Tara Moore: Swiatek was allowed to play WTA Finals and BJK Cup while being banned.

[vokazu]

Nick Kyrgios’ Blunt Critique on Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner’s Doping Issues Draws Canadian WTA Pro’s Support

Canadian WTA pro takes a dig at Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner's doping cases while echoing Nick Kyrgios' blunt reactions on them.

www.essentiallysports.com

The British WTA pro wasn’t happy after learning of Iga Swiatek‘s doping controversy. However, she had her own reason to be upset, considering the manner in which the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) handled the Pole’s case. For those unaware, Iga had received a provisional suspension from September 12 to October 4, after her doping results came positive. Additionally, she was also handed a 1-month ban. Now, here’s where the complicated twist comes in.

According to ITIA’s verdict, the 1-month ban for Swiatek is still in effect and will end on December 4. However, she was still allowed to play in the WTA Finals and then the BJK Cup in Malaga, when the ban was active. That’s something Moore couldn’t understand as she wrote in her post on X, “Wait… so she was supposed to be suspended until Dec 4th yet played BJK cup.. which was (correct me if I’m wrong) LAST WEEK. HOW WAS SHE ALLOWED TO PLAY WHILST BEING SUSPENDED??? Someone plz explain cause I’m spiralling.”
For the unversed, Moore herself had faced a ban after testing positive in June 2022. She was handed a 19-month suspension where she couldn’t play any competitive match. However, she was cleared last year, in December, after the ITIA found that her failed test was caused by contaminated meat.

Moore’s argument is that Iga not only received a shorter ban, but also participated in two major events. And she was allowed to do that when her ban was not even over. Interestingly, an ITIA spokesperson mentioned that “No two cases are the same, they often involve different circumstances, and direct comparisons are not always helpful” while defending Iga’s position.

What do you think about this entire matter? Do you believe there’s a lack of transparencies in ITIA’s rules for different players?

 

[Arak]

No two cases are the same because they involve two different players with different rankings.

 

[Sudacafan]

All tennis players are created equal, but some tennis players are more equal than others.

 

[vokazu]

Something that really disgusted me was when Swiatek said something like "I hope you guys will support me next year at AO" and then she smiled.

 

[TennisBro]

The ban lacks clarity, integrity and reeks of partiality and misconduct by organizations responsible for professional tennis players. This is no longer about Swiatek but people who manage the professional tennis affairs. People should be worried about what goes on behind the curtains of the powers when they are making their fuzzy decisions that may not only be unethical but also unlawful if corruption is involved.

 

[Jonesy]

The should strip her of all of her titles and if she has an idol they should strip all of his titles too.

 

[GloW]

The should strip her of all of her titles and if she has an idol they should strip all of his titles too.

Im pretty sure her idol is Nole... uh oh

 

[Jonesy]

Im pretty sure her idol is Nole... uh oh

 

[thrust]

No two cases are the same because they involve two different players with different rankings.

No doubt, but that doesn't make the situation correct or fair.

 

[Kerouac]

Are we really surprised a sport happily taking money from China and Saudi Arabia could possibly be corrupt?

 

[thrust]

Are we really surprised a sport happily taking money from China and Saudi Arabia could possibly be corrupt?

Well, we shouldn't be- LOL!

 

[tennis3]

Winners never cheat and cheaters never win

 

[vokazu]

Im pretty sure her idol is Nole... uh oh

Rofole Nodole

 

[RSJfan]

Iga was not suspended during the WTA Finals or BJK Cup:

WTA Finals Nov 2 - 9
BJK Cup 13 - 20

All the date details of her case are spelled out in the ITIA decision. If too lazy to read that the ITIA provides a helpful summary. If that’s still too much below is mine. Else you can “spiral” and go on social media and whine.

Positive test Aug 12.

Sent a “pre-charge letter” and provisionally suspended on Sept 12.

She appealed the provisional suspension Sept 22 and her appeal was successful with the suspension lifted Oct 5.

22 day provisional suspension Sept 12 thru Oct 4: missed Korea Open, China Open and Wuhan tournaments during this period.

After the full investigation she was offered and accepted a one-month (30 days) suspension beginning Nov 27. She is credited with the 22 days of her provisional suspension. So her remaining eight days of suspension is Nov 27 thru Dec 4.

The legit whine should be about the resources available to well heeled and highly ranked players to put on a robust and timely defense that may not be available to pleebs.

 

[Sudacafan]

Something that really disgusted me was when Swiatek said something like "I hope you guys will support me next year at AO" and then she smiled.

It disgusted you then, or now?

 

[insideguy]

I have been saying this for awhile. This is gonna cause alot more conflict internally in the ATP/Wta than anything from us. Im sure there are many very unhappy tour players right now. And I dont blame them.

 

[RSJfan]

The ban lacks clarity, …

The contrary. It’s laid out in such boring detail that most people including the whiny player won’t read it but will instead head to tik tok for a case summary.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

So your favourite Iga can choose to break up her suspension into pieces. Serve three weeks here. Then decide to play a tournament. Then serve another week.

 

[tennis3]

Else you can “spiral” and go on social media and whine.

Are they serving whine on social media now? This is surely the best of all possible worlds

 

[Sudacafan]

These distractions never happened in the Big Three Era.
Sad, so sad. Very sad.

Defund the WADA and the ITIA.

 

[tennis3]

These distractions never happened in the Big Three Era.
Sad, so sad. Very sad.

Defund the WADA and the ITIA.

Dopers lives matter

 

[Robert F]

Why would the suspension be split up or able to split up? Even if it is legit, it looks really bad that she takes a ban on the lame tournaments but can then play WTA finals and BJK? What's the point of the suspension?
This is like sending your kids to their room for an 8 hour grounding from 10PM-6AM. Once they wake up, time is served.

Heck give Sinner a 3 years suspension, he'll spread it out over his career. Say take the week after every slam off for the next 20 years.
Or can he have his suspension on off days during a tournament?

 

[RSJfan]

So your favourite Iga can choose to break up her suspension into pieces. Serve three weeks here. Then decide to play a tournament. Then serve another week.

Iga is your fav not mine. You are my fav. Your fav’s are Iga, Kamala, Xi and Vlad. And, of course, Noam.

All players are subject to the same TADP time constraints such as the period to make appeals. All players have the right to appeal a provisional suspension. Anytime a provisional suspension is lifted and there is a subsequent decision imposing a suspension the total period of suspension will necessarily be in pieces.

Though I think it bears commenting on your fav Carrot’s case. His provisional suspension was lifted at light speed. This may suggest the clout to have very senior ATP official(s) light a fire under the ITIA.

Speaking of whining. You were whining incessantly that your fav doper Halep’s final CAS decision wasn‘t released in a time manner that suited you but then it was released and you forgot all about it.

 

[RSJfan]

Why would the suspension be split up or able to split up? Even if it is legit, it looks really bad that she takes a ban on the lame tournaments but can then play WTA finals and BJK? What's the point of the suspension?
This is like sending your kids to their room for an 8 hour grounding from 10PM-6AM. Once they wake up, time is served.

Heck give Sinner a 3 years suspension, he'll spread it out over his career. Say take the week after every slam off for the next 20 years.
Or can he have his suspension on off days during a tournament?

Because you are automatically suspended after a positive test result pending a full investigation by the ITIA and if you challenge the ITIA conclusion then also pending an arbitration before the Tennis Independent Tribunal to resolve the dispute. However, you have the right to appeal this automatic provisional suspension (to the Chair of the Tennis Independent Tribunal). If successful you may play so this is where a “split” occurs because after a full investigation you may wind up with a (final not provisional) suspension.

Provisional suspension [can’t play] …Successful appeal of provisional suspension [can play]…final ITIA decision or Tennis Independent Tribunal arbitration decision that results in a suspension [can’t play]

 

[RSJfan]

These distractions never happened in the Big Three Era.
Sad, so sad. Very sad.

Defund the WADA and the ITIA.

I’m sad when a legitimate request for post certification is slow-walked. Very sad.

 

[vokazu]

It disgusted you then, or now?

Now I'm appalled, tomorrow probably disgusted again.

 

[vokazu]

It disgusted you then, or now?

Now I'm appalled, tomorrow probably disgusted again.

 

[Sudacafan]

I’m sad when a legitimate request for post certification is slow-walked. Very sad.

You're not sad, you're anxious.
I don't know which is worse.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

Why would the suspension be split up or able to split up? Even if it is legit, it looks really bad that she takes a ban on the lame tournaments but can then play WTA finals and BJK? What's the point of the suspension?

It is fine to apply her provisional ban and credit her for time served.
But she was then allowed to serve the remainder of the ban beginning on Nov 28. Starting on Turkey Day.
After the BJK and WTA finals were over. What a deal!

Iga Swiatek's participation in the WTA Finals and Billie Jean King Cup during her provisional suspension has raised concerns regarding the timing and implications of her situation.

Timeline of Suspension and Participation​

• August 12, 2024: Swiatek tested positive for trimetazidine (TMZ) in an out-of-competition urine sample.
• September 12, 2024: The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) notified Swiatek of her positive test and imposed a provisional suspension.
• October 4, 2024: After an investigation, the ITIA lifted her provisional suspension, allowing her to compete again due to findings that indicated contamination from a non-prescription medication.
• November 2-9, 2024: Swiatek participated in the WTA Finals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
• November 13-20, 2024: Swiatek played in the BJK Cup Finals in Malaga, Spain, where she led Poland to significant victories against Spain and the Czech Republic.
• November 28, 2024: The ITIA officially announced a one-month suspension for Swiatek, which included time already served during her provisional suspension. She had just eight days remaining on her suspension at that point.

Concerns Regarding Participation​

1. Timing of Suspension: Swiatek's one-month suspension was announced after she had already competed in both the WTA Finals and the BJK Cup. This raises questions about the appropriateness of allowing her to participate in these high-stakes events while under scrutiny for a doping violation.
2. End of Tournaments: The final decision regarding her suspension came after the conclusion of major tournaments for the year. While she was technically eligible to compete due to the lifting of her provisional suspension, the timing of the announcement has led to discussions about fairness and integrity in competition.
3. Regulatory Oversight: The situation highlights potential gaps in regulatory oversight within competitive sports, particularly concerning athletes who are under investigation or facing sanctions while still being allowed to compete at high levels.

Swiatek's case illustrates the complexities surrounding doping regulations and athlete eligibility, prompting ongoing discussions about how such situations should be managed to maintain fairness in sports.

 

[ibbi]

 

[vokazu]

These distractions never happened in the Big Three Era.
Sad, so sad. Very sad.

Defund the WADA and the ITIA.

Gasquet 2009, Cilic 2013, Troicki 2013, Canas 2005, Puerta 2005

Hingis 2007, Barbora 2013, Sharapova 2016, Halep 2022,

 

[Sudacafan]

Gasquet 2009, Cilic 2013, Troicki 2013, Canas 2005, Puerta 2005

Hingis 2007, Barbora 2013, Sharapova 2016, Halep 2022,

OK, but I was not paying attention to players not top #5s.

 

[RSJfan]

…

Iga Swiatek's participation in the WTA Finals and Billie Jean King Cup during her provisional suspension has raised concerns regarding the timing and implications of her situation...

She didn’t play (in these or any sanctioned events) during her provisional suspension. Because —- wait for it ————- she was suspended.

Perhaps you may be trying to say that her participation in events pending the final resolution of her case raises concerns? But the right to challenge the automatic provisional suspension (and if the player desires to keep the matter private at this stage) is a matter of basic fairness and available to all players.

 

[vokazu]

OK, but I was not paying attention to players not top #5s.

Geez, u pay tribute to Srsh everyday man.

 

[RSJfan]

You're not sad, you're anxious.
I don't know which is worse.
…

I assume for reasons unknown to me that you “split” the work involved in certifying my post and have not permanently suspended my application. I look forward to ultimately prevailing once you complete your full investigation.

 

[jmnk]

Nick Kyrgios’ Blunt Critique on Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner’s Doping Issues Draws Canadian WTA Pro’s Support

Canadian WTA pro takes a dig at Iga Swiatek and Jannik Sinner's doping cases while echoing Nick Kyrgios' blunt reactions on them.

www.essentiallysports.com

The British WTA pro wasn’t happy after learning of Iga Swiatek‘s doping controversy. However, she had her own reason to be upset, considering the manner in which the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) handled the Pole’s case. For those unaware, Iga had received a provisional suspension from September 12 to October 4, after her doping results came positive. Additionally, she was also handed a 1-month ban. Now, here’s where the complicated twist comes in.

According to ITIA’s verdict, the 1-month ban for Swiatek is still in effect and will end on December 4. However, she was still allowed to play in the WTA Finals and then the BJK Cup in Malaga, when the ban was active. That’s something Moore couldn’t understand as she wrote in her post on X, “Wait… so she was supposed to be suspended until Dec 4th yet played BJK cup.. which was (correct me if I’m wrong) LAST WEEK. HOW WAS SHE ALLOWED TO PLAY WHILST BEING SUSPENDED??? Someone plz explain cause I’m spiralling.”
For the unversed, Moore herself had faced a ban after testing positive in June 2022. She was handed a 19-month suspension where she couldn’t play any competitive match. However, she was cleared last year, in December, after the ITIA found that her failed test was caused by contaminated meat.

Moore’s argument is that Iga not only received a shorter ban, but also participated in two major events. And she was allowed to do that when her ban was not even over. Interestingly, an ITIA spokesperson mentioned that “No two cases are the same, they often involve different circumstances, and direct comparisons are not always helpful” while defending Iga’s position.

What do you think about this entire matter? Do you believe there’s a lack of transparencies in ITIA’s rules for different players?

It is truly disappointing that Moore would imply that the handling and the timing of the suspension is unclear. I somewhat understand her frustration caused by her own ordeal - so I'm not going to judge her.

However the entire verdict on Swiatek (or Sinner) case can be easily read. In summary or details. It spells the timing of events very clearly. _Everything_ was done per the established process. Of course the final judgment and penalty can be debated depending on whether one accepts (or to what extend) Sinner's/Swiatek's arguments or not - but that is different than implying that that the enforcement of the penalty makes no sense timewise. Of course one can argue that the process itself is bad - but no one proposed a better one, so.....

Some (here on this forum, or players in general) call for 'greater transparency' - but it is clear they have not bothered to read either Sinner or Swiatek verdict, they just go by headlines.

This is exactly what Fritz was referring to - the facts do not matter, it only matters whether you like a certain player or not.

 

[Bartelby]

On the other hand, is it simply fortuitous that the two players who did take advantage of the privacy option went basically unpunished?

The reason why people don't take this option is that they expect a long drawn-out fight to avoid a suspension. But no worries for those two!

She didn’t play (in these or any sanctioned events) during her provisional suspension. Because —- wait for it ————- she was suspended.

Perhaps you may be trying to say that her participation in events pending the final resolution of her case raises concerns? But the right to challenge the automatic provisional suspension (and if the player desires to keep the matter private at this stage) is a matter of basic fairness and available to all players.

 

[jmnk]

Because you are automatically suspended after a positive test result pending a full investigation by the ITIA and if you challenge the ITIA conclusion then also pending an arbitration before the Tennis Independent Tribunal to resolve the dispute. However, you have the right to appeal this automatic provisional suspension (to the Chair of the Tennis Independent Tribunal). If successful you may play so this is where a “split” occurs because after a full investigation you may wind up with a (final not provisional) suspension.

Provisional suspension [can’t play] …Successful appeal of provisional suspension [can play]…final ITIA decision or arbitration decision that results in a suspension [can’t play]

thank you for the excellent explanation. The process is complicated - but can be fairly quickly understood if one bothers to actually read the ITIA documents.

 

[vokazu]

It's about keeping the sports clean, not about liking the players or not.

 

[Bartelby]

The secret adjudication process should be abolished. It has been discredited by the Sinner and Swiatek decisions.

thank you for the excellent explanation. The process is complicated - but can be fairly quickly understood if one bothers to actually read the ITIA documents.

 

[RSJfan]

thank you for the excellent explanation. The process is complicated - but can be fairly quickly understood if one bothers to actually read the ITIA documents.

Bingo.

I suspect many of the same people complaining that the process is opaque won’t read the ITIA materials let alone the actual TADP rules. Probably because the materials and the rules are very boring. And to be fair, the general anti-doping process should be clearly communicated to fans without them having to read a bunch of dense material.

 

[Chairman3]

Shes in cahoots with the head of WADA, good for polish tourism, good for the polish people.

 

[RSJfan]

Shes in cahoots with the head of WADA, good for polish tourism, good for the polish people.

WADA has no role at this stage. She would need to be in cahoots with the ITIA.

Tennis You Can Trust.

 

[jmnk]

Shes in cahoots with the head of WADA, good for polish tourism, good for the polish people.

Except that WADA _does not_ rule on the punishment so your statement makes no sense.
edit: ^^ exactly what @RSJfan stated

 

[Bartelby]

She could be in cahoots with the ITIA (although I'm not sure what that means) which is a body off to a very bad start.

The ITIA is too close to the industry whereas WADA has no role on the adjudication side. It can however appeal the Swiatek decision.

Shes in cahoots with the head of WADA, good for polish tourism, good for the polish people.

 

[jmnk]

The secret adjudication process should be abolished. It has been discredited by the Sinner and Swiatek decisions.

sure, it can be argued that the process can be changed. What would you want that process to be though? I'm not sure in what sense it has been 'discredited' since once the final outcome is reached all the reasoning is made public.
I presume the reason why the process is _not public_ until the final verdict is reached is to protect the privacy in case it turns out the tests were wrong. For example - if they announced that _your favorite player tested positive_ the moment the lab results are in, and later it turned out it was a malfunction in the lab - would you still think it's fair? Once something gets out it will be repeated over and over and over again tarnishing one's reputation, even it it was a true 'malfunction/bad test'.

 

[insideguy]

I say we throw them all in a lake. If they sink they were clean if the float they are on Roids. Then we burn them at the stake.

Authors note- This idea is completely original and at no time was I copying a well known historical time.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

She didn’t play (in these or any sanctioned events) during her provisional suspension. Because —- wait for it ————- she was suspended.

Perhaps you may be trying to say that her participation in events pending the final resolution of her case raises concerns? But the right to challenge the automatic provisional suspension (and if the player desires to keep the matter private at this stage) is a matter of basic fairness and available to all players.

Iga played BJK and WTA Finals. At this time her provisional suspension had been lifted. She was now awaiting final decision.
It was only after these events were completed did the 1 month ban come down. Ban starting on Thanksgiving.
With credit for provisional suspension time served in September which is fine.
But many are complaining that the ban should have come down in November when BJK and WTA were held.
The ITIA lifted the provincial suspension on Oct 4 and then took 2 months to hand down the one month ban. Why the 2 month delay in handing down a 1 month ban?

• September 12, 2024: The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) notified Swiatek of her positive test and imposed a provisional suspension.
• October 4, 2024: After an investigation, the ITIA lifted her provisional suspension, allowing her to compete again due to findings that indicated contamination from a non-prescription medication.

• November 2-9, 2024: Swiatek participated in the WTA Finals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
• November 13-20, 2024: Swiatek played in the BJK Cup Finals in Malaga, Spain, where she led Poland to significant victories against Spain and the Czech Republic.
• November 28, 2024: The ITIA officially announced a one-month suspension for Swiatek, which included time already served during her provisional suspension. She had just eight days remaining on her suspension at that point.

 

[Bartelby]

Have you ever seen any breakdown of the numbers who take this "in-camera process"?

It's only a rational choice to take the "in-camera process" if you think you'll get off.

It seems odd that the two best players in the world took this option and got off lightly.

The ITIA seems a very obliging organisation compared to the TIU that preceded it.

sure, it can be argued that the process can be changed. What would you want that process to be though? I'm not sure in what sense it has been 'discredited' since once the final outcome is reached all the reasoning is made public.
I presume the reason why the process is _not public_ until the final verdict is reached is to protect the privacy in case it turns out the tests were wrong. For example - if they announced that _your favorite player tested positive_ the moment the lab results are in, and later it turned out it was a malfunction in the lab - would you still think it's fair? Once something gets out it will be repeated over and over and over again tarnishing one's reputation, even it it was a true 'malfunction/bad test'.

 

[RSJfan]

?…

Reread what you wrote and my reply. With more attention this time.

And if you quote me please don’t leave out the operative part when bolding it.

===
I see you have substantively edited your post after my reply above to remove the bolded text as well as your question mark. So you now follow as well as realize your initial mistaken statement suggesting Iga played the two events while suspended.

I need to always fully quote you when replying because when caught making an error instead of acknowledging the error you will edit your posts without subsequently noting the edit. You are tricky like your fav Xi.