Tennis backlash as World No. 1 escapes ban for failed drug tests

By Ben Rumsby of Daily Telegraph UK

Jannik Sinner’s drugs ban reprieve has caused a backlash from his fellow tennis professionals, with Nick Kyrgios branding it “ridiculous”.

Kyrgios was among several players to hit out after the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) revealed the world No 1 had failed two doping tests a tribunal accepted were the result of contamination from a massage by his physiotherapist.

The ITIA confirmed on Tuesday that Sinner bore “no fault or negligence” over the presence in his urine of the banned steroid clostebol both during and after March’s Masters 1000 tournament at Indian Wells.

The Italian, who won his maiden grand slam at January’s Australian Open, was stripped of the 400 ranking points and £250,000 prize money he earned at the tournament, where he was beaten in the semifinals by Carlos Alcaraz.

But he escaped a ban of up to two years after an independent tribunal convened by the London-based Sports Resolutions accepted his explanation that the failed tests had been caused by a healing spray used to treat a cut suffered by his physio, Giacomo Naldi, who had unwittingly exposed him to the substance through what were regular full-body massages.

The panel also deemed the amount of clostebol in Sinner’s system, a billionth of a gram, had not had any performance-enhancing effect.

Kyrgios, who last year avoided a criminal conviction despite admitting assaulting his ex-girlfriend, posted his views on X.

The case against Sinner had not been made public until Tuesday, with the 23-year-old having been provisionally suspended after his failed tests only to successfully apply to have the sanction lifted.

Denis Shapovalov posted: “Different rules for different players.” He also drew a response from fellow former top-10 player Lucas Pouille.

Those players include Britain’s Tara Moore and the United States’ Jenson Brooksby. Moore was cleared of being a drugs cheat in December after a panel ruled contaminated meat was the source of a failed test taken more than a year-and-a-half earlier. She had already served a provisional ban spanning 19 months.

Responding to the news about Sinner, Moore posted on X, formerly Twitter:

After his own provisional suspension was lifted, Sinner went on to play at both the French Open and Wimbledon, where he reached the semifinals and quarter-finals, respectively, and to be crowned world number one for the first time.

The announcement by the ITIA came less than 24 hours after he won his fifth ATP title of the year, the Cincinnati Open, and less than a week before the start of the US Open.

Sinner said in a statement: “I will now put this challenging and deeply unfortunate period behind me. I will continue to do everything I can to ensure I continue to comply with the ITIA’s anti-doping programme and I have a team around me that are meticulous in their own compliance.”

"There is no question Jannik is innocent in this case"
His lawyer, Jamie Singer, added: “Anti-doping rules have to be very strict to be effective. Sadly the unfortunate consequence is that, occasionally, entirely innocent athletes get caught up in them.

“There is no question that Jannik is innocent in this case. The ITIA did not challenge that key principle. However, under strict liability rules Jannik is responsible for whatever is in his system, even when entirely unaware of it, as in this exceptional case.”

The doping case against Sinner was the sport’s biggest since that of former women’s world number one Simona Halep, whose four-year suspension for taking a banned blood booster was reduced to nine months.

The tribunal’s final verdict also made him the latest of a growing number of athletes to have escaped drugs bans after being deemed to have been innocent victims of contamination, including – controversially – 23 Chinese swimmers in the build-up to the recent Olympics. Sinner missed the Games after announcing last month he had been diagnosed with tonsillitis.

Announcing the outcome of his doping case, the ITIA said: “The player explained that the substance had entered their system as a result of contamination from a support team member, who had been applying an over-the-counter spray [available in Italy] containing clostebol to their own skin to treat a small wound. That support team member applied the spray between 5 and 13 March, during which time they also provided daily massages and sports therapy to Sinner, resulting in unknowing transdermal contamination.

“Following consultation with scientific experts, who concluded that the player’s explanation was credible, the ITIA did not oppose the player’s appeals to lift the provisional suspensions.

“A thorough investigation by the ITIA followed, including multiple in-depth interviews with Sinner and their support team, all of whom co-operated fully with the process. Following that investigation, and in line with the independent scientific advice, the ITIA accepted the player’s explanation as to the source of clostebol found in their sample and that the violation was not intentional.

“The ITIA referred the case to an independent tribunal to consider the specific facts, review any comparable anti-doping decisions, and determine what, if any, fault the player bore and therefore the appropriate outcome.

“A hearing was convened at Sport Resolutions on 15 August 2024, from which the independent tribunal determined a finding of No Fault or Negligence applied in the case, resulting in no period of ineligibility.”

Karen Moorhouse, ITIA chief executive, added: “We take any positive test extremely seriously and will always apply the rigorous processes set out by Wada [World Anti-Doping Agency]. The ITIA carried out a thorough investigation into the circumstances leading to the positive tests with which Mr Sinner and his representatives fully co-operated.

“Following that investigation, the ITIA accepted the player’s explanation as to the source of the clostebol and that the presence of the substance was not intentional. This was also accepted by the tribunal.

“We thank the independent tribunal for the speed and clarity of its decision in relation to the player’s degree of fault.”

The ITIA confirmed it would not contest a decision that is also subject to appeal by Wada and the Italian Anti-Doping Agency (NadoItalia).

This article was first published on nzherald.co.nz and is republished here with permission