NEW DELHI: While handing down a four-year ban on
BACKGROUNDX
Narsingh doping case: WFI questions WADA's timing of appeal, seeks CBI probe Highlights
WFI demanded a CBI probe into the Narsingh Yadav doping scandal. The WADA had appealed against the NADA all-clear to Narsingh at CAS, three days ahead of his bout. Narsingh was cleared of doping charges by the NADA who said he was indeed a victim of 'sabotage'. NEW DELHI: Left red-faced by the four-year ban imposed on
Narsingh Yadav
by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the Wrestling Federation of India on Sunday demanded a
CBI probe
into the doping scandal that has jeopardised the grappler's entire career.
"The Wrestling Federation of India President (Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh) feels that the World Anti-Doping Agency's timing of appeal against the NADA clean chit to Narsingh was suspect. He had also objected to the CAS hearing being held just hours before the competition started in the Olympics," the WFI said in a statement.
"The notice from CAS came at such a time neither could Narsingh bring his lawyer to Rio to argue his case nor could a replacement be arranged for the 74kg category by the WFI," the release added.
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) had appealed against the NADA all-clear to Narsingh at CAS, three days ahead of his scheduled opening bout at the Olympics.
The verdict marked a painful end to the controversy which began with the wrestler failing a June 25 test.
Having grabbed the quota by virtue of his World Championships bronze medal in Las Vegas last year, Narsingh's road to Rio was fraught with obstacles after he was named to represent India ahead of double Olympic-medalist Sushil Kumar.
Sushil dragged Narsingh to the Delhi High Court and a bitter courtroom tussle followed but the judgement went in the latter's favour.
There was more drama in store for the Asian Games bronze-medalist after he returned positive for a banned steroid following a dope test in June by the NADA.
Narsingh's roommate at the SAI centre in Sonepat also tested positive for the same substance but WFI backed the Mumbai-based wrestler's claims of foul-play.
Days before the Olympics, Narsingh was cleared of doping charges by the NADA who said he was indeed a victim of 'sabotage' and deserved the benefit of doubt.
"Narsingh told CAS that he had complained against the suspect who might have spiked his drink but the Haryana Police has been unable to catch him so far. Had the police got hold of this suspect, the country would not have lost the chance to grab a medal," the WFI said.
"The WFI and its President thus demanded a CBI inquiry into this incident so that no other player goes through this," it added.
Narsingh Yadav+ , the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has ruled that the wrestler failed to produce any "real evidence" regarding the
BACKGROUNDX
Rio Olympics: Narsingh became 'unconscious' after hearing CAS verdict Highlights
The dope-tainted grappler has vowed to take his battle to the Prime Minister's Office. "We don't want to accuse anyone. Our only demand is a CBI inquiry," WFI chief said. "Such kind of politics mars India's medal prospects in Olympics," Narsingh said. RIO DE JANEIRO: Disgraced after being ousted from the Olympic Village for flunking a dope test, Indian wrestler Narsingh Yadav "became unconscious" when he was slapped with a four-year ban by the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS).
Wrestling Federation of India president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh said Narsingh lost his consciousness after being debarred for the dope violation back home.
Still backing the disgraced grappler, the WFI chief told PTI, "Narsingh behosh ho gaya tha kal, aaj thik hai (Narsingh became unconscious yesterday, he is fine today). We don't want to accuse anyone. Our only demand is a CBI inquiry.
"Everything will become clear after a thorough investigation. All the skeletons will tumble out of the closet once the boy is nabbed. We will press hard for an investigation."
The dope-tainted grappler has vowed to take his battle to the Prime Minister's Office.
"Meri toh naam badnam hui, isse pura desh pe kala dhabba lag gaya hai (My name has been tarnished, not just me, this ban is a blot on India). Chahe mujhe phaasi ho jaye, mein iski chhanbin karwaoonga, din-raat ek kar doonga (Let me be hanged, I will take this to higher courts and will leave no stone unturned)," the 74kg freestyle wrestler told PTI.
"I will appeal to the Prime Minister to investigate this matter thoroughly. The truth must come out, even if we need CBI for that. If I'm the culprit, hang me, I'm ready for it. Do a NARCO test on me and also the people who are involved."
Narsingh had claimed that his drinks/food were spiked during the pre-Games training in Sonepat by unknown persons, which was agreed to by the National Anti-Doping Agency that exonerated him on the dope charge and allowed him to take part in the Games.
Narsingh further said he could have easily competed in the Olympics had the evidence of wrong doings were stronger.
"There's a big lobby involved and the names should be out. It's a matter of country's future in s port. I have become a victim of all this without any fault of mine. All my four years' hardships to win an Olympic medal have gone in vain."
He said that such kind of politics mars India's medal prospects in Olympics.
"If I don't get the justice the future for sport will be bleak. Not many will be encouraged to join sport and win medal for India. We ourselves are to be blamed."
Narsingh was evicted from the Olympic Village this morning as the ban meant his accreditation and entry was cancelled and he had to be shifted to a hotel from where he would leave for New Delhi.
Without directly pointing fingers at anyone in particular, Narsingh said: "It's clear from the series of episodes who all are involved."
The last India faced a similar embarrassment was in Athens 2004 when women weightlifters Sanamacha Chanu and Pratima Kumari tested positive for banned substances and were thrown out of the Games Village.
The first to be caught was Pratima Kumari wh o failed to compete in the 63kg category citing back pain, but was later found to have flunked a dope test.
Chanu, who competed in the 53kg category, also failed a dope test.
sabotage theory+ he had advanced and the balance of probabilities" was that he orally took the banned substance intentionally in tablet form on more than one occasion.
In its full award, the ad hoc panel of the CAS relied on expert evidence that Narsingh's dope offence was not due to one-time ingestion of the prohibited substance and its concentration in the first test result (of June 25) was so high that it had to come from an oral ingestion of one or two tablets of methandienone, rather than from a drink where the powder had been mixed with water.
The expert opinion was given by Professor Christiane Ayotte from Canada who was presented by the World Anti-Doping Agency. Professor Ayotte is a member of IAAF Doping Commission since 1995 and was elected representative of the Heads of IOC Accredited Laboratories in 1995-1996. She is currently the Director of the WADA-accredited laboratory in Montreal.
Narsingh's urine sample taken out-of competition on June 25 was found to contain metabolites of methandienone and long term metabolite of methandienone. Another sample taken out-of competition on July 5 was also found to contain long term metabolites of methandienone.
"...all in all found the sabotage (s) theory possible, but not probable and certainly not grounded in any real evidence. The panel therefore determined that the athlete had failed to satisfy his burden of proof and the panel was satisfied that the most likely explanation was that the athlete simply and intentionally ingested the prohibited substance in tablet form on more than one occasion," the CAS panel said.
The CAS had handed Narsingh a four-year ban in its 'operative award' on August 18 barely hours before his 74kg freestyle opening bout was scheduled.
"The panel had to weigh circumstantial evidence of the athlete against scientific evidence of WADA to determine whether it was satisfied with the athlete's position that he did not take the prohibited substance intentio nally. The panel is conscious that expert evidence offered by Professor Ayotte may be susceptible to qualification by other expert (s). However, the panel has no reason to question the scientific data and/or her expert testimony," the full award said.
Narsingh had submitted that the doping offence was due to sabotage carried out by Jithesh (a junior wrestler and a member of Sushil Kumar's entourage) by mixing his energy drinks with prohibited substance on either June 23 or 24.
The panel also noted that the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of the NADA had heard three persons -- Paswan, Rahul Kumar and Pankaj Kumar -- who had confirmed that they had seen Jithesh trying to contaminate Narsingh's food earlier on June 5 by pouring some powder into the curry.
Narsingh also cited some earlier decisions of the CAS which had considered circumstantial evidence but the ad hoc panel of the top sports tribunal went with the expert evidence.
The panel said that "the reading of the long term metabolite in his second test (July 5) was consistent with the second ingestion towards the end of June 2016."
It also ruled that the room-mate's (Sandeep Yadav) ingestion was not at the same time.
"He (Sandeep) had the parent compound of methandienone in his test results, so he must have taken the substance after the athlete (Narsingh), as opposed to both having their drinks spike at the same training session," the panel said.
Vidhuspat Singhania, the counsel for Narsingh, who appeared before the panel via video conference, had also argued that the drinks might have been spiked twice. But the panel did not consider this argument.
Regarding the criminal case filed against Jithesh at a Sonepat police station, the WADA said that if any decision was rendered at a later stage by a criminal court in India which confirmed the alleged sabotage, then any award made by this panel could be reviewed by the Supreme Court in Switzerland where the CAS is b ased.
The NADA was also one of the respondents in the case and it objected to the jurisdiction of the CAS on the ground that it had 21 days to appeal against the ADDP decision and so should be allowed to do this before WADA could appeal. The NADA also argued that the case was not in connection with the Olympic Games.
The ad hoc panel of the CAS rejected NADA's objection and went ahead in deciding the case on merits.
WADA's expert Ayotte argued that there was at least 12 to 20 hours difference between the ingestion of the prohibited substance by the athlete and by his room-mate Sandeep. She said that the ingestion was from a therapeutic dose, rather than from a suspension in water.
"The long term metabolite reading in the athlete's first sample was 4ng/ml, yet 10 days later the long term metabolite reading in the second sample was 20ng/ml. While the reading can increase, it would only do so in the first 2 or 3 days after ingestion. As there was no trace of the parent compound in the first reading, the likely ingestion was a few days before 25 June 2016. The conclusion is that the long term metabolite in the second Test (July 5) was from a different (second) ingestion of the prohibited substance," said Ayotte, a leading independent scientist on anti-doping research. WADA argued that Narsingh has failed that his doping offence was not intentional. "He cannot establish the source of the prohibited substance. He has merely claimed that his drink must have been spiked during a training session on 23 or 24 June 2016. There is no evidence relating to this, only evidence that his food was allegedly tampered with some 20 days before," the WADA said. "Further, according to the expert evidence of Dr Christiane Ayotte, methandienone would not completely dissolve in a drink even if it had been ground down, so the athlete (Narsingh) would have seen traces in the drink; the concentrations of methandienone were not consistent with a few micrograms having been ingested as a dispersed powder in a drink taken even the day before, and by the time the second sample of 5 July 2016 was taken, the concentration of the long term metabolite was too high to be consistent with a one-time ingestion," it said.
Source:
CAS rules Narsingh intentionally took substance in tablet form
$85.99 
Viagra 
60 pills 