Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Radhika Withana's avatar

Hi Edmund, thanks for this article. I have always thought both Sinner staff were truly negligent so this story is all the more galling.

In relation to the comparisons between the Sinner case and the basketballer (Moraschini) the comparisons quoted by others in the article that it’s a similar case needs some care (this is seperate from you’re own valid point about Naldi’s expected knowledge of closterbol risks from antiseptic sprays based on the basketballer case years before).

Although there does not appear to be any reported decision in the Moraschini case - it appears to have been decided by NADO and by reference to the WADA code as well — it was found by the Tribunal in that case (accordingly to other reporting of its findings) that the tribunal found that he should have been aware of the risk, leading to the 1 yr suspension. This would imply, unlike in the Sinner case, that the first instance tribunal found him to 1) have know that his fiancée was using the spray hence why he should have been aware of the risk and thus 2) found to have no significant fault/negligence (hence the 1 yr). This is different to the Sinner case where the independent tribunal found he did not know Naldi used the spray or that Ferraro gave Naldi the spray and thus he bore no F/N. I appreciate that WADA’s agreement with Sinner subsequently for 3m to reflect player responsibility for his staffs’ negligence cuts against that but I think that needs to be understood in the context of the use of the settlement clause (A 10.8.2) of the WADA code. There is debate on the interpretation of that clause and whether it allows flexibility to depart from the mandatory 1 yr suspension and its not settled. So whilst Lara Mortseifer says a reduction of less than one year suspension is “generally” not permissible, that does not account for the debatable construction of A 10.8.2 (which will become moot with the proposed changes to the new WADA code that will allow suspensions of less than 1 year for contamination by a third party).

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts