• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Maria Sharapova wins ITF appeal, ban reduced by half, back April 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.

LuuKyK

Member
http://www.itftennis.com/news/243888.aspx

4 October 2016 – London, ENGLAND - An appeal panel appointed under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) has reduced the sanction imposed on Maria Sharapova by an Independent Tribunal on 8 June 2016 from 24 months to 15 months. The results and prize money that Ms. Sharapova earned at the 2016 Australian Open remain disqualified. Her period of ineligibility will now end at midnight on 25 April 2017.

Ms. Sharapova, a 29-year-old player from Russia, provided a urine sample on 26 January 2016 that was found to contain meldonium, which is prohibited under section S4 (Hormone and Metabolic Modulators) of the 2016 WADA Prohibited List. She admitted her consequent violation of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme, and noted that the meldonium was the active ingredient of a medication, Mildronate, that she had been taking for ten years, and that she had not realised it had been added to the Prohibited List as from 1 January 2016.

An Independent Tribunal appointed under Article 8.1.1 of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme found that Ms. Sharapova bore significant fault for her violation, because (among other things) she had failed to put in place an adequate system to check for changes made each year to the Prohibited List. It therefore imposed on Ms. Sharapova a period of ineligibility of two years, backdated to commence on 26 January 2016. Her results at the 2016 Australian Open were disqualified, and the ranking points and prize money that she won at that event were forfeited.

Ms. Sharapova appealed that decision to CAS on the basis that she bore No Significant Fault or Negligence for her anti-doping rule violation and therefore her ban should be reduced from two years to "time served" (i.e., she should be free to start competing again from the date of the CAS panel's decision).

Following a hearing on 7 and 8 September 2016, the CAS panel found that Ms. Sharapova had a reduced perception of the risk that she took while using Mildronate, because (a) she had used Mildronate for around ten years without any anti-doping issue, (b) she had consulted the Russian doctor who prescribed the Mildronate for medical reasons, not to enhance her performance, and (c) she had received no specific warning about the change in status of meldonium from WADA, the ITF, or the WTA. In addition, the CAS panel considered that it was reasonable for Ms. Sharapova to entrust the checking of the Prohibited List each year to her agent.

However, the CAS panel found that Ms. Sharapova was at fault for (a) failing to give her agent adequate instructions as to how to carry out the important task of checking the Prohibited List, and (b) failing to supervise and control the actions of her agent in carrying out that task (specifically the lack of any procedure for reporting or follow-up verification to make sure that her agent had actually discharged his duty). The CAS panel also noted Ms. Sharapova’s failure to disclose her use of meldonium on her doping control forms.

Taking all of these circumstances into account, the CAS panel determined that, although Ms. Sharapova was at fault, her plea of No Significant Fault or Negligence should be upheld, triggering a discretion to reduce the otherwise applicable two year sanction by up to 50 per cent. Based on its analysis of Ms. Sharapova's degree of fault, the CAS panel decided that the sanction should be reduced in this case to 15 months.

The full decision is available here.

Most important part:

Ct7R_o1UAAEVWH6.jpg:large


Here is Maria's statement:

Ct7RlWIUkAAe8U3.jpg:large
 

oti

Banned
Not the same situation as the Olympics at all though. Totally different circumstances.

Pretty much in full agreement with the findings though I think they should have cut the punishment more than they did. I think she's learned enough from this already.

Too bad she's missing the Happy Slam but April sounds like a good month. She now has the time go get in competitive shape and mentally prepare for the tour again.
 

jett

D-Member
So it's an "over the counter supplement" now? What happened to it being your "medicine" for your "diabetes"?
 

LuuKyK

Member
The tour is not the same without her. I am glad justice was served.

Now those pressed players like Mladenovic and Cibulkova will have to eat their words for saying that she was a cheater. Lmao Can't wait to see they seething over her winning matches and titles again.
 

thefro

Member
I think a suspension was fair to impose on her, but it was obvious 2 years was too harsh when Yuliya Efimova got popped for the same thing after Sharapova (after already getting banned for doping once) and was able to swim in the Olympics a few months later.

I think it's still about 3 months too harsh. I think Jan 2017 would have been a more fair punishment.
 
I think a suspension was fair to impose on her, but it was obvious 2 years was too harsh when Yuliya Efimova got popped for the same thing after Sharapova (after already getting banned for doping once) and was able to swim in the Olympics a few months later.

I think it's still about 3 months too harsh. I think Jan 2017 would have been a more fair punishment.

We're definitely in backwards land here. Efimova is a repeat offender and got a slap on the wrist because reasons. Sharapova had been clean for 15 years and got a punishment over twice as long as Efimova's. I guess a Russian athlete that lives in the US doesn't get the good bribes.
 

DOWN

Banned
Glad she'll be back
This is ridiculous. Whether she knew the substance had been banned or not is a non-issue.

She should serve the normal suspension.
Nah, in this case they acknowledge that she made officials aware shortly after they changed the regulations. It's not like she started taking a long-banned substance. They changed a rule and she didn't notice. She didn't hide from the mistake. Punish her, but there's little suspicion that she was trying to slide it past them.
 
Not sure if this is old news but Maria did an interview and she was spitting fire in every direction.

Maria Sharapova Claims Victory and Goes on the Offensive

Pointing out incompetence and alluding to favoritism in the federation's handling of these matters. Couple of quotes

Asked if the tennis federation had conceded any failure on its part, Sharapova scoffed.

“They wanted to ban me for four years; that was their way of conceding to me,” she said, citing the maximum penalty she could have received from the federation at its initial June hearing before her violation was ruled unintentional. “I spent four days total in hearings listening to the head of the I.T.F. antidoping, Stuart Miller, giving two testimonies. I’m sitting there just shaking my head on how so many athletes and tennis players are in the hands of someone in his position. I really couldn’t believe it.

“I was really shocked how little knowledge someone like him had, in his position. When he spoke about meldonium, he didn’t know anything about it. It didn’t strike him that it was so common that maybe more notice was appropriate for Eastern European athletes.”

While her case was being considered by the appeals court, Russian hackers penetrated the World Anti-Doping Agency’s athlete database and publicly revealed private medical information about international athletes. The hackers published documents showing that Serena Williams and others received medical exemptions to use banned drugs.

The hackers said the exemptions were proof of unfairness in antidoping protocols. Antidoping officials said the athletes had legitimate medical reasons for using the drugs and had followed the rules. Of the athletes with medical exemptions whose records were published, about a quarter are American, though that group is not necessarily a representative sample of all international athletes.

“I think everyone knows how the system works, and that didn’t show me anything except that players requested T.U.E.s and those were granted,” she said, referring to therapeutic use exemptions. “The only thing I took notice of was the difference in numbers from certain countries compared to others and the number of T.U.E.s that each country had. But as far as anything the athletes were doing, they didn’t do anything wrong.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom