Sorry I beg to differ.Also her team should have also been aware,especially her trainer.She is a sportsperson and must know at all times what susbtances are legal in her body at all times.Also on our news here in Sydney that she will have to repay the money she won at the AO.
Hmm, not quite sure with what you are differing.
I'm only offering the human reason for her failure to notice the change based on the letter itself.
Moxie Billie also gave a similar example.
She got an email letter she has been getting every year, no different than any other.
There was apparently nothing specific about the drug change in the letter itself.
Personally, I would prefer and suggest that WADA put a "changes list" i
n the letter itself - naming the drugs that have been added and removed since the previous year's list, to call attention to them, rather than just offering a link to the entire list. Or if not in the letter itself, a link to the "changes list" plus the link to the entire list.
I think there is no harm for WADA to do as much as possible to help inform the athletes.
In any case, the
HUGE problem was that it obviously appears that she and her team failed to review the 2016 prohibited list in conjunction with what she was taking.
Or if someone did review it, they failed to notice the relation between now-banned drug (Meldonium), and the name of the drug she was taking (Mildronate), which is a very shaky excuse in my opinion as the generic name is on the box at least in English. Someone who knows Russian better than I will have to check the Russian box label, but I think it's there. The review board will certainly want to see the boxes she was taking.
.
Either or both of those failures are inexcusable for a pro athlete.
In addition to herself, since
she is ultimately responsible, with her money, she should have been paying at least two professionals looking over each others' shoulder at the prohibited list, especially for a drug that was on WADA's monitored list.
That is what is
irresponsible and
inexcusable and based on what I know, deserves a suspension.
I believe the sanction for a first time doping violation is now 4 years.
Will she be able to get her suspension reduced due to her medical issues, or even totally eliminated with a backdated TUE?
That's a different question. Being up front about it and taking responsibility helps her cause.
What I believe will really matter in the end is if her doctor can prove to the review panel that she has sufficient health problems that make it necessary for her to use this drug.
Think about it like this. IF it is determined that she absolutely needs this drug or something similar for her health problems, then she will have to get a TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption) for it, or find another drug that will help her that is not on the banned list. If the former turns out to be what happens, then she will probably get a hefty reduction in her suspension, possibly down to time served on her provisional suspension while the case is being reviewed. If it turns out that the use of the drug was merely "convenient", shall we say, I can't see anything less than 2 years.
Personally, I don't agree with the backdated TUE concept in this case..
If one knows one has a health issue, and one is taking medication for it, and the substance is on the banned list, one should have applied for the TUE before competing.
I don't think that ignorance of the medication being put on the prohibited list is an excuse to allow a backdated TUE.
But it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks, it is what the review board will decide...
Respectfully,
masterclass
