Big money and the eclipse of amateurism paved the way for the illegal drugs culture, writes Al Guy.
When I was young the biggest sin in sport was to accept payment of any sort. "Amateur status" was a virtue to be treasured. Athletes had been banned for life for accepting paltry amounts. English footballers toiled in a regime which limited wages to £20 a week.
Sir Arthur Gold, late president of the European Athletic Association and a lifelong supporter of the amateur ideal, albeit in somewhat modified form, delighted in telling of a conversation with Billy Morton shortly after the Herb Elliott 1958 mile world record in Santry.
Gold asked Billy if he paid the athletes, to be met with an immediate response: "Jaysus, no, Arthur. We couldn't afford that. I only pay the timekeepers."
B.J. Fitzpatricks imported the Longines chronometers, Swiss certified, specially for each big meeting. The team of timekeepers under the inscrutable leadership of Louis Vandendries did their job well. Louis made sure of this. Their evidence was accepted.
There were no photo-finishes, no electronic timing. This was sport then, clean, simple, innocent, enjoyable.
The innocence of sport died in 1967 with Tommy Simpson on the Tour de France, the first widespread awareness of the chemical invasion of sport. Even then we bemoaned the success of east European sportspeople and envied the system of state support afforded them.
It took time to realise that much of the success was due to chemically assisted performers.
The full terrible exploitative nature of the system only became apparent after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
With Lord Killanin replacing the dictatorial Avery Brundage as IOC president in 1972 the slow progression to professionalism in hitherto amateur sport gained momentum. Under-the-counter payments had long been a factor in many sports.
Payments of "appearance money" (to show up) and "insole money" (a phrase coined by Adidas supremo Horst Dassler for monies paid to sportspeople to wear certain branded products) were common knowledge.
Commercialisation was seen by many as an antidote to the eastern European state-sponsored systems. Improved television and, with it, increased interest in sport as a billboard gave added momentum.
Chaotic systems of trust funds and other methods of transferring money to performers quickly gave way to the induction of sport into the real world of business.
The door was opening. People could devote themselves to sport full-time and compete on a level playing pitch.
However, they needed time. Business dealings could be handled by a new breed of manager or agent. The smarter agents could source the necessary back-up.
Sports federations, national and international, were ill-prepared to take on these tasks.
Frederick Holder, the honorary secretary of the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), in his report made to the Munich congress of 1972, reported that it had "a bureau staff of two full-time members, with some part-time assistance" servicing the 147 national member-federations.
Ominously, this same report and the accompanying medical advisory panel report noted "the great increase in the use of anabolic steroids" and unanimously condemned "the principle of taking a given amount of blood from athletes and then giving this blood back four weeks later by means of transfusion in order to increase the athlete's athletic performance".
The panel also recommended that athletes be medically tested before going to high-altitude training camps.
Tests for anabolic steroids began to produce a number of positives, but a reliable test for testosterone abuse was some years away.
Rumours of blood-doping abounded in the run-up to the Montreal Olympics of 1976, but there was no test.
Science finally succeeded in artificially producing Erythropoietin (EPO) in 1987. It has a valuable role in treatment of many diseases. The obvious potential for sports abuse was quickly identified: no more messy transfusing with the attendant risks and no known test.
For the top performer, willing to cheat, it appeared that all necessary ingredients for a form of success were available.
Sponsorship and, sometimes, suspected state or federation support provided the wherewithal to attract the necessary scientific and medical advice and monitoring, business agents to do the deals, lawyers to handle contracts.
It only remained for the ambitious sportsperson to satisfy his or her conscience.
The scandal last year involving Balco, the controversial California company involved in steroid production, is a clear indication of demand. The hypocritical cover-ups, in some cases by the very same bodies or people who so vigorously condemned the old eastern European regimes, are probably more damaging to the credibility of sport than any other single factor.
The World Anti-Doping Agency has finally succeeded in providing a unifying force for good in the field of policing and detecting drug abuse in sport.
The efforts of the various international federations (the IAAF staff in Monte Carlo now exceeds 50, with others based in regional development centres throughout the world) and national bodies (including the Irish Sports Council) are being co-ordinated and given leadership in the intensification of the efforts to clean up sport. The task requires time, patience, commitment and honesty.
Hopefully we are not too late for the restoration of belief.
Al Guy has been a member since 1984 of the IAAF Technical Committee, former council member of the European Athletic Association, retired chairman of the IAAF Certification Working Group.
He has acted both as doping and technical delegate at world athletic events since 1980. He is operations manager, Ireland, for International Doping Tests and Management