When the IHSA decided to go ahead with its proposed drug testing program in January, it did it on the merits of this survey of its member schools.
At the time, I couldn't figure out what was more significant: that only 54 percent of the schools responded to the survey or that 60 percent of those that did respond said they didn't think teams should have to forfeit playoff awards if one of their players came up dirty.
On Saturday, the IHSA announced what the penalties would be for testing positive. A year ban that can be reduced to 90 days if that student-athlete completes an education program and passes a follow-up test is a significant penalty.
What I think is more significant is that the IHSA decided to go against the results of the survey when it came to teams forfeiting games. The IHSA will decide when a team will forfeit games on a case-by-case basis.
On the one hand, the IHSA values the opinion of the schools that voted when the overwhelming majority agreed to the program. On the other, the IHSA went against the 60 percent who said teams shouldn't be punished or forfeit games.
I think that's a good thing though. If this program is going to change anything, schools need to embrace the idea that the collective suffers along with the individual.
Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps it would be unfair to the other team members to suffer for one kid's mistake.
What I am completely sure of is that a testing policy that only tests athletes at the end of the season will not put a dent in the cheating culture that has brought us Marion Jones and Floyd Landis.
I understand this program isn't just about performance-enhancing drugs, but PEDs are the main resason for this. Now that the IHSA has displayed some backbone -- going against the trophy lust of its members -- the next move should be putting teeth in this program with random year-round testing.
Leave a comment