Sharapova fails drug test

[10isfan]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3484161/Tennis-star-Maria-Sharapova-did-not-tell-national-team-doctor-taking-banned-substance-meldonium-Russian-tennis-boss-claims.html
https://www.instagram.com/p/BCsvdfvMTDk/?taken-by=serenawilliams...Serena is mean...lol

I am being dense. What is the significance of the Russian tennis team doctor and Kafelnikov being unaware of her use?

 

[kskate2]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3484161/Tennis-star-Maria-Sharapova-did-not-tell-national-team-doctor-taking-banned-substance-meldonium-Russian-tennis-boss-claims.html
https://www.instagram.com/p/BCsvdfvMTDk/?taken-by=serenawilliams...Serena is mean...lol

I am being dense. What is the significance of the Russian tennis team doctor and Kafelnikov being unaware of her use?

I'm pretty sure it's because she still represents the Russian Tennis Federation when she plays Fed Cup and the Olympics.

 

[kskate2]

HEAD Racquets is standing by Maria and Evian hasn't cut their ties yet either.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/tennis/racquet-maker-head-stands-by-maria-sharapova-plans-to-extend-sponsorhip-deal/story-ViwG2k4v8ofcjdntnClyMN.html?utm_source=base&utm_medium=also-read

 

[GameSetAndMath]

HEAD Racquets is standing by Maria and Evian hasn't cut their ties yet either.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/tennis/racquet-maker-head-stands-by-maria-sharapova-plans-to-extend-sponsorhip-deal/story-ViwG2k4v8ofcjdntnClyMN.html?utm_source=base&utm_medium=also-read

Looks like despite the name, they don't have a good head on their shoulders. Even forgetting the moral aspects involved here, it just does not make pure business considering Maria is turning 29 this April and her game is on the decline. This would be a great time to get rid of her, using the clauses that are typically built into endorsement contracts about doping, without incurring any penalty.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The inventor of drug provides shady defense of the drug.

 

[Tennisman12345]

Still no news of when Ana Ivanovic is getting the 2008 AO trophy she was cheated out of?

 

[Front242]

HEAD Racquets is standing by Maria and Evian hasn't cut their ties yet either.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/tennis/racquet-maker-head-stands-by-maria-sharapova-plans-to-extend-sponsorhip-deal/story-ViwG2k4v8ofcjdntnClyMN.html?utm_source=base&utm_medium=also-read

Evian didn't cut their sponsorship 'cos, hey, she needs some of that cool, clear h2o to wash down all those tablets with! :snicker

 

[Front242]

so she was warned 5 times about the drug and still took it.

If this is true, then her inaction shows a high level of arrogance. Did she believe that as a top star in the sport, she would be exempt from punishment or exposure? This is troubling.

Believe me, her status as a top player will most definitely still count for a lot. Sadly, they're so cowardly they'll give her a very reduced sentence but I guarantee 100% a nobody would be banned the full 4 years. They're nothing but cowards and only make examples of people no one has ever heard of. Same with match fixing. Banning players for life when a top player would get a slap on the wrist.

 

[tented]

The question is why is she taking a drug for over 10 years for ailments I presume she is not suffering from? The drug might have been legal until this year, but was it ethical that she used it? My students in my bioethics course just happened to be on the topic of steroids and PEDs, when Maria made her announcement. We have been having some lively discussions and debates about what is legal vs what is ethical.

Excellent question! I'd be curious what you and your students have discussed. It could help our discussion here.

Personally, I don't think it was appropriate for her to have been taking a drug for that long which she didn't need. Clearly she was taking it for its performance-enhancing aspects, which wasn't ethical, IMO, however it was legal.

My students do not have any real interest in the tennis. They follow baseball and football. They were aware of what Maria's announcement because it was on the news. I also played her press conference in class and gave them the information on the drug she took and arguments posed by those sympathetic and upset by her explanations.

Almost 100% of my students admired her honesty in admitting to failed test and her use of the drug. "At least she admitted it and didn't try to blame it on poor testing, etc.....," was the common phrase repeated during class. Everyone agreed that she should be banned for 6-12 months and be made to give back any prize money she earned this year. They thought she was "stupid" but not a real "cheater" when compared to Alex Rodriquez, Lance Armstrong and the US track star , Gaitlin(?). Even though the drug was not banned at one time (legal) they thought she was unethical in taking it if it increased performance on the court.

When asked about her legacy, the discussions became heated. With half of the class believing that she should not be admitted into the HOF and the other half stating that if she does the time, she should be admitted but......with an asterisk. They also believed that ARod should be admitted in the HOF as well! (Please remember that these are 17-18 year olds)

Thanks for the summary of your discussions!

I, too, think she was wise to get ahead of it by admitting it herself, while also taking full responsibility. She could have said the tests were wrong, she could have blamed one or more members of her team, etc. But she didn't.

As for HOF, I think she should not be allowed in, but perhaps others disagree.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Just an update on the timeline here.

She was served with the letter on March 2nd. The preliminary hearing has to be scheduled within 21 days from that point. So, it will be scheduled before March 23rd. There will be no "tribunal" in the preliminary hearing, just ITF folks and Maria and her high paid legal team. The time to broker a deal with ITF will be during the preliminary hearing. If they cannot agree on the terms, it will go to a regular hearing and that has to be scheduled within 21 days from the end of preliminary hearing. There will be a tribunal in the regular hearing. Assuming preliminary hearing ends by end of March, the actual hearing has to begin at least by April 21st. Even if the hearing lasts for a full week, we should get to know the initial punishment handed out by ITF by 7th May.

Once the initial punishment is doled out both Maria (if she thinks punishment is harsh) and WADA (if they think punishment is lenient) to appeal to CAS (court of arbitration for sports). It would be funny if both choose to appeal. :devil We will worry about the timeline when we get there.

 

[10isfan]

Kudos to Nadal for stating what he believes, and not caving into what the media, sponsors, etc wanted him to say.

Of course the inventor will defend his drug. The sales will fall off dramatically when athletes stop using it.

 

[Denis]

I'm thinking a one-year ban is fair. It does look like negligence of her part rather than ill intent.

I really don't buy this idea that Sharapova 'was playing poker' as brittbox says. That makes no sense whatsoever. Risking a ban for a drug that isn't that potent anyways. Apparently there is no proof that it does have a performance enhancing effect in the first place. This is no game-changer like EPO in cycling.

First offender + negligence = 1 year ban. She can have a baby now with Grigor.

 

[10isfan]

There was nothing smart or courageous about her admission. She could not have denied the accuracy of the first test because a repeat would have led to the same result which would cast her in worse light. She also took responsibility rather than placing blame on her staff because there is certainly a story behind that. I am sure the person she was paying to monitor the list intentionally kept her in the dark. If she said XYZ should have told me, she would look petty, and open up a floodgate of inquiry aimed at the person.

I, too, think she should be denied entry into HOF. A doper being initiated would cheapen that achievement for everyone who were and will be inducted.

Thanks, GSM, for the timeline. I am hoping a decision can't be reached; a string of appeals keeping her off the courts for as long as possible for the damage she inflicted on the sport would be appropriate.

 

[tossip]

the problem is WTA and the media spend years worshiping Sharadopa now they are no where...did anyone saw her dark roots..she is a fake in every way

 

[colleen66]

When Simona was asked if she had spoken to Maria since the announcement, she laughed and replied that she didn't speak to her before. ( I assume she meant that they do not speak at all):lolz:

 

[britbox]

She didn't take it by accident Denis, she'd been taking it for 10 years. There was intent to take it. If the argument "I didn't know it was on the list" is going to be accepted then that sets a dangerous precedent for anyone else caught taking banned substances.

 

[kskate2]

I agree. No HOF. :nono And if by chance they were going to let her in it would have to be on the merits of what she did before 2006. So that would mean 1 slam, no #1 ranking and x number of titles. Do they admit people who only have one slam and no stint at #1 into the HOF?

 

[tossip]

When Simona was asked if she had spoken to Maria since the announcement, she laughed and replied that she didn't speak to her before. ( I assume she meant that they do not speak at all):lolz:

pova thought she is superior to other players,now no one cares about her situation and are probably hoping for a long ban..
I dont blame Halep she could have won that final if it were not for the peds

 

[Moxie]

She's been a lot even in mainstream news today. Her arguments are generally seen to be falling apart. This drug was on the watch list all of last year, so there was a head's up, and apparently there were 5 emails sent out. That's a lot of ignoring/missing info by Sharapova and her team. Vanity Fair has this to say, and it brings up a few disturbing points: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/03/maria-sharapova-drug-scandal-may-be-darker-than-you-think

 

[Denis]

She didn't take it by accident Denis, she'd been taking it for 10 years. There was intent to take it. If the argument "I didn't know it was on the list" is going to be accepted then that sets a dangerous precedent for anyone else caught taking banned substances.

That's not what I said. I said it looks to me to be negligence rather than ill intent. The substance was not banned until this year....

That being said: 5 emails by WAda does certainly not help her cause, and would make the ban go in the direction of 2 years imo.