8 мин.

Sharapova ban reduced

546

BY RICHARD EVANS

Written by: Staff on 5th October 2016

“I have learned from this and I hope the ITF has as well.”

That statement from Maria Sharapova should draw a line under the two year ban for use of Meldonium after the January 1st 2016 deadline handed to her by the International Tennis Federation in conjunction with WADA and eventually reduced to 15 months by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

But, of course it won’t. The arguments will rage on right up to Sharapova’s scheduled return to the WTA Tour in May next year and beyond. There are a whole host of reasons for this – Sharapova’s super star status and popularity as well as her unpopularity; the confusion created by WADA’s own incompetence in not discovering how long the drug stayed in the body before setting an arbitrary date for illegalization and the fact that the media are never going to let a good drug story die.

Shortly after the CAS decision was announced, Sharapova went on the Charlie Rose Show and then was interviewed by Matt Lauer on NBC. As expected she was poised and articulate and did not deviate from the story she had presented to the world back in March, three days after she learned that she had tested positive for Meldonium at the Australian Open.

Her defence has always been that she didn’t know of the January 1st ban and she re-iterated that it was her mistake in not making sure her team, led by her agent Max Eisenbud, did not check on any change in doping regulations.

While making a very valid point about the level and clarity of information offered, Maria went a little too far in telling Lauer that the ITF and WADA had not sent out any emails. They did but, as the authorities must have been well aware, the vast majority of tennis players just do not read them.

It must be said, however, that a story concerning the upcoming ban on Meldonium – or, as Sharapova, had always known it, Mildronate — was put out by the Associated Press in September last year. I read it. But apparently the tennis world, living in its own little bubble, did not. After talking to many members of the tennis family who were at the Australian Open, it became clear that Meldonium and its change of status was simply not discussed in Melbourne. No one I spoke could remember it ever being mentioned.

Nobody is putting that forward as an excuse but it remains a fact. And it validates Sharapova’s claim while talking to Charlie Rose that the other Russian sports Federations such as swimming, skating and volleyball, had done a much better job of making sure their athletes knew of the ban.

And this, I think, gets to the heart of one of the problems tennis has faced both with WADA and the ITF for years. How much do they care for the welfare and reputation of the players under their jurisdiction?

Two points: Firstly, for all the testing that is done (and I know that there is more of it than some sceptics want to believe) WADA have never yet nailed down a hard and fast case of deliberate doping by a top player since some South Americans were caught over six years ago. Without going into all the details again, Richard Gasquet, Victor Troicki and Marin Cilic all made stupid mistakes and all of them had their heavy sentences reduced by CAS.

Sharapova also made a careless mistake and the ITF wanted to ban her for FOUR years. In other words, the game’s official governing body wanted to end the career of a five time Grand Slam champion and former world No 1 who also happened to be, along with Serena Williams, one of only two women players who were world wide celebrities and effective ticket sellers.

There are ways to cut off your nose to spite your face but you don’t need to use a hacksaw to do it.

By June, a tribunal appointed by the ITF (fair and unbiased?) had admitted that Sharapova had not deliberately tried to cheat by taking Meldonium and reduced the ban to two years. CAS then blew that ruling out of the water by reducing it to 15 months, insisting that, in no way, Sharapova should be regarded as an “international doper”.

Sharapova’s point about how much the ITF cared for her welfare was well made. Not only was she very visible and accessible on tour throughout the year but she was with the Russian Fed Cup team – and ITF event – in November. “Could not an ITF official warned me?” she asked.

Why wouldn’t they want to? They knew – or should have known because WADA had been testing her all year with the Meldonium clearly visible – that she was taking a drug that was about to be banned. A little reminder, perhaps? A little case of “Watch it, Maria, we don’t want to lose you!”

But did they want to lose her? Was she the Tall Poppy, as Charlie Rose described it, they had been thirsting for; the super star that would refute the frequent suggestions that they never caught big names? The flippant, irresponsible and unprofessional remark made by WADA chairman Sir Craig Reedie in the summer about Maria earning more money than his entire committee reeked of the “Gotcha!” syndrome that has seen so prevalent over the years.

Maria has enemies in the game and that is partially her fault. Kiki Mladenovic is just one of several players who have condemned her with evident glee and Pam Shriver seems to be launching an anti-Sharapova campaign on Twitter. Sharapova has never made any secret of the fact that she is not looking for friends in the locker room because she considers that her work place and all the players her rivals. Her height, her beauty, her success and the aloof way she carries herself are all factors that give rise to jealousy and resentment.

But none of that should give rise to questioning her honesty. That Sharapova has a brain and a very sharp one cannot be disputed. So she could not possibly have been so stupid to go on taking a drug that she knew was banned when she also knew, without any shred of doubt, that she would be tested at the Australian Open.

She could, of course, have lied. And, with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been a clever – but not honest – thing to do. If she had told WADA she had not taken Meldonium since, say, December 28, they wouldn’t have had a clue as to whether she was telling the truth or not. Because they had not done their homework. They had put the cart before the horse and set a date before learning how long the drug could stay in the human body. As has been shown in various other ways, they really are a desperate organization.

But our glamorous Tall Poppy is a much easier target than the unknown suits who sit in judgement over athlete’s lives. There are those critics and former players who keep inferring that Sharapova was taking Mildronate – available over the counter in Eastern Europe – because she knew it enhanced her performance.

Although she denies it, let’s just assume that she was. So what? Until January 1st this year, it was legal. So any athlete accusing her of trying to take unfair advantage should immediately stop sipping that cup of coffee and pour it down the sink. Because caffeine helps people focus and prolongs their ability to indulge in extensive mental work or physical exercise before exhaustion sets in.

Until caffeine was on the banned list and, apparently, WADA still have it under surveillance, whatever that means. But the fact remains that thousands of athletes, including tennis players, drink coffee before competition because they are convinced it helps their performance. If it’s legal they will do it. Fact.

But Sharapova had a very legitimate reason for taking Mildronate that had everything to do with her health and nothing to do with her performance. After winning Wimbledon at the age of 17, she returned to Russia the following year and, feeling exhausted, went for a check up. The doctor told her she had a heart condition which could be controlled by taking a drug that enlarged the arteries to the heart. She was told to take it before extreme exercise, before her matches.

I have always found it strange how some people have so much difficulty it putting themselves in someone else’s shoes. So you’re an 18-year-old athlete who pushes yourself to physical extremes virtually every week of the year and a doctor tells you to watch out because something is not quite right with your heart. And suggests a remedy that might prevent you dropping dead. And the remedy can be bought without prescription in any pharmacy in Moscow. So you ignore the advice and don’t buy it? Really?

So, yes, I am sure Maria Sharapova has leaned some hard lessons. It remains to be seen whether that is also true of the ITF and WADA. But Maria’s hundreds of thousands of fans can take heart from the fact that her highly respected coach Sven Groeneveld, who could find another top player in a nano-second, has stood by her as have Max Eisenbud and her team. More significantly, considering the mistakes that were made, she has stood by them and accepted full responsibility.

I think that says quite a bit about what kind of person Maria Sharapova is. In the meantime, tennis is going to benefit from having her back on court.

http://www.10sballs.com/2016/10/05/sharapova-ban-reduced-by-richard-evans/

>

logoATP
logoМария Шарапова
logoWTA