Shortly after revelations first surfaced about Alberto Salazar being investigated by the US Anti-Doping Agency in 2015, I asked a UK Athletics contact whether they feared reputational damage if he was ever convicted. “Of course,” came the reply. “But we’ve gone all in on Alberto and Nike.” Long past the witching hour in Doha on Monday night, that decision came back to haunt them. And with the legendary American coach now banned for four years for “orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct”, UKA now looks desperately short of chips.

After all, it was not a good look that your performance director Neil Black – who once hailed Salazar as a “genius” and “one of the best people to work with that I have ever come across” – continued to give the American the benefit of the doubt for several years despite damaging accusations made by Panorama programme Catch Me If You Can?

And it did not exactly inspire confidence when UKA’s own performance oversight management, set up to investigate the interaction of the Nike Oregon Project with its star athlete Mo Farah, found “no reason for concern” – despite speaking to several whistleblowers.

You wonder what the investigators, led by former sprinter Jason Gardener and marathon runner Sarah Rowell, were asking. When I spoke to Allan Kupczak, a former massage therapist at the Nike Oregon Project in 2015, he told me Salazar always carried testosterone with him. As he put it: “Alberto would say: ‘Don’t let anyone touch my bag – I have my testosterone cream in there. I don’t want anyone to get contaminated accidentally.’ My thought was why risk something that could possibly contaminate the athlete?”

That raised a red flag for me. Others I spoke to had similar stories. No wonder Steve Magness, the BBC’s main whistleblower, was dismissive about UKA’s enquiry and said that he had only a 30-45 minute interview with their panel.

So why did UKA not establish more distance from Salazar in 2015? According to one senior insider, the organisation should have done more, but some figures were either too close to Salazar, or did not appreciate the scale of the revelations. “Where were UK Sport in all this?” the source added. “They weren’t putting any pressure on UKA to get rid of Salazar at any time up to Rio.”

However, the biggest factor was Farah himself. The simple fact is he did not want to leave the man who had transformed him from a decent distance runner, who finished seventh in the 5,000m at the 2009 world championships, into an unstoppable title-winning machine between 2011 and 2017.

Mo Farah wins 5,000m gold at London in 2012. Photograph: Tom Jenkins/The Guardian

That clearly left UK Athletics in a bind. After the BBC Panorama programme aired in June 2015, Farah promised UKA he was going to ditch Salazar. But at some point on a flight from Portland to the UK, he had dramatically changed his mind.

After that, few in UKA wanted to go against its double Olympic champion – because they needed his medals – or be too critical of Nike given its massive kit sponsorship of the organisation. Only UKA’s chairman, Ed Warner, who suggested Farah should suspend his relationship with Salazar, sounded a note of caution. Otherwise everyone stuck to the line: the American was innocent until proven guilty.

And of course he was. However, there was surely a middle way that would have meant establishing distance from Salazar without condemning him. After all, much of what is in the American Arbitration Association report, which found that Salazar had been “orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct” while head coach of the Nike Oregon Project, was known in 2015 – including that Salazar infused his athletes with more than the permitted levels of L-carnitine, and got another, Amy Begley, to unwittingly transport an envelope with testosterone cream on it, which he later used in a bizarre experiment on his sons.

Incidentally, the report contains several fresh testimonies that certainly raise some eyebrows. The American former athlete Danny Mackey says that while he was working at the Nike lab he was told by one of the doctors, Loren Myhre, to take thyroid and testosterone therapy. Mackey testifies that Dr Myhre told him: “This is what Salazar’s athletes do, and they haven’t gotten caught. You’ll be OK.” Salazar has always denied any wrongdoing with his athletes.

The report also contains Salazar’s emails to Nike’s chief executive, Mark Parker, in which the coach discusses experimenting with a banned testosterone product called Androgel, which can boost performance, on his own sons. In one of his emails, Salazar indicates that using a small amount does not reach the level that would “trigger great concern” about failing a test. To which Parker responds: “It will be interesting to determine the minimal amount required to create a positive test.”

Quick Guide Six key figures in Salazar saga: Where does the judgment leave them? Show Alberto Salazar The legendary coach is flying home from Doha after his ban. Has vowed to clear his name, saying he has “endured unjust, unethical and highly damaging treatment from Usada”. Neil Black The British Athletics performance director is already under pressure for disappointing performances on the track and many in the sport are now questioning his judgment and loyalty to Salazar. Will come under pressure to step down. Mo Farah About to run in the Chicago marathon and in a statement brushed off close ties with Salazar from 2010 to 2017. “I left the Nike Oregon Project in 2017 but as I’ve always said, I have no tolerance for anyone who breaks the rules or crosses a line.” Jeffrey Brown The Texas endocrinologist who treated many of Salazar’s athletes was also banned for “orchestrating and facilitating prohibited doping conduct.” Yet to comment on Usada’s decision. Nike The sportswear giant has said it will back Salazar’s appeal against his four-year ban. Also insists that Usada’s decision had “nothing to do with administering banned substances to any Oregon Project athlete”. Questions about its CEO Mark Parker discussing testosterone with Salazar remain. Sebastian Coe IAAF president has always stood by Salazar, saying: “Don’t run away with the idea that this is a hole-in-the-wall, circa 1970s Eastern Bloc operation. It’s not.” However moved quickly to ensure that his old friend’s credentials were deactivated on Tuesday.

The panel accepted Salazar’s explanation that he was experimenting with testosterone on his sons because he was paranoid that someone might try to spike one of his athletes. However, it added: “While the panel accepts [the] Respondent’s contention that the experiment was designed to protect athletes of the NOP, it could have also been conducted as part of a nefarious attempt to ‘beat’ the testing system and thus is susceptible to creating an appearance of cheating that one could argue would bring the experiment much closer to being ‘in connection with’ an athlete, competition or training.”

There is no evidence that Farah cheated. But sometimes you judge people by the company they keep. And his record of being coached by Salazar, plus his friendship with Jama Aden, who is being investigated by Spanish Anti‑Doping, are two strikes against him. Farah denies continuing any relationship with Aden since 2015 when the coach acted as an “unofficial facilitator” to UKA.

It is worth remembering, too, that at a press conference in 2015 Farah promised he would speak to whistleblowers. “Definitely, for my sake,” he said. “I want to know the answers. Because at the end of the day it’s my reputation. Because the headline is not Alberto. It’s Mo’s coach. And it’s not fair on kids, my family, people who come out and watch me. At the Olympics 75,000 people were cheering for me, and I think them 75,000 people should know what’s going on. I should at least be honest with them.”

The passion in his words suggested he was serious. Sadly for him, and UKA, he does not appear to have acted on them.