Why the WADA case against the Jannik Sinner doping case goes to the heart of anti-doping priorities

At the heart of the doping case against Jannik Sinner, the world’s top-ranked men’s tennis player, is an existential debate over the oversight of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) in sport.

Are the primary goals to detect cheating and prevent athletes from gaining unfair advantages over their peers? What happens when World Anti-Doping Code enforcers see violations but unanimously agree that an athlete did not achieve or pursue such an advantage?

Numerous athletes have found themselves in the middle of this debate and now it is the two-time Grand Slam champion’s turn, with one anti-doping agency taking another anti-doping agency to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

An apology to anyone sensitive to the alphabet soup of the sports bureaucracy.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed against a ruling by an independent panel convened by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA), which found the 23-year-old showed “no fault or negligence” after testing two positive tests. tested on clostebol. an anabolic steroid that is on the WADA list of prohibited substances. The panel still found him to have committed two anti-doping violations.

WADA said in a statement that it is not seeking disqualification of Sinner’s results, apart from his participation in the semi-finals at the BNP Paribas Open, held in Indian Wells, California. (These results were already disqualified in the decision shared by the ITIA).

It challenges the dismissal of any blame attributable to Sinner, which the company said was “not correct under the applicable rules.”

WADA therefore accepts the final ruling that Sinner did not intentionally dope, but is still making a point about its own credibility by seeking to change the terms of that ruling.

Sinner, who recently won the US Open, could be banned from tennis for one to two years if WADA prevails.

GO DEEPER

The World Anti-Doping Agency demands a ban of up to two years in appeal against Jannik Sinner

Sinner was informed of his positive tests in late March. The ITIA said he tested positive for clostebol on March 10 at the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, California, and again on March 18, between that tournament and the Miami Open. The results brought mandatory provisional suspensions, which Sinner appealed.

In each appeal and at a final hearing on August 15, three separate independent tribunals convened by the ITIA and led by Sport Resolutions, an arbitration company, accepted the Italian world number 1’s explanation for the positive tests. His physical therapist, Umberto Ferrara, had brought Trofodermin, an over-the-counter healing spray containing clostebol, to Indian Wells. His physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, cut his hand and used the spray on the cut. Naldi then performed massages on Sinner, which resulted in the substance on Naldi’s skin transferring to Sinner’s skin.

GO DEEPER

Jannik Sinner built the team that made him world number 1. Then he blew it up

These tribunal rulings meant that Sinner avoided first the two provisional suspensions, and then, at the final hearing, a “period of ineligibility”, which would have been a feared, reputation-destroying ban. The first two successful appeals also meant that his case remained private until that final hearing, under the ITIA protocol.

At the final hearing, the independent tribunal ruled that Sinner was not to blame for the positive tests. It states that he did not benefit from clostebol, a notorious and outdated anabolic steroid that East Germany used in the 1970s and 1980s as part of state-sponsored doping programs.

“Even if the administration had been intentional, the minute amounts likely to have been administered would not have had any relevant doping or performance-enhancing effect on the player,” said Professor David Cowan, a member of the tribunal who explained the ruling.

Yet, with the clostebol in his system, Sinner was found to have committed two anti-doping violations, for which the ITIA stripped him of his ranking points, prize money and Indian Wells results. But it did not demand a suspension.

After six months of playing under a secret cloud, Sinner won the US Open, the first tournament after the ITIA published the case and final ruling.

But three weeks later, on Saturday, WADA announced its appeal against that ruling. The case now goes to CAS, usually the final arbiter in sports doping disputes.

Jannik Sinner is currently playing in Beijing, at the China Open. (Lintao Zhang/Getty Images)

Sinner is not too happy. In a statement released Saturday, Sinner noted that he had already gone through three separate hearings there that confirmed he had not intentionally broken the rules or competed unfairly.

“I understand that these things need to be thoroughly investigated to preserve the integrity of the sport we all love,” he said. “However, it is difficult to see what will be gained if another group of three judges is asked to look again at the same facts and documentation.”

Sinner and WADA are now in difficult territory. Since the announcement of the ITIA, Sinner has indirectly faced criticism – some of it more vituperative than verifiable – over the perception of preferential treatment. Tennis is a sport where double standards exist, from better court allocations and higher participation fees for players in higher rankings, to a sharper ear from the tennis authorities on the sport’s biggest issues. As the No. 1 player in the world, Sinner has more powerful and readily available legal resources than most tennis players would have in a similar situation.

While other anti-doping cases have seen players provisionally suspended for many months while an investigation continues, it remains the case that the alleged silence on his case was not part of preferential treatment, but instead of following the ITIA investigation procedure.

Other Italian tennis players who tested positive for the same drug as Sinner have been suspended and found guilty. Stefano Battaglinoanother Italian tennis player, received a four-year ban in 2023. Battaglino was unable to prove that his positive test for clostebol was unintentional after it was discovered during a random drug test at an ITF event in Tunisia.

Jannik Sinner lost to Carlos Alcaraz in the semi-finals in Indian Wells, where the first positive test was registered. (Matthew Stockman/Getty Images)

This is one of the most complicated factors. Italy has a widespread and easily recognized problem with athletes testing positive for clostebol, because it is freely sold in the country as an ingredient in healing products – including the Trofodermin that Ferrara brought to Indian Wells. WADA has stated that about half of cases of positive clostebol tests come from within the country.

WADA, meanwhile, is dealing with the fallout from its decision not to investigate 23 Chinese swimmers who tested positive for the same heart drug seven months before the 2021 Tokyo Olympics. The swimmers were allowed to participate and several athletes won medals. In his statement on the case, published in April 2024 after what it called “some misleading and potentially defamatory media reporting,” the agency said it was “not in a position to refute the possibility that contamination was the source” of the positive tests.

Travis Tygart, the head of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) and a key figure in the cases of Lance Armstrong in cycling and Alberto Salazar on the track, on Saturday linked their situation to WADA’s decision on Sinner.

“It is unimaginable that WADA leaders would appeal this case when the rules were clearly being followed by tennis and yet do nothing when China swept under the rug 23 positive tests that indisputably broke the rules,” Tygart said.

“As athletes are held to high standards by anti-doping authorities, it is high time that WADA decision makers do the same.”

WADA responded to that statement by criticizing Tygart. “It is strange that Mr. Tygart would comment on a case when he is not involved, has not seen the file and does not have all the facts at hand. It is equally strange that he then compares it to a completely unrelated case in which he was not involved and does not have the facts at hand,” said James Fitzgerald, a spokesman for WADA. “It may be more productive for Mr. Tygart to spend his time working on the problems in the U.S. anti-doping response, rather than continually commenting on what is happening elsewhere in the world.”

WADA recognizes that detection of clostebol has improved significantly in recent years due to technological advances that allow lower concentrations to be detected.

This has helped detect some cases of doping, especially when it comes to new substances that are difficult to detect. But it has also led to the arrest of innocent athletes who, judging by the concentrations of a certain substance detected, are not doping – at least not with the substance that gives rise to a positive test.

WADA rules in this case still appear to be catching up with advances in testing, creating an imbalance between science and administration as athletes see their careers and reputations on the line.

(Top photo: Lintao Zhang / Getty Images)