Wada head tells athletes to stop moaning at 'whereabouts' clauses

Andy Murray among those upset about new rules
Belgian sportsmen preparing to go to court
Andy Murray, left, and Rafael Nadal are among those who have protested against the requirement to say in advance where they will be for one hour every day. Photograph: Ermindo Armino/AP

The head of the World Anti-Doping Authority has warned high-profile athletes such as Andy Murray who have hit out against strict new drug-testing rules that they must accept them for the good of their sports. Wada's director-general, David Howman, is in London to meet eight bodies representing athletes from a range of sports, including athletics, football, cricket, tennis and rugby, which had raised concerns over a new requirement for them to reveal their whereabouts for one hour of every day.

Under the new regulations, if a tester turns up at the given location and they are not there, that counts as one missed test unless they are able to give a "valid excuse". Three missed tests within an 18-month period will lead to a ban of between one and two years, prompting some athletes to react. Murray and other tennis players have complained that the regulations will make it difficult to lead a normal life, while some governing bodies such as FIFPro, which represents professional footballers internationally, have claimed it could be at odds with European law. In Belgium a coalition of athletes is challenging the new rules in court.

But Howman said the main problem was that the new rules, and the importance of adhering to them, had not been adequately explained by the relevant governing bodies. "On an international level there was discontent, not so much about the new rules as the way they were introduced. They are unhappy about that and we heard the unhappiness," said Howman. "Does that mean there'll be a whole new consultation process and we'll start all over again? No. But it does mean we've given them an avenue for expression, which we had wrongly assumed was taking place through each individual sport."

Howman, who believes the Belgian case has little chance of success, said the new rules were carefully drafted to ensure they did not infringe existing laws. He added that athletes who argued their sport was a special case should be given short shrift. "It's a silly conversation for anyone to say their sport hasn't got a problem. One, because it's not true. Two, because you don't know what's around the corner," he said.

Howman dismissed concerns regarding athletes' civil liberties. "If people were totally honest they'd say their civil liberties are affected on a daily basis by inhouse cameras, security things at airports and so on. That's part of life. Secondly, they're exposing much of their lives by typing away on Facebook and MySpace and all those things," he said, adding that top athletes would have to accept the regime, which requires them to specify a time between 6am and 11pm, as part of competing in their chosen discipline.

"If you take it by itself, you say that could be a serious invasion. But is it proportionate? Yes, because it's not everybody. Are you playing sport under certain rules? Yes, we're invading your rights by saying you can't kick the referee and you can't swear at so and so. This is just another rule that you tack on to your game."

The principle of out-of-competition testing was well established, said Howman. "The guys at the coal-face doing testing all the time know only too well that, when someone is on a break, that's when they dope up. It's common sense. It's known. It's not as though we're making this up," he said. "So if you're going to show yourself as a clean athlete, you make yourself available. You're not going to be tested day in day out."