Troicki banned for 18 months....

First topic message reminder :

BBC Sport Twitter:

Serbian tennis player Viktor Troicki banned for 18 months by ITF for refusing to provide a blood sample at a drugs test.

Interesting.

Anything on Cilic? Especially the ridiculous 3 month ban?
To be fair Troicki wasnt given everything to him by the sport. He earn't the right to be making that kind of money with his own (and hopefully only his own) hard work. The sport doesn't give soo much to people out in the sticks of the ATP. Hes made a mistake clearly, and hell hopefully learn from it. I'm not saying the ban is wrong but ive never been one to hang draw and quarter someone unless they repeat it.

The Troicki case looks less than clear...prepared to give him B of D until its clear he was actually doping. There have been no spikes in his results either.

Its never going to be clear he was doping. The problem is that he might have been looking for an excuse to delay a blood test to allow something to leave his system. Hence, in the absence of unequivocal evidence that the doctor had told him it would be ok to skip the test, he had to be banned. The only question for me is whether it should be reduced.

I think it a ban that had to be made. Unfortunate as it may seem a door cannot be opened up to players to avoid blood tests. Was a blood test in anyway life-threatening to Troicki? Of course not so he should have obliged. He chose not to so now has to pay the consequences.

It is the right decision by the ATP.  I'm prepared to give Troicki the benefit of the doubt about whether he did have something in his system or not, but rules must be seen to work and to be applied properly.  The fact remains that it is harder to mask drug taking in blood samples than in urine samples and therefore sport has to respond accordingly and test athletes' blood more regularly.  This has been well flagged and Troicki should really have been in no doubt what the penalty for refusing would be.

As for feeling under the weather - often when blood tests are taken for mere mortals!

I hope that his appeal is not successful - not because I wish him any ill, and I have great sympathy for him in many ways if he is clean. He is the architect of his own misfortune though and for the reputation of the sport, which is bigger than any one player, there cannot be seen to be convenient loopholes.

I couldn't have put it better myself time please.  

It's all very well feeling sympathy for Troicki - and I can understand why people do - but he's not the only human being who is getting dragged through this.  Nobody seems to have any sympathy for the Dr - her role is somehow assumed to be entirely expendable whilst we focus exclusively on the manchild Troicki and the "will he won't he" saga of his attitude towards understanding and complying with his responsibilities.
 
I can forgive a mistake, I am much slower to forgive someone who tries to wreck a professional reputation to avoid the consequences of his own mistake.  That is what Troicki has tried to do and that tells me more about what the guy is all about than the initial mistake.  Now he intends to appeal and prolong the Dr's agony.

The initial decision to decline a test may or may not have been cheating - we'll never know and I can entirely see why people here give him the benefit of the doubt - but at best it was selfish and breathtakingly uninformed bearing in mind his clear responsibilities. The fact that he was so wilfully ignorant of what he had to do and was prepared not to give a test because he was feeling a bit under the weather, but not so bad that he needed to see a doctor, is alarming to say the least. Having made that daft mistake (if that's what it was) a decent guy would have faced realities the next day, admitted that he and nobody else decided not to take the test, that he was wrong but would do what he could to make amends by submitting to a new test, and otherwise agree that he'd need to take his medicine and plead mitigation on the basis of his fear of needles and his panic and so-on. Instead he persists with the allegation that the Dr gave him the all clear when she clearly didn't and puts up his putz of a coach to give inconsistent and unbelievable evidence.

People panic... besides we dont know exactly what the doctor said, it might have been misleading by mistake. Troicki may legitimately feel that what the doctor said was confusing.

The most important thing name calling and witch hunting aside is that the truth comes out. If the likely result happens, that is Troicki messed up and misheard or otherwise the doctor, then great, the doc gets in the clear and Trocki's doubts are answered.

I still think 18 months is harsh and it sets an important precedent to the ATP I would expect at least 24 months minimum for an actual failed test from here on in, and not a 3 month ban which is i SINCERELY hope a rumour, else all the good work is gonna get thrown straight into question again. Id give him 6 months to a year, and to be straight, a perma ban if he does it again.

falzy21: They've had a hearing, they've heard the witnesses, and they have decided what happened and that the Doctor is in the clear because she did what she should have done. They were in no doubt that the Dr. told Troicki that he should to take a test, that she was not in a position to excuse a decision not to take a test, and if he decided not to he should contact the ITF and explain why he did not want to take a test. Inconsistently with Troicki's suggestion that he was satisfied that the Dr. had given him the all clear they tried to contact the ITF guy to enable Troicki to explain himself several times but he was not available and Troicki persisted with his decision and wrote a letter to the ITF instead. The Tribunal decided that Troicki had persuaded himself that he was OK and he'd heard something he had not, aspects of his and his coach's evidence were inconsistent with his protestation that he'd been 100% sure it was OK to refuse.

Troicki is entitled to appeal - whether that is a re-hearing of the evidence or just a review of the earlier decision I don't know. It's always possible he'll succeed - but speculation as to what is the "truth" or the "likely result" of what happened has to take second place to what an Independent Tribunal who has heard the evidence has decided - and it looks very bad for Troicki.

I'm not name-calling or witch-hunting (if it's me you are referring to), I'm trying to remind people that there's two people in this drama. One a responsible professional who's been dragged into this, another is an extremely irresponsible unprofessional person who made a mistake (we all do that) and has made matters worse by desperately casting about him to avoid its consequences regardless of the harm it may do to others.

This is clearly something you're extremely passionate about given the length of your responses, clearly more than I care for it. I didn't feel man child, schmuck and other words was a fair response that's all. The doctors a professional with the backing of the ATP, theyll be fine. Hopefully the right punishment will be given

falzy21 wrote:I still think 18 months is harsh and it sets an important precedent to the ATP I would expect at least 24 months minimum for an actual failed test from here on in, and not a 3 month ban which is i SINCERELY hope a rumour, else all the good work is gonna get thrown straight into question again. Id give him 6 months to a year, and to be straight, a perma ban if he does it again.

I don't think you can equate failed test with 24 months if missing a test gets you an 18 month ban necessarily.  You could fail a test by taking too much glucose or protein maybe, in a nutrition bar that was thought to be safe but actually fell foul of the rules/wasn't in the list of approved foods - there might be some energy advantage and a line has to be drawn somewhere, but not many people would consider the above infraction to be hardcore drug abuse.  (It really is that strict in equestrian sports, so I'm assuming it is the same for human athletes??)

However, if you avoid a test then it is right that the ATP impose a ban which reflects that a player may have done more than a protein bar too many.

By fail i meant of course a fail which was shown to be a doping substance, if its an accidental one then they should be let off.
A ban for what Troicki did is appropriate, refusing one half of a test is weird at best and dodgy at most. Most actual fails get you about 2 years i think, I just think its harsh is all.

I agree very much with barry's posts. You have a tennis professional who made a very stupid mistake. Instead of holding his hands up and taking responsibility for his actions, he is casting the Dr into this fiasco in a bid to ruin a reputation so that he does not appear to be as retarded as he is.

falzy21 wrote:By fail i meant of course a fail which was shown to be a doping substance, if its an accidental one then they should be let off.
A ban for what Troicki did is appropriate, refusing one half of a test is weird at best and dodgy at most. Most actual fails get you about 2 years i think, I just think its harsh is all.

It is still not that simple falzy.  All banned substances are deemed to give an unfair advantage to an athlete, or to be injurious to health.  However, anabolic steriods and masking agents are at one end of the spectrum in terms of both, and some recovery powders are at the other (there are plenty of approved recovery products available to athletes) - the advantage/long term health issues are clearly far greater with the first than with the latter and so the penalty for one is likely to be a longer ban than for using another substance.  Avoiding a test is serious and it should be treated as such.

The only way that a drug policy can work is to draw a line (tick), make sure athletes know which substances/products are banned (tick) and then have a zero tolerance policy.

To be clear I don't disagree that Troicki has acted stupidly or shouldn't be given a ban I just don't like insults calling him retarded and a man child And soo on. I was hurled insults like that most of my young life I take it quite seriously. We should stick to the result of the appeal and let the ATP judge troicki

Sorry falzy he deserves every insult he gets. I don't agree with anyone who passes the buck for their own actions. Society is littered with them and this whole save your own ass mentality. It is about being responsible and he wasn't.

I'm in the barry camp on this one: actually think Troicki has gotten off lightly with an 18 month ban. Should have had two years. It's ridiculous that a professional athlete can think that it's OK to not give a blood sample because he's feeling unwell, and give one 24 hours later. If you read Tyler Hamilton's book (The Secret Race - excellent read) you know that 24 hours is more than enough to flush anything unwanted out of your system.

Cilic rumours if true are of course much more disturbing: 3 months is really a pathetically short time to be banned for, especially a retro-active suspension. Once more, athletes should be conscious and responsible for anything they put in their body. I just can't understand how a professional sportsman can take something from the chemist without checking whether it contains banned substances or not. Ignorance should not be an excuse.

I'm very much in the "hard line" stance. You're responsible for what you put in your body, any failure is your fault, minimum ban should be 12 months (maybe longer), no retrospective action (as it isn't truly a "ban": had Cilic not played Queens for instance someone else would have made the final, so he's "stolen" money from that other person in a sense).

Unfortunately Tennis has gone the other way: i.e. they don't take doping seriously whatsoever, deliberately burying their heads in the sand. The recent French Senate report on doping suggested as much, though the Media once more portrayed only cycling as being the bad egg. Until other sports take doping problems half as seriously as cycling does, there will be no progress...

Sorry lk also but I don't like the word retarded apologies if you feel this is overly critical

No need for apologies falzy. Your entitled to your opinions and values. It just irks me seeing an athlete or anyone for that matter create a mess and then blame someone else for it. It is lying and I loathe all forms of it.

Ok so he refused a blood test because he was feeling unwell. What about the millions of people attending hospitals each day who then give blood samples. I bet 99% of them are feeling a lot worse than he was  

And taking the test the next day is no excuse. As the Mad Chelsea guy said, 24 hrs is enough to mask or washout many substances.

 

emancipator

A fear of needles ? LOL... for a tennis athlete to turn down every instance of the use of a needle would mean playing through intense, debilitating pain, remaining injured off tour for months longer, not ever giving a blood sample (impossible) and never being inoculated (a walking bacteria ridden mother ship of disease).

Oh, and never being able to knit a jumper.  

He must have taken tests before, with needles. The crux for Troicki is to properly explain why this time there was an exceptional circumstance, to require taking one the next day

Novak pulling no punches. Flat out accuses the doping officer of lying:

“I don’t see why they’re keeping him suspended. For what? For failing to provide the blood test? He asked the lady that day, you know, he’s not feeling well. Can I provide you tomorrow? She said, 'Yes, if you write report.' He wrote the report, and the next thing you know she’s failing to say the truth in the court in London. She was saying that he was convincing him, that it took her 20 minutes to walk from anti-doping office to the ATP office in Monte-Carlo tournament, which is 20 meters. So she was lying a lot. That’s very bad for our sport. That’s very bad for anti-doping agency, to have people who are responsible for this work to fail to say what really happened that day. There was another person present in the room that day that wrote a perfect English on the report, and then in the court in London he didn’t understand a single word.”

Coming from Djokovic, that is very interesting. It is a mystery why the lady in question would have any motivation to lie.

Good point Laverfan, my thoughts exactly.

laverfan wrote:Coming from Djokovic, that is very interesting. It is a mystery why the lady in question would have any motivation to lie.

Because she messed up and told Troicki it was ok to come back the next day?

Not saying she did, just offering a motive.

Interesting from Djokovic - obviously backing one of his better friends, but I suppose he also pointed out inconsistencies, if true.

Djoko obviously trusts his mate, but he should definitely keep quiet about it.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Djoko obviously trusts his mate, but he should definitely keep quiet about it.

I agree, or at least he should have been much more diplomatic on what he said about the official. He normally seems much more mature and thoughtful. It's a very poor comment from him, tbh.

Yeah, seems like a potentially calculated statement given the appeal hearing is on Wednesday.

Cilic has had his ban reduced from 9 to 4 months by CAS. Seemingly means he can play Paris.

Born Slippy wrote:Cilic has had his ban reduced from 9 to 4 months by CAS. Seemingly means he can play Paris.

Sets an interesting precedent. If Cilic, who failed a test, gets his ban reduced, it would seem harsh not to reduce the ban of Troicki who did not fail a test but missed one.

Yes, but missing the test, means you are hiding something? While when caught doped, then you have a chance to explain.

Missing a test completely, maybe. But Troicki took his the next morning. The delay must have been less than 24 hours.

It doesn't strike me that he was hiding something. Who knows though?!

Troicki's case, thought possibly innocent and naive, does look dodgy, whereas the ATP appear to beleive Cilics story and soo have reduced his sentence, which im not in favour of personally because it sets a precedant that maybe they should reduce other ones, like you said. ATP should be firm, but clear about it, soo exactly what are the sentences for each infringement, and stick to them unless really exceptional, that way theres no surprise.

Troicki should be allowed to serve his ban, and allow to come back wihtout insult and be given to chance to rebuild his reputation

HM Murdoch wrote:Missing a test completely, maybe. But Troicki took his the next morning. The delay must have been less than 24 hours.

It doesn't strike me that he was hiding something. Who knows though?!

One day or night is plenty of time to flush something from your system, which is why WADA operate a strict rule on undertaking the tests as soon as requested. There is a story of Lance Armstrong having the doping controllers wait for an hour or so on his doorstep before letting them take samples - the suggestion is that he was busy cramming the aspirin to thin his blood to prevent an EPO test failure.

I doubt Troicki is guilty of anything more than a bit of stupidity and naivety - I understand he had just lost badly in the match and was genuinely unwell, and so it was an unfortunate time to be called in by the doping control people. However, he should have been a bit more savvy of the rules. I also wonder if he mis-understood what the doctor told him with regard to providing a written excuse letter - I presume this would have been a conversation in English, so not VTs native language, and one in which he could easily have missed a nuance regarding how such a letter would be viewed by the authorities.

Cilic's ban reduction makes me really angry

How can this Nikethamide be allowed out of competition but banned during compettion?

Cilic convinced them that it was in a Glucose tablet.

dummy_half, that interesting about LA, I didn't realise they could be flushed out of one's system / disguised so quickly.

That certainly makes Troicki's case look worse.

I really don't like reducing sentences. If other factors are worthy of consideration, then consider them when giving the original sentence.

Not even as much as an hour. Hamilton said 20 minutes, for the "glow" to go down.

So ban reduced to 12 months. Troicki remains devastated. Novak launched a sensational tirade against the anti-doping organisations after the match last night as well. Looks like a lot of distrust has been engendered by this incident.

Omerta...

They did reduce it! Didn't expect that This and the whole cicil affair has done more to damage the anti drug procedures than help them. They've been shown to hide things and set penalties but not stick to them hopefully it's a lesson learnt soo it can imprive

I think Djokovic is a bit cross...

"It's just not bad news for him," said Djokovic. "It makes me nervous as a player to do any kind of test."

"I don't have trust in what's going on," said Djokovic, who has known Troicki since he was eight years old.

"I don't know if tomorrow the representative, the DCOs, who are representatives of Wada there at the tournaments, because of their unprofessionalism, because of their negligence, because of their inability to explain the rules in a proper way, I don't know if they're going to misplace the test that I have or anything worse than that."

Djokovic also cited the case of Croatia's Marin Cilic, who had a nine-month ban for testing positive for banned substance nikethamide  reduced to four months in October.

"So what happened?" said Djokovic, 26. "Who is going to be responsible for that? Whose duty is it going to be that he lost four or five months of points, money, everything?

"That is his job, that is his life. Who is going to be answering for that?

"Now in Viktor's case, he's going to be sanctioned until July next year, and this lady, the DCO, the representative that was there that day, she's going to come back tomorrow for the job. Nobody is going to answer for that, only him. Why?"

"The ATP, which is supposed to be an association of players of tennis professionals, which is supposed to be the governing body, the association that stands behind the players, is not going to answer on this announcement," said Djokovic.

"It is not going to do anything for Viktor, so Viktor is there by himself. Tomorrow it can be anybody else."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/24831468

Why on earth is Novak not being heavily criticized for these remarks? To have a leading player come out and say some of this stuff isn't great. His comments on Cilic seem particularly unfortunate. Not sure the #2 player should be sticking his oar in on behalf of his mate. If you miss a test, then you deserve a stern penalty - surely that's clear to any pro?

It's not just Novak. Tsonga said this:

"I just don’t know who to believe any more. Everybody is lying, even the institutions. Those who are testing us I feel are not always saying the truth."

The thing I don't like is that if they are reducing the bans, it means the original judgement was wrong. Judgements that affect players careers and livelihoods should be reliable.

But I think Novak is plain wrong. Cilic didn't miss 5 months more than he had too. His ban was reduced and he returned after 4 months I believe?

Agree HM, the ban reductions are a concern. Reliability is key to credibility - something that the doping institutions desperately need to demonstrate right now.

Even so, a tad outspoken by Novak! It's difficult when a fellow countryman is involved, but...

Silver wrote:Why on earth is Novak not being heavily criticized for these remarks? To have a leading player come out and say some of this stuff isn't great. His comments on Cilic seem particularly unfortunate. Not sure the #2 player should be sticking his oar in on behalf of his mate. If you miss a test, then you deserve a stern penalty - surely that's clear to any pro?

I don't know why Novak should be criticised. In fact I think he should be praised for actually been the only of the top players to stick up his fellow pros

The fact is, that if these were such great offences, then certainly Cilic would have got longer than a few months. The fact that neither got severe bans (longer than a year) shows us that there is an obvious flaw in the procedures - as if they'd have tried, say two or more years, they'd have been sued until the cows come home

Doping always one of these things that has a very emotive response. Wrongly, most people think that any form of doping misdemeanour should result in a lengthy (more than two years) ban, some 'militants' would argue lifetime - even for these  

The fact is that in all rules and regulations, there has to be degrees of punishment / or understanding and consistency

HM Murdoch wrote:It's not just Novak. Tsonga said this:

"I just don’t know who to believe any more. Everybody is lying, even the institutions. Those who are testing us I feel are not always saying the truth."

The thing I don't like is that if they are reducing the bans, it means the original judgement was wrong. Judgements that affect players careers and livelihoods should be reliable.

But I think Novak is plain wrong. Cilic didn't miss 5 months more than he had too. His ban was reduced and he returned after 4 months I believe?

Yeah but some might argue, as you alude, that any ban for Cilic was unfair - as if it wasn't why on earth was it so light? I mean if you're caught doing 35 in a 30mph zone, your punishment is just as harsh as someone doing 55mph. So why did he, in affect, hardly get a ban

Now I would actually argue that speeding punishments should be graded a bit like these doping ones - but if this results in claim and counter claim and then a lack of confidence in the speeding laws, there would be chaos

The problem is that no-one has the bottle to say that they think really these were nothing offences and so really deserve only a slap on the wrist and that's simply because it would be political and commercial suicide to do this. I mean who's going to sponser a sport that appears to support doping offences?

Hence we get this muddle

HM Murdoch wrote:It's not just Novak. Tsonga said this:

"I just don’t know who to believe any more. Everybody is lying, even the institutions. Those who are testing us I feel are not always saying the truth."

The thing I don't like is that if they are reducing the bans, it means the original judgement was wrong. Judgements that affect players careers and livelihoods should be reliable.

But I think Novak is plain wrong. Cilic didn't miss 5 months more than he had too. His ban was reduced and he returned after 4 months I believe?

Yeah, he also got points and prize money back from the tournaments post Munich I believe so that his ban is effectively only June to October.

It will be interesting to read the reasoning for the reductions in both cases.