The tennis fraternity was hit with two high-profile doping controversies in 2024. First it was World No. 1 males’s participant Jannik Sinner, whose US Open title run was overshadowed by a doping scandal. It was revealed that he had examined optimistic twice for an anabolic agent in March, however his protection was accepted by an impartial tribunal that it was as a consequence of unintentional contamination. The WADA appealed the choice to CAS, and the decision is predicted to return subsequent yr.
ITIA chief Karen Moorhouse broke her silence on doping in tennis.
Then it was Polish tennis star Iga Swiatek, who additionally misplaced her world no. 1 place to Aryna Sabalenka this yr. Swiatek served a one-month doping ban which ended this month. She obtained the ban after testing optimistic for a prohibited substance, in an out-of-competition pattern in August. Her protection was accepted by the ITIA, that her outcome was optimistic as a consequence of contamination of a regulated non-prescription medication melatonin, manufactured and offered in Poland.
Sinner and Swiatek obtained assist from former and present gamers, followers. However the pair additionally bought a unfavourable response from some, together with former world no. 1 Simona Halep. Halep was initially banned for 4 years in September 2023, a yr after she examined optimistic for roxadustat and had irregularities in her blood passport. In a while, the CAS diminished her suspension to 9 months. Halep felt that there have been large variations between the way in which doping instances have been being dealt with in tennis lately.
ITIA chief Karen Moorhouse broke her silence on the latest doping controversies and answered claims that Sinner, Swiatek got preferential therapy. Chatting with Tennis365, she stated, “It’s the same rules and the same processes for every player.”
“All cases are different and each case turns on individual facts. Cases can also be quite complex, so it isn’t right to look at two headlines and draw comparisons between two cases as the detail is always the key part.
“Let’s take Swiatek and Halep. The CAS tribunal found that her (Halep’s) supplement was contaminated. So just in relation to that finding, they said nine months (suspension).
“That was the tribunal deciding on the objective fault she had and the subjective fault she should have. So what should she have done in relation to the product that was found to be contaminated?
“In relation to Swiatek, the contaminated product was a medication. So it was not unreasonable for a player to assume that a regulated medication would contain what it says on the ingredients. Therefore, the level of fault she could accept was at the lowest level as there was very little more she could have done reasonably to mitigate the risk of that product being contaminated. Halep’s contamination was not a medication. It was a collagen supplement and her level of fault was found to be higher.
“The key point here is it’s rare to find two cases that are the same they will all turn on their particular facts,” she added.
The banned substance which Swiatek reportedly consumed was trimetazidine. She missed three tournaments as a consequence of her doping ban.