–

One day, world No. 1 Jannik Sinner wins the ATP 1000 in Cincinnati.

The next morning, it emerges that Sinner tested positive for a banned substance – but the tribunal has absolved him of any fault or negligence.

That said, with the positive test occurring at Indian Wells, Sinner’s significant points and prize money from that tournament are confiscated.

The positive test came March 10, when Sinner tested positive for a metabolite of clostebol “at low levels”. (Really, infinitesimal levels). Tested again out of competition eight days later in Miami, Sinner came up positive again.

On both occasions, even though there was an automatic provisional suspension applied, the ITIA didn’t announce it.

The reason for that – unlike the Simona Halep case – is that both times, Sinner successfully appealed on a rush basis to the independant tribunal, and was able to continue playing. Halep did appeal, but her appeal was denied. And the announcements are made only after unsuccessful appeals.

Those are WADA rules, not ITIA rules; they just follow them.

But certainly the lack of transparency doesn’t help the situation.

At all.

Different rules for different players

— Denis Shapovalov (@denis_shapo) August 20, 2024

Shapovalov has no filter, but is he wrong?

Certainly the early reaction from players on social media is a collective … raised eyebrow.

Per Wikipedia, a number of athletes have tested positive for this, including baseball player Fernando Tatis, Jr.

Tatis said the substance – which has accepted uses in addition to being a banned substance, was contained in a ringworm medication.

The full decision is here, if you want more detail.

The base period for a non-intentional positive test is two years. But then they go down from there. To get it to zero, the athlete must prove “on balance of probability” that they know where the substance originated. And that the substance got into their system despite all due care on the part.

Sinner apparently met those thresholds.

Culprit an over-the-counter spray

The appeal was successful on the basis that the tribunal accept that Sinner’s physio, Giacomo Naldi, had been applying an Italian over-the-counter spray to his own skin to treat a cut suffered when he reached into his bag and sliced the finger on a scalpel used to slice callouses off Sinner’s feet (ewww).

It was applied between March 5-13, and during that period the physio was also “providing daily massages and sports therapy” to Sinner. And so, the successful appeal noted, the banned substance was transmitted transdermally.

The spray had been given to Naldi by Sinner’s fitness coach, Umberto Ferrara.

The spray, called Trofodermin, is used to heal cuts and is sold by prescription in many countries, although in Italy it’s sold over the counter. And it contains that banned substance.

And this is CLEARLY indicated on both the packaging and canister – although if you don’t know what Clostebol is, it might not click. But if you’re working with a professional athlete, it’s your duty to know.

Nick Kyrgios not buying it, which is on brand.

Ridiculous – whether it was accidental or planned. You get tested twice with a banned (steroid) substance… you should be gone for 2 years. Your performance was enhanced. Massage cream…. Yeah nice 🙄 https://t.co/13qR0F9nH2

— Nicholas Kyrgios (@NickKyrgios) August 20, 2024

The decision noted that the spray is biggest in the Italian market, and that fully half of anti-doping proceedings related to Clostebol occur in Italy. And yet, Sinner reportedly was never made aware of this issue, which you’d think would be the department of the Italian Anti-Doping federation.

Naldi testified that he didn’t check the ingredients, nor did he notice that the offending ingredient was clearly indicated on the canister. That is a hugely expensive fail on his part. To say the least.

Interestingly, there is a “conflict” in the testimony from Naldi and Ferrara about whether Ferrara warned Naldi about the ingredient in the spray.

What that means, per the testimony, is that Ferrara was “clear” that he’d warned Naldi that the spray contained the banned substance and should not be applied anywhere near the player. Naldi claimed that he couldn’t remember any such warning, or that he was advised to only use the spray in Ferrara’s bathroom – even though that was where he did apply it.

The tribunal took Ferrara’s side on that in part because of his background. And also because Naldi “had arrived later than the others, may have been jetlagged and ‘was under some family pressure at the time’ “, so his memory was less reliable.

Ferrara, per the decision, holds a degree in pharmaceutical technology/pharmacology in addition to being a fitness coach. And that he was SPECIFICALLY hired to advise Sinner and his team on doping matters. And yet, the decision states, “he failed to ensure that his Trofodermin Speay did not come into contact with the player”.

I mean, that feels like a fireable offence, doesn’t it? It’s inexcusably sloppy on his part.

It also states that Naldi did not wash his hands after using the spray, before making direct contact with Sinner’s skin (and that Sinner had “cuts and sites of exposure on his skin).

More sloppiness.

And it cites an earlier incident – as backup to Sinner’s contention that he is extremely careful with anti-doping issues – that he “had to reprimand Naldi for ‘faling to wash the water bottles properly’, as he was concerned about someone tampering when them.

The decision also mentions that Sinner asked Naldi, when he first saw the cut, whether he was using anything to treat it.

Also: things you didn’t need to know about Sinner:

Sinner statement

Sinner and/or his reps issued the following statement about an hour ago.

pic.twitter.com/8UhRd8qik9

— Jannik Sinner (@janniksin) August 20, 2024

“I will not 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 strict anti-doping programme and I have a team around me that are meticulous in their own compliance,” was the statement from Sinner.

From the testimony, evidence and decision, it appears that last part is far from the case. It was their own lack of meticulousness that seems to have led to all this.

Expensive cut

Sinner reached the semifinals at Indian Wells, losing to Carlos Alcaraz.

He earned 400 rankings points and … $325,000 US.

(As of Monday noon, those points are still listed on Sinner’s tabulation on his ATP Tour web page).

That is the price to be paid for this – not including all the experts and attorneys’ fees.

Ouch. But better than the alternative. Especially if you can afford it.

The initial appeals were considered credible following consultation with scientific experts, following which the ITIA (tennis anti-doping association) underwent a “thorough investigation”.

The ITIA accepted the explanation for the likely source of the clostebol, and that it was an unintentional violation.

The case was then referred to the independant tribunal to consider similar cases, and decide the level of fault and the appropriate outcome.

That hearing was convened last Thursday, the tribunal came to a “no fault or negligence” finding, which means there will be no suspension. They also noted that the “minute amounts” would not have “had any relevant doping, or performance enhencing, effect upon the player”.

Some of the precedents stated by Sinner’s legal team were the Richard Gasquet cocaine case, the Sara Errani “tortellini case” and the Marco Bortolotti case (an Italian tennis player who also tested positive for Clostebol). The tribunal considered the Gasquet case (Google it) to be most comparable.

Quote from the ITIA CEO, Karen Moorhouse: “We take any positive test extremely seriously and will always apply the rigorous processes set out by WADA. 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.”

WADA and the Italian Anti-Doping agency can still appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport; they have 21 days to file.  You wouldn’t think the Italian organization has any interest in doing that.

But does make you wonder what would have happened if Sinner didn’t have all the resources in the world to battle this – even if the explanation sounds more than credible.

Sinner filed “urgent” appeals after the two provisional suspensions in the wake of the two positive tests. And, all agreed to an “expedited” hearing on the matter.

The players out there who’ve dealt with positive tests and fairly obvious explanations – especially in the cases of steroids and contaminated meat in South America, would like a word.

 

  

About Post Author