Doping Again !

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

RE: Doping Again !

Oakland2002 · All-time great

That's the point it isn't legal and never has been legal you cannot buy it over the counter in the UK or USA, it is a ydrug developed to improve cardiac function in people who are sick, she wasn't sick, isn't sick, and does not need to continue taking it? She was taking it fraudulently. That's where the line is.

Now if she'd had been taking beetroot capsules,which isn't a drug you take when your sick, which she isn't. I might have some sympathy because it was legal and still is legal and therefore not an issue.

Regulation of and understanding the use of supplements is a different issue, in day to day life people take supplements to keep them healthy. I accept there is potential to move into the grey here also but it is a completely different discussion a totally different shade.

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Wednesday 9th of March 2016 09:48:38 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

But how can you say it isn't legal and never had been legal?
It was legal. The WADA said it was legal. As in, it wasn't banned. So it was legal.

Etienne · Club Coach

It was legal internationally for her to take it as a sportsperson, I think Oakland is saying it was illegal for her to take it as an American resident. I don't think that's right though, it is legal to take in the US just not to prescribe.

RBBOT · Futures qualifying

My favourite twitter comment on this is: "why would someone taking drugs for diabetes start a confectionary company?"

On a more serious note, according to Eurosport, there was a mini-olympic style competition called the European Games in Azerbaijan last year in which 6,000 european athletes competed in 20 sports. 490 of them in 15 sports had Meldonium in their blood tests.

www.eurosport.co.uk/tennis/many-athletes-used-sharapova-drug-meldonium-during-2015-european-games-study_sto5305205/story.shtml

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

She was taking a legal PED, which then became illegal, so she mucked up big time. I still don't see how or why she was so remiss. We she so arrogant to think that she'd just get away with it??But when it WAS legal I don't see the issue.

I would like to add though, and it seems to me now that she was taking it as a PED (Which I didn't earlier). With the current discussions it seems that that 'truth' would have come out eventually. That being the case, why didn't she say that at her presser. I would have had more respect for her if she had just owned up at the start.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Aga, Rafa and Petra have now been asked at pressers do they read the emails about prohibited drugs.

Both Aga and Rafa answered the same they don't but their doctors do, whilst Petra who may have more need to take medication given her health issues, said she just takes vitamins and avoids iffy stuff, interesting.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Defence for Maria looks like it will centre on 2 issues : 1. The drug was taken purely for medical reasons together with other medications to treat several long term health conditions, all recommended by her doctor. 2. Given the dosage that Maria was taking there would have been no performance enhancing side effects, you need to take much higher levels in order for there to be any performance enhancing benefits.

Head is being very supportive and will extend contracts etc.,

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

philwrig wrote:
2. Given the dosage that Maria was taking there would have been no performance enhancing side effects, you need to take much higher levels in order for there to be any performance enhancing benefits.

Has this been said by Maria, or are you saying that this is one of the factors? Just trying to clarify.

philwrig · Hall of fame

There was an article in the Guardian I think where Maria's lawyer answered several questions about the case, also Head referred to the dosage amounts as not being sufficient to have any performance enhancing effects.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

It is a drug that aids recovery allowing a player to train harder for longer before a tournament and then take a drug holiday during the event so as not to get caught. That is why there is an out of competition testing programme. Head should think again there are many more deserving tennis players to support.

wimdledont · Challenger level

There are now about 20 articles on the Guardian; and my impression is that Sharapova was being parsimonious with the truth at her presser.

I am also a bit surprised that tha ITF protocol is for the player concerned to be invited to present the case for the defence before the charges have been announced.

Anyway, Andy thinks she should be banned...

www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/mar/10/maria-sharapova-andy-murray-ban-drugs-test-meldonium

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I thought she was always going to get banned ? But it was just a question of how long?

I also do not buy off on Maria's version that Phil is mentioning - i.e. how do we know what concentration or dosage she was taking? Her word? Her doctor's word? Please.

As said ages ago, I think it's so unlikely as to be inconceivable that she was taking it for 'family' health reasons.

And Andy is such an excellent spokesperson, well done.

But I still feel she can only be sanctioned for the one offence in January, as the other ones were not offences. And retrospective legislation goes against the rule of law.

But the sanction even for one offence should be 'worthwhile'.

wimdledont · Challenger level

Naomi Cav's audioblog raises the question of the most injured parties...

audioboom.com/boos/4285263-maria-sharapova-faces-two-year-ban-march-9th

...the four women who were beaten by Sharapova at the Australian Open.

My initial thoughts, repeated from above in this thread, are that each of these matches should be registered as a postdated technical walkover, and the loser of each match should be given the ranking points for winning that round. The money reclaimed from Sharapova should be used to reward each of her beaten opponents with a further round's worth of prize money.

In the case of Nao Hibino, for example, her worst ranking score of the current 12 months is 10 points for losing in R1 of the Australian Open, in a contest that was, through no fault of Hibino's, unfair. She will be punished by the WTA computer for losing that match for another 10 months. Her current ranking is 60. If she is given the extra ranking points (70 as opposed to 10), her ranking would, and in my opinion should, be 52. It matters. The difference will cost her seedings, and tournament entries, for the rest of this year. She is being punished because The Australian Open and the WTA allowed an illegal match to proceed, and Sharapova was cheating.

Bencic is ranked 8. If she is given Sharapova's points for reaching the QF, and Sharapova is stripped of hers, Bencic rises to WR7, overtaking Maria Sharapova. It is potentially worth over $2M to Bencic to be in the top 8 at the end of the year, and to play in Singapore.