So, British sprinter Dwain Chambers has lost his bid to run at the Olympics after a court ruled that the lifetime ban imposed after he tested positive for the steroid THG should stand.

The High Court’s Mr Justice Mackay refused to suspend the ban saying Chambers’ argument that it was an unfair restraint on his right to work was not strong enough.

No doubt the ruling will have its fair share of supporters and opponents.

The whole situation really has split opinion, making it very difficult to come to a satisfactory conclusion.

While most people seem to have fairly strong views on the case one way or the other, it’s just not so clear to me.

On the one hand, the man cheated, testing positive for the banned substance THG in 2003, disgracing himself, his sport and his country.

We have to send out a clear message that cheats don’t prosper, that drug taking in any form is not acceptable.

On the other hand, Chambers is an accomplished and remarkable athlete.

He has served his two year ban, he’s clean, he’s admitted his mistakes and is full of remorse for what he did.

He was ordered to repay all the money he won during 2003 (estimated to be more than £100,000) and clearly has been keeping up his demanding training schedules even though he no longer receives any funding and has no idea whether he has effectively destroyed any chance of resurrecting his career.

Has he not paid his dues?

He was selected to compete for GB in the World Indoor Championships earlier this year despite widespread opposition, and he is currently the fastest man over 100m in Britain with a qualifying time in Birmingham only just over a week ago of exactly 10 seconds.

In any other country (except possibly China or Denmark) there is no mandatory life-time ban and Chambers would be competing in the Olympics based on current performance alone.

Doesn’t this just prove there’s no point in trying to make amends for past crimes? And why was he allowed to compete in the World Indoor Championships if we feel his cheating brought us such shame?