Maria Sharapova fails drug test

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Talking Bread wrote: »

I wasn't speculating anything. In fact I never heard of stosur before I Google her! My comment was more so based on her body building structure which looks extremely unnatural.

Wasn't aimed directly at your post, just a general note as I see some other players names being thrown about.

frostyjacks

Don't jump to conclusions? She's already said she's been on this drug for ten years. Even a non-athlete would be wary about what doctors prescribe them. She's dragged the game of tennis and all female athletes down the gutter.

Halloween Jack

frostyjacks wrote: »

Don't jump to conclusions? She's already said she's been on this drug for ten years. Even a non-athlete would be wary about what doctors prescribe them. She's dragged the game of tennis and all female athletes down the gutter.

Aye, ten years, while the usual course for this drug is four to six weeks...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/tennis/2016/03/08/meldonium-maria-sharapova-course-treatment/81471906/

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Halloween Jack wrote: »

Aye, ten years, while the usual course for this drug is four to six weeks...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/tennis/2016/03/08/meldonium-maria-sharapova-course-treatment/81471906/

“Depending on the patient’s health condition, treatment course of meldonium preparations may vary from four to six weeks. Treatment course can be repeated twice or thrice a year,”

One, that clearly says depending on the medical condition.

Two, it says the course can be repeated, has she stated she's been taking this drug every day of her life for 10 years, or just that she has been taking it for 10 years? I've been taking Migraleve for 10 years but not every day of my life.

Three, the drug wasn't on the banned list until January of this year so it's irrelevant what she was taking it for, or how often, before January 1st 2016.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

frostyjacks wrote: »

Don't jump to conclusions? She's already said she's been on this drug for ten years. Even a non-athlete would be wary about what doctors prescribe them. She's dragged the game of tennis and all female athletes down the gutter.

No she hasn't.

Halloween Jack

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

One, that clearly says depending on the medical condition.

Two, it says the course can be repeated, has she stated she's been taking this drug every day of her life for 10 years, or just that she has been taking it for 10 years? I've been taking Migraleve for 10 years but not every day of my life.

Three, the drug wasn't on the banned list until January of this year so it's irrelevant what she was taking it for, or how often, before January 1st 2016.

Firstly, I didn't allege or suggest that she had taken it every day of her life. Secondly, It's not irrelevant how long she's been taking it if she's using it as part of a defence/mitigation strategy. Also, it states 'depending on condition', now as far as I understand it, this drug was intended for sufferers of serious and chronic cardiac conditions, I find it highly improbable that we would never heard mention of such a condition in relation to sharapova.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Halloween Jack wrote: »

Firstly, I didn't allege or suggest that she had taken it every day of her life. Secondly, It's not irrelevant how long she's been taking it if she's using it as part of a defence/mitigation strategy. Also, it states 'depending on condition', now as far as I understand it, this drug was intended for sufferers of serious and chronic cardiac conditions, I find it highly improbable that we would never heard mention of such a condition in relation to sharapova.

She said yesterday that she was taking it, along with other medication, for a number of symptoms including irregular EKG results.

Anyway, it may not be irrelevant for public opinion on her, but in terms of what she was to answer for now it is.

curiosity

I found this piece to be a good analysis of Sharapova's approach to her failed test.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/35754677

.....The first six words Sharapova spoke appeared to be beautifully chosen. "I wanted to let you know..." Personal. Thoughtful. Not "I have been forced to…" or "You would have found out anyway", but an act of choice, an almost moral decision to keep us informed.

"…that a few days ago I received a letter from the ITF that I have failed a drugs test." The introduction of the idea that it is all new to her, that she has been taken by surprise; that this is something happening to her from the outside.

"For the past 10 years I have been given a drug called Mildronate by my family doctor…" Not Sharapova choosing to take it. Not a dodgy pharmacist or lab rat, but a family doctor.

"A few days ago, I found out it also has another name, which is meldonium, which I did not know." Not that the drug was on the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) watch-list for the whole of 2015, or that it was announced in September that it would be banned, or that Sharapova received an email to that effect six months ago.

Instead, confusing old science. No reference to Wada's announcement of its 2016 prohibited list, released on 16 September 2015, which prominently contains this sentence: "Meldonium (Mildronate) was added because of evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance...."

Tombo2001

This quote also jumped out:

"a 2015 study revealed that 724 of 4,316 Russian athletes tested were found to have meldonium in their system."

......and its not performance enhancing?

Pudsy33

Tombo2001 wrote: »

This quote also jumped out:

"a 2015 study revealed that 724 of 4,316 Russian athletes tested were found to have meldonium in their system."

......and its not performance enhancing?

Nah, they all have the same illness :rolleyes:

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Tombo2001 wrote: »

This quote also jumped out:

"a 2015 study revealed that 724 of 4,316 Russian athletes tested were found to have meldonium in their system."

......and its not performance enhancing?

Doesn't matter if it was legal, which it was.

mickmackey1

Don't understand why she didn't just say: I've been taking this product for ages to aid my recovery between matches. It's legal and its purpose is no different from loads of other supplements I and my competitors are taking.

But having come up with this diabetes/cardiac excuse she now has to back it up, otherwise she comes across as a liar aswell as a cheat and her legacy is far more tarnished than it would have been with an honest admission.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Don't understand why she didn't just say: I've been taking this product for ages to aid my recovery between matches. It's legal and its purpose is no different from loads of other supplements I and my competitors are taking.

But having come up with this diabetes/cardiac excuse she now has to back it up, otherwise she comes across as a liar aswell as a cheat and her legacy is far more tarnished than it would have been with an honest admission.

There is, shock horror, always the possibility that she is actually telling the truth about why she was taking it.

Water John

Listened to expert on RTE I Radio. It was being monitored and was turning up in a siginificant number of athletes. This obviously spooked them as to its use. Thus put on the banned list.
It is made in Latvia.
She had nothing of it being used in relation to diabetes.

mickmackey1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

There is, shock horror, always the possibility that she is actually telling the truth about why she was taking it.

Seems that its original purpose is for pretty serious complaints, doubtful if anyone who genuinely needed it would be playing top-level tennis.

Mr.Prodston

curiosity wrote: »

I found this piece to be a good analysis of Sharapova's approach to her failed test.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/35754677

1st paragraph quoted:

The first six words Sharapova spoke appeared to be beautifully chosen. "I wanted to let you know..." Personal. Thoughtful. Not "I have been forced to…" or "You would have found out anyway", but an act of choice, an almost moral decision to keep us informed.

For me it's her final line about the "fairly ugly carpet" really betrays her clearly coached, damage limitation beginning. Why would she feel the need to lash out at something right at the end if it was all perfectly innocent?

It might all be an innocent mistake (which I don't believe at this moment) but it certainly opens up room for more investigating into more sports.

It might only have been added to the banned list on Jan 1st but is there not a moral obligation for athletes to not take such things if they're "legal" but not "approved". Perhaps that's naive on my behalf and a lot of athletes are probably taking it but it doesn't really sit well, that's probably my issue though. Were there other medicines available that had less performance enhancing and actually approved?

A lot more questions will be raised generally for Tennis, Russia and Sports even if we get answers to the ones currently asked.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The carpet comment was a joke. She actually has a sense of humour and often jokes around in pressers. It may not have been a great time to make a joke but it was a joke regardless. It was not "lashing out".

She said she got it from her family doctor who is based in Russia where it is approved. You can question why she was taking it but it was obtained legally.

Elmer Blooker

Giruilla wrote: »

Sharapova cheating is so unfair on clean athletes like sam stosur and serena.

What do you expect from those Russian scoundrels?
Samantha has some gym regime I must say!!
Kick those Rooskies out of the Olympics and take the 2018 World Cup off 'em!
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/20/24DB524200000578-0-Samantha_Stosur_of_Australia_plays_a_backhand_in_her_first_round-a-56_1421729483475.jpg

Augme

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Doesn't matter if it was legal, which it was.

The important part being WAS. At the end of the day the fact is she took a banned performance enhancing drug while competing for a Grand Slam. She's a cheat and she should be banned for 4 years.

Mr.Prodston

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

The carpet comment was a joke. She actually has a sense of humour and often jokes around in pressers. It may not have been a great time to make a joke but it was a joke regardless. It was not "lashing out".

She said she got it from her family doctor who is based in Russia where it is approved. You can question why she was taking it but it was obtained legally.

It's a lack of respect for the hotel though that gave her the platform to defend herself (obviously I'm sure most hotels would have been more than happy to accommodate her but still there's better jokes to make than that). I obviously missed the humour in it though. It's simply how I construed the carpet comment, rightly or wrongly.

I never questioned the legality either it was the morals behind the decision to continue to take it when it was flagged a year in advance, but I guess she wasn't aware of that, not to mention beforehand. But like I said the morals of the issue are my issue (as an irreleveant fan of the sport looking on) and are very minor to that of the legal stand point.

Anyway I guess we'll learn more as we go on and other parties have their say. It can only be good for the sport that these things are picked up on and actually confronted publicly rather than brushing it under the rug, or carpet if you will :pac:

RosyLily

Porsche have also suspended their contract. Evian are sticking with Maria for now.

Serena has spoken out about it. Saying Maria had courage and heart to speak out....or something along those lines. It's on the Sky News Twitter.

Pudsy33

RosyLily wrote: »

Porsche have also suspended their contract. Evian are sticking with Maria for now.

Serena has spoken out about it. Saying Maria had courage and heart to speak out....or something along those lines. It's on the Sky News Twitter.

Courage and heart my eye. How else would she handle it? Honestly. She came out to create a narrative before the press got a hold of it.

frostyjacks

What possible reason would Serena have to come out with that sort of praise for someone who's just been caught cheating? Seems an odd choice of words to use in the circumstances.

EndaHonesty

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Its probably all that you are capable of but there's no need for such childish hyperbole. I'm just stating that she is a cheater and I'm not so naive that I believe her story that she didn't know she was taking a banned performance enhancing drug

I don't think you know what hyperbole means!?!

You have tried and convicted her, all from the comfort of your high-horse.
You need to take some deep breaths.

Halloween Jack

EndaHonesty wrote: »

I don't think you know what hyperbole means!?!

You have tried and convicted her, all from the comfort of your high-horse.
You need to take some deep breaths.

Are you in fact bill tormey?

The Talking Bread

frostyjacks wrote: »

What possible reason would Serena have to come out with that sort of praise for someone who's just been caught cheating? Seems an odd choice of words to use in the circumstances.

1. Unlike certain people in the media and posters she has the decency not to persecute Sharapova until the full facts are out.she would be aware justice will play it's natural course. Media are seeking a negative reaction from her competitors and Serena has the professionalism not to give them what they want.

2. They probably have a close relationship from seeing eachother every other weekend for the last decade.

3. It's not her position to question anything.

Water John

Jack, he's not Bill Tormey, did you not recognise the Ted Cruz line?

leavingirl

RosyLily wrote: »

Porsche have also suspended their contract. Evian are sticking with Maria for now.

Serena has spoken out about it. Saying Maria had courage and heart to speak out....or something along those lines. It's on the Sky News Twitter.

Was Serena speaking from her panic room by any chance? The same panic room where she hid from drug testers when they called to her door.

What a piece of sh1t.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Indian Wells is about to start, the biggest tournament of the year outside if the 4 Slams. All the players will be asked about it in the coming days. Serena was doing press today, she won't be the only one who was asked about it, her comments are obviously going to get more attention given her position on the tour and also probably the idea the media love to run with that Maria and Serena hate each others guts.

PressRun

Apparently, according to the manufacturers, the drug is normally prescribed for medical use for a time period of 6-8 weeks. Also, interestingly, it was given to Soviet troops in Afghanistan in the 80s to boost their stamina.

Water John

Well if it was around then, it didn't work very well for those soldiers.

RosyLily

leavingirl wrote: »

Was Serena speaking from her panic room by any chance? The same panic room where she hid from drug testers when they called to her door.

What a piece of sh1t.

No need for that.

leavingirl

RosyLily wrote: »

No need for that.

She's supporting a drugs cheat. Sharapova's story is also full of holes.

Imagine all the players beaten by her over years. Those tennis balls has white powder on them.

strawberryb0y

Its difficult to reach a conclusion from her version of events.

On one hand we're expected to believe that Sharapova, a phenomenally fit, healthy young woman has been seeking treatment for a heart problem and diabetes for the past ten years, serious health problems which she has never spoken of up until this point. Her doctor has prescribed for her medication which is not yet deemed suitable for human consumption in the country in which she lives (a country in which a person as wealthy as she is could easily afford effective proven medical treatment) which also just happens to have massive performance enhancing capabilities.
Highly unlikely imo.

However, while she might be inventing a backstory for herself, it would seem strange for her to risk tarnishing almost her entire career if people choose not to believe her when she could easily have said she was sick over the off season and was prescribed a drug she didn't know was illegal.

I personally would be of the opinion that she has knowingly used the drug for its performance enhancing capabilities but I do find her own version of events quite hard to believe if shes not telling the truth.

Jayop

She could snort the blood of Lance Armstrong from the side if her bat in the middle of center court in Wimbledon and I'd still watch her!

RosyLily

leavingirl wrote: »

She's supporting a drugs cheat. Sharapova's story is also full of holes.

Imagine all the players beaten by her over years. Those tennis balls has white powder on them.

Even so, there's no need to call her a "piece of sh1t."

frostyjacks

Paul Kimmage didn't mince his words on Off The Ball earlier.

Sharapova's explanation for taking this drug: "Absolute bullsh1t".

Serena's praise : "Absolute horse manure".

People who seriously believe Sharapova's story: "Idiots".

RosyLily

frostyjacks wrote: »

Paul Kimmage didn't mince his words on Off The Ball earlier.

Sharapova's explanation for taking this drug: "Absolute bullsh1t".

Serena's praise : "Absolute horse manure".

People who seriously believe Sharapova's story: "Idiots".

That Kimmage is always hiding his true feelings.:pac:

Shemale

Interesting that a load of Russian and Ukranian athletes have the same medical condition

Halloween Jack

Hmmm....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2016/03/08/maria-sharapova-clouds-gather-over-tennis-star/

Ormus

I know Maria and Serena have been rivals for years (albeit the most one sided rivalry of all time), but I think in the last year or two they've been friends, and even socialise together a bit.

Could be wrong on that, but fairly sure I heard it somewhere.

Memnoch

Serena and Venus have been strong opponents of off-season drug testing, delaying its implementation for as long as they could. In addition to that, Serena has been found to avoid drug testers when they called to her home. Is it really any surprise that she is going to defend Sharapova in the situation?

sbsquarepants

Mr.Prodston wrote: »

It might only have been added to the banned list on Jan 1st but is there not a moral obligation for athletes to not take such things if they're "legal" but not "approved".
.

Why on earth would there be a "moral obligation" to avoid a perfectly legal substance? That makes no sense whatsoever!

What kind of professional athlete would think it a sensible approach to avoid things that might help them win

Mr.Prodston

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Why on earth would there be a "moral obligation" to avoid a perfectly legal substance? That makes no sense whatsoever!

What kind of professional athlete would think it a sensible approach to avoid things that might help them win

Perhaps if you quoted the full paragraph my opinion would be a little clearer to you?

Mr.Prodston wrote: »

It might only have been added to the banned list on Jan 1st but is there not a moral obligation for athletes to not take such things if they're "legal" but not "approved". Perhaps that's naive on my behalf and a lot of athletes are probably taking it but it doesn't really sit well, that's probably my issue though. Were there other medicines available that had less performance enhancing and actually approved?

What I have bolded is the part you left out. My ideals are that just because something is legal, doesn't make it right. I said my belief was "naive" and that it was "my issue" to deal with.

You don't have to agree with me but I tried to make it clear why I thought there was a "moral obligation". I apologise if I wasn't clear as to why I felt so

I'm perfectly aware that professionals take all sorts of legal performance enhancers and they'd be crazy not, assuming it doesn't cause danger to their health and is ideally approved by medical professionals in countries where she competes. "2.2% of a sample of 8,320 athletes" The Guardian - 9th March were taking Meldonium. So either 2.2% of athletes had the same medical condition or they had other uses for it. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/mar/09/maria-sharapova-meldonium-banned-drug-wada

I'm currently of the opinion that Sharapova is being disingenuous about taking the drug to treat diabetes as per her family doctor's advice and for no other reason but her medical conditions. If it was the safest and best medication for her to treat her condition then fine but it could appear to give her an extra edge in competiton. And while legal I don't think it looks great when she also vigorously promotes her candy brand, Sugarpova.

As I said it's simply my opinion that there's a moral obligation and mine alone. Hopefully it was an innocent mistake but I just feel the issue raises wider questions that go further than something being legal or not. Perhaps that's a different argument though for another day.

sbsquarepants

I don't think your naïve, I just don't think what you're saying makes any sense. It's not naïve to suggest a professional competitor should feel a moral obligation to avoid something solely because it aids competition, it's just plain wrong.
Also I don't see the issue with her selling sweets and having a family history of diabetes?
For example would you refuse a well paying job for Cadburys or Coca Cola because of a family history of diabetes? Would you refuse a good job with Diageo because you have alcoholism in your family? I certainly wouldn't.
I think your holding the girl to an improbably high standard, one I'd be very surprised if you could live up to yourself.

That being said -
Is she spoofing about why she took it - almost certainly.
Was she wrong to take it for the last 10 years - definitely not.
Was she wrong to take it for the last 10 weeks - absolutely, wrong and very stupid.
Should she punished like anyone else - yes, no more and no less.

frostyjacks

This logic that it was perfectly ok for an athlete to take a performance enhancing drug for 10 years just because it wasn't on a proscribed list is why professional sport is going down the toilet. Cheats will always be one step ahead of the testers. It's difficult to watch any sport now without wondering whether the athletes are clean or not.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

sbsquarepants wrote: »

That being said -
Is she spoofing about why she took it - almost certainly.
Was she wrong to take it for the last 10 years - definitely not.
Was she wrong to take it for the last 10 weeks - absolutely, wrong and very stupid.
Should she punished like anyone else - yes, no more and no less.

She failed the test at the Australian Open. Three weeks into the season.
Now maybe she was still taking it up until she was informed of failing the test, whenever that was, but she hasn't played since the Australian Open, so really the relevant time frame for this is three weeks.

Your assessment of her actions in this period is still accurate though.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

frostyjacks wrote: »

This logic that it was perfectly ok for an athlete to take a performance enhancing drug for 10 years just because it wasn't on a proscribed list is why professional sport is going down the toilet. Cheats will always be one step ahead of the testers. It's difficult to watch any sport now without wondering whether the athletes are clean or not.

It's on WADA's list of banned substances, it's not a PED.

frostyjacks

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It's on WADA's list of banned substances, it's not a PED.

It was added to the WADA list of banned substances because of evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance. Why would they ban it otherwise?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

frostyjacks wrote: »

It was added to the WADA list of banned substances because of evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance. Why would they ban it otherwise?

They have different lists of what is banned, they're not all PEDs. It may well end up on the list of PEDs but at the moment it's just a banned substance.