This article examines the inconsistencies associated with doping control and explains the inequity which results from such inconsistent application particularly where the violation is caused by a recreational substance. This is achieved through an analysis of the WADA code anti-doping rules and the interrelationship with the principle of strict liability and an examination of the recent case IRB v. Keyter. The application of these rules creates impossible behavioural burden on athletes; ultimately this may result in a further challenge to the legal status of such rules under EU competition law.</p
