry (2005) describe as the most

profound crises of the Olympic Movement in recent times, the IOC ethics commission was

established because of discrepancies around how National Organising Committees and

Olympic Committees treat IOC members with hospitality and gifts. Rules on this matter

were unclear prior to the 2000 reforms and questions into the legitimacy of an ethics

commission with ties in the IOC have been raised (Girginov & Parry, 2005, Horne &

Whannel, 2012).

12

2.4 Athlete Commissions and Representation

Habermas notes the importance of athletes having a voice through the informal public sphere;

“The end goal of placing political pressure on bureaucrats and politicians with an

aim of bringing about policy change that reflects a more pronounced athlete-centered

sport system.”

(1996, p. 485, cited in Kihl, 2007, p.19)

Kihl et al. (2007, p.24) explains the importance of incorporating athlete’s views and

contributions to sport governance;

“Sport bureaucrats’ use of discretion in determining what is in the best interest of the

athletes does not always symbolize the principle of athlete-centred sport.”

2.4.1 IOC athletes’ commission

The IOC Athletes commission is an organisation that provides the opportunity for athletes to

influence decisions in how the IOC is run and bridges the relationship between active athletes

and IOC leadership. The commission’s agenda includes the Olympic candidate city

evaluation process, monitoring of the programme and organisation of the Olympics, the ‘IOC

athlete career programme’, supporting humanitarian schemes, addressing the environment,

and gender equality (IOC, 2014). The commission is made up of 12 elected athletes for an

eight year tenancy, of which seven athletes are appointed by the IOC president. Adam

Pengilly, former Olympic skeleton athlete is currently the only British member of the IOC

athletes’ commission (IOC, 2014).

3.4.2 IAAF Athletes’ commission

Thibault et al. (2010) outlines how athlete representation is used in athletics:

“The Athletes’ Commission was created in 1989. The commission is composed of 19

members who serve a four-year term. Of these members, seven are appointed by the

IAAF Council, and 12 members are athletes elected by their peers.”

(Thibault et al, 2010:284)

Thibault et al. (2010) includes an appraisal from former British Olympian, Sebastian Coe, on

Samaranch’s introduction of the IOC Athletes’ Commission. Coe has significant public

13

backing from the athletics community and competing athletes, including 400 metre world

champion Christine Ohuruogu (Guardian, 2015). But Coe’s intention to be in a high political

position in the IAAF and current power struggle to achieve IAAF presidency in 2015 after a

16 year reign could be influential in his support for political figureheads in hope that the

favour will be returned during the presidential election (Guardian, 2014, IAAF).

2.4.3 WADA athletes’ commission

WADA’s Athlete Commission was established in 2005 and is made up of 17 Olympic and

Paralympic athletes. The Commission sets out to represent the views and rights of athletes,

internationally bridging the gap between athletes and WADA, providing insight and oversight

of doping governance (WADA, 2010).

2.4.4 British Olympic Association athletes’ commission

Bill Sweeney, BOA chief executive, spoke about the role of the BOA athletes’ commission

"Since 2010, the Commission has been an integral part of the BOA in allowing us to

have the athletes' voice at the very heart of everything we do" (Etchells, 2014).

Goldie Sayers and Christian Malcolm are the only representatives of athletics on the BOA

athletes’ commission (BOA, n.d.).

2.4.5 Athlete Representation

Thibault et al. (2010) investigates the use of athlete representation through commissions in

individual federations. The article suggests that across the Olympic sporting spectrum, athlete

commissions/boards have been implemented which can help to improve the quality and

legitimacy of decisions. Habermas’s (1995, cited in Kihl, 2007 p.5) theory of discourse says

that equal consideration is justified by living under a particular policy in order for successful

democratic governance.

According to Girginov and Parry (2005 p.164) Olympic athletes possess ‘enormous symbolic

power’ and those in position of political power are aware of this. Houlihan (2004, pp.421-

422) contradicts Thibault et al. and Girginov and Parry’s views, arguing that

“athletes are safely quarantined from any significant decision-making opportunities”

(cited in Geeraert et al., 2014, p.20)

14

This is supported by Geeraert et al.’s research stating that only 11% of the sport governing

bodies included in the study granted athletes decision-making power. Thibault et al. (2010,

p.293) supports the inclusion of athletes in the decision making process in international sport

governance but questions the accountability and legitimacy around the appointment of

athletes to the IOC and other international federations in comparison to elected members of

athlete commissions.

Jarvie (2006) believes that shareholder owned/run organisations are arguably far more

accountable than international governing bodies such as the IOC, FIFA and UEFA,

supporting the idea that organisations with athletes involved in important decision making

positions are more transparent and accountable.

Athletes often feel devolved from governing bodies, exemplified by former nine-time

Olympic sprint and long-jump champion Carl Lewis who spoke at a Qatari sports conference,

displaying his disappointment at the World Championships being awarded to London

because of the IAAF’s ‘seedy’ selection process (Telegraph, 2011).

Kihl et al. (2007, p.11) suggests that administrators may often filter through athletes’

suggestions and implement policy without giving a justification for decisions made which can

cause isolation and disconnection from organisations they see themselves as the central

stakeholder.

Habermas’s (1996) solution to this is the deliberative democracy theory employing

communicative power to legitimising policies and decisions made; an example of this is Greg

Rutherford and Darren Campbell’s public criticism of global athletics after the widespread

Russian doping claims, and Robert Harting’s request to be removed from Athlete of the Year

shortlist because of the inclusion of Justin Gatlin, who has received two drugs bans in his

sprinting career (BBC, 2014, Mackay, 2014). Although Habermas (1995) recognises that

there can be obstacles for athletes using their communicative power, such as administrative

power being utilised by those that disagree at the top of sport governance (cited in Kihl et al,

2007 p.15).

15

2.5 Athletics governance in the UK

2.5.1 UKA

UKA Athletics is the national governing body for athletics in Great Britain and Northern

Ireland. The governing body’s aim is to inspire the public by winning medals, increase

participation and stage successful athletics events (British Athletics, n.d.).

Grix (2009) tries to convey the clear decline in the sport of athletics in the UK despite being

the most heavily funded of the Olympic programme from UK Sport. Grix (2009) then

theorises the ‘modernisation’ of the governing bodies to accord with International

Organisations adoption of capitalist culture by making UK Athletics a lucrative financial

organisation.

Grix’s article (2009) is particularly critical of the grass-root system for being elitist and less

embracing and explains how the nurturing of solely podium-potential athletes isn’t the

solution, supported strongly with relevant examples from the Osaka 2007 World

Championships; Christine Ohuruogu’s 400 metre gold medal was celebrated by UK Athletics

despite receiving no funding. Clearly the author feels the hierarchical system is not a viable

long-term strategy that will benefit British athletics because of the marginalisation of

coaches, volunteers and athletes that aren’t supported by UK Sport or the national lottery.

An area which the author could have used to support his argument about grass-root athletics

and sustainable sport in the long term is the maintenance of athletics stadia; since the article

was written (2009) the Don Valley stadium in Sheffield has been demolished and there are

proposals to demolish Crystal Palace stadium in London. (Guardian, 2014).

16

2.5.2 British Anti-Doping

The UK’s national Anti-Doping Organisation is UKAD, and abides by the WADC. UKAD is

clearly committed to transparency and good governance through quarterly reports and

appropriate ISO accreditation (UKAD.org, 2015). UKAD has a number of initiatives to

encourage clean sport in Britain; including a portal for reporting doping and athlete

representatives for clean sport through the ‘100% me’ campaign (UKAD.org, 2015).

One noticeable difference between WADA and UKAD is UKAD’s commitment to greater

financial transparency easily accessible published quarterly finances (UKAD, 2015).

On the other hand UKAD were criticised in January 2015 after an investigation by Athletics

Weekly magazine suggesting drug-testing at British road-race events outside of IAAF-label

events is ‘virtually non-existent’, despite 1st place prizes worth up to £25,000 available on

two occasions. Multiple international athletes supporting this claim, including British

distance runners Alyson Dixon and Charlotte Purdue (Athletics Weekly, 2015). Although it is

clear that in the UK doping is comparatively lower to other nations; WADA have suggested

that doping in elite sport could be at around 8%. UKAD’s research into British elite sport

suggests the level of doping in the UK is between 1-2% but acknowledges it is likely to be

higher; at around 4-5% (Batt, 2011, p.264-265).

17

2.6 Chapter Summary

Academic literature on IOC is heavily critical of the organisation’s hierarchical structure and

recurring incidents around transparency and accountability. Reasons for these issues can be

put down to being a self-autonomous sporting institution which inhibits a culture of

corruption that has become a cycle. Without suitable regulation this vicious cycle is likely to

continue and become ‘normalised’, only fundamental change is the reform solution

(O’Higgins, 2006, p.239).

On the other hand, efforts to resolve issues in Athletics governance are becoming more

credible through WADA, the IOC ethics commission and athlete commissions. A recurring

theme among academics is that those in the highest positions of power in sport governance

are responsible for failings in international athletics organisations such as the IAAF and the

IOC (Lenskyj, 2012), but the organisations receive little recognition for progress because of

how the public see corruption and doping incidents in the media.

The introduction of athlete represented committees is a step forward in bridging the gap

between autonomic dictatorships and democratic governance to facilitate decision making in

the best interests of athletics, governed along with internal regulation and self-commitment to

good governance. The degree of decision-making power should be increased to address other

stakeholder interests outside of INGSO’s and their associated corporate sponsors (Thibault et

al, 2010). Although this challenges senior management of INGSO’s and many are not willing

to give up their position of power (O’Higgins, 2006).

It is clear that the amount of literature on the importance of athlete commissions in sports

governance in combatting corruption is minimal which highlights the importance of the work

of Thibault et al (2010), Kihl et al. (2007) and Geeraert et al. (2014).

18

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Chapter Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to outline the research processes used to achieve the aims and

objectives of the study – see 1.2 objectives section or project proposal, appendix A. Included

is a brief explanation of the significance of the applied research process model in relation to

this study and how each stage is applied containing the data collection and analysis methods,

the research limitations and ethical issues posed by the research.

3.2 Research Process

The research process best suited to this study is by Saunders Lewis & Thornhill, illustrated in

figure 1 (2003). Other models were considered; Gill and Johnson (2002), Veal & Darcy

(2014) and Jankowicz (2005). Veal’s circular research process model was considered too

broad for the proposed project considering the researcher’s level of experience.

Most research models are multi-process including the following; clarifying the research topic,

reviewing literature, identifying/understanding research philosophy and approach, research

design, data collection, data analysis and writing up/presentation of findings. Saunders et al

(2012) was considered most clear and suitable with a systematic method.

19

Figure 1 – Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill (2012)

20

3.3 Clarifying the Research Topic

Formulating and clarifying the research topic, critically reviewing the literature and

understanding the study’s philosophy and approach were all performed in the project’s

proposal – see appendix A. The research topic is one that the researcher should be capable of

undertaking and one that excites them (Janowicz, 1995).

3.4 Conducting the Literature Review

Writing a literature review is a description and critical analysis of what other authors have

written (Jankowicz, 2000). The purpose of conducting a critical literature review is to

demonstrate awareness of the subject area and associated applicable theoretical and

conceptual framework for the rest of the study in relation to the study’s research questions

and objectives (Gill & Johnson, 2002).

Carrying out a critical review of literature allows the researcher to refine a focus, setting

conceptual boundaries. Gill and Johnson (2002) suggests identifying a broad area to work on

before focusing down to a manageable topic. For this study the broad area was corruption in

international athletics governing bodies and the focus topic was the importance of athlete

commissions for tackling corruption. By doing this it clarifies the justification for new

research (Gill & Johnson, 2002).

3.5 Research approach

“The researcher’s philosophy determines the way research is conducted.”

(Saunders et al, 2012, p.83).

This study will use the inductive approach theory; this is examining a particular aspect of

social life and derives theories from the data. The inductive approach is considered flexible

and is generally used in the social sciences; by first observing, secondly analysing and thirdly

explaining/theorising. Deductive approach is used primarily in scientific quantitative research

(Gill & Johnson, 2002 p. 40). Johnson (2004: 165, cited in Saunders et al, 2012, p.574)

defines induction as “the intensive examination of a strategically selected number of cases as

to empirically establish the causes of a specific phenomenon”.

21

Interpretivism is more applicable to induction and deduction is more applicable to positivism

(Jankowicz, 1995). Positivism aims to explain the cause and effect of human behaviour and

make conclusions from observation of social phenomena holistically. This does not reflect

individuals’ attitudes and responses which an interpretivist philosophy does (May, 2001,

p.10).

For this study the researcher adopted the interpretive philosophy. Veal states that the

interpretivism attempts to “get inside the mind of the subjects and see the world from their

point of view” (1992, p.31).

This study takes an interpretive phenomenological approach to the primary research to

understand and interpret athletes’ experiences in order to determine the meaning of the

experiences (Tuohy et al, 2013). The generalisations that positivist research makes were not

appropriate for how the data was interpreted. Interpretivism takes an empathetic viewpoint,

delving into the world of the participant in order to interpret their perspective of corruption in

athletics (Saunders et al, 2012, p. 137).

3.6 Data collection

3.6.1 Interviews

Finn et al (2000:75) defines an interview as: “An open, democratic, informal, free-flowing,

two-way process…”

Semi-structured interviews include specific questions but allow further probing for

participants to elaborate and clarify making interviews more flexible and can instigate deeper

into a topic area than structured interviewing. Structured interviews were not chosen for this

study because standardised working may inhibit responses despite increasing comparability

of responses (Finn et al, 2000). Furthermore, structured interviews impede the potential to

record the complexity of respondents’ attitudes (Marvasti, 2004).

Saunders et al (2012) identifies 7 areas requiring competence from the researcher during in-

depth semi-structured interviews:

Opening the interview

Using appropriate language

Questioning

Listening

22

Testing and summarising understanding

Behavioural cues

Recording data

The interviews will be recorded on an audio-device. Recording the interview allows the

researcher to concentrate on listening to the recipient and follow with appropriate responses,

and then analyse the interview by re-listening. There is the possibility of technical problems

with an audio device but by saving the recording and duplicating it on to the researchers hard-

drive this problem should be avoided (Saunders et al, 2012, p.396).

Focus groups were not chosen for this study because one-to-one interviews allow the

researcher to immerse themselves in the individual athlete’s world and their personal

experiences rather than focus groups which can be influenced by participant’s personalities.

Focus groups are aimed at facilitating discussion rather than the research aim of recording

experiences along with discussion (Then et al, 2014). Focus groups can facilitate more

dominant respondents’ views over others, ultimately influencing the data (Marvasti, 2004).

On the other hand, focus groups can inhibit healthy debate addressing contrasting viewpoints

without needing to come to a consensus (Saunders et al, 2012, p.403).

In-depth interviewing was most applicable to this research because it “encourages mutual

self-disclosure in the context of an emotionally charged atmosphere where the interviewer

and interviewee freely express their views about an issue” (Douglas, 1985, cited in Marvasti,

2004:22). In comparison, in more structured approaches the researchers’ interests are

dominant, impeding respondents from expressing their views on a matter and therefore an in-

depth study. In this particular research into the topic of corruption and bribery, structured

approaches would refocus ‘off-topic remarks’ which could limit the amount of research

conducted because of the amount the participant knows on a topic (Morgan 2002:147, cited

in Marvasti, 2004, p.23).

23

3.7 Qualitative Research

Elias (1986:20) describes the aim of research “the aim is to make known something

previously unknown to human beings. It is to advance human knowledge to make it more

certain or better fitting… the aim is… discovery.” (cited in Veal, 2014, p.38)

Neither a qualitative nor quantitative is best; it is dependent on the initial research question.

(Jankowicz, 1995, p.174). Qualitative research methods are described as soft, flexible,

subjective, political, speculative and grounded (Halfpenny, 1979:799 cited in Silverman,

2001).

Silverman describes how qualitative methods are especially focused on how people observe

and describe their lives (2005:6). Qualitative research allows the researcher to view

observational behaviour whilst quantitative research may conceal social processes.

Qualitative research requires the researcher to adopt a holistic understanding of the topic and

take an empathetic stance in conducting the primary research (Miles & Huberman, 1994:6,

cited in Janowicz, 1994, p.173).

The researcher adopted qualitative research because it interprets social processes as a whole,

whilst quantitative research separates data into different variables (Marvasti, 2004). This

means that the researcher can provide a ‘deeper’ understanding of how athletes have come

into contact with the social phenomena of corruption in sports governance, than what would

have been obtained from purely quantitative data (Silverman, 2005, p.10).

3.7.2 Phenomenology

The purpose of phenomenology is to understand the way individuals perceive the world

around them incorporating their personal experiences (Murray & Holmes, 2014). It is crucial

for the researcher to accept empathy as part of the research without having a bias influence

(Saunders et al, 2012), Singleton et al. (1988:11, cited in Silverman, 2005, p.78) supports this

stance:

“Field research is essentially a matter of immersing oneself in a naturally occurring… set of

events in order to gain firsthand knowledge of the situation.”

24

3.7.3 Sampling

The sample for this project is made up of five current or former international athletes that

have competed at either a major IAAF or WMRC major event. The sample size was chosen

to adhere to financial, time-based restraints without compromising the quality of the research,

and was most appropriate for a purposive sample and in-depth semi-structured interviews

(Silverman, 2005).

Sample athletes were contacted by the researcher and asked to take part voluntarily. Studying

a small sample of subjects is suggested when adopting the inductive approach (Saunders et al,

2012, p.119).

This study uses self-selection sampling and purposive sampling. Self-selection sampling was

chosen because of the emotional connection to the study’s objectives for the participants- see

objectives section 1.2 or project proposal – appendix A. Participants accepted to take part,

this would suggest an interest in the research topic if accepting which is one of the

characteristics of successful self-selection sampling (Saunders et al, 2012).

Purposive sampling was used because of international athletics recognition competing at an

IAAF or WMRA recognised event. Some participants may be more interested in the study

topic than others meaning they are better informed. Snowball sampling was not chosen

because of its uncertainty in making initial contact with the international athletics community

(Jankowicz, 2005).

3.7.4 Pilot Interview

The purpose of a pilot study is to resolve any doubts in the proposed questions to be asked in

the interviews by asking the questions intended to ask, in the same environment, using

member of the same sample for the main study (Jankowicz, 2005). The pilot test used one

participant that is a currently competing athlete.

The pilot test revealed that a topic area the researcher expected to come up without

suggestion did not. When asked a general question about corruption in sport, the researcher

expected the participants to raise the Salt Lake City scandal but they didn’t. This led to the

initial question being amended.

25

3.8 Data analysis

Analysis is defined as doing two things; the researcher familiarising themselves with the data

until recognising a pattern/patterns and tabulating the data in a way that the insights

recognised are informative (Jankowicz, 2005, p.190).

The interviews are transcribed after being audio-recorded, then categorised. This allows the

researcher to analyse and explore the data in-depth to;

1. Comprehend and manage them;

2. Integrate related data drawn from different transcripts and notes

3. Identify key themes or patterns from them for further exploration;

4. Develop and/or test theories based on these apparent patterns or relationships;

5. Draw and verify conclusions

(Dey, 1993, Miles & Huberman, 1994, cited in Saunders et al, 2012:479).

This study will use content analysis during the next chapter; specifically open coding which

incorporates the grounded theory previously mentioned in section 3.6 – research approach.

Open coding is the process of separating conceptual units and labelling similar units

(Saunders et al, 2012). This will be performed doing thematic coding (Veal, 2014, p.467). the

key for the thematic coding is located as appendix F.

3.9 Ethics & Access

Research ethics are the steps that must be taken to protect the dignity and safety of the

research participants and researcher, Payne and Payne define ethical practice as:

“…a moral stance that involves conducting research to achieve not just high professional

standards of technical procedure, but also respect and protection for the people actively

consenting to be studied” (2004:66).

Confidentiality and anonymity were specified agreements in the consent form – see Appendix

D for signed consent forms from all participants. Confidentiality and anonymity are

important concepts because revealing the identities of the respondents could result in

26

ramifications in the athlete’s careers with sports governing bodies or unwanted media

attention regarding their views (Marvasti, 2004).

The Leeds Beckett University ethics policy was abided by throughout the project – ethical

approvement is located in the appendicies – appendix E. To ensure participants are clear on

the research being conducted an information sheet was provided – see appendix B.

The Leeds Beckett University sports reception was the suggested location to host the

interviews because of convenience with training and the publicity for participant and

researcher safety; although participants were offered any location they felt most comfortable

within reason.

Once recorded the data will be transferred from a recording device and transcribed onto a

password encrypted hard-drive. Only the researcher and research supervisor will have access

to the data recorded.

The participants were accessed through the Leeds Beckett University athletics team and

coaching staff.

3.10 Research Limitations

Purposive sampling restricts the research in that the data collected may not reflect every ‘cell’

and the time-frame for the project is limited to a 6 month period, therefore restricts how much

data can be obtained (Silverman, 2005, p.130).

During the pilot study the researcher used a university athlete that has not competed

internationally due to time-scale and accessibility to international athletes during January,

some of which have altitude training during January and February months. The project would

require a longer time-frame and financial funding for incentive to use international athletes

willing to give a time commitment rather than using university athletes that will not have any

first-hand experience of corruption in international athletics.

3.11 Chapter Summary

This section identifies the structure Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill’s model (2012) gives to

the project. Qualitative methods; specifically semi-structured interviews are the most

appropriate devices in conducting this study into the significance of athlete commissions of

27

tackling corruption in international governing bodies. The data collected will then be

interpreted and analysed using coding.

28

4. DISCUSSION & FINDINGS

4.1 Chapter Introduction

This section will discuss the findings from the five semi-structured interviews conducted. An

example of the transcribed interviews is located is located in the appendices – appendix G

and full interview are located in the attached plastic sheet.

4.2 Corruption & International Athletics Governance

When asked specifically about experiences and knowledge of corruption in the form of

bribery and financial payments to officials in athletics governance none of the athletes were

aware of any outside of the IOC or FIFA and presented muted responses requiring the

researcher to make questions less specific to corruption cases (like the Salt Lake City bidding

controversy) which would suggest the amount athletes are aware of corruption in athletics is

dependent on how much media exposure there is.

Another reason for recipients not offering a dynamic insight into the topic area is that they are

being interviewed because of their experience in the international athletic community and

their voluntary participation, not because they are experts in the field of sports corruption

meaning their knowledge in the topic area may be minimal, in general and/or in specific topic

areas. Age of the participants and duration in the international athletics community is a

limitation to the research.

It is clear that where athletes’ performances are not directly influenced by the implications of

corruption (such as bribery of senior officials) they have less first-hand experience or interest

in the topic, unlike an associated issue of corruption, such as doping has on the individual

performance of athletes.

This corresponds with Numerato’s (2009) literature that advocates financial corruption as

having little influence on the sporting result which would provide an explanation for most

interviewee’s responses about corruption lacking in overall knowledge and depth in

comparison to the discussion of doping because they aren’t directly affected. The British

athletes expressed their lack of faith in international governance and don’t see athletes as

having the capacity to influence radical change that they will experience the benefits, yet

those interviewed recognised athletes as valued stakeholders with a position of power within

athletics governance as a unified stakeholder group; without the athletes there would be no

29

event, “they are the one’s competing” as pointed out by participant C when discussing the

hosting of the 2019 World Championships.

The athlete’s disconnection and lack of interest with athletics governing bodies’ procedures

and policy is expressed by pessimistic acceptance that because there has been little change

over a long period of time in personnel and those that have internal political power (such as

organisation committee members) and external political power (such as corporate sponsors).

They see it as unlikely to happen in the near future, especially considering the length of

Lamine Diack’s IAAF presidency and the age of athletes meaning that it is more than likely

that athletes have experienced no substantial change in governance in their competitive

careers prior to implications of the 2002 Salt Lake City bidding fiasco.

Numerato (2009) identified the importance of leadership which coincides with athlete A’s

view that without change in leadership as a result of the formation of athlete commissions

little is being done apart from presenting a positive image for the international sports

organisations.

Similar to Chatzigianni (2006), Mason et al. (2006) MacAloon (2011) and Sugden &

Tomlinson’s (2012) perception that organisational change is only reactive to public and

media scrutiny to preserve the reputation of INGSO’s and the broadcasting and sponsorship

revenue, without addressing the issues the sport faces.

An organisation that is mistrusted and viewed by the public as unaccountable and opaque as a

result of doping scandals will most likely impact on, not only the popularity of the sport in

terms of spectatorship, but the amount of people participating in athletics (Horne & Whannel,

2012). Repercussions of lack of interest in athletics and loss of broadcasting revenue will be

less athletes coming through grass-root clubs and competing at international level.

One athlete mentioned a rumour from when they were competing (prior to their retirement)

linking commercialisation and the doping issues of the late 20th Century, supporting Jarvie

(2006);

“I’ve heard rumours about the 100m final in 1988 when Ben Johnson was caught

very famously, out of that race I heard 7 were all guilty of taking drugs and only Ben

Johnson got caught and the rumour was that he was caught because he was Canadian

and not American and the big sponsors were American so they went for the ‘soft

target’.”

30

If this allegation against the IOC, USOC and USADA were true it would undoubtedly

support Katwala (2000), Jarvie (2012) and Sugden & Tomlinson’s (2012) cynical view of the

IOC as an organisation more focused on the retention of economic revenue and appeasing

commercial partners, such as the TOP programme, over playing a positive role in society and

contributing to fair competition on the highest level since becoming a globalised product

(Owen, 2014).

One participant’s misinterpretation of a question on the commercial nature of organisations

was supportive of Numerato’s (2009) identification of the media as a catalyst for corruptive

activities. The enormity of INGSO’s like the IOC have the capacity to influence how athletics

is televised to portray themselves as moral organisations, dismissing allegations of lack of

transparency and accountability which lead to corruption (O’Higgins, 2006).

The participants understanding of the IAAF, WADA and the IOC is recognised in Lenskyj

and Wagg’s (2012) analysis of leaders in hierarchical organisations as stifling the progression

of fundamental positive change from ‘further down the ladder administrators’. This is

reflected by Numerato (2009) who theorises the social acceptance of systematic corruption in

sport governance that is filtered through all forms of the organisational hierarchy.

This ultimately has repercussions on athletics as a sport. For example, by awarding bidding

committees the rights to host an event because of inappropriate practice and ‘under the table’

financial payments bidding cities are less confident of winning hosting rights legitimately.

This discourages nations/cities to bid for athletics events and encourages nations to take part

in corrupt activities to secure major events like the Olympic Games and IAAF World

Championships. Girginov & Parry (2004) back this up by observing that candidate hosts are

willing to go to extreme lengths to secure the Olympic Games and other mega-events such as

the IAAF World Championships. Having fewer candidate cities/nations bidding for major

athletics events means the choice for the IAAF is limited, making the pressure lower on the

host to deliver a high quality event.

Participant A and E identified the relationship between finance and corruption. Respondent 5

noted capitalist culture as one of the driving factors in corruption which is supported by the

IOC’s introduction of an Olympic channel and its profitability from broadcasting rights.

When asked about the awarding of the 2019 World Championships host city respondent 5

stated “you can see how much money Doha has got, I think they have bought that bid and I

31

don’t think it’s hard to buy.” This supports José Maria Odriozola’s angry response to an

unclear bidding process and Lenskyj & Wagg’s (2012) view that power and money are

influential in bidding for sport mega-events.

Participant E also remarks that financial backing is an influential factor in major international

doping. This is supported by the widespread 2014 Russian doping scandal recognised by

every athlete interviewed as a serious threat to the sport, described by one athlete as “the

doping scandal of the last decade”.

The athletes knew very little about the Salt Lake City bribery allegations but maintained a

united stance in viewing financial transparency as an important element of good sport

governance, recognised by literature conducted after the emergence of the events of the Salt

Lake bidding process; Katwala (2000), Maennig (2005), Hamilton (2010), MacAloon (2011)

and Geeraert (2014).

Most athletes expressed that they were satisfied with the governance of British Athletics and

see it as leading the way in transparency and anti-doping governance; the 100% me

programme was identified by participant D (UKAD.org, 2015). Respondent A described the

relationship with other governing bodies as ‘shooting ourselves in the foot’ by abiding by the

policies and regulations set out by INGSO’s, as other nations don’t.

The data shows confidence in British Athletics holistically and the IAAF in the near future if

Seb Coe is elected as the next president prior to the Beijing World Championships in May

2015 (Telegraph, 2014). Respondent 4 commented on those in power in the future of

athletics:

“I think that it will have a dramatic effect in the short term perhaps people changing position

high in power, if those decisions are made correctly and are successful then the future of

athletics will be better”

Suggested solutions for tackling corruption include developing an independent ethics

commission from the IAAF, IOC and National Governing Bodies which supports Howden’s

view that sport requires a world sports integrity agency (Howden, 2013). This is supported by

Seb Coe’s views to create a truly independent body to regulate the IAAF’s governance of

athletics addressing issues of transparency and doping noted in chapter 2.

32

The only issue presented by the sample around British athletics governance was the

pressuring of athletes to centralise to Southern England to be coached by a GB coach in order

to retain national lottery funding, which the athlete described as “dodgy”. Grix (2009)

recognises the elitism in the British athletics system which leads to marginalisation of certain

athletes and coaches due to their region which doesn’t provide a fair and equal funding

system. An unfair system could lead to decline in high-performance athletes from areas

isolated from GB coaching centres catalysing the elitist “bubble”, as described by participant

E.

4.3. Doping

It is noticeable that the interviewed athletes see a correlation between sports corruption and

doping. One athlete identifies the that systematic doping programs require corrupt officials

from international governing bodies and national federations to ‘get away with’ doping,

giving the example of the Russian Athletics Federation bribing IAAF officials to facilitate the

alleged wide-scale Russian doping program (Independent, 2014). This emphasises the

importance of coordinating between INGSO’s and state government for good governance

(Katwala, 2000).

Although, how much the opinions of British athletes are influenced by the British media

against non-Western states (such as Russia, East Germany and Eastern European Nations,

referred to by one participant), national stigma and competitive patriotism of elite athletes is

open to debate.

Almost every athlete interviewed instigated conversation about performance enhancing drug

doping when asked about corruption in sport and had no reservations in expressing their

disapproval of athletes being caught for doping offences. This gratifies Chatzigianni’s (2006)

view that the role of WADA is merely a smokescreen for wide-spread doping in athletics in

the last decade which simply needed a German journalist to expose what entire organisation

was set out to do; identified by Wendt, and Sugden & Tomlinson (2012) as collaborating with

governments and other INGSO’s in a ‘comprehensive fight’ against doping.

A common theme in the data collection is a call for consistent doping testing for international

athletes across Olympic and World Championship level, particularly when the researcher

mentioned the lack of drug-testing facilities and governance in Kenya. It is clear that it would

not only make athletics a fair playing field but justify and rationalise what British athletes are

33

working towards without the inevitable paranoia that athletes from a nation that has a

reputation for systematic doping are taking performance-enhancing drugs.

2 athletes were asked about Germany’s decision to criminalise the use of performance-

enhancing drugs in competition; one athlete emphasised the importance of incorporating

legality and international sports law to make policies legally binding;

“I’d like to see lawyers involved more and sports law enforced, making things legally

binding. A lot of these governing bodies seem to be a law unto themselves.”

(participant A)

This view supports Howman’s (2013) call for government prosecution, without, it allows

doping sanctions to conform to the IOC’s autonomic governance by ruling as ‘the supreme

governing body of sport’ Wagner (2011).

One athlete stressed their frustration at athletes being caught after competing in their Olympic

final, sighting longer bans as being a solution to the doping culture in athletics. This was a

common theme in the data collected. By giving a harsher punishment it would present a more

substantial deterrent for athletes willing to dope because they would be jeopardising a longer

period of their athletic careers. The sample conclusively sees the ban lengths given out by

CAS and WADA in its current form as not being fit for practice because it allows athletes to

come back stronger which athlete A suggests; “…people are told to go away for 2 years and

have a baby or whatever. Athletes disappear for 2 years and suddenly they come back better

than ever, it leaves a nasty taste…” and another compares a drugs ban to ‘bad injury’;

“It’s quite common in athletics to be out for a year or two with an injury. You look at Justin

Gatlin, he’s not sorry for what he did, he’s had a couple of years out, failed tests twice and

now he’s back making lots of money on the diamond league circuit”.

(Participant E)

All respondents viewed the governance of anti-doping in the UK as successful and leading

the way with the amount of athletes being tested in spite of allegedly having no doping

control systems for IAAF label road races in the UK in January 2015.

Athlete E states that doping has “tainted the sport but I’ve grown up seeing doping as part of

the sport so I accept it’s there”. This view is reflective of an individual that sees it as an

34

embedded component of the sport. Although, this is not reflective of the entire sample; one

athlete summaries how catching those doping is beneficial for the future of the sport;

“At the moment it looks like things are getting worse because there’s so many athletes

are getting caught but actually that means that it’s actually getting better because the

World Anti-Doping Agency are catching more and more people and with the advance

in technology doping system and blood passport they’re actually able to prove that

more athletes are doping, so in time this reduces in the future the more people that

are caught”

(Participant B)

The general consensus is that those interviewed have faith in the sport of athletics to

overcome what is described as a ‘crisis’ for the sport by the current IAAF president Lamine

Diack (Guardian, 2015), despite one respondent commenting that they think doping will

always be a problem because of the ever changing drug masking agents available to athletes.

The researcher commented on the issue of the lack of drug-testing in Kenya and asked for

their opinions on the issue.

4.4 Athlete Representation & Athlete Commissions

When participants were asked about whether they were aware of any athlete commissions in

athletics and any implications of athlete representation, specifically the IOC athletes’

commission, WADA athletes’ commission, IAAF athletes’ commission or BOA athletes’

commission, the responses were extremely limited; some athletes not having heard of them

before.

The one former international athlete acknowledged that there may have been positive change

in athletes benefiting from an increase in prize money for competitions and getting less

popular athletic disciplines (such as the jumps and throws) into grand prix series events, but

nothing that would influence organisations change in sports governance.

Although, generally participants endorsed the concept of giving athlete commissions more

decision-making power being a solution to encompassing athletes as valued stakeholders,

concurring with Kihl et al. (2007) on athletes being essential to having an athlete-centred

sport system to combat corruption through accountable and transparent governance which

35

endorses Jarvie (2006) whom suggests shareholder run organisations facilitate financial

transparency and Habermas’ theory of discourse.

Despite this, participant A questions the current system whereby some members of the IOC

athlete’s commission and IAAF athlete’s commission are not credible themselves;

“A lot of athletes on athlete commissions are famous former athletes that may have

had a shady past themselves, so is that not ‘a poacher becoming a gamekeeper?’”

This supports Thibault et al.’s (2010) cynicism of elected athlete’s motives in international

athlete commissions such as the IOC athletes’ commissions and IAAF athletes’ commission.

The athlete continues, supporting Chatzigianni (2006), Mason et al. (2006) and Sugden &

Tomlinson’s (2012) viewpoint on how sports organisations operate. Athlete A addresses the

issues of INGSO’s reliance on protecting a favourable image to the public by suggesting that

athletes are made out to be given a position in democratic organisations when it is a façade in

keeping with the ethos of their governing bodies;

“…if you don’t actually get to do anything or change the leadership or change how

things are done, it just seems to be ‘lip service’ really.”

All exemplified by the following incidents in athletics governance; Salt Lake City bribery

scandal, allegedly for the London 2017 World Championships by Carl Lewis and Doha’s

questionably being awarded the 2019 World Championships against public opinion. A

solution to the issues of hosting rights is put forward by one of the participants; by letting

athletes decide where the Olympics should be held. Although it is an extreme suggestion,

athletes should be represented in where events are awarded rather than bureaucratic discretion

(Kihl et al., 2007).

(Participant E)

This is an extreme example but offers an insight into the enthusiasm and desire from athletes

to be involved in the decision-making process. It is clear that the views of the athletes

interviewed contradict Girginov and Parry (2005) who identifies Olympic athletes as

possessing ‘enormous symbolic power’.

Athlete D described the exclusionary and elitist nature of the international athletics

community as “the circle” which describes international athletics governing bodies and the

36

most successful athlete’s influential in the public eye, not necessarily the highest earners;

such as Robert Harting (BBC, 2014, Mackay, 2014).

“Yes the most successful, not necessarily the highest earners but those that if they’re

not happy the public will know they aren’t happy, but I myself feel like I could talk to

people and say what I would like to see done.”

(Participant D)

This demonstrates how Habermas’ (1996) deliberative democracy theory uses

communicative power and suggests that there is an informal existence of a hierarchy in the

“circle” of the Olympic movement and athletics community meaning the extent of athletes’

communicative power is limited to their success, popularity and athletic discipline (some

athletics disciplines are valued more than others by the public, media and athletes). This

“circle” or “bubble” leaves athletes devolved and isolated from the international athletics

community. Participant E supported this stance;

“For four years I had a card that said I was a part of the IOC passport scheme and you get a

few discounts here and there but you’re not a part of the bigger picture, you’re just a

number.”

(Participant E)

Moreover, participant D believes that they possess the skills to help benefit the sport but

doesn’t feel there is a platform to do that for the average athlete endorsing Kihl’s (2007) work

that suggests administrators filter athlete suggestions and contribution in order for a quick

process of policy implementation which creates this feeling of isolation and exclusion from

decision-making power where the athletes see themselves as a central stakeholder, which also

supports Houlihan (2004) and Geeraert’s research (2014).

The athletes views support Mason (2006) and Jarvie (2006) whom suggest shareholder run

organisations facilitate financial transparency. All athletes interviewed agreed that athlete

commissions would be beneficial but none of the respondents recognised any implemented

policies or change in the athletics circuit since competing internationally. Respondent 5

identified that they were aware of the election process for the BOC athlete commission

through an athlete running for a position but hadnot seen any results.

37

The findings support the work of Houlihan (2004) and Geeraert et al (2014) that athletes are

purposefully isolated from major decision-making which needs to be increased to encapsulate

a fair system of how world athletics in governed. This is confirmed in a statement by the only

athlete not currently competing;

“They have a voice and they can voice their concerns but I haven’t seen any massive changes

in policy or in how things are done as a result of athlete commissions”.

(participant A)

In terms of the IOC athletes’ commission this is unsurprising considering that there are only

12 athletes on the commission when there are 27 international sports federations partially

governed by the IOC, meaning not every sport has a representative.

Although, when one athlete was asked if they felt there is a platform to communicate with

their governing bodies to say what they would like to see changed their response was ‘no’

and that they believe the current system in the UK is fair. It is important to acknowledge

athletes have no responsibility to contest organisational issues of poor governance; their

athletic career is first and foremost the reason why they are in the international athletics

community, not because of experience in administrative and policy making.

Although, respondent 1 and 5 note the importance of major icons in athletics, supporting

Thibault et al. (2010) and Girginov and Parry’s (2005) studies that voice the political power

that athletes possess.

4.5 Additional Study Limitations

Despite the researcher emphasising the value of confidentiality prior to the research

conducted, athletes may have given restrained answers to questions in fear of insulting the

image of their retrospective governing bodies in fear of action being taken which may put

their athletic careers at risk.

The research sample is solely British athletes and does not address the views and experiences

of athletes from alternative nationalities. With the ideal financial backing and time-scale the

study would ideally look at several nationalities to validate the analysis of international

bodies and commissions.

38

The literature evaluated the benefits of athlete commissions does not focus specifically on

their use in Great Britain and only briefly on the sport of athletics and the IAAF.

4.6 Chapter Summary

This chapter has provided an in-depth discussion of the research findings contextualised by

applying secondary literature used in chapter two. The findings analysed will help formulate

comprehensive conclusions of the research as well as recommendations for industry and

further academic research.

39

5. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMENDATIONS

5.1 Chapter introduction

This study draws the following conclusions and recommendations for industry and academia

from the secondary research literature review and

5.2 Conclusions

Excluding doping activities, corruption is an issue that British athletes at international level

are only narrowly aware of. Their mistrust and feeling of isolation from the exclusionary

“circle” of the international athletics community is an issue that governing bodies have failed

to address. Athletes view themselves as important stakeholders in international athletics

governance and do not see themselves as represented in how the sport is governed by

INGSO’s including WADA, the IOC and the IAAF.

Using the informal public sphere to express the communicative power that athletes possess

could be the inspiration needed for increased transparency and accountability leading to the

exposure of corrupt activities within these organisations.

Where the result is not directly influenced by bad practice in athletics governance, generally

athletes are less knowledgeable and absorbed because they cannot empathise with sports

bureaucrats because they have seen the issues the sport faces as developing athletes and seen

little or no fundamental change in athletics governance, reflected by Lamine Diack’s reign as

IAAF president.

Athlete related decision-making responsibility is heavily weighted to sports bureaucrats and

requires organisational reformation of international athlete commissions to encompass

athletes as valued stakeholders.

Doping is viewed as a serious threat to the sport but the recent exposure of systematic doping

in Russia is demoralising and frustrates clean British athletes, but is seen as progression in the

‘fight against doping’ that WADA is supposedly working towards. Since the establishment of

WADA it is undeniable that anti-doping measures and anti-doping governance have

improved substantially but have a long way to go to tackle an issue so entangled in the sport.

The possibility of Sebastian Coe being IAAF president has given athletes confidence in how

the sport will be governed in the future.

40

Athlete commissions were established to break-down bureaucratic barriers restricting and

isolating central stakeholders of international athletics like athletes but it is clear that these

characteristics haven’t been eliminated, but reinforced through lack of influential decision-

making power and elitist ‘cherry picking’ of athletes that support the ethos of the organisation

and discarding critics by using the administrative power international sports governing bodies

such as the IOC and IAAF possess.

Athletes democratically elected to represent athlete’s interests and work towards the best

interests of the sport through athlete commissions are a route to developing transparent and

accountable international athletics governing bodies. These bodies would argue the success of

athlete commissions because of their desire to maintain a romantic idealist image of the

organisation despite autonomic governing.

5.3 Recommendations

5.3.1 Industry

The legitimacy of appointing members that are athlete’s to the IOC and IAAF alongside

elected members of athlete commissions needs to be clarified and illuminated to the public

and the athletics community.

Organisations must empower athletes as a valued stakeholder group through transparent

practices and developing the degree of decision making power in athlete commissions. This

will lead to personnel changes at the highest level of power in the hierarchical and corporate

INGSO’s.

The establishment of an independent ethics commission and independent doping body would

justify decision-making and policy implementation eradicating cynicism of corruption and

bribery being influential on decisions made by administrators and increasing athlete’s faith in

fair competition and reflecting positive social values.

Creating an athlete centred international sport system in the IOC, ‘the supreme sport’s

governing body’, to devolve to individual international sport federations like the IAAF

integrating executive committee members and athlete representatives. This can be

implemented by increasing the number of athletes in the IOC athletes’ commission and IAAF

athletes’ commission. IOC sessions should be conjoined with the IOC athletes’ commission

and the IAAF congresses conjoined with the IAAF athletes’ commission.

41

5.3.2 Academia

Research into corruption as a theological and philosophical practice in the Olympic

movement and guidance for good governance in INGSO’s is saturated; therefore research

into the implications of corruption in athletics would be appropriate. Future academic

research should investigate the power relations of stakeholder groups and how they can be

changed to achieve good governance in international athletics governing bodies. In particular

the extent of communicative power in context to the globalisation of athletics and

advancements in technology, like using twitter as a source of communication between

athletes and fans.

The area most identifiable of lacking in substantial academic research is how successful

athlete commissions are in the progression of international sport, particularly athletics.

The validity of the project could be strengthened by repeating the study but having

participants with specific criterion, such as athletes that have competed at IAAF and IOC

events for 4 years or more that still compete internationally and comparing the results with

former athletes that competed for 4 years or more at Olympic and World Championship

level. This would allow athletes that have had more experience of being a part of the elite

international athletics community and have a comprehensive understanding of how the IAAF,

IOC, BOC and British Athletics are governed. Their understanding of issues presented by

athletics governance would help give an insight of how athletes’ attitudes have changed as

the sport has developed since reformation of the IOC, the development of international

doping and societal changes.

42

6. APPENDICES

Appendix A: Project Proposal

Aim:

To critically analyse the extent of athletes influence on governance of international athletics

governing bodies and their knowledge around the topic of corruption exploring whether

international athletes are aware of their position of power in these organisations and the

implications of corruption on elite athletes.

Objectives:

Objectives of the study:

1. Investigate athlete’s views of corruption in international athletics governing bodies.

2. Investigate the implications of corruption on the sport of athletics, the athletes and sport

governance.

3. To explore allegations of corruption against international governing bodies using external publications and contemporary academic literature to theorise and contextualise my research.

4. Explore British athletes’ experiences of corruption & associated issues since competing internationally and the implications they have had in a wider context.

5. Analyse the importance of athlete commissions to good governance in international athletics governing bodies.

Context

Corruption of the bidding process in the IOC has been an open secret for a long time

(Lenskyj, 2000). Since commercialisation and unlocking of economic potential of the

Olympics at the Los Angeles 1984 Games, television rights, sponsorship programmes, and

the attraction of hosting an event claimed to deliver the world’s largest-ever television

audience have sustained the IOC though corruption, the performance-enhancing drugs saga

and economic volatility (Tomlinson, 2012).

The emergence of corruption and bribery in the public eye came in the early 1990’s following

the 2002 Salt Lake City bid which began to ‘damage the reputation’ of the organisation. The

IOC have subsequently engaged in public relations companies such as hill and Kowlton who

were known for their influence on the US public about opinions on the Gulf War (Roche,

1999 & Starkman, 1999, cited in Lenskyj, 2000 p. 23) and ‘spin doctors’ to manage the

Olympic image and the media, Horne & Whannel (2012) compares political parties to

international sports organisations and international federations. The research is to find out

whether athletes have succumbed to the ‘Olympic family’ image, relinquishing personal

queries into the validity and credibility of the IOC.

Payne (2005, cited in Horne & Whannel, 2012 p.44) describes the introduction of self-

regulation in the IOC as the ‘Olympic Turnaround’, in which they changed the rules (also

43

known as the Hodler rules after Marc Hodler’s public openness about mass corruption in the

IOC) by amending the procedures for the bidding process and stopping IOC members visiting

candidate cities (Horne & Whannel, 2012, p.44).

Despite former Olympic athletes being well represented in the IOC (Horne & Whannel, 2012

points out it is less than 20/110 members), athletes make up the biggest division of the

‘Olympic Movement” but arguably the least powerful (Lenskyj, 2000, p.43). This project is

important to recognise athletes’ knowledge of the IOC as an organisation and the issues the

IOC has faced and faces today.

By awarding Sochi the 2014 Winter Olympics and endorsing the games The International

Olympic Committee said that it had no grounds to challenge a Russian law widely perceived

as anti-gay (Lally, 2013). The IOC Olympic Charter states that “any form of discrimination

with regard to country or person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is

imcompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement” (IOC, 2009:44 cited in Horne &

Whannel, 2012 p.31). Is there not a point at which this contradicts the ‘Olympic Charter’,

bringing them into disrepute? (Lenskyj, 2000).

The research is important to understand what the interviewee’s use as information sources

and the whether their interest is extensive or limited in the topic. Are they aware of the

implications of the IOC’s actions on Olympic athletes and aspiring Olympic athletes?

Research Methods

The study will use secondary research into the social history of international sport

governance that has influenced the Olympics and IAAF events and allegations of corruption

in international governing bodies. Other secondary sources will come from external IOC

publications, National Organising Committee publications, academic literature & journals,

formal investigative documents from government.

The primary research will be qualitative research using semi-structured interviews and

interpretive phenomenological analysis. Interpretive phenomenological analysis allows the

researcher to try and understand the athletes’ point of view from the perspective of an

individual within the Olympic circle (Smith & Osbourn, 2007). Snelgrove’s analysis justifies

the study’s intentions; “Qualitative methodologies support an idealist ontology that

acknowledges the subjective construction of reality” (2014:21).

Using semi-structured interviews provides the opportunity for the respondent to focus on an

area of interest which may or may not correlate between athletes interviewed. Smith

(2007:57) elaborates on stating that semi-structured interviews are the best form of data

collection using interpretive phenomenological analysis; by engaging in dialogue with initial

questions causing the interviewees response to be topic-focused and the researcher can

instigate further into areas of relevance (Smith & Osbourn, 2007).

From an interactionist view by accepting personal experiences, not as bias, but as a

component to understanding possible similarities and differences between myself as the

44

researcher and the interviewee helping to clarify understanding and theorise the topic in a

social context (Silverman et al, 2011).

My primary data collection will be conducting interviews with currently competing athletes I

am in contact with, some of whom representing Great Britain, England & Wales at numerous

major sports events1 (majority of athletes requiring confirmation) all governed by either the

World Mountain Running Association, International Olympic Committee or International

Association of Athletics Federations. I have confirmation Laura Weightman, 2012 Olympic

1500m finalist, Bronze Commonwealth and European 1500m medallist and Daniel Gardiner,

2008 World Junior Championships decathlete will be participants in the study, among others.

These athletes will be accessed through snowball sampling starting from resources at Leeds

Beckett University athletics team.

Conducting the research mentioned has its criticisms, limitations and potential problems. A

problem qualitative research faces is reliability; categorisation events or activities described

by the participant (Hammersley, 1992:67, cited in Silverman, 2000, p.9). When constructing

semi-structured interview questions it is essential to ask the right questions to prevent the

subject discussing irrelevant information. Wording of questions is crucial to acquiring

necessary data; Berg & Lune outline the goal of interviewing is it seem ‘both warmly human

and cooly non-judgemental’ (2012:122).

Staff Consulted

Dr Thomas Fletcher

Tim Yeardley

Nicola McCullough

1 including Commonwealth Games, the Olympics, World Mountain running championships, European Athletics

Team Championships, European Championships & IAAF World Championships, IAAF World Junior

Championships, IAAF world race-walking World Cup

45

Appendix B: Participant information sheet

Participant Information Sheet

Research title: Allegations of corruption in international athletics governing bodies: An analysis of

British athletes’ perception

Name of researcher: Tom Smith

If you have any questions or queries please do not hesitate to contact me, contact details are provided at the end

of this information sheet.

I am gathering research on athlete’s opinions and knowledge of corruption and athlete representation in

international athletics governing bodies. I will be exploring whether international athletes are aware of their

position of power in organisations such as the IOC and IAAF and discussing the implications of corruption on

elite athletes.

The study I will conduct is for my dissertation as part of my BSc (Hons) in Sport Event Management.

The aim of my study is to gain information and an understanding into the field of sports corruption and outline

the importance of athlete representation in international sport governance.

I would like to know if you could give me any information regarding your knowledge and views in regards to

corruption and bribery in athletics and Olympic governance and event bidding processes (including doping),

British governance of athletics and athlete commissions from a one-to-one semi-structured interview.

All of the data you provide will be kept highly secure and confidential from others. Your name will not be

included in the research. The researcher and Leeds Beckett University will comply with the Data Protection

Act 1998.

If you feel uncomfortable at any time while completing the questionnaire you may withdraw from the research.

You can withdraw at any time by simply exiting the questionnaire. If you have any problems with the

information you give being used after you have submitted the questionnaire, you may contact the researcher

who will delete your information and it will not be used in the research. This is only possible up until the 1st

March.

Contact details

Student email: t.smith6684@leedsbeckett.ac.uk

Alternative email: tomjamessmith@hotmail.co.uk

Tel (mobile): 07557782720

Supervisor’s email: N.L.McCullough@leedsbeckett.ac.uk

46

Appendix C: Declaration form

SCHOOL OF EVENTS, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY

DECLARATION FORM

I confirm that the work contained in this Individual Project is my own work. It has not been

previously published or submitted for assessment elsewhere.

I confirm that all other sources of information have been acknowledged in line with the regulations

for referencing.

I confirm that I have fully complied with all University regulations regarding plagiarism and unfair

practice.

I confirm that the electronic and hard copy versions of the submitted Individual Project are identical.

I confirm that the word count for the dissertation is …………………. words.

Signed …………………………………………………………………………

Name …………………………………………………………………………

Date …………………………………………………………………………

47

Appendix D: Research Consent form

Research Consent Form

Researcher: Thomas Smith

Project: Allegations of corruption & bribery in International athletics governing bodies: An

analysis of British athletes’ perception

Please circle to confirm

I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet (dated 22 January 2015) for

the above study.

Yes/No

I have had the opportunity to consider the information, ask questions and have had these

answered satisfactorily.

Yes/No

I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time,

without giving any reason, without my business or legal rights being affected before 22nd

Febuary (one week prior to the 1st of March).

Yes/No

I agree to take part in the above research study.

Yes/No

I give permission for the interview to be voiced recorded Yes/No

I certify that the information shared with the researcher can be revealed in the study

Yes/No

48

I certify that my personal details will not be revealed for the study and made anonymous.

Yes/No

I give the permission that the study may be published by the university.

Yes/No

Name of Participant: Date: Signature:

Researcher: Thomas Smith Date: Signature:

49

Appendix E: Ethics confirmation

50

Appendix F:

Coding key:

Corruption in International Governing Bodies ABC

International athletics governance ABC

British Athletics Governance ABC

Doping ABC

Doping Governance ABC

Athlete involvement and representation ABC

Athlete Commissions ABC

51

Appendix G: Example of interview transcriptions

Interview 1

Researcher: What knowledge do you have of corruption in sport?

I only know from what I see on TV and reading about stuff but it appears wherever there is

huge amounts of money involved usually that’s the driving factor behind corruption or that

what it appears to be and obviously those making decisions that seem strange and you find

out that there’s big money involved and it’s maybe not as strong.

I hear about the World Cup and the (Olympic) bidding process and hearing about people

(officials) getting favours, getting gifts. I heard about some of the English guys (FA officials)

had to give back watches that were worth 20 grand, so I am aware of corruption in sport but I

believe it’s geared towards money so when money isn’t involved you don’t get it as much

Researcher: So are you aware of the Salt Lake City Scandal (involving gifts giving and

bribery)?

I am aware of it but being a winter Olympics so I’m not sure about the detail but heard all

about it. I believe there were bribes involved

Researcher: So are you aware of corruption and bribery in British athletics specifically?

First hand or second hand?

No but you hear rumours about not so much corruption but more about, certainly when I was

starting out in the sport we heard about certain athletes were being tipped off that drug testing

might be going on at warm weather training camps but I don’t know how much truth there

was in that. I’ve heard of drug testers flying into Lanzarote and certain athletes flying out of

Lanzarote earlier than they should have been, in terms of financial corruption I’m not sure.

Researcher: So do you see the IOC and IAAF as credible, accountable and transparent

governing bodies?

Probably not, no, especially after hearing about doping on a massive scale in Russia and

obviously we knew about stuff in Eastern Europe especially East Germany and again you

hear about certain athletes being warned about drug tests and ‘are drug tests secure?’ and you

hear about this Russian thing and seems like it’s been going on for ages

Researcher: Do you think WADA and other regulatory bodies are tackling doping related

corruption in the right way since competing internationally?

I think they’re trying to, but if they are catching people and these things are getting ignored or

if people are told to go away for 2 years and have a baby or whatever. Athletes disappear for

2 years and suddenly they come back better than ever, it leaves a nasty taste and I’ve been an

athlete all my life and it pains me that this sort of thing is going on and has been going on for

and long, long time.

52

Researcher: Do you believe that corruption in Olympic and athletics federations is a cycle

that is possible to break?

I’d like to think it’s a minority, but until people know the facts and the more rumours start

spreading it grows into a monster. I’d love to feel there are some honest people in the sport

who are trying to run the sport. I’m a romantic in hoping that someone will be ‘whiter than

white’ and not be corrupt and be able to be bribed, but maybe that’s a simplistic view.

Researcher: Do you believe democratically voted athlete representation in governing bodies

is the solution to corruption cases in athletics?

If they’ve got no powers I don’t. These commissions exist and they liaise with the sport’s

governing bodies of athletics and other sports but if you don’t actually get to do anything or

change the leadership or change how things are done, it just seems to be ‘lip service’ really.

Researcher: Do you believe athletes voices are listened to enough by those at the top of the

hierarchy in athletics governance or do you feel that athletes are devolved from governing

bodies?

You’ll find a lot of the athletes on athlete commissions are famous former athletes that may

have had a shady past themselves, so is that a ‘poacher becoming a gamekeeper’? I don’t

know.

I’d like to see lawyers involved more and sports law enforced, making things legally binding.

A lot of these governing bodies seem to be a law unto themselves.

Researcher: So what did you make of the recent criminalisation of doping in Germany?

If you look at East Germany, they have the worst history; they had a shocking reputation. As

far as I’m concerned it’s fraud, cheating clean athletes out of teams. I’d love to see it

criminalised, as someone who didn’t take drugs I undoubtedly competed against people who

probably did so when they won things they were taking money from me, so in that respect it’s

cheating me out of a living, so yes I’d love to see it criminalised in the UK.

Researcher: So do you believe the degree of decision-making power should be increased,

kept the same or adapted?

For them to have teeth yes, otherwise they are playing lip-service and the governing bodies

do what they like so yes giving them more power and more say (would be beneficial).

Although who do they represent?

Researcher: Did you feel that athletes are devolved from governing bodies?

I felt very much that you were playing by their rules but you always felt like they were trying

to search out cheats, and it would appear they weren’t (considering the emergence of doping

scandals). I’ve heard rumours about the 100m final in 1988 when Ben Johnson was caught

very famously, out of that race I heard 7 were all guilty of taking drugs and only Ben Johnson

53

got caught and the rumour was that he was caught because he was Canadian and not

American and the big sponsors were American so they went for the ‘soft target’.

Researcher: Have you seen direct implications of these athlete commissions? Such as the

IOC athlete commission, WADA athlete commission or IAAF athlete commission

No, I can’t think of anything. They have a voice and they can voice their concerns but I

haven’t seen any massive changes in policy or in how things are done as a result of athlete

commissions, maybe in prize money and things like that and getting less popular events in the

grand prix series. All the business of the sport absolutely not, I don’t think they are. The

governing bodies need the athletes or they haven’t got anything to sell to the TV companies

but in terms of actually listening to athletes I don’t know. You’re playing by their rules.

Researcher: Finally, do you view corruption in athletics as a serious threat to the future of

the sport or do you think that governing bodies are making progress in tackling poor

governance, corruption and associated issues such as doping?

In terms of Great Britain, we have a very robust system. I don’t know if that’s the same in

other countries, it doesn’t seem to be. In GB we shoot ourselves in the foot by playing by the

rules. From what I’ve heard, other countries aren’t. You see stuff like the World Cup (FIFA)

we (the English Football Association) were questioning FIFA and Sebb Blatter, you can stand

up to these organisations but it jeopardises you chances of winning anything.

54

References

A.D. Jankowicz (1995) Business research projects. 2nd ed. Thomson: London.

Amitava, C. (2013) Review of Olympic reforms ten years later. Sport in Society.

Batt, A. (2011) The role of UK Anti-Doping in the fight against doping in sport. International

Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 3 (2) pp.261-270. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 3 January 2015]

BBC (2015) Greg Rutherford will guide son away from scandal-hit athletics. [online] British

Broadcasting Company Ltd. Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport> [accessed 20

February 2015]

Berg, B. & Lune, H. (2012) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. 8th ed.

Bergsard et al. (2007) Sport Policy: a comparative analysis of stability and change.

British Athletics (n.d.) About UK Athletics. [online] Available at:

<http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/governance/about-uka/> [accessed 26 December 2014]

British Paralympic Association. (n.d.) About the BPA. Available at:

<http://paralympics.org.uk/about-us> [accessed 3 January 2015]

Chatzigianni (2006) The IOC as an International Organisation. [online] Sport Management

International Journal. 2 (1-2) pp.91-101. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 6 December 2014]

Dino, M. (2009) The Media and Sports Corruption: An Outline of Sociological

Understanding. International Journal of Sport Communication.

Etchells, D. (2014) Olympic medallists among quartet elected to BOA Athletes' Commission.

[online] Dunsar Media Company. Available at: <http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics>

[accessed 13 February 2015]

Finn, M, Elliot-White, M. & Walton, M. (2000) Tourism & Leisure Research Methods: Data

collection, analysis and interpretation. Harlow: Pearson.

Geeraert, A. (2014) Good governance in international sport organizations: an analysis of the

35 Olympic sport governing bodies [online] International Journal Of Sport Policy And

55

Politics. 6 (3) p. 281-306. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 12

February 2015]

Geeraert, A., Alm, J. & Groll, M. (2014) Good governance in international sport

organizations: an analysis of the 35 Olympic sport governing bodies. [online] International

Journal of Sport Policy. 6 (3) pp.281-307. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 15 December 2014]

Gill, J. & Johnson, P. (2002) Research Methods for Managers. 3rd. London: Sage.

Girginov, V. & Parry, J. (2005) The Olympic Games Explained: A Student Guide to the

Evolution of the Modern Olympic Games. Routledge: Oxon.

Gratton, C. & Jones, I. (2010) Research methods for sports studies. 2nd ed. Routledge:

London.

Grix, J. (2009) The impact of UK sport policy on the governance of athletics. [online]

International Journal Of Sport Policy And Politics. 1(1) pp.31-49. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 8 December 2014]

Grix, J. (2013) Sport Politics and the Olympics. [online] Political Studies Review. 11 (1)

p.15-25. Available at: <http://libraryonline.leedsmet.ac.uk> [Accessed 21 October 2014]

Guttman, A. (1994) The Olympics: A History of the Modern Games. 2nd ed. Champaign: The

University of Illinois Press.

Habermas, J. (1995) Reconciliation through the public use of reason: Remarks on John

Rawl’s political liberalism. [online] The Journal of Philosophy. 92 (3) p.109-131. Available

at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 12 February 2015]

Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law

and Democracy. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Halford, P. (2015) AW uncovers apparent severe lack of drugs testing at UK road races.

[online] Athletics Weekly Limited. January 2. Available at:

<http://www.athleticsweekly.com/featured/ [accessed 3 January 2015]

Hamilton, T. (2010) The long hard fall from Mount Olympus: the 2002 Salt Lake City

Olympic Games bribery scandal. [online] Marquette Sports Law Review. 21 (1) pp.219-241.

Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 16 December 2014]

56

Horne, J. & Whannel, G. (2012) Understanding the Olympics. Routledge: London.

Howman, D. (2013) Supporting the Integrity of Sport and Combating Corruption. [online]

Marquette Sports Law Review. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 3

January 2015]

Independent (2014) The Last Word: Candidate Sebastian Coe must demand that doping is a

criminal offence. [online] Independent Print Ltd. Available at:

<http://www.independent.co.uk/sport> [accessed 8 December 2014]

International Association of Athletics Federations (n.d.) President: Lamine Diack. [online]

Available at: <http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/structure/president> [accessed 17 February

2015]

IOC (2008) Basic Universal Principles of Good Governance of the Olympic and Sports

Movement. Seminar on Autonomy of Olympic and Sport Movement. [online] 11- 12 February.

Available at: <http://www.olympic.org/Documents> [accessed 15 November 2014]

IOC (2014) Athletes’ Commission. Available at: <http://www.olympic.org/> [accessed 18

December 2014]

Irene, K. (2007) A new concept in European sport governance: sport as social capital.

Biology of Exercise.

Jarvie, G. (2006) Sport, Culture & Society. [online] 2nd ed. London : Routledge. Available

at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 13 December 2014]

Jennings, A. (2011) Investigating corruption in corporate sport: The IOC and FIFA.

Sociology of Sport. [online] 46 (4) pp.387-798. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 6 December 2014]

Katwala, S. (2000) Democratising Global Sport. London: The Foreign Policy Centre.

Kihl, L. Kikulis, L. & Thibault, L. (2007) A Deliberative Democratic Approach to Athlete-

Centred Sport: The Dynamics of Administrative and Communicative Power [online]

European Sport Management Quarterly. 7 (1) p.1-30. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 12 February 2015]

57

Koss, J. (2011) Athletes' rights and Olympic reform: a discussion with Johann Koss, Ann

Peel and Alexandra Orlando. [online] Sport in Society. 14 (3) pp.309-318. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 16 December 2014]

Lally, K. (2013) IOC: No grounds to challenge Russian anti-gay law as Sochi Olympic

Games approach. [online] The Washington Post. Available at:

<http://www.washingtonpost.com> [accessed 20 October 2014]

Lenskyj, H. & Wagg, S. (2012) The Palgrave Handbook of Olympic Studies. Hampshire:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Lenskyj, H. (2000) Inside the Olympic Industry: Power, Politics, and Activism . Albany: State

University of New York Press.

MacAloon, J. (1981) This Great Symbol: Pierre de Coubertin and the Origins of the Modern

Olympic Games. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

MacAloon, J. (2011) Scandal and governance: inside and outside the IOC 2000 Commission.

[online] Sport in Society. 14 (3) pp.292-308. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 8 December 2014]

Mackay, D. (2014) Harting asks IAAF to remove him from World Athlete of the Year

shortlist in protest at Gatlin nomination. [online] [online] Dunsar Media Company. Available

at: <http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics> [accessed 13 February 2015]

Marvasti, A. (2004) Qualitative Research in Sociology. London: Sage.

Mason et al. (2006) An Agency Theory Perspective on Corruption in Sport: the case of the

International Olympic Committee.

Mason, D. Thibault, L. & Misener, L. (2006) An Agency-Theory Perspective on Corruption

in Sport: The Case of the International Olympic Committee. [online] Journal of Sport

Management: Human Kenetics. 20 pp.52-73. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 16 October 2014]

May, T. (1993) Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process. 3rd ed. Buckingham: Open

University Press.

McLaren, R. (2008) Corruption: It’s Impact on Fair Play. [online] Marquette Sports Law

Review. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 5 January 2015]

58

Murray, S.J. & Holmes, D. (2014) Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) and the

Ethics of Body and Place: Critical Methodological Reflections. (online) Human Studies: a

journal for philosophy and the social sciences. 37(1) pp.15-31. Available at:

<http://libraryonline.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/> [accessed 11 February 2015]

O’Higgins (2006) Underdevelopment, and Extractive Resource Industries: Addressing the

Vicious Cycle. [online] Business Ethics Quarterly. 16 (2) pp.235-254. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 3 February 2015]

Owen, D (2014) Olympic TV Channel secures unanimous approval. [online] Dunsar Media

Company. Available at: <http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics> [accessed 8 December

2014]

Payne, G. & Payne, J. (2004) Key Concepts in Social Research. London: Sage.

Rowbottom, M. (2014) Exclusive: IAAF claim Doha's $37 million offer in 2019 World

Championships bid was legal and within guidelines. [online] Dunsar Media Company.

Available at: <http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics> [accessed 12 February 2015]

Saunders, M. Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2012) Research Methods for Business Students. 4th

ed. Pearson education Ltd: Harlow.

Schenk, S., 2011. Safe hands: building integrity and transparency at FIFA. Berlin:

Transparency International.

Scott-Elliot, R. (2013) Ben Johnson: The original drug cheat takes a run at redemption

[online] The Independent. Available at: <http://www.independent.co.uk> [accessed 19

March]

Silverman, D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. 2nd ed. London:

Sage

Silverman, D. et al. (2011) Qualitative Research: Issues of Theory, Method and Practice.

London: SAGE. 3rd ed.

Simson, V. & Jennings, A. (1992) The Lords of the Rings: Power, Money and Drugs in the

Modern Olympics. London: Simon & Schuster Ltd.

59

Smith, J. & Osborn, M. (2007) Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. [online]

Qualitative Psychology. Available at: < http://www.uk.sagepub.com/> [accessed 23 October

2014]

Snelgrove, S. (2014) Conducting qualitative longitudinal research using interpretative

phenomenological analysis. Nurse Researcher. 22 (1) p20-25.

Sport Industry Group (2014) Germany to Make Doping Illegal. [online] Available at:

<http://www.sportindustry.co.za/> [accessed 19 December 2014]

Sugden, J. & Tomlinson, A. (2012) Watching the Olympics: Politics, Power and

Representation. Routledge: Abingdon.

Sugden, J. & Tomlinson, A. (2012) Watching the Olympics: politics, power and

representation. London: Routledge.

TAS/CAS (2014) ORIGINS: Tribunal Arbitral du Sport & Court of Arbitration of Sport.

[online] Available at: <http://www.tas-cas.org/history> [accessed 17 December 2014]

The Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (2011) ASOIF Member.

[online] Available at: <http://www.asoif.com/> [accessed February 22]

The Guardian (2014) Questions for IAAF president’s son over $5m request to Doha amid

2017 bid [online] Guardian News and Media Ltd. Available at:

<http://www.theguardian.com/sport> [accessed 17 February 2015]

The Guardian (2014) Seb Coe manifesto for IAAF promises to transform athletics calendar.

[online] Guardian News and Media Ltd. Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/sport>

[accessed 8 December 2014]

The Guardian (2014) Top athletes criticise plan to demolish Crystal Palace track [online]

Guardian News and Media Ltd. Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/sport> [accessed

9 December 2014]

The Guardian (2015) Christine Ohuruogu attacks Lamine Diack over athletics ‘crisis’

remark [online] Guardian News and Media Ltd. Available at:

<http://www.theguardian.com/sport> [accessed 17 February 2015]

The Telegraph (2011) World Athletics Championships 2017: Carl Lewis criticises 'seedy'

IAAF vote for London. Telegraph Media Group. Available at:

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport> [accessed 26 December 2014]

60

The Telegraph (2014) Sebastian Coe targets IAAF presidency. Telegraph Media Group.

Available at: <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11257193/Sebastian-

Coe-targets-IAAF-presidency.html> [accessed 8th March 2015]

Then, K. Rankin, J. & Ali, E. (2014) Focus Group Research: What Is It and How Can It Be

Used? [online] Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 24 (1) pp.16-22. Available at:

<http://libraryonline.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/> [accessed 20 February 2015]

Thibault et al. (2010) Democratization and governance in international sport: addressing

issues with athlete involvement in organizational policy. [online] International Journal of

Sport Policy and Politics. 2 (3) pp.275-302. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 5 December 2014]

Tomlinson, A. (2005) The commercialization of the Olympics: Cities, corporations, and the

Olympic commodity In: Young, K and Wamsley, K, eds. The Global Olympics: Historical

and Sociological Studies of the Modern Games. Research in the Sociology of Sport (3).

London: JAI Press, pp. 179-200.

Tomlinson, A. (2010) A Dictionary of Sports Studies. [online] Oxford University Press.

Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 17 December 2014]

Tuohy, D. Cooney, A. Dowling, M. Murphy, K. & Sixmith, J. (2013) An overview of

interpretive phenomenology as a research methodology. (online) Nurse Researcher. 20(6)

pp.17-20. Available at: <http://libraryonline.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/> [accessed 20 February

2015]

UKAD (2015) Governance. [online] Available at: <http://www.ukad.org.uk/what-we-

do/governance> [accessed 3 January 2015]

Veal, A.J. (1992) Research Methods for Leisure and Tourism: A Practical Guide. 2nd.

London: Pitman.

Veal, A.J. (2014) Research Methods in Sport Studies and Sport Management. [online] Oxon:

Routledge. Available at: < www.tandfebooks.com> [accessed 24 February 2015]

Wagner, U. (2011) Towards the Construction of the World Anti-Doping Agency: Analyzing

the Approaches of FIFA and the IAAF to Doping in Sport. [online] European Sport

61

Management Quarterly. 11 (5) pp.445-470. Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library>

[accessed 3 January 2015]

Wagner, U. (2014) The IOC and the doping issue - An institutional discursive approach to

organizational identity construction. [online] Sport Management Review. 17 (2) pp.170-173.

Available at: <http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 16 December 2014]

Wendt, J. (2012) Toward Harmonization: British Olympic Association v. World Anti-Doping

Agency. [online] Marquette Sports Law Review. 23 (1) pp. 155-169. Available at:

<http://leedsbeckett.ac.uk/library> [accessed 17 December 2014]

Wolfgang, M. (2005) Corruption in International Sports and Sport Management: Forms,

Tendencies, Extent and Countermeasures. European Sport Management Quarterly.

World Anti-Doping Agency (2010) Athlete Committee. [online] Available at:

<http://www.wadaama.org/en/About-WADA/Governance/Athlete-Committee> [Accessed 3

January 2015]

World Anti-Doping Agency (2014) WADA Foundation Board Approves 2015 Compliance

Plan at November Meeting. [online] Available at: <https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media>

[accessed 3 January 2015]