French Open Champion Calls for Life Ban on Sinner & Swiatek

[Bartelby]

I want to exercise my own judgement but, to be frank, I'm merely pointing out that you know only the tip of the iceberg.

are you serious? Do you want me to also provide their personal addresses, the birthdays, and a list of acquaintances?

You really should make yourself familiar with the process. Moore case took so long because it went up to the Independent Tribunal which provided the final (so far, it is being appealed by ITIA) verdict that essentially nullified initial ITIA findings. In Swiatek (and Sinner) case that did not need to happen because players did not contest ITIA's verdict (of essentially not guilty at all in Sinner case, and 'not significantly guilty' in Swiatek case). It is expected that a case that involves Independent Tribunal will take way longer. And I mean no one is naive enough to think that Sinner/Swiatek being so well-known, and having an army of people working on their behalf did not make things go faster - of course it did. But not to the degree of marathon vs sprint.

 

[Jonas78]

"Current players are setting bad examples for younger generations" Kyrgios backs Kafelnikov.

Just when you thought you had heard everything. Nick is now a frontrunner for how to be a role model for younger players

 

[Bartelby]

I'd also like to know the average length of time to first tribunal decision for Sinner and Swiatek compared to the average.

That wouldn't be a difficult statistic to calculate and publish.

Don’t waste your time, now it is more about ‘Western institutions’ and demanding absurd levels of ‘proof’ versus basic levels of science and law.

People are writing without even reading the simple stuff or understanding it and you have a bunch of the nastiest (ex-)people in tennis throwing ****.

WADA is now reconsidering its policy for simple logical reasoning which were anticipated here.

 

[Rovesciarete]

"Current players are setting bad examples for younger generations" Kyrgios backs Kafelnikov.

Just when you thought you had heard everything. Nick is now a frontrunner for how to be a role model for younger players

His sterling reputation of sportsmanship is of course on his mind

I think all younger generations should follow his fine example.

Maybe players should also befriend the Russian mob, like Kafelnikov did. Sinner should go full Sicilian…

 

[Bartelby]

Aren't these matters two stage? What are the initial ITIA findings that were nullified by the Independent Tribunal, or are you simply talking about the prosecution case put to the Independent Tribunal?

You contest the ITIA verdict in the CA and yet you are suggesting the case didn't go to the CA because the IT found in her favour. So why was her IT hearing so long delayed whereas the other two were fast-tracked?

are you serious? Do you want me to also provide their personal addresses, the birthdays, and a list of acquaintances?

You really should make yourself familiar with the process. Moore case took so long because it went up to the Independent Tribunal which provided the final (so far, it is being appealed by ITIA) verdict that essentially nullified initial ITIA findings. In Swiatek (and Sinner) case that did not need to happen because players did not contest ITIA's verdict (of essentially not guilty at all in Sinner case, and 'not significantly guilty' in Swiatek case). It is expected that a case that involves Independent Tribunal will take way longer. And I mean no one is naive enough to think that Sinner/Swiatek being so well-known, and having an army of people working on their behalf did not make things go faster - of course it did. But not to the degree of marathon vs sprint.

 

[travlerajm]

Whether or not Tara Moore was guilty or not, it’s pretty clear (from the difference in her current appearance vs. her appearance when still on tour) that the suspension ended her pro tennis career.

 

[Kerouac]

Where is Andy Murray? I thought he was tennis' most vocal anti-doping critic, or is it only when Odesnik is concerned?

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

It also means that if Sinner gets banned for life, his lifestyle will still be ok.

Sinner is a God in Italy. A lifetime ban is unthinkable. Italy would never recover and it will never be allowed to happen.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

Where is Andy Murray? I thought he was tennis' most vocal anti-doping critic, or is it only when Odesnik is concerned?

Sir Andy is a HeForShe warrior and will say nothing about Iga.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

Kafelnikov was a great player but his takes are ridiculous.

 

[inflation_era]

This wouldn't be fair since some players who can more easily get away with it, particularly in cases of miraculous recoveries from surgeries.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

You really should make yourself familiar with the process. Moore case took so long because it went up to the Independent Tribunal which provided the final (so far, it is being appealed by ITIA) verdict that essentially nullified initial ITIA findings. In Swiatek (and Sinner) case that did not need to happen because players did not contest ITIA's verdict (of essentially not guilty at all in Sinner case, and 'not significantly guilty' in Swiatek case). It is expected that a case that involves Independent Tribunal will take way longer.

Whether or not the player contests the initial findings of the ITIA are irrelevant to the Tribunal process.
The Tribunal, if convened, always conducts a thorough examination of all aspects of the case, independent of the ITIA's initial findings or Sinner's or Moore's preferences.

The ITIA concluded its initial Sinner investigation and its findings were favourable to Sinner.
Yet the ITIA chose to refer the complex unique case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.
Sinner did not have the option of settling the case with ITIA even if he wanted to because the ITIA chose to refer his case to the Tribunal.

Likewise, the ITIA also chose to refer the Moore case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.

The Process:

1. After initial investigation, the ITIA may issue a "pre-charge notice" to the player, giving them two weeks to explain the circumstances.
2. If there's a case to answer, the ITIA formally charges the player with an anti-doping rule violation.
3. The player then has options:
   • They can admit to the charge, which may result in a sanction offered by the ITIA without a hearing.
   • They can claim unintentional doping and provide evidence to support their claim.
4. If the ITIA accepts the player's explanation, they may offer a sanction without going to a Tribunal.
5. A case goes to an independent tribunal when:
   • There are fundamental disagreements between parties over the evidence.
   • The case involves unique or complex circumstances.
   • The player contests the charges or proposed sanction.

Therefore, while Tribunals are an important part of the process, they are not automatically involved in every case.
The ITIA has the ability to resolve some cases through direct negotiation with the player, particularly when the player admits to the charge or when there's clear evidence of unintentional doping that the ITIA accepts.

Sinner Tribunal:

1. The ITIA referred Sinner's case to an independent tribunal due to its unique circumstances and lack of comparable precedent
2. A hearing took place on August 15, 2024, before a panel of three arbitrators: Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair), Ms Tamara Gaw, and Mr Benoit Girardin
3. The Tribunal reviewed all evidence, including:
   • Testimonies from Sinner and his team
   • Reports from three independent scientific experts
   • Results of the ITIA's extensive investigation
4. The panel assessed Sinner's level of fault or negligence, considering factors such as his awareness, conduct, and team management
5. The Tribunal made its own determination based on the evidence presented, ultimately concluding that Sinner bore No Fault or Negligence

 

[Shaolin]

Who's Kafelnikov? How can he be a "legend" when his name has been forgotten with the wind?

Grand slam champion and former world #1. Incredible all-court player who hit an incredibly clean ball off both wings and excelled in doubles as well.

Learn something about the sport, Sport.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Cheating in sports is one of the national pastimes of Russia, he must go against the grain there.

lol. The Russian federation is banned from the winter Olympics for widespread doping violations and attempts at both coverups, and interfering with ongoing investigations by WADA. The country might’ve changed in some ways from the Soviet Union days, but institutionalized doping certainly has not.

Obviously. Russia's sports program is objectively the most corrupt in history, and always builds on that reputation as that body sees any sort of ethical behavior as a hindrance. It is no wonder one of its biggest tennis exports brazenly used PEDs and thought she was going to get away with it.

Sir Andy is a HeForShe warrior and will say nothing about Iga.

Probably.

 

[Bartelby]

It's not obvious to me. The corrupt former head of the Russian sports program was hired by America and told the story that his benefactors wanted to hear.

But even he had no evidence of state involvement in any doping.

Obviously. Russia's sports program is objectively the most corrupt in history, and always builds on that reputation as that body sees any sort of ethical behavior as a hindrance. It is no wonder one of its biggest tennis exports brazenly used PEDs and thought she was going to get away with it.



Probably.

 

[Bartelby]

So the initial decision is completely internal to the ITIA. This seems like a system designed to result in speedy and ... bad ... decisions. Once made the initial decision searches for its confirmation.

Whether or not the player contests the initial findings of the ITIA are irrelevant to the Tribunal process.
The Tribunal, if convened, always conducts a thorough examination of all aspects of the case, independent of the ITIA's initial findings or Sinner's or Moore's preferences.

The ITIA concluded its initial Sinner investigation and its findings were favourable to Sinner.
Yet the ITIA chose to refer the complex unique case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.
Sinner did not have the option of settling the case with ITIA even if he wanted to because the ITIA chose to refer his case to the Tribunal.

Likewise, the ITIA also chose to refer the Moore case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.

The Process:

1. After initial investigation, the ITIA may issue a "pre-charge notice" to the player, giving them two weeks to explain the circumstances.
2. If there's a case to answer, the ITIA formally charges the player with an anti-doping rule violation.
3. The player then has options:
   • They can admit to the charge, which may result in a sanction offered by the ITIA without a hearing.
   • They can claim unintentional doping and provide evidence to support their claim.
4. If the ITIA accepts the player's explanation, they may offer a sanction without going to a Tribunal.
5. A case goes to an independent tribunal when:
   • There are fundamental disagreements between parties over the evidence.
   • The case involves unique or complex circumstances.
   • The player contests the charges or proposed sanction.

Therefore, while Tribunals are an important part of the process, they are not automatically involved in every case.
The ITIA has the ability to resolve some cases through direct negotiation with the player, particularly when the player admits to the charge or when there's clear evidence of unintentional doping that the ITIA accepts.

Sinner Tribunal:

1. The ITIA referred Sinner's case to an independent tribunal due to its unique circumstances and lack of comparable precedent
2. A hearing took place on August 15, 2024, before a panel of three arbitrators: Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair), Ms Tamara Gaw, and Mr Benoit Girardin
3. The Tribunal reviewed all evidence, including:
   • Testimonies from Sinner and his team
   • Reports from three independent scientific experts
   • Results of the ITIA's extensive investigation
4. The panel assessed Sinner's level of fault or negligence, considering factors such as his awareness, conduct, and team management
5. The Tribunal made its own determination based on the evidence presented, ultimately concluding that Sinner bore No Fault or Negligence

 

[Mustard]

Obviously. Russia's sports program is objectively the most corrupt in history

Nonsense.

 

[sureshs]

Nonsense from Kafelnikov. He seems to have no idea about how the system works. Has-been people like him have some inferiority complex which makes them jealous of the younger generation.

 

[Mustard]

Nonsense from Kafelnikov. He seems to have no idea about how the system works. Has-been people like him have some inferiority complex which makes them jealous of the younger generation.

If Kafelnikov is jealous of today's tennis players, it's because of the greater sums of money on offer

Kafelnikov used to play a lot, singles and doubles, so much that he burned himself out early. He didn't really have a technical weakness in his game, but was most vulnerable to players who had a big weapon of some kind.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Nonsense.

Yes, your aggressive defense of the corrupt Russian sports program is nonsensical.

 

[Mustard]

Yes, your aggressive defense of the corrupt Russian sports program is nonsensical.

Your selective blindness, more like. Next you'll be telling me about the American and British values of freedom, democracy and liberty for the people.

 

[Fabresque]

lol. The Russian federation is banned from the winter Olympics for widespread doping violations and attempts at both coverups, and interfering with ongoing investigations by WADA. The country might’ve changed in some ways from the Soviet Union days, but institutionalized doping certainly has not.

Russia is bad because they don’t have the NATO/International PR and protection that Poland and Italy have. Swiatek and Sinner are disgraceful cheaters.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

So the initial decision is completely internal to the ITIA. This seems like a system designed to result in speedy and ... bad ... decisions. Once made the initial decision searches for its confirmation.

There is always a first step in any investigative process. The ITIA has the option of settling the case with Sinner following the ITIA investigation. There is nothing wrong with that. Not at all.

If the ITIA were interested in a speedy outcome, the ITIA would have closed the case with Sinner after their initial investigation's findings were favourable to Sinner.
But instead of closing the case, the ITIA referred the case to the independent neutral Tribunal.

Once the case is referred to the Tribunal, the Tribunal then has the authority to impose stricter penalties independent of what the ITIA initially sought.

The Tribunal is appointed independently by Sport Resolutions, which operates separately from the ITIA.

The Tribunal members in the Jannik Sinner doping case were:

Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair)
Tamara Gaw
Benoit Girardin
This Independent Tribunal was appointed to hear and determine the dispute regarding Sinner's Anti-Doping Rule Violations.

Note To Readers:
KC denotes King's Counsel.

 

[anarosevoli]

Never heard that name...

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

Why do Russians buy meat from Kim when there are still pigs like this?

Russia has a very close relationship with Chairman Kim.

Ukraine’s Zelensky says Putin to use North Korea troops as ‘cannon fodder’

Ukrainian president says North Koreans deployed in western Russia have been killed in combat against his forces.

www.scmp.com

 

[Bartelby]

This story has been around for more than a month, so it's safe to file it under BS.

Russia has a very close relationship with Chairman Kim.

Ukraine’s Zelensky says Putin to use North Korea troops as ‘cannon fodder’

Ukrainian president says North Koreans deployed in western Russia have been killed in combat against his forces.

www.scmp.com

 

[Bartelby]

You're a sucker for someone in horse hair, that's all, and have ever heard of "covering your ass" by calling in the horse hair?

There is always a first step in any investigative process. The ITIA has the option of settling the case with Sinner following the ITIA investigation. There is nothing wrong with that. Not at all.

If the ITIA were interested in a speedy outcome, the ITIA would have closed the case with Sinner after their initial investigation's findings were favourable to Sinner.
But instead of closing the case, the ITIA referred the case to the independent neutral Tribunal.

Once the case is referred to the Tribunal, the Tribunal then has the authority to impose stricter penalties independent of what the ITIA initially sought.

The Tribunal is appointed independently by Sport Resolutions, which operates separately from the ITIA.

The Tribunal members in the Jannik Sinner doping case were:

Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair)
Tamara Gaw
Benoit Girardin
This Independent Tribunal was appointed to hear and determine the dispute regarding Sinner's Anti-Doping Rule Violations.

Note To Readers:
KC denotes King's Counsel.

 

[Tennis Devolution]

Kafelnikov was a great player but his takes are ridiculous.

What is considered to be a "PED" is completely subjective so attempting to ban "PEDs" is always completely objectively futile.

 

[Tennis Devolution]

Obviously. Russia's sports program is objectively the most corrupt in history, and always builds on that reputation as that body sees any sort of ethical behavior as a hindrance. It is no wonder one of its biggest tennis exports brazenly used PEDs and thought she was going to get away with it.



Probably.

Every country has a official/unofficial "doping" program.

 

[jmnk]

@Better_Call_Raul - thank you for a thoughtful response, I really mean it. Let me address

Whether or not the player contests the initial findings of the ITIA are irrelevant to the Tribunal process.

I mean sort of. ITIA presents its own argumentation to the Tribunal, so they do matter. Indeed however the Tribunal will now be reviewing the argumentation, and coming up with the verdict, not the ITIA

The Tribunal, if convened, always conducts a thorough examination of all aspects of the case, independent of the ITIA's initial findings or Sinner's or Moore's preferences.

agreed

The ITIA concluded its initial Sinner investigation and its findings were favourable to Sinner.
Yet the ITIA chose to refer the complex unique case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.
Sinner did not have the option of settling the case with ITIA even if he wanted to because the ITIA chose to refer his case to the Tribunal.

Not saying that this is not true - but what is that based on? Judging from https://www.itia.tennis/media/yzgd3xoz/240819-itia-v-sinner.pdf it appears that the case went to the Tribunal because Sinner appealed the ITIA decision and wanted the case to be reviewed by the Independent Tribunal. See A)7) of the above doc.
I was however incorrect stating that Sinner case never went to the Tribunal. It did. It does also seem that this Independent Tribunal hearing happened awfully fast. The doc states "the Parties (in this case it means Sinner and ITIA) also agreed to corroborate to an expedited carriage of the matter as well as a procedural timetable'. I'm not sure why in Moore's case it took quite a while for the hearing to happen. BTW - Swiatek's case did not go to the Tribunal because Swiatek did not contest the findings and the punishment that ITIA proposed once the argumentation for 'medicine contamination' was presented.

Likewise, the ITIA also chose to refer the Moore case to a Tribunal for a full comprehensive neutral review.

Again, not saying that this is not true - but what is that based on? In Moore's case ITIA proposed the punishment, Moore decided to appeal, that's why it went to the Tribunal. It does not appear that it was ITIA's decision.

The Process:

1. After initial investigation, the ITIA may issue a "pre-charge notice" to the player, giving them two weeks to explain the circumstances.
2. If there's a case to answer, the ITIA formally charges the player with an anti-doping rule violation.
3. The player then has options:
   • They can admit to the charge, which may result in a sanction offered by the ITIA without a hearing.
   • They can claim unintentional doping and provide evidence to support their claim.
4. If the ITIA accepts the player's explanation, they may offer a sanction without going to a Tribunal.

teh 4) happened in Swiatek's case apparently.

1. A case goes to an independent tribunal when:
   • There are fundamental disagreements between parties over the evidence.
   • The case involves unique or complex circumstances.
   • The player contests the charges or proposed sanction.

i kind of do not see where it is stated in official docs outlining the process that the second bullet point happens. Do you have a source?

Therefore, while Tribunals are an important part of the process, they are not automatically involved in every case.

very true

The ITIA has the ability to resolve some cases through direct negotiation with the player, particularly when the player admits to the charge or when there's clear evidence of unintentional doping that the ITIA accepts.

very true

Sinner Tribunal:

1. The ITIA referred Sinner's case to an independent tribunal due to its unique circumstances and lack of comparable precedent

I kind of do not get that impression from the docs. Do you have the source of this claim?

1. A hearing took place on August 15, 2024, before a panel of three arbitrators: Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair), Ms Tamara Gaw, and Mr Benoit Girardin
2. The Tribunal reviewed all evidence, including:
   • Testimonies from Sinner and his team
   • Reports from three independent scientific experts
   • Results of the ITIA's extensive investigation
3. The panel assessed Sinner's level of fault or negligence, considering factors such as his awareness, conduct, and team management
4. The Tribunal made its own determination based on the evidence presented, ultimately concluding that Sinner bore No Fault or Negligence

Fully agreed with the above. Just that my understanding is that Sinner contested ITIA findings, or to be clear the proposed punishment, and his side requested the hearing before the Tribunal. he was trying to get the punishment lowered based on 'No Fault or Negligence' or in the alternative on 'No Significant Fault or Negligence'.

Another thing. It is ITIA choice to make the case public as soon as one is charged, and the penalty is proposed. It appears that in Sinner's case ITIA waited till after the Tribunal hearing to make the case public. A bit unusual indeed.

 

[Bartelby]

Although the banning of Meldonium proves your point, it remains the case that bureaucracies are designed to create rules and WADA does doping rules.

They have the authority ... and hopefully some degree of objectivity.

What is considered to be a "PED" is completely subjective so attempting to ban "PEDs" is always completely objectively futile.

 

[vokazu]

Why do they have to dress like a clown?

 

[Tennis Devolution]

Although the banning of Meldonium proves your point, it remains the case that bureaucracies are designed to create rules and WADA does doping rules.

They have the authority ... and hopefully some degree of objectivity.

WADA has absolutely no objectivity and only engages in "anti-doping" enforcement for power and money. What constitutes a PED is completely subjective and arbitrary. Banning certain drugs is simply a great way to control and make money off of others.

 

[vokazu]

Sinner is a God in Italy. A lifetime ban is unthinkable. Italy would never recover and it will never be allowed to happen.

God of Clostebol, yes.

 

[Happi]

….

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

"Independent, neutral tribunal"... Come on, now... Judicial/quasi-judicial decision making is always more interesting than that...

There is always a first step in any investigative process. The ITIA has the option of settling the case with Sinner following the ITIA investigation. There is nothing wrong with that. Not at all.

If the ITIA were interested in a speedy outcome, the ITIA would have closed the case with Sinner after their initial investigation's findings were favourable to Sinner.
But instead of closing the case, the ITIA referred the case to the independent neutral Tribunal.

Once the case is referred to the Tribunal, the Tribunal then has the authority to impose stricter penalties independent of what the ITIA initially sought.

The Tribunal is appointed independently by Sport Resolutions, which operates separately from the ITIA.

The Tribunal members in the Jannik Sinner doping case were:

Dr David Sharpe KC (Chair)
Tamara Gaw
Benoit Girardin
This Independent Tribunal was appointed to hear and determine the dispute regarding Sinner's Anti-Doping Rule Violations.

Note To Readers:
KC denotes King's Counsel.

 

[NattyGut]

Communists don’t want due process; shocking.

 

[jmnk]

"Independent, neutral tribunal"... Come on, now... Judicial/quasi-judicial decision making is always more interesting than that...

ok, what process would _you_ propose? Feel free to elaborate.

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

Personally I would strike ss. 10.5-10.7 from the ITIA anti doping program for a start, but I don't understand your challenge.

I made no comment on procedure. I only pointed out that these bodies are partial in all kinds of ways, which should be common sense. We shouldn't exaggerate the authority of their findings simply because they claim neutrality and independence.

As I said, their decisions are likely more.. interesting.. than that. Someone on here posted the names of the folks who delivered the Sinner decision. A good start would be looking into them, their careers, associations, commitments, past decisions etc., to get a better idea of how they formed their decision.

But, I mean, the point is pretty straightforward and intuitive. You don't have to conduct a independent research project to appreciate how judicial decisions are subject to a variety of interests, incentives, motivations, commitments and so on.

ok, what process would _you_ propose? Feel free to elaborate.

 

[Bartelby]

It is a bit of a regression on her part. Why fear an appeal?

Communists don’t want due process; shocking.

 

[Mustard]

Communists don’t want due process; shocking.

LOL

 

[jmnk]

Personally I would strike ss. 10.5-10.7 from the ITIA anti doping program for a start, but I don't understand your challenge.

I made no comment on procedure. I only pointed out that these bodies are partial in all kinds of ways, which should be common sense. We shouldn't exaggerate the authority of their findings simply because they claim neutrality and independence.

As I said, their decisions are likely more.. interesting.. than that. Someone on here posted the names of the folks who delivered the Sinner decision. A good start would be looking into them, their careers, associations, commitments, past decisions etc., to get a better idea of how they formed their decision.

But, I mean, the point is pretty straightforward and intuitive. You don't have to conduct a independent research project to appreciate how judicial decisions are subject to a variety of interests, incentives, motivations, commitments and so on.

Would you care to point out how different cases that had similar offence, and where the circumstances of the cases, and presented evidence were similar - yet the punishment was different? Because in each case, ITIA or the Tribunal, or CAS actually does cite similar cases that were considered before verdict and punishment was given. And believe it or not, it kind of all makes sense.

You are free to suspect what outside interests and motivations are. But if so none of it makes sense - you would also have to assume that line judges, umpires, tournament directors, sponsors, etc, etc, etc - they all have impartial interests. And if you believe that then no point watching any sports - because it is all fixed.

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

Do your own homework. Happy to discuss your findings. It's not news to me that judges reason from precedent.

Would you care to point out how different cases that had similar offence, and where the circumstances of the cases, and presented evidence were similar - yet the punishment was different? Because in each case, ITIA or the Tribunal, or CAS actually does cite similar cases that were considered before verdict and punishment was given. And believe it or not, it kind of all makes sense.

 

[Bartelby]

I trust CAS decisions but Tribunals depend on their "independent" appointees. "Independent" is a relative concept as those who've been "independently reviewed" will understand.

 

[Bartelby]

There are no judges involved here. They are barristers who follow legal reasoning but do not have judicial independence.

Do your own homework. Happy to discuss your findings. It's not news to me that judges reason from precedent.

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

Is the distinction relevant for understanding their decisions?

There are no judges involved here. They are barristers who follow legal reasoning but do not have judicial independence.

 

[Bartelby]

I would be very happy to appoint my own judge or to have a friendly third-party appoint one for me.

Is the distinction relevant for understanding their decisions?

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

Oh, I see what you're saying. Even better lol. Thanks for pointing that out.

I would be very happy to appoint my own judge or to have a friendly third-party appoint one for me.

 

[jmnk]

Do your own homework. Happy to discuss your findings. It's not news to me that judges reason from precedent.

But i did my homework, and, to me, the rulings are more-less consistent regardless of the name of the player. _You_ are claiming that those dishing the ruling are impartial so I'm asking you to provide an example.

 

[TrickyWithTheWindy]

I give you an F. Try again next term, and consider applying for an accommodation.

But i did my homework, and, to me, the rulings are more-less consistent regardless of the name of the player. _You_ are claiming that those dishing the ruling are impartial so I'm asking you to provide an example.