The lawyer who cleared a swimmer of doping predicted a ban for up to 2 years for Sinner

V

vokazu

Legend
www.dailymail.co.uk

Lawyer who cleared Shayna Jack of doping makes big call on world No 1

The lawyer for Australian swimmer Shayna Jack says tennis superstar Jannik Sinner will likely be held to account for his failed drug test, and could face a ban from the sport of up to two years.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

The lawyer for Australian swimmer Shayna Jack says tennis superstar Jannik Sinner will likely be held to account for his failed drug test, and could face a ban from the sport of up to two years.

Brisbane-based lawyer Tim Fuller, who represented Shayna Jack after she tested positive to a banned substance, believes the tennis body's decision on Sinner will be overturned.

'In my opinion I believe that the no fault or negligence decision will be overturned on appeal and a sanction will be imposed,' Fuller told this The Sydney Morning Herald.


'I would suggest that it's a very, very unusual case,' he added.

'All WADA are really doing here is saying we accept that it is unintentional but you bear, or did bear, a certain degree of fault or negligence for what's happened ... we say that you, as the athlete, bear the ultimate responsibility – which is strict liability – and we say, therefore, you have demonstrated fault and negligence in your actions.

'And then we're going to look at now [what] we say is between a mid- to high-range level of fault or negligence, and that's why they're seeking [a ban of] one to two years.

'One year would be deemed to be at the high end of the low fault standard. Zero to 12 [months] is the range for low fault.'
 
WADA has not stated whether it believes Sinner is at a low level of fault or at a higher level of fault.
WADA has only stated that Sinner bears some level of fault. WADA has stated that it is seeking a one to two year ban.

If a ban comes down, one year will be the worst case scenario. There is no way the CAS will impose a 2 year ban?! when WADA is stating that it will be happy with one year.

The most likely scenario is that Sinner gets a 0-6 months at worst.
 
How is 0 ban "at worst"? My money is on 4-6 months.

Better_Call_Raul said:
WADA has not stated whether it believes Sinner is at a low level of fault or at a higher level of fault.
WADA has only stated that Sinner bears some level of fault. WADA has stated that it is seeking a one to two year ban.

If a ban comes down, one year will be the worst case scenario. There is no way the CAS will impose a 2 year ban?! when WADA is stating that it will be happy with one year.

The most likely scenario is that Sinner gets a 0-6 months at worst.
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
How is 0 ban "at worst"? My money is on 4-6 months.
Click to expand...

WADA is only requesting a one to two year banishment. Some posts are claiming it will be 2 years.
But cannot see CAS going beyond the one year that WADA will be happy with. Also note that WADA very very rarely appeals tennis cases to CAS.

Does the CAS have authority to go beyond the one year is requesting? Of course.
But we do not see the CAS, this quasi-court, rocking the boat on the world's #1.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport. The key word is Arbitration.

Given that the WADA appealent has stated that one year is acceptable, it is highly unlikely that the arbitration panel would impose a penalty exceeding one year.
Particularly as the WADA is the ultimate authority on doping code and violations.

There are very few instances of CAS imposing penalties beyond what the appealing party is asking for. One rare exception was your favourite Sun Yang but he was a repeat offender.
WADA sought a penalty ranging from two to eight years, and CAS imposed a penalty of eight years. Ultimately reversed by Swiss Supreme Court.
:unsure:

In the case involving swimmer Sun Yang, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) requested a penalty of between two and eight years for his anti-doping rule violations. This request came after Sun Yang's actions during an out-of-competition test in September 2018, where he refused to complete the doping test and destroyed his blood sample containers.WADA sought a penalty ranging from two to eight years, and CAS imposed the maximum penalty of eight years based on the circumstances surrounding Sun Yang's actions and his prior doping violation

Sun Yang Case:​

  1. WADA's Position:
    • WADA appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) . WADA argued that Sun Yang had voluntarily refused to submit to sample collection, which warranted a suspension.
  2. CAS Decision:
    • CAS ultimately imposed an eight-year ban, which was the maximum penalty allowed under the rules applicable at that time due to Sun Yang's status as a repeat offender (he had previously been sanctioned for a doping violation in 2014). The CAS ruling confirmed that the eight-year period of ineligibility was warranted based on the severity of the violation and Sun Yang's prior history.
  3. Outcome:
    • The eight-year ban effectively ended Sun Yang's competitive swimming career, as it ruled him out of participation in events such as the Tokyo 2020 Olympics.

Timeline of Events​

  1. Initial CAS Ruling:
    • In February 2020, CAS imposed an eight-year ban on Sun Yang for refusing to cooperate with doping control officials during a test in September 2018. This penalty was based on the findings that he had violated anti-doping rules.
  2. Swiss Federal Supreme Court Appeal:
    • Sun Yang appealed the CAS decision to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, claiming bias from one of the arbitrators involved in the case. On December 22, 2020, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court accepted his appeal and annulled the CAS ruling, citing issues related to arbitrator bias. The court ordered that a new hearing take place with a different panel of arbitrators.
  3. New CAS Ruling:
    • Following the Swiss court's decision, CAS re-evaluated the case and, in June 2021, imposed a new penalty of four years and three months on Sun Yang. This ruling was based on the same underlying incident but took into account the procedural issues raised during the first arbitration.
  4. Subsequent Swiss Court Appeal:
    • Sun Yang appealed this new CAS ruling to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court again, but on March 3, 2022, the court dismissed his appeal, confirming that his reduced ban of four years and three months would remain in effect until May 28, 2024.
 
Last edited:
big ted said:
I don’t think it’s his fault due to he didn’t put the cream on himself… someone else did without his knowledge or consent
Click to expand...
That didn't stop Halep getting an initial 4 year ban and much more reputational damage for some time.

It's the double standards that people are most annoyed by.
 
Better_Call_Raul said:
WADA is only requesting a one to two year banishment. Some posts are claiming it will be 2 years.
But cannot see CAS going beyond the one year that WADA will be happy with. Also note that WADA very very rarely appeals tennis cases to CAS.

Does the CAS have authority to go beyond the one year is requesting? Of course.
But we do not see the CAS, this quasi-court, rocking the boat on the world's #1.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport. The key word is Arbitration.

Given that the WADA appealent has stated that one year is acceptable, it is highly unlikely that the arbitration panel would impose a penalty exceeding one year.
Particularly as the WADA is the ultimate authority on doping code and violations…
Click to expand...

Your fav WADA is not “the ultimate authority on doping code and violations” despite it’s attempt since inception to fashion itself as such. It is a private NGO birthed from the IOC — an organization with a history ripe with corruption scandals — and the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. WADA is currently feuding with US anti-doping officials and is under investigation by the FBI, notwithstanding the whining of your fav Dick Pound, WADA’s original president.

Most US professional sports leagues (e.g., MLB, NFL, NBA) and the NCAA have no use for your fav WADA and are not WADA Code signatories. They conduct their own anti-doping programs in-house like tennis used to do. And for these pro sports leagues the athletes through their collective bargaining unit have a voice in doping protocols. They are not forced to submit to WADA‘s draconian doping code that has WADA thugs chasing tennis players around the globe with 24/7/52 whereabouts testing and can snag even an innocent boy scout like Carrot for getting a well deserved massage. Even in the context of tennis, WADA has only a right to appeal the tennis tribunals ruling and request a CAS arbitration replace it with “ultimate authority” at the Swiss court. And I presume ultimately with FEDR. :D
 
Last edited:
WADA is run by a board composed of Ministers of Sport or their delegates directly appointed by national governments, mainly Western.

USADA is even more fanatical than WADA on doping and American sports opt-out of WADA because that's usually what the US does.

RSJfan said:
Your fav WADA is not “the ultimate authority on doping code and violations” despite it’s attempt since inception to fashion itself as such. It is a private NGO birthed from the IOC — an organization with a history ripe with corruption scandals — and the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. WADA is currently feuding with US anti-doping officials and is under investigation by the FBI, notwithstanding the whining of your fav Dick Pound, WADA’s original president.

Most US professional sports leagues (e.g., MLB, NFL, NBA) and the NCAA have no use for your fav WADA and are not WADA Code signatories. They conduct their own anti-doping programs in-house like tennis used to do. And for these pro sports leagues the athletes through their collective bargaining unit have a voice in doping protocols. They are not forced to submit to WADA‘s draconian doping code that has WADA thugs chasing tennis players around the globe with 24/7/52 whereabouts testing and can snag even an innocent boy scout like Carrot for getting a well deserved massage. Even in the context of tennis, WADA has only a right to appeal the tennis tribunals ruling and request a CAS arbitration replace it with “ultimate authority” at the Swiss court. And I presume ultimately with FEDR. :D
Click to expand...
 
norcal said:
Yeah, UP to two years. That includes 1 month. Or 6 months. Kind of like everyone here has been saying.
Click to expand...
Yes, reciting this "up to" crap is a complete waste of time. Everyone already knows the penalty ceiling. If you want to get your name in the news as an "expert," at least make a firm prediction. E.g., "Sinner will get 6 months." "Sinner will get one month, like Swiatek." "Sinner will get a full year." "Sinner will not receive a ban."
 
RSJfan said:
Better Nike than Chiiiiiiiiiiiina.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with making donations? I made a donation to Goodwill last week

There is no indication from the documents AP reviewed that China donated the money in expectation of a quid pro quo to gloss over positive drug tests. In fact, WADA didn't hide the extra funding; it put out a little-noticed news release in December 2020 announcing China's $992,000 donation.
 
JMR said:
Yes, reciting this "up to" crap is a complete waste of time. Everyone already knows the penalty ceiling. If you want to get your name in the news as an "expert," at least make a firm prediction. E.g., "Sinner will get 6 months." "Sinner will get one month, like Swiatek." "Sinner will get a full year." "Sinner will not receive a ban."
Click to expand...
Sinner will receive no ban + an apology.
 
tennis3 said:
What's wrong with making donations? I made a donation to Goodwill last week

There is no indication from the documents AP reviewed that China donated the money in expectation of a quid pro quo to gloss over positive drug tests. In fact, WADA didn't hide the extra funding; it put out a little-noticed news release in December 2020 announcing China's $992,000 donation.
Click to expand...
I like Chiiiiiiiiiina.
 
Mustard said:
That didn't stop Halep getting an initial 4 year ban and much more reputational damage for some time.

It's the double standards that people are most annoyed by.
Click to expand...


me personally (and in the minority), i dont find anything similar between those 2 cases other than they both failed tests.
sinners case wasnt even about a contaminated substance, and haleps story didnt match with the large amounts found in her system
so haleps was complicated
 
vokazu said:
The lawyer for Australian swimmer Shayna Jack says tennis superstar Jannik Sinner will likely be held to account for his failed drug test, and could face a ban from the sport of up to two years.
Click to expand...
Has that lawyer ever worked for the anti-doping agency like Sinner's has? Knowing where storms come from makes one a better forecaster.
 
RSJfan said:
Most US professional sports leagues (e.g., MLB, NFL, NBA) and the NCAA have no use for your fav WADA and are not WADA Code signatories. They conduct their own anti-doping programs in-house like tennis used to do. And for these pro sports leagues the athletes through their collective bargaining unit have a voice in doping protocols.
Click to expand...

Fed and Rafa have towed the WADA line.
Only the visionary and undisputed GOAT Djoker was wise enough to propose that ATP divorce itself from WADA and police itself.
:unsure:

Federer stated, "Overall, I trust the anti-doping system," and emphasized the importance of following the rules.
Nadal echoed this sentiment, saying, "We have rules. We can like the rules or not, but we have rules"

Novak Djokovic, however, has been more critical of the current anti-doping procedures.

In a recent statement, he suggested that tennis should consider creating its own anti-doping agency:
"Interestingly, WADA is a private company; there should be a discussion about whether we should have our agency within the tennis ecosystem, instead of hiring someone from the outside"

Djokovic's comments came after he criticized the timing of a doping test before a match, calling it "shameful" and questioning the logic behind WADA's decisions
While he supports testing in general, he expressed concerns about the current system's impact on players' routines and preparation.

FSz6ey-WQAEc4sd.jpg
 
I have no idea if he gets banned or not. But I do think they would be setting a dangerous precedent and open themselves up to a crap ton of lawsuits if they dont ban him.

Sooooooo I suppose the question is is tennis willing to take the revenue hit from not having sinner play. Or take the hit in the form of a crap ton of lawsuits from players who got punished much more severely. Cause thats where this is going.
 
Cool. Only the tour will suffer with Carlos-Fritz finals all year. LOL!!! People tune in to see top tier talent going at it . Not bums
viewership is already down now. I would love to see how much it tanks if sinner isn’t around for 2 years and loses his peak years
 
insideguy said:
I have no idea if he gets banned or not. But I do think they would be setting a dangerous precedent and open themselves up to a crap ton of lawsuits if they dont ban him.

Sooooooo I suppose the question is is tennis willing to take the revenue hit from not having sinner play. Or take the hit in the form of a crap ton of lawsuits from players who got punished much more severely. Cause thats where this is going.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Who is “they”? You will be wasting money if you think there is a lawsuit to be had against either the ITIA, the members of a particular CAS arbitration panel or the entity CAS because you didn’t like your own arbitration result or one you aren’t even involved in. For your own arbitration the Swiss court is the end of the road. As to other arbitrations you have zero standing. You could sue a supplement manufacturer but that is not “tennis.”
 
Last edited:
Better_Call_Raul said:
Fed and Rafa have towed the WADA line.
Only the visionary and undisputed GOAT Djoker was wise enough to propose that ATP divorce itself from WADA and police itself.
:unsure:

Federer stated, "Overall, I trust the anti-doping system," and emphasized the importance of following the rules.
Nadal echoed this sentiment, saying, "We have rules. We can like the rules or not, but we have rules"

Novak Djokovic, however, has been more critical of the current anti-doping procedures.

In a recent statement, he suggested that tennis should consider creating its own anti-doping agency:
"Interestingly, WADA is a private company; there should be a discussion about whether we should have our agency within the tennis ecosystem, instead of hiring someone from the outside"

Djokovic's comments came after he criticized the timing of a doping test before a match, calling it "shameful" and questioning the logic behind WADA's decisions
While he supports testing in general, he expressed concerns about the current system's impact on players' routines and preparation.
Click to expand...
Fedal are pillars of the establishment. Only your fav Egg stands with the tennis plebs. The legend of Egg grows.

 
RSJfan said:
:rolleyes:

Who is “they”? You will be wasting money if you think there is a lawsuit to be had against either the ITIA, the members of a particular CAS arbitration panel or the entity CAS because you didn’t like your own arbitration result or one you aren’t even involved in. For your own arbitration the Swiss court is the end of the road. As to other arbitrations you have zero standing.
Click to expand...
Let's wait and see ok:) You can roll your eyes all you want. But if he doesn't get suspended it's coming. Lots of people in denial. I saw the same crap when Ukraine got invaded oh it won't matter, no one cares, athletes should be able to play bla bla. Well gee 3 years later Russia still banned from most international events. Argued with people all day and night.

There is a difference between what should happen and how people respond and what actually does happen and how people respond. I wasnt arguing for Russians to be banned I just said it was going to happen. And people jumped all over me.

I am not arguing Sinner should be banned. I am saying if he isnt the backlash internally is going to be very large. It's going to be. And people can say oh no it will be fine. LOL. Man Ive been alive long enough I have seen how this has gone down in other sports.

I mean for gods sake they just awarded a figure skating gold this summer olympics to the USA for a girl on the Russian team who got drugged against her will and she was 14! They stripped her of her gold and the whole team as well. That took her medal and banned her for four years lol. She was like 13 when they were drugging her. That case took more than two years.
 
Last edited:
Bartelby said:
It's hard to disagree with the idea that Sinner bore some fault or negligence.
Click to expand...

Bartelby said:
My money is on 4-6 months.
Click to expand...

You either enforce the doping rules or you don't. The WADA code calls for a one year minimum ban on the Sinner type of negligence which is why WADA is requesting a one to two year ban.
WADA agrees with Tribunal finding that Sinner did not intentionally dope. WADA only disagrees with the finding of no negligence. WADA wants a penalty imposed for negligence.
A penalty of 4 months makes a mockery of the entire system. Under what grounds could CAS ever justify such a light slap on the wrist?
WADA will look foolish appealing to CAS for a long-term ban and only getting a 4 month ban.
CAS will either give WADA what it's requesting or no ban at all. There is no middle ground here.
 
One to two years seems like a starting point, rather than something fixed in stone.

Better_Call_Raul said:
You either enforce the doping rules or you don't. The WADA code calls for a one year minimum ban on the Sinner type of negligence which is why WADA is requesting a one to two year ban.
WADA agrees with Tribunal finding that Sinner did not intentionally dope. WADA only disagrees with the finding of no negligence. WADA wants a penalty imposed for negligence.
A penalty of 4 months makes a mockery of the entire system. Under what grounds could CAS ever justify such a light slap on the wrist?
WADA will look foolish appealing to CAS for a long-term ban and only getting a 4 month ban.
CAS will either give WADA what it's requesting or no ban at all. There is no middle ground here.
Click to expand...
 
vokazu said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

Lawyer who cleared Shayna Jack of doping makes big call on world No 1

The lawyer for Australian swimmer Shayna Jack says tennis superstar Jannik Sinner will likely be held to account for his failed drug test, and could face a ban from the sport of up to two years.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

The lawyer for Australian swimmer Shayna Jack says tennis superstar Jannik Sinner will likely be held to account for his failed drug test, and could face a ban from the sport of up to two years.

Brisbane-based lawyer Tim Fuller, who represented Shayna Jack after she tested positive to a banned substance, believes the tennis body's decision on Sinner will be overturned.

'In my opinion I believe that the no fault or negligence decision will be overturned on appeal and a sanction will be imposed,' Fuller told this The Sydney Morning Herald.


'I would suggest that it's a very, very unusual case,' he added.

'All WADA are really doing here is saying we accept that it is unintentional but you bear, or did bear, a certain degree of fault or negligence for what's happened ... we say that you, as the athlete, bear the ultimate responsibility – which is strict liability – and we say, therefore, you have demonstrated fault and negligence in your actions.

'And then we're going to look at now [what] we say is between a mid- to high-range level of fault or negligence, and that's why they're seeking [a ban of] one to two years.

'One year would be deemed to be at the high end of the low fault standard. Zero to 12 [months] is the range for low fault.'
Click to expand...
Lol Fuller is absolutely bargain basement lawyer material.

Sinner will be banned, and it will probably be post AO 2025 and expire before clay court season. Sinner has decent lawyers and his current coaching set up of course was a cleverly advised move...
 
If a physio on your team can massage you with an open cut finger for which he used a cream that has a big anti-doping sign and the player can claim no accountability for negligence, why can’t a team doctor tell a player he is going to inject him with something harmless like glucose, “forget” that the syringe is half-full of some banned steroid and then claim the same defense that the player had no idea of the gross incompetence of his own team member. There needs to be a ban or otherwise it gives carte blanche for team members to cite their own imcompetent negligence when a player gets busted and the player can claim unknowing lack of liability on his part.

Team members like physios, coaches etc. get bonuses, get famous and see their careers blossom when their players win a lot. So they have a lot of incentive to dope their own player without telling the player if that is a loophole that can be used by a busted player.

To me it is a completely unbelievable story that a professional sports physio would give a massage without gloves when he has a cut finger on which he used a cream that was handed out to him by another member of the team especially when it is well known fact due to many Italian busted athletes (27 or so at last count) that there are creams used to heal cuts sold over the counter in Italy with the banned clostabol drug. These athletes have to be so careful about every substance put in or on their body that it is really farfetched that this kind of incompetent negligence can happen without a player’s knowledge. And in the case of this physio, he worked on an Italian basketball team, in the past where multiple players got busted for clostabol. How unbelievable and fantastic is this story?

Even if somehow it is true and the physio is an incompetent professional, it is a bad precedent to not hold a player accountable when his own team member is so negligent about what he put on a player’s body.
 
Last edited:
Bartelby said:
It's hard to disagree with the idea that Sinner bore some fault or negligence.
Click to expand...
No, his physiotherapists are fully responsible for this. They should be banned for 10 years for any job in which they would use their hands, and 5 years for jobs using their feet. Sinner should be exonerated.
 
Sinner employed them so he has, at least, vicarious responsibility.

Sudacafan said:
No, his physiotherapists are fully responsible for this. They should be banned for 10 years for any job in which they would use their hands, and 5 years for jobs using their feet. Sinner should be exonerated.
Click to expand...
 
insideguy said:
Let's wait and see ok:) You can roll your eyes all you want. But if he doesn't get suspended it's coming. Lots of people in denial. I saw the same crap when Ukraine got invaded oh it won't matter, no one cares, athletes should be able to play bla bla. Well gee 3 years later Russia still banned from most international events. Argued with people all day and night.

There is a difference between what should happen and how people respond and what actually does happen and how people respond. I wasnt arguing for Russians to be banned I just said it was going to happen. And people jumped all over me.

I am not arguing Sinner should be banned. I am saying if he isnt the backlash internally is going to be very large. It's going to be. And people can say oh no it will be fine. LOL. Man Ive been alive long enough I havseen how this has gone down in other sports.
Click to expand...

The eye roll was for your projected flood of litigation against “themselves/tennis” if Carrot walks as stated in your post below. And your reply above has nothing to do with the specific question of whether an athlete unhappy with their arbitration decision has a cause of action against ITIA, a Sports Resolution Tribunal, a CAS tribunal or CAS based on the result of another athlete’s arbitration. Good luck finding a lawyer willing to waste your money filing that complaint. You barely have any recourse once your own arbitration is final. That’s inherent in the process. It’s final.

insideguy said:
I have no idea if he gets banned or not. But I do think they would be setting a dangerous precedent and open themselves up to a crap ton of lawsuits if they dont ban him.

Sooooooo I suppose the question is is tennis willing to take the revenue hit from not having sinner play. Or take the hit in the form of a crap ton of lawsuits from players who got punished much more severely. Cause thats where this is going.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
socallefty said:
Even if somehow it is true and the physio is an incompetent professional, it is a bad precedent to not hold a player accountable when his own team member is so negligent about what he put on a player’s body.
Click to expand...

So, it the punishments for Sharapova and Halep were justified, as both were claiming a form of "Who me? I do not know / someone else did it"
 
Better_Call_Raul said:
You either enforce the doping rules or you don't. The WADA code calls for a one year minimum ban on the Sinner type of negligence which is why WADA is requesting a one to two year ban.
WADA agrees with Tribunal finding that Sinner did not intentionally dope. WADA only disagrees with the finding of no negligence. WADA wants a penalty imposed for negligence.
A penalty of 4 months makes a mockery of the entire system. Under what grounds could CAS ever justify such a light slap on the wrist?
WADA will look foolish appealing to CAS for a long-term ban and only getting a 4 month ban.
CAS will either give WADA what it's requesting or no ban at all. There is no middle ground here.
Click to expand...

“Sinner type of negligence” is borderline libel. Carrot was found to bear “No Fault or Negligence.”

You are conflicted with feels. Both WADA and Carrot are your favs. I feels for Raul’s predicament.
 
RSJfan said:
“Sinner type of negligence” is borderline libel. Carrot was found to bear “No Fault or Negligence.”
Click to expand...

That was the Tribunal finding. All was well with Sinner until WADA shocked the world by appealing.
Keep in mind that WADA rarely appeals tennis cases. WADA would not appeal unless it believes it has a strong case.
Hence the young Sinner is the clear underdog here in the WADA appeal to CAS.

The CAS will certainly find Sinner to be at fault by applying the Cilic guidelines. But not to fear, it may be a light degree of fault.
:unsure:

“Degree of Fault” in the World Anti-Doping Code​

Under Article 10.6.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code, if an athlete is able to successfully establish they bear No Significant Fault or Negligence for their Article 2.1 (presence), Article 2.2 (use), or Article 2.6 (possession) anti-doping rule violation, their period of ineligibility can be reduced based on their “degree of fault”.

Although the term “degree of fault” has never been explicitly defined in the World Anti-Doping Code, for the last 10 years, panels have applied a consistent degree of fault analysis thanks to the guidelines set out in Cilic v. ITF.

The Cilic Degree of Fault Analysis​

The first case to establish concrete guidelines for assessing an athlete’s degree of fault was Cilic v. ITF.
There, the Cilic Panel explained that every athlete’s degree of fault could be broken down into one of three categories of severity:

  • Significant degree of fault. This tier applies to cases where the athlete's actions show a clear disregard for anti-doping rules. It might involve knowingly taking a prohibited substance or failing to exercise even basic caution. Sanctions in this category are typically the most severe.
  • Normal degree of fault. This middle tier encompasses situations where the athlete made some effort to comply with anti-doping regulations but fell short due to negligence or oversight. Sanctions in this category are moderate to strike a balance between punishment and the unintentional nature of the violation.
  • Light degree of fault. The lowest tier applies to cases where athletes exercised considerable caution but still inadvertently violated anti-doping rules. This might include situations where the athlete consulted with medical professionals or checked ingredients but was misled or misinformed. Sanctions in this category are typically the lightest.

www.globalsportsadvocates.com

Degree of Fault in Anti-Doping Rule Violations

Explore how Cilic v. ITF has influenced fault assessments in anti-doping violation cases and how Global Sports Advocates can protect your right to compete.
www.globalsportsadvocates.com www.globalsportsadvocates.com
 
Last edited:
Sharapova claimed that her agent did not read the email about the recent ban, so she thought she was taking a permitted substance.

This was a unique case in that sense.

THUNDERVOLLEY said:
So, it the punishments for Sharapova and Halep were justified, as both were claiming a form of "Who me? I do not know / someone else did it"
Click to expand...
 
Better_Call_Raul said:
That was the Tribunal finding. All was well with Sinner until WADA shocked the world by appealing.
Keep in mind that WADA rarely appeals tennis cases. WADA would not appeal unless it believes it has a strong case…
Click to expand...

How many times will my fav Raul swing from WADA’s appeal is cosmetic to WADA thinks it has a strong case. Pick one and stick with it.

And you will also have to choose between your fav WADA or your post-Emma fav Carrrot. Their interests are adverse. You can not support them both like your favs Xi and Vlad.
 
Last edited:
It's hard not to see Sinner in the "normal range" and he did fall short twice.

Better_Call_Raul said:
That was the Tribunal finding. All was well with Sinner until WADA shocked the world by appealing.
Keep in mind that WADA rarely appeals tennis cases. WADA would not appeal unless it believes it has a strong case.
Hence the young Sinner is the clear underdog here in the WADA appeal to CAS.

The CAS will certainly find Sinner to be at fault by applying the Cilic guidelines. But not to fear, it may be a light degree of fault.
:unsure:

“Degree of Fault” in the World Anti-Doping Code​

Under Article 10.6.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code, if an athlete is able to successfully establish they bear No Significant Fault or Negligence for their Article 2.1 (presence), Article 2.2 (use), or Article 2.6 (possession) anti-doping rule violation, their period of ineligibility can be reduced based on their “degree of fault”.

Although the term “degree of fault” has never been explicitly defined in the World Anti-Doping Code, for the last 10 years, panels have applied a consistent degree of fault analysis thanks to the guidelines set out in Cilic v. ITF.

The Cilic Degree of Fault Analysis​

The first case to establish concrete guidelines for assessing an athlete’s degree of fault was Cilic v. ITF.
There, the Cilic Panel explained that every athlete’s degree of fault could be broken down into one of three categories of severity:

  • Significant degree of fault. This tier applies to cases where the athlete's actions show a clear disregard for anti-doping rules. It might involve knowingly taking a prohibited substance or failing to exercise even basic caution. Sanctions in this category are typically the most severe.
  • Normal degree of fault. This middle tier encompasses situations where the athlete made some effort to comply with anti-doping regulations but fell short due to negligence or oversight. Sanctions in this category are moderate to strike a balance between punishment and the unintentional nature of the violation.
  • Light degree of fault. The lowest tier applies to cases where athletes exercised considerable caution but still inadvertently violated anti-doping rules. This might include situations where the athlete consulted with medical professionals or checked ingredients but was misled or misinformed. Sanctions in this category are typically the lightest.

www.globalsportsadvocates.com

Degree of Fault in Anti-Doping Rule Violations

Explore how Cilic v. ITF has influenced fault assessments in anti-doping violation cases and how Global Sports Advocates can protect your right to compete.
www.globalsportsadvocates.com www.globalsportsadvocates.com
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Better_Call_Raul said:
You either enforce the doping rules or you don't. The WADA code calls for a one year minimum ban on the Sinner type of negligence which is why WADA is requesting a one to two year ban.
WADA agrees with Tribunal finding that Sinner did not intentionally dope. WADA only disagrees with the finding of no negligence. WADA wants a penalty imposed for negligence.
A penalty of 4 months makes a mockery of the entire system. Under what grounds could CAS ever justify such a light slap on the wrist?
WADA will look foolish appealing to CAS for a long-term ban and only getting a 4 month ban.
CAS will either give WADA what it's requesting or no ban at all. There is no middle ground here.
Click to expand...
The bolded part does not appear to be the case. Would you mind citing the relevant WADA document stating that?
 
insideguy said:
Let's wait and see ok:) You can roll your eyes all you want. But if he doesn't get suspended it's coming. Lots of people in denial. I saw the same crap when Ukraine got invaded oh it won't matter, no one cares, athletes should be able to play bla bla. Well gee 3 years later Russia still banned from most international events. Argued with people all day and night.

There is a difference between what should happen and how people respond and what actually does happen and how people respond. I wasnt arguing for Russians to be banned I just said it was going to happen. And people jumped all over me.

I am not arguing Sinner should be banned. I am saying if he isnt the backlash internally is going to be very large. It's going to be. And people can say oh no it will be fine. LOL. Man Ive been alive long enough I have seen how this has gone down in other sports.

I mean for gods sake they just awarded a figure skating gold this summer olympics to the USA for a girl on the Russian team who got drugged against her will and she was 14! They stripped her of her gold and the whole team as well. That took her medal and banned her for four years lol. She was like 13 when they were drugging her. That case took more than two years.
Click to expand...
It does not appear that you addressed @RSJfan comment like at all. Originally you claimed that if Sinner does not get suspended then
insideguy said:
I have no idea if he gets banned or not. But I do think they would be setting a dangerous precedent and open themselves up to a crap ton of lawsuits if they dont ban him.

[...].
Click to expand...
but now you are merely saying that some people will be unhappy. Not agreeing with ITIA/CAS decision is a far cry from having a good reason for a lawsuit.
 
I don't understand why CAS isn't addressing the case now that we're out of season. If Sinner wins the 2025 AO and gets banned afterwards, it will be a disgrace for to tennis. It should be addressed now so that we know where we stand, until the AO starts.
Since this is about the World No. 1 tennis player and winner of two Grand Slams in the 2024 season, Sinner' case should be a priority.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Iga Swiatek receives doping ban after positive test for banned substance trimetazidine
12 13 14
Replies
660
Views
32K
Mustard
Mustard
Rovesciarete
A tale of three Italians and the source of Clostebol: Battaglino, Bortolotti and Sinner - one got four years, two 'no fault, no negligence'!
2 3
Replies
125
Views
8K
Kralingen
K
Rovesciarete
WADA offered Sinner a deal, most likely to avoid getting their system blown up by CAS
2
Replies
82
Views
4K
jmnk
J
P
Puerta - Banned For 8 Years
3 4 5
Replies
249
Views
19K
ChaelAZ
ChaelAZ
V
Grand Slam Doubles Legend believes Sinner is in line to receive a ban for failing doping tests
Replies
19
Views
1K
vokazu
V
Back
Top