BigDaddy News

Tennis News

ITIA chief breaks silence on Swiatek-Sinner doping scandals, blames Halep for her ban: ‘Her level of fault was higher’ | Tennis News

The tennis fraternity was hit with two high-profile doping controversies in 2024. First it was World No. 1 men’s player Jannik Sinner, whose US Open title run was overshadowed by a doping scandal. It was revealed that he had tested positive twice for an anabolic agent in March, but his defense was accepted by an independent tribunal that it was due to unintentional contamination. The WADA appealed the decision to CAS, and the verdict is expected to come next year.

ITIA chief Karen Moorhouse broke her silence on doping in tennis.
ITIA chief Karen Moorhouse broke her silence on doping in tennis.

Then it was Polish tennis star Iga Swiatek, who also lost her world no. 1 position to Aryna Sabalenka this year. Swiatek served a one-month doping ban which ended this month. She received the ban after testing positive for a prohibited substance, in an out-of-competition sample in August. Her defense was accepted by the ITIA, that her result was positive due to contamination of a regulated non-prescription medicine melatonin, manufactured and sold in Poland.

Sinner and Swiatek received support from former and current players, fans. But the pair also got a negative reaction from some, including former world no. 1 Simona Halep. Halep was initially banned for four years in September 2023, a year after she tested positive for roxadustat and had irregularities in her blood passport. Later on, the CAS reduced her suspension to nine months. Halep felt that there were huge differences between the way doping cases were being handled in tennis in recent years.

ITIA chief Karen Moorhouse broke her silence on the recent doping controversies and answered claims that Sinner, Swiatek were given preferential treatment. Speaking to Tennis365, she said, “It’s the same rules and the same processes for every player.”

“All cases are different and each case turns on individual facts. Cases can also be quite complex, so it isn’t right to look at two headlines and draw comparisons between two cases as the detail is always the key part.

“Let’s take Swiatek and Halep. The CAS tribunal found that her (Halep’s) supplement was contaminated. So just in relation to that finding, they said nine months (suspension).

“That was the tribunal deciding on the objective fault she had and the subjective fault she should have. So what should she have done in relation to the product that was found to be contaminated?

“In relation to Swiatek, the contaminated product was a medication. So it was not unreasonable for a player to assume that a regulated medication would contain what it says on the ingredients. Therefore, the level of fault she could accept was at the lowest level as there was very little more she could have done reasonably to mitigate the risk of that product being contaminated. Halep’s contamination was not a medication. It was a collagen supplement and her level of fault was found to be higher.

“The key point here is it’s rare to find two cases that are the same they will all turn on their particular facts,” she added.

The banned substance which Swiatek reportedly consumed was trimetazidine. She missed three tournaments due to her doping ban.

Leave feedback about this

  • Quality
  • Price
  • Service

PROS

+
Add Field

CONS

+
Add Field
Choose Image
Choose Video

Want To Earn From Skills ?

10%
Bonus On New ID

NO DOCUMENTATION,NO KYC REQUIRED