Doping Again !

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

RE: Doping Again !

emmsie69 · Top national player

Why would the ATP release a statement about Tara? The WTA and the ATP are 2 entirely different organisations. Any beef should be aimed at the WTA.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

emmsie69 wrote:
Why would the ATP release a statement about Tara? The WTA and the ATP are 2 entirely different organisations. Any beef should be aimed at the WTA.

I think the point is that to the watching public, that nuance isnt understood or known- it just all feels two tier all round

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

JonH comes home wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:
Why would the ATP release a statement about Tara? The WTA and the ATP are 2 entirely different organisations. Any beef should be aimed at the WTA.
I think the point is that to the watching public, that nuance isnt understood or known- it just all feels two tier all round

Yes. ATP can think their own brand stands completely apart from the WTA (which technically it does, in terms of governance etc). But tennis is tennis. And most of us, and definitely Joe Public, think of it as one sport i.e. the rules, the system is basically the same. If the two bodies don't talk to each other, we don't care, that's just behind the scenes admin and technicalities. And the ATP/all the tennis bodies should be aware of that.

Not to mention that most of the very anti-Sinner's treatment tweets have come from ATP players

Elegant Point · Satellite level

Cahill explains why the 'Sinner' case did not come to light earlier

*It didn't come out because we all believed in his innocence and that's what Sport Resolutions (the independent tribunal) applied to the case. Sinner could continue playing, and the ITIA would carry out its due diligence*

www.puntodebreak.com/en/2024/08/21/cahill-explains-why-the-sinner-case-did-not-come-to-light-earlier

christ · Futures level

Elegant Point wrote:
Cahill explains why the 'Sinner' case did not come to light earlier

*It didn't come out because we all believed in his innocence and that's what Sport Resolutions (the independent tribunal) applied to the case. Sinner could continue playing, and the ITIA would carry out its due diligence*

www.puntodebreak.com/en/2024/08/21/cahill-explains-why-the-sinner-case-did-not-come-to-light-earlier

That must make it so much easier for the others: he was innocent unless proven guilty, they were all guilty until proven innocent.

(as I noted earlier, though: I don't think Mr Sinner was "innocent", it was just that his excuse seems to have been more readily acceptable)

9vicman · Satellite level

It's important to make the point that any player can request that their Provisional Suspension be overturned. The other players either didn't make the request or their request was turned down (eg Yastremska). All Provisional Suspensions that are upheld are announced. So Sinner hasn't been treated any differently from other players in terms of protocols being followed.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

It seems that WADA has told the Beeb that it is "continuing to review" whether it will appeal against the ruling that Sinner bore no fault. I have to say that I agree with christ's assessment of the situation & am not exactly jumping up & down with delight at his victory at Flushing Meadows. Article mentions Tara's case.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Clostebol, which Sinner took/was contaminated by, is at the centre of a wider scandal brewing in Italian sport

honestsport.substack.com/p/italys-clostebol-doping-crisis-across

The fear is it is hiding a deeper and darker issue. This story was

written before Sinners situation arose.

-- Edited by JonH comes home on Monday 9th of September 2024 08:05:48 PM

RainDelay · Pro player

I read that article a month ago or so. I'm not at all convinced by Sinners story, guess it will all come out in the wash eventually.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

It always comes out eventually, just needs a good journo to unpack it all.

Var · Pro player

Here we go. Appeal against Sinners exoneration www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c4gr8433527o

christ · Futures level

If we just take the excuses/ reasons out of it for a moment - isn't the point of drug testing to stop people benefitting from the effects of performance-enhancing drugs?

Mr Sinner isn't disputing that he was exposed to performance enhancing drugs, so surely he shouldn't be allowed to benefit? Do we all believe that the drug testing policy is perfect, so the only time that he was exposed to the drugs were on the occasion that he was caught, or could we credibly expect that he was exposed to them on other occasions too - possibly frequently and/ or often - in which case (assuming that performance-enhancing drugs actually enhance performance) his performance has been enhanced (accidentally or otherwise).

I think WADA have a point.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

From what I read, the amount of the drug in his system was miniscule, though - it wouldn't have had any performance enhancing abilties

So it doesn't really matter how it got there, if yo're looking purely at the benefit argument - there was no benefit

The problem is having drugs as a supposedly strict liability offence (black or white), but then allowing a 'no personal fault' argument, which can take no more than a couple of days if you have an extremely capable and expensive legal team, and 18 months if you don't

There's some argument that the quantity should be taken into account

And there's some argument that the WADA v ITIA contest (as per Sinner, as per Halep) just looks really bad

christ · Futures level

Coup Droit wrote:
From what I read, the amount of the drug in his system was miniscule, though - it wouldn't have had any performance enhancing abilties

If it wouldn't have helped, why is it illegal? (Seriously - I thought the whole point of this was to root out cheats, not "non-cheats-that-may-have-been-exposed")

What Mr Trump (and Mr Simpson before him - remember that?) has effectively demonstrated is that there is no offence - and no evidence - that cannot be overcome by a sufficiently talented and sufficiently high-paid legal team.