Email
In August 2013 researchers from the Humboldt University in Berlin and the University of Münster published a report into doping in West German sports from 1950 to 2007. Journalists took up part of the report with headlines like: 1966 World Cup: Three Germans 'On Drugs'. This referred to evidence which showed that in 1966 a representative of FIFA, Prof. Dr. Mihailo Andrejevic, had written to the President of the West German Athletics foundation, Dr Max Danz, to let him know that the urine samples of three members of the National football team had tested positive for ‘fine traces’ of ephedrine, a banned amphetamine-like substance.
As the English victory in the 1966 World Cup is so iconic (and such a rarity) it must be tempting to update the tale with a twist ending that suggests the English team’s opponents may have been cheating. But this story doesn’t really add up to much, and it ignores a more interesting British victory – in drug testing. The tests used to find these amphetamine traces had been developed and trialled in Britain, and this innovation was about to be exported right across the world.
The use of drugs had been banned in international sport as early as 1908 – when the rules for the Olympic marathon in London said that "No competitor either at the start or during the progress of the race may take or receive any drug. The breach of this rule will operate as an absolute disqualification." Of course, this did not cover the use of drugs during training, and did not define what the organisers meant by ‘drug’; effective bans really require the presence of tests for drugs, and a specific list of forbidden substances.
A British innovation? a rapid, reliable test for amphetamines
An effective test for amphetamines appeared in sport in 1965 almost by accident according to its major developer, Professor Arnold Beckett, then at Chelsea College, London. Beckett and his team had been working on tests to discover trace amounts of various substances in body fluids, and when they presented a paper on their work with amphetamines at a conference in March 1965, a Belgian colleague suggested that these rapid, reliable tests could be used in sports. A specially designed test, using mass spectrometry, was trialled at the Tour of Britain cycling races in 1965 and 1966, leading to the disqualification of several cyclists.
The tests for the 1966 World Cup were developed from the experience of the two cycling events, and drawn up with the Medical Sub-Committee of F. I. F. A. and the British Football Association. Random sampling was applied to all the matches played during the cup by asking the referee at each match to pick player’s ID cards from a box, and over 130 samples (including controls) were taken. The urine samples were divided into two, coded with an anonymous identification number, placed in tamper-proof containers, and shipped to the Chelsea College labs for rapid testing. The master record, which listed the codes with the player’s real identities, was sent to Prof. Andrejevic.
One of each pair of samples was analysed, and the spare kept in case of dispute. The results of all the tests were sent to Prof. Andrejevic, who would open his master record and find out which tests were on players and which on controls, and if any players tested positive, he would write to the team officials, but would not tell them which drug had been found. If no explanation could be given, the situation would escalate to a Disciplinary Committee organised by FIFA. The whole procedure was incredibly meticulously planned, and is laid out in this 1967 article.
Beckett’s paper on drug testing at the 1966 World Cup concludes that “All players' samples were reported as being negative for artificial stimulants”. So what of the three players who allegedly tested positive for trace substances? Well the article also says that there could be reasonable explanations for some test results, for example: "[t]he use of ephedrine as a bronchial dilator would constitute a defence if its use was adequately documented in the medical records of the player concerned."
The British Football Association’s own World Cup Report for 1966 mentions that aside from two tests contaminated by use of a nasal spray (probably a bronchial dilator) “all of the other tests proved negative”. In 1978 Beckett himself confirmed that the use of nasal sprays explained some positive tests, demonstrating how sensitive they were. This problem of ‘false positives’, where apparently harmless, everyday pharmaceuticals contain traces of banned substances is still live in sport; 37 years after developing the test Prof. Beckett himself put weight behind the claims that Scottish skier Alain Baxter was unfairly stripped of his medals in 2002, after he suggested that his positive dope test result may have been caused by an inhaler.
There’s no scandal here: Prof. Andrejevic’s letter is explained away by the drug testing protocol, and it’s pretty clear that the three players who had a ‘trace’ of ephedrine in their urine also had reasonable explanations for its presence, and their excuses were good enough for the doping regulators of the 1960s. The presence of ‘traces’ of drugs in players’ urine was no secret in 1966, although their nationality was not revealed (and there’s a bit of confusion over whether two or three players triggered positive results). What’s more dramatic, and deserves headlines, is the key role British scientists – inspired by a Belgian! – played in introducing rapid, effective, at-event drug testing in sport.
Vanessa tweets @HPS_Vanessa. Since it's hayfever season, she is probably doing so under the influence of a nasal spray...
;