No UKA concern over Mo Farah and Oregon Project

UK Athletics (UKA) says there is no reason to be concerned over Mo Farah or any other British athlete’s engagement with the Oregon Project and its head coach Alberto Salazar.

Salazar has consistently denied allegations of doping after he and Galen Rupp – who won Olympic silver in the 10,000 metres in 2012 behind Oregon Project training partner Farah – were accused of illegal practices in a BBC investigation in June.

In the aftermath of the BBC’s ‘Panorama’ programme, Farah was later reported to have missed two drugs tests in the build-up to the 2012 Games in London, where he also won gold in the 5,000m.

Farah has stood by Salazar and was cleared of any impropriety by UKA in July, going on to win gold in the 5,000 and 10,000 metres at the World Championships.

Summarising the findings of an audit into engagement with the Oregon Project by the independent Performance Oversight Group (POG), a UKA statement read: “In July we said that there was no evidence of any impropriety on the part of Mo Farah and no reason to lack confidence in his training programme.

“The Oversight Group have restated that view today. They have also found no reason to be concerned about the engagement of other British athletes and coaches with the Oregon Project.

“The review established that the vast majority of the endurance program’s interaction with the Oregon Project is in fact focused on Mo Farah, with very little other UK Athletics related activity.

“Coaching and support for Mo Farah will remain the focus of our engagement with the Oregon Project.

“The Oversight Group has made a number of organisational and procedural recommendations which UK Athletics’ Performance Director Neil Black will take forward and implement over the coming months.

“Obviously since our review was set up USADA [US Anti-Doping Agency] announced that it was conducting an investigation into allegations made in respect of staff within the Oregon Project.

“USADA is clearly the right body to look at anti-doping issues. They have asked us not to give any further details of our review until their work has concluded. We respect their request and are of course giving them our fullest support and co-operation.”