AS THE country prepares for the London 2012 Olympics, we ask is the life ban on taking part in the prestigious games for drug-taking right or are the current rules too strict?

DR EMILY RYALL, senior lecturer in the philosophy of sport and exercise at the University of Gloucestershire thinks the ban is too harsh:

IT seems a strange state of affairs indeed when a sporting Governing body is seen to take a harder line on drug-taking than the body designed to keep it in check in the first place. Yet that is the case with the British Olympics Association (BOA) and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

The situation is this: the British Olympics Association is determined to enforce life bans on athletes found guilty of taking banned substances despite the World Anti-Doping Agency ruling that such action is "non-compliant" with WADA policy.

The matter was brought to the fore last year after 400m athlete LaShawn Merritt successfully appealed against his International Olympic Committee (IOC) ban from competing in the next Olympics. This has paved the way for other athletes, such as Dwain Chambers and David Miller, to also appeal their lifetime bans. But the BOA is determined to stand firm on the matter.

Bans

The result means that not only are we left in a scenario whereby British athletes are given lifetime bans whilst other international competitors are able to serve their sentence and compete in consecutive Games, but the work of the World Anti-Doping Agency is itself being undermined. And it is the latter that is the more serious problem.

If Governing Bodies, such as the BOA and the IOC, sign up to WADA then they relinquish control over the issue of doping testing, regulation and the penalties imposed. The very reason WADA was established in 1999 was to provide consistency across all countries and all sports that sign up. The BOA is undermining that consistent approach in its contrary stance.

It may well be that the BOA believes that WADA's policies are wrong and that they are too lenient on the penalties meted out to drugs cheats, but that is an argument they have to win through fair lobbying and conversation.

What the BOA cannot do is enforce their own policies when those policies are inconsistent with others to which they have already agreed. If they do, then the whole WADA raison d'etre falls apart. Countries would be able to pick and choose whichever particular anti-doping policies they agreed with, and make up their own rules on others.

So the irony is this; the BOA's determination to enforce their own ruling contrary to WADA's will destabilise the notion of fair competition that they seek to preserve. And that is why the British Olympic Association should back down.

TUESDAY BIRMINGHAM from Charlton Kings, is a member of the Team GB waterpolo team and is hoping to take part in the Olympics this year. She believes a lifetime ban is fair:

A sportsman or women can be defined as a hard-working, dedicated and committed person with a clear focus goal and a path to achieve it.

However, when drug use is introduced to the equation of an athlete's profile, the five-letter word 'cheat' nullifies any positive qualities they possess and in my eyes permanently removes their status as a sportsman or women.

Drug use in sport is one of the most selfish things a person can do.

It is important as an athlete to understand the time, effort and money that people other than yourself put into helping you in your sport. Through taking illegal substances, you are directly disrespecting each and every one of these people and not only cheating yourself, but also cheating them out of their time, effort and money.

Cheating

In addition to this, not only are you cheating yourself, your family, your supporters and your coaches, but you are also cheating every member of your team; through taking illegal substances you are robbing your team members of all hard work they have dedicated to their sport as well as deceiving the strong bond of friendship and trust that is essential within a team.

It can be argued that we are all human and that everyone makes mistakes; however, taking inhibited drugs during training, even if clean during competition, can enhance your lifetime performance and not just be a short-term gain.

It is therefore impossible to define where the effects of the drug diminish and this is why the line has to be drawn at a lifetime ban.

Harsh as it may be, the rules are clearly stated and all athletes are educated on the risks and consequences of taking illegal substances.

A cheat has no place in the name of any sport.