The Sharapova drug announcement

First topic message reminder :

A big announcement on Monday night from Sharapova was not, as some thought, about her retirement but about the shock news that she had failed a drug test at this year's Australian Open.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Well of course it matters .. it puts a whole new slant on it.
It makes a hell of a difference to him.. to have his own minister speak out against him but  he would doubtless not be surprised that it was the French Minister as I am not.

I have no doubt that Rafa would seek his own legal council on the matter

That sheds a v. different light on matters if she was the French minister.

If he goes to law, Rafa will seek his own legal counsel!

I've been reluctant to comment on this because I don't have all the facts ; though I see that hasn't stopped anyone else

What we can say is that Maria has admitted deliberately taking a drug which is on the banned list so there can be no question as to her culpability and liability to a term of suspension. The length of that suspension is up to the relevant sporting authorities - and what , if anything they may find in mitigation.

Her press conference (however much we may see it as PR) has offered something in that regard : she has cooperated with the authorities by coming clean immediately - waiving the right to a test of the "B" sample ; admitting she took the banned substance , with no attempt to suggest she was deceived by someone else , etc...mightn't seem a lot ; but it saves them a bit of messing about and such cooperation tends to be taken into account by most legal systems in allocating penalties.

As many have pointed out , her use of the drug in the past was perfectly legal. The moral "grey area" seems to be her reason for taking it : she says it was for medical reasons ; many suspect it might be more for gaining an edge... Truth is , we don't know for sure. She was rather young when she was apparently prescribed the drug , by her account , for health reasons...if in fact it seemed to her to "work" in relieving bothersome symptoms , it is not impossible that she kept using it in the same way many people pop all sorts of vitamins and herbal supplements ; not a judgement I can make with any degree of certainty. Perhaps her own medical records may present a clue as the case goes on - as might more detail as to whether she was using the product as the manufacturer recommends , ie for a few weeks at a time , perhaps two or three times a year ; or rather more often. I imagine there will be questions asked on those lines.

As to the doubts some people have whether she is telling the truth that she was unaware the drug had been banned : surely it is rather more likely that she did , in fact , simply neglect to check the new drug list when she was sent it , rather than that she deliberately tackled a major tournament loaded with a drug only days after it had been placed on the "test and ban" list? After all , she may be blonde , but really...

We all have our prejudices and they will influence our views on this . I am not a great fan of hers ; but I'm not in a hurry to rush her to the gallows. Quite happy to leave it to
the responsible authorities to come to a judgement when they are in possession of as much evidence as possible.

Alfie what do you make of the fact that 17 % of Russian athletes were found to have in in their system ? That's from a sample of circa 4500.

Also other athletes in other sports have been found with it in their system. So far 55 athletes this year.

Strange the article in question said "former Spanish Health Minister". Still it's a direct accusation at Nadal and should be dealt with in the appropriate manner.

DJk - what did you think of that spate of drugs test failures by Jamaican athletes a couple of years ago?

Roselyn Bachelot was a former French minister, she never held a position within Spain. It seems that an article linked above, news.com, stated:

Perhaps most sensation of all, however, was former Spanish minister for health and sport Roselyne Bachelot sensationally declaring Nadal’s extended break from the game was the result of a covered-up positive drugs test.

The word Spanish seems to be an error in news.com.

Mochyn du wrote:Strange the article in question said "former Spanish Health Minister".  Still it's a direct accusation at Nadal and should be dealt with in the appropriate manner.

Mochyn du wrote:

DJk - what did you think of that spate of drugs test failures by Jamaican athletes a couple of years ago

 

Which goes to prove you cant believe everything you read  

Anyway what about this statement would you make stick in a court of law

Bachelot said lengthy player injuries were “not every time, of course, but very often” drug cover ups.

Left herself a loophole but at the same time making a point by innuendo.She has no proof and it was a mischieviou comment to make in those circumstances.. she well knew what she was saying.

Somehow I think Uncle T would advise let it go..don't give her or the comment credence

Rafa has enough to deal with in his career as it is ...he does not need any more distractions

She also said:

“We know about that famous injury of Rafael Nadal, who has led seven months of competition stop, is certainly due to a positive control,”

Seems pretty damning. I just wish genuinely clean players would take the people who made such comments to court. It would stop all the insinuations of a player once and for all if they successfully sued someone for libel. No one else would dare say such things. Can't help but think that letting it go is the easy way out.

Would anyone here allow such damning comments about them be publicised if it involved an attack on their professional integrity? Probably not would be my guess.

Mochyn du wrote:She also said:
I just wish genuinely clean players would take the people who made such comments to court.  It would stop all the insinuations of a player once and for all if they successfully sued someone for libel.  

The French minister shooting off about Nadal like that is not going to damage his reputation with anyone except those who have already decided he's a wrong'un, I'd think that she's better left well alone to her allegations and insinuations.

I also doubt your premise that it would end insinuation once and for all - a player cannot prove he/she is genuinely clean, only that he/she has not failed a drugs test - the two may coincide, or they may not - Lance Armstrong won a case vs. the Sunday Times back in the day.  As the THASP website shows, there are many ways to ground suspicion - some fairly reasonable, and some much less so.  Every time a player does something unwise (like Nadal's support for Contador post CAS), or expresses himself in an 'off-message' way about drug testing, he risks fuelling the suspicion factory.  Too many athletes have wittered on about being clean and subsequently been shown to be liars in the past.

I agree that there would be much support for the wild ramblings of a French Sports Minister who is obviously trying to get some mileage out of this in the current climate. The accusations, insinuations, the rumour and speculation that has surrounded Rafa's career has gone on for some years and nothing has been proven. I believe him when he says he would be cheating himself as well as the sport and his opponents.
I cant believe that he would wish to set up an academy for young players based on the fact that he himself is a sham.. am I naïve.. I don't think so. How a French woman would love to bring down the reputation and integrity of a Spaniard

Bachelot is a bit of an idiot TBH, "les guignols de l'info" used to have a field day whenever she said something. I think most French people wished she was Spanish

Mochyn du wrote:
“


DJk - what did you think of that spate of drugs test failures by Jamaican athletes a couple of years ago


What do I think? If the failed the drugs test they have only themselves to blame and should get the full sanctions.

Asafa powell tool a suplement that didn't list the substance in its ingredients. He sued the company won 8 million usd dollars. CAS throw oout the case. The usda and WaDa order the same supplement and test it and found that it contains the ban substance but it wasn't listed. All the people in powell training group were using the substance and they got a big pay out. That explains the raft of positive test in that training group .


VCB got her case thrown out by CAS.

Shelly ann took a painkiller not a PED. Held her hands up and took her punishment.

At no time I defended them . But all can be seen in context.

If they are stupid not to check what goes into their body they have only themselves to blame .

But I do agree with you. If I was nadal I would sue her. But on the other hand - it might be a waste of time and money because she might not be able to pay. So I can see the reason why nadal made it slide.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Bachelot is a bit of an idiot TBH, "les guignols de l'info" used to have a field day whenever she said something. I think most French people wished she was Spanish

Point well made. However it seems a couple of players/athletes in sports get a lot more mud slung at them than others from various different angles. Never saw the Sharapova thing coming though.

Mochyn du wrote:She also said:

“We know about that famous injury of Rafael Nadal, who has led seven months of competition stop, is certainly due to a positive control,”

Seems pretty damning.  I just wish genuinely clean players would take the people who made such comments to court.  It would stop all the insinuations of a player once and for all if they successfully sued someone for libel.  No one else would dare say such things.  Can't help but think that letting it go is the easy way out.  

Would anyone here allow such damning comments about them be publicised if it involved an attack on their professional integrity?  Probably not would be my guess.

If you google "Nadal doping", you'll find 474k results, if we work under the impression that 1% of all results is a unique accusation, that adds up to 4740 accusations. Who has the time or energy?

By catching Sharapova, the ITF and WADA have shown that no stars are too big or too popular to be given a pass on this issue.
They have also shown that the anti-doping mechanisms, despite not being 100% perfect, can still be quite effective which is a good thing.

[quote="It Must Be Love"]By catching Sharapova, the ITF and WADA have shown that no stars are too big or too popular to be given a pass on this issue.
They have also shown that the anti-doping mechanisms, despite not being 100% perfect, can still be quite effective which is a good thing. [/quote}

Sharapova's positive result could be achieved with a pee test at a local clinic. It's that simple a find. Hardly an inspiring example of Wada's testing abilities.

The real dopers are cutting edge, ala. Armstrong, able to invade the Wada tests with ease, unless a rare screw up. The Peyton Manning clinic scandal is a perfect example... though the jury is still out on manning, the clinic has been proven to have provided many USA athtletes with Peds and the head of that clinic said they never worried for a second because their doping methods are "at least two years ahead of any testing abilities the sports have at any one time"

the testing agencies are a joke.

The testing agencies are always 3 steps behind the dopers. That's why meldonium was used legally for 10 years. WaDa just caught up.

I can't blame the test agencies. WaDa annual budget is circa 20m usd dollars. Sharapova annual income is circa 25m usd per annum.

Maybe WaDa should ask the English Premier league for advice. They seem to be doing well in the anti doping effort . During the entire history of the EPL only one footballer has been busted for PEDs.

It Must Be Love wrote:By catching Sharapova, the ITF and WADA have shown that no stars are too big or too popular to be given a pass on this issue.
They have also shown that the anti-doping mechanisms, despite not being 100% perfect, can still be quite effective which is a good thing.

Nonsense. Failing a in competition test is a massive facepalm for tennis authorities. They're happy for players to do whatever they want as long as they're careful, we've always known that.

The whole admittance of culpability and the apologies and the explanation regarding why she took the drug is clearly a joint affair between Maria and her team and the tennis authorities.

I think they're happy while tennis fans think the sport has couple of bad apples, a few mistakes (like this one) and 99% perfectly clean heroes. All those with more than a passing interest in other sports know there is no way this is the case.

Wonder why that French ex-minister hasn't been sued yet? Seems like some pretty straightforward allegations.

djkbrown2001 wrote:The testing agencies  are always  3 steps behind the dopers. That's why meldonium was used legally for 10 years. WaDa just caught up.

I can't blame the test agencies. WaDa annual  budget is circa 20m usd dollars. Sharapova annual income  is circa 25m usd per annum.

Maybe WaDa should ask the English Premier league  for advice. They seem to be doing well in the anti doping effort . During the entire history of the EPL only one footballer has been busted for PEDs.  

It's not WADA that's responsible for catching dopers though, it's the national governing bodies and the governing bodies for the sports.

The problems arise when you get sports like Tennis and Football who have no real need to catch cheats because the fanbase is happy that there is testing and the lack of +ve results means a lack of doping, and nations like Russia, Turkey, Jamaica, Kenya who have never made any effort to set up proper anti-doping for their own sportspeople.

Welcome back Dj. You went on sabbatical ,like myself.

Anyway they might as well just legalise everything. It's a losing game. The will and money is not there to keep up.

Either the legalise it or just put life ban in place. No excuses once you are caught life ban. No mitigating circumstances. Plus pay back prize money and sponsors money.

Maybe the national bodies yoy identified should make doping a criminal offence. That will make the cheaters take notice.

I will always watch sports now with a cynical view.

djkbrown2001 wrote:Welcome back Dj. You went on sabbatical ,like myself.

Anyway they might as well just legalise everything. It's a losing game. The will and money is not there to keep up.

Either the legalise it or just put life ban in place.  No excuses once you are caught life ban.  No mitigating circumstances.  Plus pay back prize money and sponsors money.  

Unrestricted would just end sport as we know it nowadays though. There would be deaths and even higher levels of exploitation of young athletes (particularly women) than there are now. You couldn't win a women's medal at any sport requiring any sort of strength without seriously blurring the boundaries between genders using steroids.

Life bans would be great, but I think every time it's been looked at they've always come to the conclusion that the threat of litigation is too great. Athletes have a lot of power it seems, particularly big names who can lawyer up, there's always a way of getting out of it.

hawkeye wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:
A final option – the worst case – is deliberate use, and not much needs to be added to that. It would be conscious cheating,

My point.. For a young healthy athlete to be taking such extreme medication intended for the seriously ill, cardiovascular/ischemia/diabetes over the period of ten years. !!!
why? if it did not have performance enhancing benefits.
It matters not whether this was illegal at that time or not.

A moot point, and a loaded question, who of the top male players on tour at the moment would you not be hauling over the coals for doing exactly this ???

I believe meldonium is available over the counter in Russia. Prior to January this year it wasn't on WADA's list of banned drugs and of course when it wasn't banned it could be used legally to enhance performance. Some might say that by using a drug or device specifically to improve performance or gain an edge would go against the spirit of the sport? I believe that's what you believe Haddie?

To answer your second question. Djokovic is a top male player who hasn't been hauled over the coals or even lost any sponsorship deals for using the CVAC to enhance performance and gain an edge. Just like meldonium prior to January this year it the CVAC is legal. It's not exactly the same though because unlike Sharapova Djokovic hasn't claimed he's using it because of a specific health problem and unlike meldonium WADA itself (and not just the media or tennis fans) have judged it's use to be against the spirit of the sport. It's also perhaps a little bit more expensive.

This is such a pathetic post by HE. Your constant and lame attempts to try to equate CVAC to EPO use is ridiculous. And now your attempts to defend Sharapova while claiming CVAC is worse than someone who actually failed a test for a banned substance and then lied about it. Oh yeah CVAC is cheating and Novak is cheating and that is the only way he could beat you Spanish God Nadal. Your hypocrisy in defending Sharapova for using a banned chemical while trying to smear Novak for using Oxygen and air pressure is a hilarious descent into the mind, lets call it that of someone who abandons all reasons and simply runs with their biases. Yes please tell us how Novak is a cheat, but Maria who tested for a banned substance well that is no big deal. This post shows exactly what I have been saying about your posts, when you like a player they can do no wrong, and when you don't like a player you will just manufacture anything to smear them.

The funny thing is you keep talking about how WADA says CVAC "is against the spirit of the game" but they never said the same thing about Meldoium, so this must mean CVAC is worse, but wait in the real world and not Hawkeye Cherrypicking Land, WADA banned melodium how much more clearly do you want them to state that Melodium is quote "against the spirit of the game" then to ban it. In a long history of pathetic posts by you in this quest of yours this is certainly in the top ten list HE.

CVAC. Does that mean Kenyans and Ethiopians and Bolivians have an unfair advantage and that it will be illegal to live at altitude ?

It Must Be Love wrote:By catching Sharapova, the ITF and WADA have shown that no stars are too big or too popular to be given a pass on this issue.
They have also shown that the anti-doping mechanisms, despite not being 100% perfect, can still be quite effective which is a good thing.

I agree, the fact is that we have heard a certain narrative by the doping true believers over the years, the ITF would never let anyone know if a star tested positive, all the stars (especially Novak and Nadal) are doping and WADA and the ITF is covering for them. I am sure doping occurs in tennis, both legal and illegal, probably more legal doping than illegal if you ask me. But again when someone wants to believe no fact that doesn't fit their narrative will be addressed, but instead it will be ignored. You and I both know that there is a certain segment of Nadal and now Djokovic haters, who don't want the fact that the ITF/WADA will out a huge star to be accepted. Because they want to put a dark cloud over the head of the accomplishments of Nadal and now Djokovic, by putting out innuendo that these guys are dopers and cheats and simply winning not because of talent and hard work but because they have the best chemist. Remember, our friend Veejay, not only did Veejay hate commas and periods, he could tell you exactly what chemical variants were contained by Nadal's blood and urine from looking at him on TV. If they acknowledge that ITF/WADA aren't part of the conspiracy or cover up, then they can't continue to smear Nadal and Djokovic with innuendos of being dope cheats. It really is pathetic how fans of certain players will go to such extents out of jealousy.

djkbrown2001 wrote:CVAC. Does that mean Kenyans and Ethiopians and Bolivians have an unfair advantage and that it will be illegal to live at altitude ?

Its Hawkeye, if she likes a player ala Maria or Nadal, ten positive tests for steroids, amphetamines, and EPO is no big deal just a small oversight. But if she doesn't like a player, and that player like Djokovic beats the Spanish Zeus then Oxygen and air pressure fluctuations become worse than blood doping and melodium. At least on the planet known as Hawkeyeland.

It's daft to suggest that anti-doping methods are working.

Without consistent blood testing, EPO users are always going to get away with it. Nobody with half a brain tests positive for EPO, people recently have been busted via the bio-passport.

While there is negligible OOC blood testing for most tennis players, EPO has always been and still is rather safe to use. The only way a tennis player would get caught is to either be very stupid and use during a competition, or get caught in a wider scandal (as we've seen, if the sport has enough wherewithal, they can make sure their heroes don't get named.)

socal1976 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:
A final option – the worst case – is deliberate use, and not much needs to be added to that. It would be conscious cheating,

My point.. For a young healthy athlete to be taking such extreme medication intended for the seriously ill, cardiovascular/ischemia/diabetes over the period of ten years. !!!
why? if it did not have performance enhancing benefits.
It matters not whether this was illegal at that time or not.

A moot point, and a loaded question, who of the top male players on tour at the moment would you not be hauling over the coals for doing exactly this ???

I believe meldonium is available over the counter in Russia. Prior to January this year it wasn't on WADA's list of banned drugs and of course when it wasn't banned it could be used legally to enhance performance. Some might say that by using a drug or device specifically to improve performance or gain an edge would go against the spirit of the sport? I believe that's what you believe Haddie?

To answer your second question. Djokovic is a top male player who hasn't been hauled over the coals or even lost any sponsorship deals for using the CVAC to enhance performance and gain an edge. Just like meldonium prior to January this year it the CVAC is legal. It's not exactly the same though because unlike Sharapova Djokovic hasn't claimed he's using it because of a specific health problem and unlike meldonium WADA itself (and not just the media or tennis fans) have judged it's use to be against the spirit of the sport. It's also perhaps a little bit more expensive.

This is such a pathetic post by HE. Your constant and lame attempts to try to equate CVAC to EPO use is ridiculous. And now your attempts to defend Sharapova while claiming CVAC is worse than someone who actually failed a test for a banned substance and then lied about it. Oh yeah CVAC is cheating and Novak is cheating and that is the only way he could beat you Spanish God Nadal. Your hypocrisy in defending Sharapova for using a banned chemical while trying to smear Novak for using Oxygen and air pressure is a hilarious descent into the mind, lets call it that of someone who abandons all reasons and simply runs with their biases. Yes please tell us how Novak is a cheat, but Maria who tested for a banned substance well that is no big deal. This post shows exactly what I have been saying about your posts, when you like a player they can do no wrong, and when you don't like a player you will just manufacture anything to smear them.

The funny thing is you keep talking about how WADA says CVAC "is against the spirit of the game" but they never said the same thing about Meldoium, so this must mean CVAC is worse, but wait in the real world and not Hawkeye Cherrypicking Land, WADA banned melodium how much more clearly do you want them to state that Melodium is quote "against the spirit of the game" then to ban it. In a long history of pathetic posts by you in this quest of yours this is certainly in the top ten list HE.

I love the utter contempt in this post

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/35773460

Jahu - please make the obvious joke.

djlovesyou wrote:It's daft to suggest that anti-doping methods are working.

Without consistent blood testing, EPO users are always going to get away with it. Nobody with half a brain tests positive for EPO, people recently have been busted via the bio-passport.

While there is negligible OOC blood testing for most tennis players, EPO has always been and still is rather safe to use. The only way a tennis player would get caught is to either be very stupid and use during a competition, or get caught in a wider scandal (as we've seen, if the sport has enough wherewithal, they can make sure their heroes don't get named.)

Well that is fair enough, and while I think the line between PED use and just normal medical aid is fuzzy and rife with problems if we are going to keep PEDs illegal, sure credibility calls for a tough testing regime. But in regards to authorities, I think it is fair to say the assumption that they would never bust a star player has been shattered. The idea that the ITF was part of the scam to cover up the doping of their stars is kind of left in tatters by the fact that the biggest draw in Women's tennis and the third or fourth biggest earner in the entire sport was outed.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:
A final option – the worst case – is deliberate use, and not much needs to be added to that. It would be conscious cheating,

My point.. For a young healthy athlete to be taking such extreme medication intended for the seriously ill, cardiovascular/ischemia/diabetes over the period of ten years. !!!
why? if it did not have performance enhancing benefits.
It matters not whether this was illegal at that time or not.

A moot point, and a loaded question, who of the top male players on tour at the moment would you not be hauling over the coals for doing exactly this ???

I believe meldonium is available over the counter in Russia. Prior to January this year it wasn't on WADA's list of banned drugs and of course when it wasn't banned it could be used legally to enhance performance. Some might say that by using a drug or device specifically to improve performance or gain an edge would go against the spirit of the sport? I believe that's what you believe Haddie?

To answer your second question. Djokovic is a top male player who hasn't been hauled over the coals or even lost any sponsorship deals for using the CVAC to enhance performance and gain an edge. Just like meldonium prior to January this year it the CVAC is legal. It's not exactly the same though because unlike Sharapova Djokovic hasn't claimed he's using it because of a specific health problem and unlike meldonium WADA itself (and not just the media or tennis fans) have judged it's use to be against the spirit of the sport. It's also perhaps a little bit more expensive.

This is such a pathetic post by HE. Your constant and lame attempts to try to equate CVAC to EPO use is ridiculous. And now your attempts to defend Sharapova while claiming CVAC is worse than someone who actually failed a test for a banned substance and then lied about it. Oh yeah CVAC is cheating and Novak is cheating and that is the only way he could beat you Spanish God Nadal. Your hypocrisy in defending Sharapova for using a banned chemical while trying to smear Novak for using Oxygen and air pressure is a hilarious descent into the mind, lets call it that of someone who abandons all reasons and simply runs with their biases. Yes please tell us how Novak is a cheat, but Maria who tested for a banned substance well that is no big deal. This post shows exactly what I have been saying about your posts, when you like a player they can do no wrong, and when you don't like a player you will just manufacture anything to smear them.

The funny thing is you keep talking about how WADA says CVAC "is against the spirit of the game" but they never said the same thing about Meldoium, so this must mean CVAC is worse, but wait in the real world and not Hawkeye Cherrypicking Land, WADA banned melodium how much more clearly do you want them to state that Melodium is quote "against the spirit of the game" then to ban it. In a long history of pathetic posts by you in this quest of yours this is certainly in the top ten list HE.

I love the utter contempt in this post

Yes unfortunately, hypocrisy and will full blindness are pretty contemptible characteristics and our friend HE is going unstrung by Nadal's string of poor form and complete domination at the hands of Novak.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/mar/10/maria-sharapova-andy-murray-ban-drugs-test-meldonium

Murray being typically forthright.

I can't see how a sportsman could hear that statement from a prominent politician and not sue. It's massive, she couldn't have been more direct.

kingraf wrote:

Mochyn du wrote:She also said:

“We know about that famous injury of Rafael Nadal, who has led seven months of competition stop, is certainly due to a positive control,”

Seems pretty damning.  I just wish genuinely clean players would take the people who made such comments to court.  It would stop all the insinuations of a player once and for all if they successfully sued someone for libel.  No one else would dare say such things.  Can't help but think that letting it go is the easy way out.  

Would anyone here allow such damning comments about them be publicised if it involved an attack on their professional integrity?  Probably not would be my guess.

If you google "Nadal doping", you'll find 474k results, if we work under the impression that 1% of all results is a unique accusation, that adds up to 4740 accusations. Who has the time or energy?

If some tom dick or harry who loves trolling famous people he/she hates says that, then I agree. The fact that the person saying such blatantly libelous remarks was once someone serving the government of a prominent European country is a completely different matter altogether.

bogbrush wrote:I can't see how a sportsman could hear that statement from a prominent politician and not sue. It's massive, she couldn't have been more direct.

If you sue for slander or libel- the person you are suing has the right to "prove" they are correct as that is the only way they can defend themselves. In the example of an athlete being accused of PEDs and suing that person for saying so- that person would have the right to have the athlete undergo "full and reasonable testing" for what you accused them of. The athtlete exposes him/herself to a range and detail of testing that would never happen under the testing they undergo within their sport. Armstrong pulled it off because he was so sure his regimen was advanced beyond any testing avaialbe... so he did sue and won-- (even though we now know he was doping during the testing)

Now there are two ways of looking at why the athlete then doesn't sue.. 1. they don't want to undergo the testing because they are guility and might get caught 2. they are innocent but don't want to expose themselves to intrusive and personal medical tests as any person would be hesitant to undergo just to prove a point when they know people are going to talk no matter what.

What you typically see is a threat to sue even though you have no intention of suing- that the public phychologicaly sees as proof you are innocent. "why would they be willing to sue if they are guility" We used to pull that card all the time when athletes I represented were accused of anything... speak out against it and the fans go - oh he is innocent. Yet- you have no intention.

the other move is to threaten or sue for something totally different and most people think you are defending yourself against the main accusation. Remember the French cartoon that showed Nadal with a syringe... The Spanish Federeration and Nadals team threatened to sue--- but notice what they said they were going to sue for--- not the accusation of PEDS, but for the French cartoon using a copyrighted trademark symbol of the Spanish federation.......... Most don't notice the difference and think the Spanish are defending against the accusation of peds.. Of course a lawsuit never followed- just the threat.

It's all marketing and a game.

^ That analysis of defamation is miles off based on UK law. You need to show you have evidence to support your belief in the truth at the time. You most definitely can't go off and compel the Plaintiff to be tested. I would be surprised if it was substantially different in the US.

I don't know about France. It's more "Defendant friendly" for libel and the freedom with which these statements are made suggests a confidence that they are unlikely to be successfully sued. You just wouldn't get a politician being that outspoken in the UK.

Here's the link to French law re Defamation (wikipedia, but hey...)

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffamation_en_droit_fran%C3%A7ais

BS is right that France is more "defendant friendly". Basically, Bachelot would most likely use the "bonne foi" (good faith) defence, which states that, well, she was acting in good faith on information she believed to be true. It would be up to Nadal to show the contrary, which he would struggle to do. It's why there are very few successful libel cases (in fact few cases are ever brought to court at all) in France, why "les guignols", "Charlie Hebdo" and other satirical news outlets can get away with so much.

Also, without wishing to rain on BB's "see, this proves Nadal must be doping!" parade, to describe Bachelot as a "prominent politician" is stretching the truth well beyond breaking point TBH. She's completely irrelevant these days, and has been largely since her disastrous stint as health minister, and that was over five years ago.

Suing would be the dumbest thing to do.
Firstly it actually gives what the French person said more publicity, ano secondly Lance Armstrong successfully sued people so sceptics wouldn't be satisfied anyway.

Now barely anyone knows about it, I'm a huge Nadal fan and I only saw it when going on this forum. If he made a big deal out of it, it would be in the news big time, and whatever the result of the trial, all publicity is bad publicity on this issue due to Armstrong successfully suing.

Also Socal is right that comparisons between CVAC and meldonium are unfair.
If CVAC is banned, then that discussion can be had, but at this point in time medonium is banned and CVAC isn't, end of story.

The other unfortunate thing is that the BBC and others seems to think that "so and so accuses x of y" isn't newsworthy but "so and so denies doing y" is suddenly a big story. Why is the denial the story, it makes no sense. As a player, if you have got the smarts, you will be less in the news for negative issues just by saying something like "I once again refer you to the comment made by my agent in 2004 when he stated that I would never respond to unsubstantiated rumours and unworthy allegations". Then, you could stop the BBC running the "Nadal denies..." type story.

Quite strong words from Murray. He basically called it a performance enhancing drug and said it was a bit off so many athletes were using it. Stopped about a hair short of saying Sharapova's story was BS.

seems like Nadal (well, Toni at least) is making noises about suing

http://www.marca.com/tenis/2016/03/10/56e1c22546163f71538b4647.html
http://www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/Rafael-nadal-porte-plainte-contre-roselyne-bachelot/642083

anyway, perhaps we should get back on topic?

My stance on drug abuse in sports is, and has been, clear. There should be a zero tolerance policy, built around total responsibility for what you put in your body. I think tennis tries very hard to pretend it doesn't have a drugs problem, and the few who are caught always have some sob story and get away with a slap on the wrist. I expect nothing different here, but really it should be a clear minimum two year ban.

Nadal pretty rough on Sharapova, "she should be punished, and I am a clean guy.

Nadal's hiatus of a few times lasting a few months have been to cleanse himself.

Someone hit me now with some libel bs warning

IN ENGLISH
T oni Nadal, trainer and uncle of Rafael Nadal, who won 14 Grand Slam and No. 5 worldwide, language did not bite when asked this afternoon in the Versió RAC1 program 'RAC1 on the accusations to his nephew by the former Minister of Health and Sport, Roselyne Bachelot.  "I do not know what reasons have this ladies say this, but clearly know tennis and the world of sport".

The mentor of the king of clay in the last decade confirmed reports Cadena COPE on intentions to file a lawsuit against Bachelot. "The lawyer Rafa is already working to take posibñes measures and the maximum forcefulness Instead to prove the guilt you have to prove innocence. This woman is an idiot. "

It Must Be Love wrote:Also Socal is right that comparisons between CVAC and meldonium are unfair.
If CVAC is banned, then that discussion can be had, but at this point in time medonium is banned and CVAC isn't, end of story.

Of course the difference between using the CVAC and taking meldonium is now stark! Meldonium is now on the banned list whereas the CVAC is legal. But prior to January this year a comparison could be made. Both were legal and performance enhancing and both were being monitored by WADA because of this. Any talk of criticizing athletes for taking meldonium to enhance performance or suspicion that they may have taken it for performance enhancing reasons should apply equally to use of the CVAC. There is quite a lot of this talk. ie suspicion about the high number of athletes testing positive for meldonium prior to 2016. If WADA decides in the future to change the status of CVAC use then anyone using it prior to the status change would have been doing nothing wrong just like the meldonium uses prior to 2016.

So socal far from just having a go at Novak I would be defending him if this ever happened. Using a legal drug or process is by definition legal. A drug not being on WADA's banned list could be viewed as an endorsement that the drug is above board and will affect their moral decisions on whether to use them.

Jahu wrote:Nadal pretty rough on Sharapova, "she should be punished, and I am a clean guy.

Nadal's hiatus of a few times lasting a few months have been to cleanse himself.

Someone hit me now with some libel bs warning

Think you are twisting his words. Nadal also said that he hoped it would turn out to be a mistake but he made it clear the judgement should be made by the correct authorities. Then for some reason (perhaps because of 23-11?) the reporters decided to use Sharapova's problems to accuse Rafa asking him if he was ever tempted to dope etc. Odd and pathetic.

Should Rafa sue that stupid ex French sports minister? Can imagine how that would run in the media. "Nadal fights for his reputation" it would likely be twisted to make out he was the one with something to prove. Shouldn't be Rafa and his team seeking legal action anyway. Should be the ITF, ATP and WADA. Basically she has accused them of being corrupt.

Isn't this standard team Nadal practice to put out noises about lawyers, but nothing ever comes to court.

Rather than suing Nadal could just ask the tennis authorities to put out a formal statement saying that he has never had a silent ban.

Really, also journalists could ask for this statement to be put out.

Well that's my feelings too.. I think Uncle T is making the noises that some think he should make, but frankly I think he has enormous pleasure out of calling  French exMinister an idiot. There is no onus on Rafa to prove his innocence.. only hers to prove his guilt and she cant do that she has nothing to back up her wild accusations
... so she makes sensationalist comments.
It is a well known fact, if not anywhere else, but certainly here that the Spanish on the whole have little time for the French and it would not be the first time that Toni has complained about the French crowds when Rafa and the Spanish Armada are playing so its a little bit of wrangling and as I say Rafa would be well advised to get on with his tennis and leave this French bit@@ to do her worst.He has more important things to do
Perhaps she might have a go a DelPotro.. and hey Fed don't stay away too long you might be the next !!!

I think the real problem with accusing Nadal of failing tests is that you're then proposing three very... very strange phenomena

1- ATP ITF keep taking back a repeat offender. Not unlikely of course but not quite believeable
2- ATP seem to have a raffle system for his bans since his layoffs seem to have varying lengths. Sometimes six months sometimes two weeks.

lastly and probably most importantly it also assumes he's a better player off the sauce than on it since he seems to generally come back from his "bans" in better form than he went in

kingraf wrote:I think the real problem with accusing Nadal of failing tests is that you're then proposing three very... very strange phenomena

1- ATP ITF keep taking back a repeat offender. Not unlikely of course but not quite believeable
2- ATP seem to have a raffle system for his bans since his layoffs seem to have varying lengths. Sometimes six months sometimes two weeks.

lastly and probably most importantly it also assumes he's a better player off the sauce than on it since he seems to generally come back from his "bans" in better form than he went in

Unless the tapes around his knees were impregnated with the stuff
Until the more advanced treatment when he had it injected into his knees
When that wore off he had his appendix removed and a bag of the stuff inserted.

Amazing what medical science can do .