Cilic Banned for 9 months

[Moxie]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

 

[tented]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

I agree. Next we'll hear of the "inadvertent use" of blood transfusions.

 

[britbox]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

You believed Gasquet? :huh:

 

[Moxie]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

You believed Gasquet? :huh:

No. I believed Rafa, who stood up for him.

 

[britbox]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

You believed Gasquet? :huh:

No. I believed Rafa, who stood up for him.

Rafa stood up for Contador too.

 

[Kieran]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

You believed Gasquet? :huh:

No. I believed Rafa, who stood up for him.

Rafa stood up for Contador too.

They're probably his friends, it's a likeable trait to believe your friends...but he was wrong. Gasquet's kiss is the symbol of all dodgy excuses...

 

[DarthFed]

I don't believe the "mother went out and bought some over the counter supplements" argument. Dopers who are caught always deny doping and find an excuse.

The ban shouldn't have been reduced on the basis that it was "inadvertent use" - everyone caught will say it's inadvertent.

Well come on, it's not like someone who has been caught cheating has an incentive to lie :snigger

 

[Moxie]

That may well be right, as he did go down unusually quietly. At least Gasquet made a big stink in his own defense, and it turned out that that seemingly implausible story was probably true, after all.

You believed Gasquet? :huh:

No. I believed Rafa, who stood up for him.

Rafa stood up for Contador too.

They're probably his friends, it's a likeable trait to believe your friends...but he was wrong. Gasquet's kiss is the symbol of all dodgy excuses...

At the risk of appearing (even more) naive, the cases of Contador and Gasquet are different, vis-a-vis Nadal, and on their own merits. Nadal has known Gasquet since they were kids; Contador, I'd be sure, not so long. Gasquet was accused of having cocaine in his sample, a recreational drug, not a PED, as opposed to Contador's infraction. IF the info that came from the ITF's judgement on the Gasquet case is to be believed, the amount of cocaine was so small as to be insignificant. No one who was going to use a drug for fun would do so little. So, inadvertent ingestion could be plausible.

The problem is that we don't feel enough confidence in the information that comes from the ITF.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The problem is that we don't feel enough confidence in the information that comes from the ITF.

As britbox suggested few times, the primary problem is the conflict of interest. ITF
is responsible both for promoting tennis and for keeping tabs on the players. These
functions should be separated. Until then, even if ITF does everything properly,
they will always be under suspicion.

 

[isabelle]

His appeal was sucessful : he has been authorized to play again from 26th Oct (4 months instead of 9)
CAS believed his glucose tablet story even if it was more than strange

 

[britbox]

No surprises there. These stories usually get "believed". Contador's "contaminated beef" story was accepted by the Spanish Authorities even though it was regarded as having a one in three million chance of being likely.

 

[Kieran]

Yeah, it's crazy. The "reason" why the banned substance is present is irrelevant. It shouldn't be present, no excuses. How can they say they're serious about tackling drug cheats when they let his old mammy take the blame and swallow a tear-jerking sob story? :nono

 

[isabelle]

I wonder if he'll play Bercy, his name is on the entry list. He has the right to play but will he show up ??

 

[Kieran]

I wonder if he'll play Bercy, his name is on the entry list. He has the right to play but will he show up ??

Oh he'll be there alright, with his crooked mammy grinning in the front row, doubtless smoking a cigarette...

 

[DarthFed]

Just stupid. It is getting more difficult to take pro tennis seriously. Bans get released by a country's media and now they reduce the sentence for no reason whatsoever.

 

[isabelle]

Cilic will play Bercy....1st a qualifier then Delpony !! Will he be booed by crowd ? Or cheered ? curious to see this "strange" come back

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Just bumping this up as Tsarmatt wanted a refresher.

 

[the AntiPusher]

I knew this thread would get a bump today.. I mentioned it to another poster, the opposition would probably use this if Roger had a bad day at the office.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I knew this thread would get a bump today.. I mentioned it to another poster, the opposition would probably use this if Roger had a bad day at the office.

You can see in the thread for finals that there was a request by Tsarmatt to get to know
the issue and hence the bump. It is natural for people to be curious about his ban, given
that he has now reached the finals. There is no agenda here as you insinuate.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

I knew this thread would get a bump today.. I mentioned it to another poster, the opposition would probably use this if Roger had a bad day at the office.

You can see in the thread for finals that there was a request by Tsarmatt to get to know
the issue and hence the bump. It is natural for people to be curious about his ban, given
that he has now reached the finals. There is no agenda here as you insinuate.

It must be noted his explanation was accepted and his ban was reduced.

Also, his fellow players have stood by him.

By the same token, Bob Brett chastised him for not being more conscientious about what he ingests.