ALTHOUGH cleared of any deliberate attempt to cheat, Christine Ohuruogu, the Commonwealth 400 metres champion, was banned for 12 months by UK Athletics (UKA) yesterday for missing three drugs tests. Ohuruogu, saying that she was “utterly devastated and completely heartbroken”, responded last night by threatening to quit.

Ohuruogu, 22, a linguistics graduate, had been billed as the potential face of the 2012 Olympic Games in London as she lives in Stratford, close to the site of the proposed main stadium. But now she will be banned from the Games for life under a British Olympic Association (BOA) bylaw unless she appeals and wins her case.

Should she opt to stay in the sport and seek Olympic reinstatement, it would raise a difficult issue for the BOA. Ohuruogu’s resentment at the decision will be heightened by the fact that the only other British competitors to have fallen foul of the same rule received lesser punishments.

Peter Cousins, a judo player, was banned for three months and Gillian Wright, a powerlifter, for six months for missing three tests each. Under the World Anti-Doping Agency code, each sport sets its own tariff and the IAAF, the world governing body, chose one year. In normal circumstances, the BOA regards any offence carrying a punishment of six months or less as minor, increasing the chance of a successful appeal against an Olympic life ban. Over the years, there have been 21 successful appeals. Cousins has lodged one and, should his ban be overturned, the BOA, if it persisted in banning Ohuruogu, would be accused of punishing two competitors differently for the same offence.

The BOA, however, would argue that no two cases are the same. Cousins argued that he was only two minutes late for a test. Ohuruogu contested her suspension on the grounds that a late change to her training schedule meant that she was not where she had said she would be for testing.

Under tighter anti-doping regulations, introduced in July last year, athletes are required to be available for random testing during one specified hour a day on five days of each week. A UKA disciplinary committee, which met on Monday but took four days to deliver its verdict, concluded that only a “limited degree of fault” could be attributed to Ohuruogu.

UKA said in a statement: “The committee stated that this was a minor unintentional infraction of the regime due only to forgetfulness. It made clear that there is no suggestion, nor any grounds for suspicion, that the offence may have been deliberate in order to prevent testing.” It acknowledged that the sanction was “very harsh”.

Ohuruogu had not decided last night whether to appeal. In an earlier statement, the athlete said: “In reality this is a two-year suspension due to the fact that, by August 2007, when I will be eligible to compete, I will not be able to qualify for the World Championships.”

Referring to the “ending [of] my Olympic dream”, Ohuruogu added: “I have been penalised as a result of an enforced change to my training schedule. This change was due to my attempt to overcome an injury which threatened to prevent me [from] competing in the European Championships.”

Ohuruogu was suspended from the continental championships in Gothenburg last month after it emerged that she had missed a third test.

“I feel strongly that my exclusion from the European Championships was adequate punishment,” she said. “This situation has been emotionally and financially costly for me and I am now forced to rationally consider my athletics future.”

Chris Butler, the IAAF’s anti doping communications manager, said that the 12-month ban was what the world governing body would have expected. Ohuruogu will also lose her lottery funding and John Scott, of UK Sport, which distributes elite athlete funding, said: “It sends out a strong signal to all athletes that making themselves available for testing is a key requirement.”