What? Professional tennis has banned Maria Sharapova for two years for violating drug policy? As surprising as this, a situation concerning one of tennis’s most talented and famous athletes, it’s also confusing. Although when you think about it, confusion regarding drug use, punishment, and professional sports seems to be the norm, not the exception.
Why is Sharapova’s case confusing? It turns out that Sharapova had been taking a banned substance known as meldonium. The World Anti-Doping Agency banned the substance in January 2016. Sharapova said she had been taking the drug since 2006 for a medical condition.
If Sharapova is telling the truth, this prolonged use seems to indicate that she didn’t suddenly start taking the drug to enhance her performance on a temporary basis. And if meldonium is a prescription drug, shouldn’t it be easy to track how long she’s been using it?
On the other hand, Sharapova said that she wasn’t aware that meldonium was a banned substance because she was taking a form of the drug known as Mildronate. If she was using a prescription drug, shouldn’t she or her doctors have determined whether this substance was on the list of banned substances, whatever name the substance used?
Some sources have said that various agencies warned Sharapova that the World Anti-Doping Agency was going to add Mildronate to its banned substances list. So now we have the issue of how much Sharapova knew and when she knew it.
Of course, the confusion doesn’t end there. Not at all. Sharapova has appealed her suspension. She’s appealing her suspension to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The CAS hopes to rule by July 18th, which could determine whether Sharapova can play in this year’s Olympics.
Adding to the confusion, the CAS is not sure if it will conduct a hearing regarding this matter or take other measures. This brings to mind how other sports, such as professional sports in the United States, often seem to address drug and alcohol violations on a case-by-case basis, not according to overarching policies.
There are many unknowns in Sharapova case. The unknowns rely on the word of some people and the actions of others. It illustrates that there are many unknowns surrounding drugs, unknowns that relate to physical, professional, legal, and other matters.
