ITF hits back as Maria Sharapova questions its neutrality

Maria Sharapova claims she was made an example of following her failed drugs test.  Picture: Clive Brunskill/Getty Images

Maria Sharapova claims she was made an example of following her failed drugs test. Picture: Clive Brunskill/Getty Images

0
Have your say

The International Tennis Federation has rejected Maria Sharapova’s claim that the hearing into her doping violation was “not neutral”.

The 29-year-old former Wimbledon champion tested positive for the heart drug meldonium in January and was then sanctioned by the ITF in June.

On Tuesday, the Court of Arbitration for Sport announced a reduction in the five-time grand slam winner’s doping ban, from two years to 15 months.

Sharapova’s lawyer John Haggerty described the CAS ruling as a “stunning repudiation of the ITF”, while the former world No 1 said she was “counting the days until I can return to the court”.

She is expected to make her comeback in early May 2017.

In her first television interview since the CAS ruling, Sharapova was again critical of the ITF, telling American broadcaster PBS she is “starting to think” the sports governing body tried to make an example of her.

“I got a 24-month suspension, but they [the ITF] wanted four years for me,” the Russian said. “I went through the ITF hearing, which was in front of an arbitration [panel] which was chosen by the ITF.

“I am at a hearing [in London] knowing the people I am speaking to were chosen by the people that I am actually in a fight with.

“They call that neutral? That is not neutral. CAS is neutral and this is what CAS has awarded to me.”

Asked if she thought the ITF was trying to make an example of her, Sharapova said: “I never wanted to believe that, but I am starting to think that.”

In a statement released to the Press Association, the ITF defended its position.

“The ITF did not ‘try to ban Ms Sharapova for four years’. The ITF took the position that it is the independent tribunal’s responsibility to determine what the appropriate sanction should be,” the statement read. “This included the decision as to whether Ms Sharapova met the requirements set out in the tennis anti-doping programme – which are the same as those in the WADA code – for a reduction from the default four-year suspension for the use of a non-specified substance such as meldonium.

“The members of the independent tribunal, which consisted of a barrister as chairman and medical and scientific experts as co-members, are appointed by the ITF.

“However, Ms Sharapova’s legal team was given the opportunity to object to any member of that tribunal, and they agreed in writing that they had no such objection.”

The result from CAS is a partial victory for the world’s highest-earning female athlete and also a setback for the ITF and the World Anti-Doping Agency.

The three-man CAS panel said it did “not agree with many of the conclusions of the [ITF] tribunal” and the federation has already seen the court reduce doping bans for Marin Cilic and Viktor Troicki. The ITF was also criticised by the panel for not properly informing players of changes to WADA’s banned list.

Sharapova’s lawyers had asked for an immediate reinstatement to the tour, but the nine-month reduction is the most they could have expected as she did not meet all the criteria for a “no significant fault” reduction of 50 per cent.

Meldonium was added to WADA’s banned substances list on 1 January, having been on its monitoring list for all of 2015, and athletes and their entourages were warned several times by email that it was about to be prohibited – emails Sharapova did not read.

Back to the top of the page