Senior International Olympic Committee (IOC) member Richard Pound has stepped-up his criticism of his organisation's response to the Russian doping crisis by criticising their "lack of resolve" and failure to show "moral leadership".
In a bruising editorial published today in the Globe and Mail, Pound, the former IOC vice-president and founding head of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), also claimed the IOC need to start "meaning what they say" when they advocate a zero-tolerance approach towards doping.
Pound is seen as a longtime critic of current President Thomas Bach.
Pound uses the editorial to put forward possible responses by which the IOC could improve its stance, including introducing greater protection for whistleblowers and the allocation of more money and power to WADA to carry out investigations.
The IOC opted not to hand Russia a blanket ban from Rio 2016 following allegations of state-sponsored doping.
"Like it or not, the IOC has decided to absolve Russia for designing and operating a doping programme that enabled its athletes to cheat other competitors and to ensure that doped Russian athletes at the Sochi Games in 2014 would not get caught," Pound wrote.
"I, for one, am hugely disappointed by the IOC’s lack of resolve in dealing with proven Government-sponsored cheating.
"This was a perfect opportunity for the IOC to provide moral leadership in regard to a country that showed complete contempt for the rules of the game.
"The best that could be said of the IOC in the circumstances is that it fumbled the ball and, in the process, may well have scored an own goal.
"If the IOC leadership had assumed its responsibilities and was determined to let the Russians participate in the Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro, it should have made that decision itself - and taken the resulting flak.
"The IOC is entitled to determine who may compete in the Games; it was an abandonment of its responsibility to purport to delegate the decision to the individual international sport federations, many of which are conflicted in their dealings with Russia."
Pound also highlighted concerns with the IOC approach during this week's Session here.
But, like all of the membership except for Britain's Adam Pengilly, he voted in favour of a vote of confidence in response to the ruling IOC Executive Board decision.
This was because the "arrow had left the bow" with regard to Olympic participation, Pound said.
He did vow, though, to continue his criticism and call for an Extraordinary IOC Session to take place next year in order to discuss the problem of doping.
Pound is now urging greater funding for WADA as well as the power to "conduct investigations, to call on public authorities to provide timely and effective assistance and to require the target of any investigation to contribute to the costs of the investigation, failing any of which, the target may be provisionally sanctioned".
WADA should also be given the right to impose provisional sanctions, he claims, rather than simply to report on non-compliant conduct.
Whistleblowers must also be "encouraged, protected and given recognition for their courage", as they are often the "best sources of information", wrote Pound.
This latter remark is a reference to Russian doping cheat turned whistleblower Yuliya Stepanova, who has not been allowed to compete here, despite being permitted to race at other international athletics events.
Bach and other IOC figures have also attempted to shift blame onto WADA for the failure to spot Russian doping.
WADA had been slow in beginning their investigation but have produced two damning reports in the last year and, unlike the IOC, had called for a blanket Rio 2016 ban,
"I hope that it can and that the public, including athletes, spectators and supporters, will be willing to forgive the 2016 lapse - if they can see a genuine and uncompromising commitment to delivery of doping-free sport, in which actions match the rhetoric," the Canadian wrote.
"It has to be made much clearer that such cheating has no place in Olympic sport.
"This is so regardless of whether the cheating is state-sponsored or whether it occurs on an ad-hoc basis in certain areas or in certain sports or clubs.
"Cheating is cheating.
"The ball is now in the IOC’s court, at the place of the fumble - the IOC must get off its back foot and move forward."