Cilic Doping Ban reduced

[PSNELKE]

Marin Cilic's doping ban was reduced to 4 months instead of 9. That said, he'd be allowed to play Paris Bercy next week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/10404579/Marin-Cilic-has-doping-ban-reduced-to-four-months-by-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport.html

Its a digrace, its an scandal, its a outrage!

Your take?

 

[Rainalkar]

There was 0 intention from his side. It was a good call.

 

[atptennis]

Good for him. Hopefully he does well at Paris Masters next week.

Ray of hope for Victor Trioski?

 

[Wim]

Good for him. His mother must feel awful!

 

[Crisstti]

I have to say I find it debatable that they'd just consider his "degree of fault" to be so low when there was a warning for athletes in the package... but I haven't read much about his case really (have no time either), so I don't know, maybe what he took wasn't much performance enhancing anyway.

 

[atptennis]

He is getting his ranking points and prize money back from RG[90], Queens[150] and Wimbledon[45].
He is expected to go back up in top 30 in the rankings.

 

[smash hit]

Good for him. Hopefully he does well at Paris Masters next week.

Ray of hope for Victor Trioski?

I don't believe there is any comparison between Cilic and Troicki. In the words of Leif Shiras "Cilic was extremely naive in his decision to allow his mother to by an over the counter product". Troicki's case is very different, again in the words of Shiras, "His refusal to take the test invites suspicion"

 

[jg153040]

This also proves, muscles don't mean doping. Or even great stamina.

Cilic is not really known for grinding style.

 

[bullfan]

I would say this most likely does bode well for Troiki. the problem for Troiki is 2 fold, he won't get and ranking points back, and is now ranked 77, which means he'll have to play Qualifyiers to get into all tournaments, except GS. The second, is the refusal to take the test is suspicious.

 

[Chico]

Good sign Troicki's sentence will be greatly reduced. Cilic's offense was greater than Troicki's, so Troicki must end up with lesser or equal sentence.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

This also proves, muscles don't mean doping. Or even great stamina.

Cilic is not really known for grinding style.

Cilic actually has great stamina, i don't have figures but i think his record is 5 sets matches is very good.
I remember him playing like a machine against Querrey in Wimbledon winning 17/15 the last.

Also remember him playing 3 matches friday/saturday/sunday in Davis cup, 5 hours the friday, 5 hours the saturday (double), then got squashed by Del Potro on sunday, obviously.

I'm happy he's back.

 

[Gonzalito17]

Hmmmmmmmmm

 

[dr325i]

I don't believe there is any comparison between Cilic and Troicki. In the words of Leif Shiras "Cilic was extremely naive in his decision to allow his mother to by an over the counter product". Troicki's case is very different, again in the words of Shiras, "His refusal to take the test invites suspicion"

Yes, very different, however...one was proven to have doped but had a good excuse (we have seen that before with Gasquet using what is not allowed...) and the other was proven...NOTHING but serving 3x the Ban.

Both are responsible for their actions...

 

[RF20Lennon]

I was really surprised that Cilic was doping to be honest. He didn't seem the type.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

Reduced? It should have been permanent. Same goes for Troicki, who should have been stripped of every single title and bit of prize money he's collected, along with an infinite amount of debt that he'd be forced to pay on a weekly basis.

 

[dr325i]

Reduced? It should have been permanent. Same goes for Troicki, who should have been stripped of every single title and bit of prize money he's collected, along with an infinite amount of debt that he'd be forced to pay every weekly.

So, why was the other guy "banned" for only 7 months?

 

[Crisstti]

I would say this most likely does bode well for Troiki. the problem for Troiki is 2 fold, he won't get and ranking points back, and is now ranked 77, which means he'll have to play Qualifyiers to get into all tournaments, except GS. The second, is the refusal to take the test is suspicious.

It's extremely suspicious, to say the least.

I'm a little surprised by people's willingness to believe Cilic when he says he didn't know he was taking a prohibited substance, EVEN though it had a warning... wonder if these people would be willing to believe Rafa if he ever tested positive and said "oh, I just didn't read the label".

 

[Goosehead]

the big cheeses of tennis don't care about drug testing..this was a silent ban before it was leaked.

....yep, it's a fiasco of the highest order. SHAMBLES.

 

[bullfan]

the big cheeses of tennis don't care about drug testing..this was a silent ban before it was leaked.

....yep, it's a fiasco of the highest order. SHAMBLES.

You keep acting like it was leaked, Cilic spilled, that's not leaking. Quite frankly, it was a smart tactical move PR wise on his part. He got ahead of the atp, who are required to keep it silent during the investigation.

 

[90's Clay]

How are dopers who knowingly dope (They just lie about it citing, "I didn't know what I was doing. Yea right!!!) that are caught allowed back in the game?

 

[bullfan]

Seriously, I would guess that if the ATP gives Troicki any kind of penalty less than Gasquet, it sends the message that avoiding a test benefits you. Apparently, the ATP will be less harsh than those that indicate those that avoid breathalyzers tests are in the right vs those that take the test.

I think that everyone that is familiar with folks refusing to take breathalyzers respect them more because they can pass the test 24 hours later!

 

[Tenez101]

He blamed his mother as an excuse? Wow, that's a new one.

 

[andymaratkimi]

Has Cilic prepared well to play in Madrid? Hope he can do as well as before.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Has Cilic prepared well to play in Madrid? Hope he can do as well as before.

What are you talking about ?

 

[*Sparkle*]

I'm not happy about this.

I don't particularly doubt that it was accidental ingestion, and I'm prepared to accept that the dose he took wouldn't have given him an advantage, so I'm OK about some reduction from the 24 month standard, but four months is pathetic. To be honest, I thought 9 months was a bit light.

The best possible scenario is he was careless and he should have known better. There is an advice line they can call to double-check things, and he's not some newbie who was overwhelmed by life on the tour.

It's just not a good example to set, that claiming you "didn't realise" is the kind of excuse that allows a very substantial reduction in the ban. It's just been like an injury break for him, except he hasn't had to deal with an injury.

I don't think this decision should have much impact on the Troicki case, as this decision seems to be based on a judgement of how careless he was. With Troicki, it's a straight case of him refusing to follow the rules. There was no carelessness involved. He has to rely on claiming he didn't realise he was obliged to take the test, and that's much harder to get out of. He was there, on site, surrounded by people who could tell him that he had to take the test, and who probably did.

 

[smash hit]

Yes, very different, however...one was proven to have doped but had a good excuse (we have seen that before with Gasquet using what is not allowed...) and the other was proven...NOTHING but serving 3x the Ban.

Both are responsible for their actions...

Yes, indeed both are responsible for their actions and I personally don't agree with the reduction in Cilic's ban. To say that Troicki was guilty of NOTHING is ridiculous. He refused a blood test. This is not arbitary. Doping tests are not decided by personal choice or whim. He and anyone else cannot be allowed to decide whether or not they will take the test. I wonder what your opinion would have been had a certain Rafael Nadal refused the test. I have a feeling that you would not have been quite so ready to give support.

 

[Crisstti]

It's unbelievable that people need to have this explained to them. Again and again :-?

I'm not happy about this.

I don't particularly doubt that it was accidental ingestion, and I'm prepared to accept that the dose he took wouldn't have given him an advantage, so I'm OK about some reduction from the 24 month standard, but four months is pathetic. To be honest, I thought 9 months was a bit light.

The best possible scenario is he was careless and he should have known better. There is an advice line they can call to double-check things, and he's not some newbie who was overwhelmed by life on the tour.

It's just not a good example to set, that claiming you "didn't realise" is the kind of excuse that allows a very substantial reduction in the ban. It's just been like an injury break for him, except he hasn't had to deal with an injury.

I don't think this decision should have much impact on the Troicki case, as this decision seems to be based on a judgement of how careless he was. With Troicki, it's a straight case of him refusing to follow the rules. There was no carelessness involved. He has to rely on claiming he didn't realise he was obliged to take the test, and that's much harder to get out of. He was there, on site, surrounded by people who could tell him that he had to take the test, and who probably did.

I'm not happy about it either.
And it's not only that there's a line to call. The warning was right there on the package.
Seriously, so anyone can dope and all you need to get just a four month ban is to know in what relatively harmless product you can find the banned substance, and claim you took that. Way too easy.