Comments on: Yanina Wickmayer gives the whole story behind her doping ban

By: Yanina Wickmayer still not allowed to compete | Yanina Wickmayer

Yanina Wickmayer still not allowed to compete | Yanina Wickmayer — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:20:38 +0000

[...] Wickmayer’s doping ban was suspended on Monday, but the Belgian is not eligible to enter tournaments [...]

By: iceager

iceager — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 05:35:15 +0000

The general tennis public outside of Belgium might not have heard about other players having trouble, of course.

But according to the Flemish media, dozens of Flemish athletes have missed two reports due to the same kinds of difficulties that Wickmayer had: not being educated about the new system and troubles with the computerized reporting process. Wickmayer was unfortunate in that in spending so much time outsider her home country, she reached the magic number of three strikes against her, which, according to the rules, carries the same weight as a missed test.

Dick Norman, another Flemish tennis player, also went on record with his own difficulties with the reporting system.

Note that this discussion only applies to Flemish athletes. Tennis players from other countries and other regions of Belgium are not subject to the same set of rules, lest anyone imagine that all the other tennis players handled the reporting regime without problems.

By: Sher

Sher — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:35:39 +0000

How many of us have had problems loging in to systems online? I believe that part of her story completely. WADA should also have made sure she was notified that (a) some letters missed her, and (b) she had 1 and then 2 strikes against her. Since she has been tested through out the year anyway, and never failed her tests, it is misguided at best and malevolent at worst for WADA to suspend a player for a YEAR over something so stupid.

But then, anyone who has read what comes out of WADA's mouth in press conferences won't be surprised. The organization sounds like it's run by some kind of medieval spanish inquisition type.

By: Diane

Diane — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:24:38 +0000

Though I sympathize with Wickmayer–the penalty is very harsh–I haven't heard anyone else complain about a lack of education about the ADAMS rules. It also seems that she didn't treat the matter with the urgency it required. Having said that, I still hope she wins her appeal.

FYI, Mentari…The ATP is appealing Gasquet's two-month ban and seeking a harsher penalty.

By: Mentari

Mentari — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 02:34:00 +0000

Gasquet was banned for two months after being tested positive for cocaine, and why the hell she's suspended for a year for having failed to report her whereabouts to anti-doping officials!?

By: clearwater

clearwater — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:43:49 +0000

I hope the powers at be do an objective, open review of her appeal.

How many players were subjected to the same process and were or were not able to comply?

To some of us, Wickmayer is not a sympathetic figure. See the first comment at:

http://bit.ly/4nMAcx

for Wickmayer's behavior that destroyed a challenger event earlier this year.

By: Juan

Juan — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:13:46 +0000

Yanina's ban is really excessive, given that she didn't fail or missed any test (she just missed to update her 'whereabouts'), the system was just implemented, not working well and players hadn't any education on it. This system is not well-suited for tennis players, who are rarely at home and from january to october can be easily located just looking at their tournament schedule.
My opinion is that Flemish Anti-Doping Agency is trying to get noticed, as it is not the first time (I remember they tried to ban Kuznetsova after an exhibition match in Belgium a few years ago).
Wickmayer will win the appeal for sure (c'mon, even Gasquet was reduced ban to 2 months after being tested possitive for cocaine)

By: Kartik

Kartik — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:04:00 +0000

This is harsh indeed. Its not like she was caught using performance enhancing drugs. Gotta re-examine the process to reach out and educate with empathy, instead of a witch-hunt … it has to be "innocent until proven guilty" and not the other way round

By: sms

sms — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:15:30 +0000

1 yr is harsh, they should first give a warning , then, suspension but not 1 yr. maybe the 1st offense is 1 month then 2nd 3 mos. and so on….

By: Marija

Marija — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:11:05 +0000

I don't know, I don't believe she was doping and avoiding the tests. I believe her that she was misinformed and confused about the system.