View Full Version : Maria Sharapova
Murray rocks
24-07-2016, 12:26
Well all I will say on this is she is and will always be my hero no matter what. She is guilty of being an idiot yes but cheat no. Now she is also becoming a victim of her nationality which is terrible and unfair.
I believe she will have to serve the two year ban but I also believe she will be back. No way will she end her career like this.
Well all I will say on this is she is and will always be my hero no matter what. She is guilty of being an idiot yes but cheat no. Now she is also becoming a victim of her nationality which is terrible and unfair.
I believe she will have to serve the two year ban but I also believe she will be back. No way will she end her career like this. just curious but by 'no matter wha't ? you meen no evidence would convince you or you dont mind she took illigal performace enhancing drugs
Murray rocks
24-07-2016, 17:26
If you read what I said I said she is not a cheat. There is no evidence to suggest the medication she was taking was performance enhancing. Even if it was she was taking such a small dose it wouldn't have made any difference to her performance.
If you read what I said I said she is not a cheat. There is no evidence to suggest the medication she was taking was performance enhancing. Even if it was she was taking such a small dose it wouldn't have made any difference to her performance.so to summerise its am evidential thing, kool we all have different opinions personally the longer the ban the better but respect the fact you believe her version:thumbup:
Murray rocks
04-08-2016, 22:14
so to summerise its am evidential thing, kool we all have different opinions personally the longer the ban the better but respect the fact you believe her version:thumbup:
I believe in her yes. Of course I do. I believe she will be back on court at some point and I so can't wait. Miss her terribly x
Josephine
05-08-2016, 08:36
If you read what I said I said she is not a cheat. There is no evidence to suggest the medication she was taking was performance enhancing. Even if it was she was taking such a small dose it wouldn't have made any difference to her performance.
Well why did she take it and increase the dosage before big matches. She had no medical need for it. Just wondering why you think she took it at all and told no-one in her team.
She's going to find out, early next month, about whether she can play again or not.
She's going to find out, early next month, about whether she can play again or not.
I don't think it's a question of whether she can play again or not, is it not more to do with the length of her ban? She appealed to have it reduced, so she is awaiting that decision.
Do you think that, if her two year ban is enforced, she will come back? She is 29 now, which means she would be nearly 31 when she was allowed to play again. She has been keeping a pretty high profile so far and, given how many irons she has in the fire, she probably doesn't really need tennis. Personally, I hope the ban is upheld otherwise it makes a nonsense of the screening programme.
I agree ban should be upheld, and if it is, who knows if she will play again? She may feel she has a point to make and play some more, or she may not!
I hadn't known that Varvara Lepchenko had also tested positive for meldonium:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/sports/tennis/varvara-lepchenko-meldonium-itf-doping.html?ref=tennis
I don't know why the ITF made her initial tour ban a secret - Lepchenko's French Open interview sounds a complete farce - imagine having to say 'No Comment' 8 times..
Glad to see the rules have been changed to no longer have 'secret bans'. what were they thinking with this in the first place? How many other secret bans have there been, perhaps hidden by a player declaring an injury as reason for missing tournaments?
What is also very telling is Lepchenko's final comment that doctors were prescribing this medication with the comment that it was like Aspirin. Will be interesting to see the outcome of Sharapova's appeal.
Josephine
26-09-2016, 13:09
Point is she says she stopped taking it before January when it was banned and Sharapova admitted she did not.
Lepchenko was not secretly banned. There have not been secret bans. She was under a secret suspension while the case was investigated. As she was cleared she will not be banned.
They do say there will be no more secret suspensions from now on.
Would you not question a doctor who said to take a drug to know why if you were a top class athlete? Don't see it makes a difference. But perhaps with others getting off due to claiming they stopped taking meldonium before January, it may have some influence on reducing Sharapova's ban.
Cas has said that the verdict on Maria's appeal will be given tomorrow at 2pm (BST), so she will them find out if her ban is to be reduced or lifted.
What's the betting that it will be either reduced to a year or rescinded completely? I will be amazed if the ban is upheld.
As her ban has previously been backdated to January even if she has it reduced to 1 year which wouldn't surprise me, she would then be back playing tennis in February of 2017. With her next GS the French, even if it is pushed to 18 months that would still see her back next year. I think if that was the case she would return to tennis.
What's the betting that it will be either reduced to a year or rescinded completely? I will be amazed if the ban is upheld.
You and me both. If that's the course they chose to go down, then it will be another nail in the coffin of professional sports for me. I am hoping that because of the stuff on TUES that has been leaked they might decide it's in everyone's interests to show toughness? Realistically I think I shall be very grumpy at 14:00 tomorrow....!!!
Ban reduced to 15 months.
The CAS have ruled (http://www.itftennis.com/news/243888.aspx) that Sharapova's two year suspension has been reduced to 15 months and she can return to the tour on the 26th April 2017.
They missed a chance to show a zero tolerance to this. Shame on them.
Better than I expected tho I'm sure her loyal bad of sheep will see it being reduced as some sort of victory
A summary of the CAS ruling.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7PqS7WYAIEKwe.jpg
Sharapova's response is far from contrite and takes a huge dig the ITF. Brass neck or what?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7QhmRXEAI5dI2.jpghttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7QhmQW8AAzxM8.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7QhmRWAAAW960.jpg
roytennisfan
04-10-2016, 13:19
Considering the timing of the offence, the background to it and everything else, I was expecting them to reduce it to 12 months.
Hmm..
I thought it was prescribed - but she calls it "over the counter".
I don't really know enough about it to comment further - just prepare your eardrums for next year.
This from Head Tennis is incredible!
HEAD Tennis @head_tennis
Congratulations to @MariaSharapova! #WeStoodWithMaria #headtennis
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7NeE1XgAA5EsX.jpg
This from Head Tennis is incredible!
Most unusually for me on this topic I am lost for words by that........
Andy was asked about Sharapova in his press conference today but before the CAS ruling was released.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct7TCY2UsAAJowR.jpg
Looking forward to see Maria back as she was't the only one who took the banned stuff and there are still lots of them out there taking banned substance for"health issues" a la Williams sisters. Why picked on Maria, she wasn't winning everything, was she? Like Serena, for example. :doh::shrug:
There may well be a bigger question to ask around TUEs, however for the time being they are the acceptable way to use prohibited substances the Williams sister may have went down that road but that's within the rules and to suggest otherwise is outrageous
Sharabova hid her use of the drug even after it was banned and therefore deserves to be banned
I had vainly hoped that the CAS would uphold the ban, although I guessed it would reduced. What annoys me most, I think, is that Maria's statement implies that she is the victim in all of this and that her indiscretion was the fault of the ITF.
"Within the Rules" Huh!! How convenient.:rolleyes:
Most unusually for me on this topic I am lost for words by that........
There are no words ......... !
themass15
04-10-2016, 15:45
You were right Alis but still she has had to serve 15 months and, she is not getting any younger.
"Within the Rules" Huh!! How convenient.:rolleyes:it's not rocket science
She was, supposedly, delighted with the news about it being cut from two years to 15 months.
lovetennis
04-10-2016, 17:51
Shocked to see Sharapova's racquet sponsor Head tweeting their "congratulations" to her. Not sure the word is appropriate!
Andy makes a good point that WADA made a complete mess of banning meldonium - they hadn't done any research to see how long it stays in the system. Dozens of others got off because of that, but Maria shot herself in the foot by admitting her mistake. So it seems reasonable to shorten the ban in this case.
My interest is in seeing how many athletes show a dip in form this year!
She was, supposedly, delighted with the news about it being cut from two years to 15 months.
Well, she would be wouldn't she?
roytennisfan
04-10-2016, 20:21
Looking forward to see Maria back as she was't the only one who took the banned stuff and there are still lots of them out there taking banned substance for"health issues" a la Williams sisters. Why picked on Maria, she wasn't winning everything, was she? Like Serena, for example. :doh::shrug:
Both Williams sisters have possibly been exploiting these TUE's. If they are performance enhancing, there shouldn't be any TUE's in my mind, NONE AT ALL
Andy makes a good point that WADA made a complete mess of banning meldonium - they hadn't done any research to see how long it stays in the system. Dozens of others got off because of that, but Maria shot herself in the foot by admitting her mistake. So it seems reasonable to shorten the ban in this case.
My interest is in seeing how many athletes show a dip in form this year!
Yes WADA did really make a mess up of this drug. First of all they banned it without making it clear to athletes and then they had no idea of how long it stays in the blood. I doubt if WADA really know what effects it has on the body and if it is performance enhancing.
It will be interesting, though, as you say to see what the performance is of the athletes known to have taken it.
david1610
04-10-2016, 21:09
One of the consequences of the athlete information leaks is that many of us have learnt a lot more about TUES and there is clearly a need to have better systems in place to evaluate these.
I can understand the shortening of the ban given the circumstances. I think she was made an example of and that many off the tues drugs are more likely to enhance performance than what she has been found taking. In the past people have got less for more. As for head supporting her they said they would from the start, they are a business at the end of the day and supporting her makes the most financial sense for them. If other businesses decided to drop her it was because they believed that was the best financial choice for them. It wouldn't have been about honour or clean sport.
More important than her appeal or ban, is where we go from here. There needs to be tighter regulations of tues especially for drugs/treatment used when players are involved in tournaments.
Sharapova recorded an interview after the announcement was made which will be broadcast in the US later tonight. There are some clips on youtube. She's going after the ITF.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_2VYN98tFU
Under no circumstances did she consider Meldonium performance enhancing then why did she take it before each match during the Australian Open and increase the dosage when playing Serena Williams?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znENYnVgD-E
Josephine
04-10-2016, 23:28
Well GB would have had a few less medals without TUEs - Laura Trott anyone - and loads more - all perfectly justified I am sure.
Brad'd story very odd though - never liked him since he dissed tennis and announced Andy winning SPOTY 2013 as though it were a dirge.
As for Head - of course it's about money but why say congratulations? She just had the ban reduced not overturned. That guy makes my skin crawl.
RosieBear
05-10-2016, 00:24
I really don't know how I feel about MaSha. The whole Russian situation is deplorable, and however wealthy Maria might be as an individual athlete, she is not beyond the reach of the all powerful Russian State. I agree with those who say that there are clear indicators of willful wrongdoing - the secretiveness, the timing of ingestion etc - but at the same time I doubt anyone on here has first hand experience of living under (the reach of) the kind of totalitarian regime that is at the heart of this story. It's very easy to pass damning judgement but it is a complex issue.
.............. but she lives in the USA and has done for most of her life, hasn't she? So much so that I tend to think of her as American rather than Russian.
themass15
05-10-2016, 06:48
Think she will find it very difficult when she returns to the tour.
RosieBear
05-10-2016, 06:50
.............. but she lives in the USA and has done for most of her life, hasn't she? So much so that I tend to think of her as American rather than Russian.
She is a Russian citizen and represents Russia, and as such will come under pressure from the Russian regime. It doesn't matter where else she has lived, or for how long, she is not protected from the issues coming from her home country. She began playing within the Soviet/Russian system, and can't imagine it's too easy to leave.
I'm not defending her, just feel that it's more complex than a question of individual morality.
Think she will find it very difficult when she returns to the tour.
I sincerely hope so. I also hope Wimbledon makes a stand by not giving her a wildcard.
Well GB would have had a few less medals without TUEs - Laura Trott anyone - and loads more - all perfectly justified I am sure.
Brad'd story very odd though - never liked him since he dissed tennis and announced Andy winning SPOTY 2013 as though it were a dirge.
As for Head - of course it's about money but why say congratulations? She just had the ban reduced not overturned. That guy makes my skin crawl.
Having it reduced will still be seen as a win. Cas said that they didn't believe she was a cheat or an intentional doper. They said she was at fault for not giving her agent adequate instructions about wadas prohibited list. This will be seen as a win by Maria and head because they will say that she never intentionally doped and feel vindicated that cas have found this to be the case. They have also found that there is more the ITF can do to let people know what it banned and these are changes the ITF have decided to make.
Personally I am not saying it is a win. I think it's unusual to ban a substance because many are taking it even though its effects aren't known, nor is the amount of time it stays in the system. I think she was used as the face of drug scandals in tennis when I think players who have got approvals to take steroids whilst in tournaments were more likely to have benefited from them than she was from this drug.
I can see however, how both Maria and head will see it as vindication. Cas has said she didn't cheat or dope intentionally and that is what she has been saying, what head have been saying and what she wanted them to find all along. I don't think it is for tournies to withhold WC as a conscientious objection though, the decision has been made to allow her to return to the tour. That choice was not theirs but it is one they must uphold. Aside from anything else the tournies of there for the fans. Tennis happens because people want to watch it. i have never been a Maria fan so it makes no difference to me but she does have many fans despite this. Fans who will want to see her play in the big matches. I will watch Roland garros for example even if they give her a WC, but many might not if they don't. For them it will be a business decision. I don't think taking a drug for one month after its ban wipes out everything else she has achieved.
No sympathy from Berdych and Muller for Sharapova. Quotes from their press conferences after their match in Tokyo today.
Berdych
"Every time I have to take something, I check with others many, many times to make sure it is legal, If it is all clear, I will use it. In the end, no matter who else is involved, you are the player and it is you who is out there playing and performing. I've already received the list for 2017 - it's easy to understand"
Muller
"Any positive test should be punished. If you reduce the penalty, it sends the wrong message."
roytennisfan
05-10-2016, 11:03
Will they all do the same?
Stuart Fraser @stu_fraser
On potential Sharapova wildcard, Prague tournament director Petra Cernoskova told PA in an email: "Great!!!! Yes we are very interested!"
goldfish
05-10-2016, 12:20
Maria would have gained some respect back from me if she had just accepted the revised suspension and kept her mouth shut. Hope she doesn't get WCs as that deprives someone else who presumably didn't cheat.
Nadal gives a great example of fence sitting.
Q. The verdict on Maria Sharapova's ban appeal is due later today. Do you think it's positive if she's allowed back? Do you think it will be positive for tennis if she's allowed back on tour after a year?
RAFAEL NADAL: I don't have all the information, no? Is not good that the people decides on that or have an opinion on that. It's good that the people has to decide on that decides the right way and do his job. It's a decision for the people who really knows about it. They going to make the right decision. So that's all.
I cannot pretend to have an opinion. You know, an opinion of this kind of case, you need to know all the information that probably you don't know, I don't know. Is not good to create an opinion or write things that maybe are not hundred percent right. Can be painful for some people. I am not agree with that. I am not happy with that, no?
There is somebody, and there is a legal instruments that they have to take the decision. They going to do it well because that's they job.
themass15
05-10-2016, 15:50
Best way to be for him; that way they cannot jump on him for anything.
I'm with Berdy and Muller on this one but, unfortunately, whatever we do or do not think won't make the slightest bit of difference. I also agree with Goldfish that Maria would have done better to accept the reduced ban gracefully and kept her mouth shut instead of playing the victim. I understand that she is hugely marketable and a great draw at the box office but I don't trust her. I struggled to watch her before because of her screeching, I certainly won't go out of my way to watch her when she returns.
No sympathy from Berdych and Muller for Sharapova. Quotes from their press conferences after their match in Tokyo today.
Berdych
"Every time I have to take something, I check with others many, many times to make sure it is legal, If it is all clear, I will use it. In the end, no matter who else is involved, you are the player and it is you who is out there playing and performing. I've already received the list for 2017 - it's easy to understand
Muller
well done tomas really gone up in my estimation, course its easy to follow every junior athlete in the world knows the score
Fair play to Berdych, (and Muller). The more the players talk about this, the better as far as I am concerned.
Nadal gives a great example of fence sitting.
Mmmmmmm ....................!
Rosalind
05-10-2016, 19:23
She took it for a medical condition. So what's she taking in it's place for the medical condition or has the medical condition mysteriously gone away now? (Sorry if I have missed information on this.)
I was never a fan but this has put her to the bottom of my list. Her bizarre PR postings take the biscuit.
lovetennis
05-10-2016, 19:32
She took it for a medical condition. So what's she taking in it's place for the medical condition or has the medical condition mysteriously gone away now? (Sorry if I have missed information on this.)
I was never a fan but this has put her to the bottom of my list. Her bizarre PR postings take the biscuit.
In this whole sorry mess, that is a very very good question Rosalind. Like you I'm not sure if this has been addressed but if it hasn't, why not?
Also never been a fan of Berdy but his answer in his press conference was very good. Sharapova seems to be on the way to painting herself as a victim, but as Berdy said the athlete is responsible for what they take
Rosalind
05-10-2016, 20:20
In this whole sorry mess, that is a very very good question Rosalind. Like you I'm not sure if this has been addressed but if it hasn't, why not?
Also never been a fan of Berdy but his answer in his press conference was very good. Sharapova seems to be on the way to painting herself as a victim, but as Berdy said the athlete is responsible for what they take
likewise: Berdy rather boring to watch imo and the pink accessories and attitude at times does not put him amongst my faves but respect for what he said on this
I have to say I thought it was great for Berdy and muller to speak their minds on the subject. Murray has been vocal in the past too. A bit easier for muller as he is in the spotlight less but It was a risk for Berdy, to take such a firm stance and not fence-sit, no doubt there will some who will be after him for it. I wonder if he cleared it with one of his sponsors first (head) lol
roytennisfan
06-10-2016, 09:36
Mike Dickson in the daily fail, taking a strong view Shameless Maria Sharapova to play at Sir Elton John's bash in Las Vegas
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-3824184/Shameless-Maria-Sharapova-play-Sir-Elton-John-s-bash-Las-Vegas.html
Josephine
06-10-2016, 09:42
Couple of veterans tweeting on the subject:
Pam Shriver Verified account
@PHShriver
Imagine if Maria took time during interviews or quotes to explain why she loves the great sport of tennis & why kids everywhere should play!
Boris Becker @TheBorisBecker 11m11 minutes ago
Watching #Sharapova on #CNN yesterday explaining her position !
I must say she could be little more humble/thankful now ...
Andy not fence sitting, well said.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuDkoHlWAAAOGQw.jpg
It's interesting how few friends Maria seems to have either among the players presently on the tour or those who are no longer playing and I'm pretty sure the way she has handled this won't have won her many more.
Sharapova did claim in one of her (many) interviews recently that she had many messages of support from other players, no names mentioned however. ;)
The ITF has responded to her criticism.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuFYYqNXgAAGnfx.jpg
Sam Stosur is by far the most outspoken player on the decision although she says other players agree with her.
“I can’t believe it actually, I don’t even know what to say. I don’t know how you can get away with that excuse [that she didn’t know it was banned], and have that [two-year ban] overturned. I think it’s remarkable that you can use that excuse and get away with it.
It really sets a bad precedence for athletes moving forward where you can almost put your hands up and say it was not my fault. I’ve spoken to a few people [fellow players] and we all seem to have the same idea. We had the same idea beforehand, and now we have the decision. So I wouldn’t imagine there’s a whole lot of support from the playing group.
It would be interesting to see [the reception] when she does come back.”
I really don't think Maria will be all that bothered if this is anything to go buy....
As Sharapova told the Telegraph in 2013, “I’m not really close to many players. I think just because you’re in the same sport it doesn’t mean that you have to be friends with everyone.” and if I remember rightly, I am sure I read years ago that when her father was her coach, her father told her that she was "There to work and not make friends" or something to that effect!! He wasn't very well liked among the coaches, maybe a bit of a "pushy parent"
Maria has been given a wild card to play Madrid in may
She already has one for Stuttgart at the end of April
I really hope Wimbledon will not give her a wildcard.
roytennisfan
09-02-2017, 20:40
I really hope Wimbledon will not give her a wildcard.
She may not need it since she has Stuttgart, Madrid and Rome? so could well win enough points say 250 for qualifiers or even 700 to enter direct. I remember how Clijsters came back after her baby and look how Roger and Rafa did after a layoff, in 2015 she made SF in Madrid (390) and won in Rome (900)
greatunclebulgaria
09-02-2017, 21:01
well I for one hope her 'comeback' is the biggest washout in history
I think the fact she is being given Wildcards demonstrates very clearly the extent to which tennis is driven by money, not ethics. Mind you given the whole Russian state sponsored doping saga, I suspect tennis is not alone. I hope Sharapova is booed when she comes on court.
I hope Sharapova is booed when she comes on court.
Sadly, I think many of her supporters will cheer!
Sadly, I think many of her supporters will cheer!
Sadly, I think you are probably right:-(
roytennisfan
09-02-2017, 21:41
David Law twitter Poll, currently 1,000 + responses should she be given wc for Wimbledon? 41% yes 59% no
David Law twitter Poll, currently 1,000 + responses should she be given wc for Wimbledon? 41% yes 59% no
Have added my vote. You don't need twitter to vote, just google David Law twitter.
greatunclebulgaria
09-02-2017, 22:32
voted thanx Teresa :thumbup:
Rosalind
09-02-2017, 23:29
David Law twitter Poll, currently 1,000 + responses should she be given wc for Wimbledon? 41% yes 59% no
going to add my vote - no!
roytennisfan
03-03-2017, 17:34
Already given 3 WCs but seems the French have let to decide if she gets one for a slam
Reem AbulleilVerified account @ReemAbulleil 14m14 minutes ago
More
FFT president to AFP: We're going to meet Sharapova, listen to her arguments and then talk it over with Guy Forget & we'll make a decision
greatunclebulgaria
03-03-2017, 18:35
hopefully it will be a fat resounding No
I think if they reward her with a wildcard, after she has been out with a doping related ban, it will be disgusting. The tournaments that are should be ashamed.
Alize Cornet's response to a puff piece from the WTA entitled "Tennis needs Maria". :big grin: :clap:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6eqetRVUAAznM2.jpg
'Sharapova should not get French Open wildcard'....
https://m.rediff.com/sports/report/maria-sharapova-should-not-get-french-open-wildcard-pix/20170421.htm
roytennisfan
22-04-2017, 15:03
'Sharapova should not get French Open wildcard'....
https://m.rediff.com/sports/report/maria-sharapova-should-not-get-french-open-wildcard-pix/20170421.htm
I have a feeling with so many top ladies missing, that they are waiting to see how she does in Stuttgart
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/39679009
That shouldn't have any bearing on it in my view.
RoastLamb
22-04-2017, 23:05
I hate what her agent/manager said about Woz and Aga. They are NOT journeywomen. A**.
JAMES4578
22-04-2017, 23:54
Certainly objected to Sharapova's agent's view of Aga and Woz, however slams may well elude them. Jo Durie on BT Sport said that if she was tournament director would give Maria wild card due to the interest and thought she shouldn't be treated more harshly than say Cilic or Troicki. However mentioned that she had never been that popular with the others players as she came across a bit cold.
Wrong for her to put troicki in with cilic and Maria. That has really annoyed me. Troicki asked the person if he could postpone because he wasn't feeling well, she said that was ok. Being a fool he thought that meant there'd be no future action. He blood was taken the next day and he was completely clear. It wasn't even 20 hours later. Maria and cilic were both found with banned substances in their systems. Troicki was clean. Even when making the decision they agreed that he was and had been. He shouldn't have got a ban as long as it was, if he was more likes or well known he would have got much less. He shouldn't be compared to those two. Cilic's ban was far too lenient. Cilic and Maria should be treated more harshly the troicki. Cilic maybe even more so because the substance he took wasn't previously allowed and then banned.
@ Jerry D - I disagree with you over Troicki. It is well known that there are certain PED's that can be metabolised within a 24 hours period. Troicki tested clean, but it is possible that had he given the blood when requested he might not have been. Because he refused the blood test, there is no way of knowing.
It is part of his job to give blood when requested. The fuss he made about that blood test was very suspicious to me. It was right that he was banned. I personally don't see him as any less guilty than the others.
I do agree with you that the bans were far too lenient. However in doping bans, as with dodgy umpiring decisions, and not acting to default Romania yesterday the ITF have repeatedly demonstrated their moral turpitude.
RosieBear
23-04-2017, 07:07
It is part of his job to give blood when requested. The fuss he made about that blood test was very suspicious to me. It was right that he was banned. I personally don't see him as any less guilty than the others.
Completely disagree. The principle of innocent until proven guilty is a bedrock of any civilised society. However implausible anyone might find his story, the *fact* is that Troicki was only penalised for not giving a sample, and nobody has any right to extrapolate his case and presume doping guilt based on their 'suspicions'. There is no way that he should be treated as harshly as someone who was definitively found to have a banned substance in their system.
Sorry, but I can't see that drug testing can operate on any other basis. If you allow people to miss drugs tests simply because they say they feel ill, surely it potentially opens the process up to all sorts of abuse. Isn't drug testing carried out on a presumption of guilt? If you miss three drugs tests in any sport within a specified time frame, aren't you treated as though you have doped, and receive an automatic ban? I.e. In the absence of evidence that you are not guilty, you are assumed to be guilty.
Completely disagree. The principle of innocent until proven guilty is a bedrock of any civilised society. However implausible anyone might find his story, the *fact* is that Troicki was only penalised for not giving a sample, and nobody has any right to extrapolate his case and presume doping guilt based on their 'suspicions'. There is no way that he should be treated as harshly as someone who was definitively found to have a banned substance in their system.
:clap::clap::clap:
RosieBear
23-04-2017, 07:36
Sorry, but I can't see that drug testing can operate on any other basis. If you allow people to miss drugs tests simply because they say they feel ill, surely it potentially opens the process up to all sorts of abuse. Isn't drug testing carried out on a presumption of guilt? If you miss three drugs tests in any sport within a specified time frame, aren't you treated as though you have doped, and receive an automatic ban? I.e. In the absence of evidence that you are not guilty, you are assumed to be guilty.
But Troicki wasn't allowed to get away with not giving a sample, that is what he was punished for, Teresa.
And using a pattern of *3* tests, to establish positive evidence of avoidance is not the same as the extrapolation of a single case to presume doping. If Troicki had refused 3 times, I don't think you would find anyone disagreeing with your harsh stance.
I'm with Teresa on this one. I think Troicki's refusal to give a sample on the day was deeply suspicious and - yes - there are substances that disappear within 24 hours. If he was well enough to play, he was well enough to give a sample. The only time I have given a blood sample for testing was when I was ill!
Yes some things leave your system after 24 hours, but his test was less than 24 hours later, officials agreed that they believed him to be clean, his refusal aside. He was found to be clean by the people we ask to decide these things, that is enough to not put him in the same box as known offenders. The powers that he said there was no suggestion he was attempting to evade the detection of a banned substance in his blood. I do think he was treated too harshly with ac12 month ban, Maria only got 15 months and she was taking a banned substance.
As for his story of being ill, in the match before the blood test he complained of being ill. And afterwards. He was convincingly beaten in that match as a result. That evening they attempted to test him, he was unwell and has a fear so asked to postpone. First thing the next morning (much less than 24 hours later) he took the test. Not sure what he could have been taking that he'd never taken before (all previous tests clean), made him so ill he played badly and then left his system in 12 hours. kevD has a fear on needles so bad, that if he is unwell we don't go ahead, we've learnt what to do and what not do through getting travel vaccinations. If he's ill it increases the chances of him fainting. Having blood drawn is worse. I don't think anyone has the right to assume troicki wasn't clean, there is no evidence of that. All the circumstantial evidence makes it highly unlikely that he was guilty. He was guilty of not being aware refusal would mean s ban. He should have known, the doctor should have reminded him.
Cilic was only banned for 4 months and he actually took a banned substance.i would have banned him for over a year. In the case of sharapova I don't know if she intentionally took a banned substance, she says she didn't realise. However there was evidence that she took a banned substance. She should have got a longer ban and certainly shouldn't be getting wild cards. She should work her way back up.
I hadn't realised that not only have the Stuttgart officials given Sharapova a wild card but they have deliberately delayed her first match until Wednesday, which is the day after her ban expires. That is grossly unfair on players like Jo Konta, who are playing Fed Cup today but have to get to Stuttgart in time to play either tomorrow or Tuesday.
WimbledonWestie
23-04-2017, 11:22
She isn't eligible to play until Wednesday - I definitely feel she shouldn't be allowed a wild card into an event she isn't eligible to play in on its start date.
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have happened if she hadn't been a big name. Sadly, she is a crowd puller and the tournament officials are looking to maximise their ticket sales. I really hope she doesn't get an enthusiastic reception from the crowd but, unfortunately, she probably will.
WimbledonWestie
23-04-2017, 12:19
It's actually a shame for Angie Kerber, the event has become the Sharapova show but as the home player with such outstanding success in the past year it should've been a chance to celebrate her achievements. Instead she is a side show.
I certainly don't agree with her getting wild cards and even if offered, she should have the decency to say "I made a mistake and thank you very much, but I'm going to come back the hard way" and play qualies etc. That would have got her way more respect from everyone.
I certainly don't agree with her getting wild cards and even if offered, she should have the decency to say "I made a mistake and thank you very much, but I'm going to come back the hard way" and play qualies etc. That would have got her way more respect from everyone.
Sadly, that's not Sharapova's style. At no stage has she shown any remorse.
I was reading today that any FO wild card might only be for qualies.
themass15
25-04-2017, 17:41
Roberta Vinci wasn't happy about it; she was on 5Live this morning.
Andy & Dan in the 3rd round of Barcelona, Aljaz in the QF of Budapest and Jo Konta winning in Stuttgart but whose match does the BBC use their resources to broadcast live? Sharapova the doppa. :rolleyes: On BBC5Live Sports Extra at 5.30pm.
greatunclebulgaria
26-04-2017, 15:04
Disgusting
Yes I was very disappointed this morning on the Breakfast sports when they failed to mention Dan's win, but managed to spend ages talking about Shrieky. Not good.
On Sky News this morning the subject of their daily debate was 'Should Sharapova receive wild cards?' Resounding 'no' was the opinion, and I'm sorry, I can't remember who the 2 were who were giving their views!
greatunclebulgaria
26-04-2017, 16:26
Barry Cowan and a woman I hadn't heard of before
roytennisfan
26-04-2017, 17:25
port360°Verified account @Sport360 1h1 hour ago
More
Maria Sharapova will learn her @rolandgarros fate on May 16 via a FFT Facebook Live.
I read about about her fate on the French Open wildcard or not on, due to be decided on the 16th of next month, earlier.
.................. and Shrieky takes the first set. I missed the beginning of the match - can anyone tell me what her reception was like when she walked onto court?
First set to Maria - 7 - 5:boogie:
Maria wins 7-5, 6-3:yahoo::yahoo:
Shrieky wins 7-5, 6-3:grrr::grrr:
Not the result most right thinking people wanted.
Woah! Genie Bouchard not holding back. :shocked: The strongest comments yet from a fellow player. A pity her game has slumped and she may well be needing wild cards herself. ;) From about 1:52 "She's a cheater.....I don't think a cheater in any sport should be allowed to play that sport again."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in-hEb_OQxo&app=desktop
Well, in my book anyway, Eugenie's right. I'm appalled at this tournament bending over backwards to accommodate Maria - it sends all the wrong messages.
JAMES4578
26-04-2017, 20:38
Strong opinions on both sides of the argument, Andy Roddick taking different view http://www.insidetennis.com/2017/04/andy-roddick-strongly-backs-sharapova-its-a-business-not-a-moral-thing/ At the end of the day Sharapova has served her ban and is entitled to play (though whether she should've received wild card when she wasn't eligible at start of event other matter) However personally was of the view it was more a case of negligence and whilst had to be penalty complete ban not warranted.
Of course opinions differ, in my view her achievements will ever be tainted.
thanks for posting that article James , interesting from Andy R
I know as fans , we dont like to think of it as a business , but thats exactly what it is
Talking of women making comebacks.
I can feel a song coming on!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ9DrReE-uo
Oh the irony.
;)
Talking of women making comebacks.
I can feel a song coming on!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ9DrR
Oh the irony.
;)
The link not working for me jagmad!
The link not working for me jagmad!
Sorry fixed now.
Sorry fixed now.
:laugh: Cheers jagmad.
I feel that anyone cheating to a major degree should be banned for life which I believe is Chris Kermode's opinion too. The reason I feel like this is that no one knew except her father and agent what a cocktail she was taking. Why so secret?
I feel that anyone cheating to a major degree should be banned for life which I believe is Chris Kermode's opinion too. The reason I feel like this is that no one knew except her father and agent what a cocktail she was taking. Why so secret?
It is that fact which convinces me she is not innocent and it is something that those who defend her fail to acknowledge.
Well, all we have to go on are the facts at our disposal, clearly not the whole story, but no way should anyone just assume anything! Those who are saying she cheated don't actually have any proof that it is not the mistake Sharapova says it is. ie. yes she took the drug, but she didn't do it deliberately. And as for Bouchard .... she should know better than to spout so hotly when she has no facts. Never liked her anyway but she should be very careful or she could be sued ....
As for wild cards, we all have our opinions but Andy Roddick, Mark Petchy and others are right when they say that like it or not these tournaments are business and also like it or not Sharapova pulls in the punters and the attention. She will put bums on seats and make the tournament money. They have to see it that way, they have no choice if they want to be a success.
I feel that anyone cheating to a major degree should be banned for life which I believe is Chris Kermode's opinion too. The reason I feel like this is that no one knew except her father and agent what a cocktail she was taking. Why so secret?
Her father again, he has a lot to answer for over the years I think, just my opinion folks!
If it was a simple mistake, and she genuinely hadn't realised it was banned then why go to such lengths to hide what she was taking from everyone? The two things simply don't equate to me.
Also if tennis as a whole is a business rather than a sport, then why bother with drugs testing at all? The same could apply across any sport. By the business argument then why bother hounding Lance Armstrong- he was a "name", put plenty of bums on seats, and made the races and organisers vast sums of money, and got lots of would be Lance Armstrong's on their pedal cycles. Surely the sensible thing would have been just to take the money and run?
In a sense dopers are surely deceiving the paying punters? Personally I don't like the thought that what I am seeing isn't honest. Diving in football really hacks me off as well.
Josephine
27-04-2017, 12:17
Who takes any medication for years without checking if there are long term side effects or if it is still needed, especially one you take randomly and for some reason take more of before big matches? She seems healthy now so presumably some other equally flexible medicine has been found to help her.
Fair enough - she was taking something which was not banned for most of the time. But if she had actually informed the WTA, then it would have been more likely she would have been directly advised about the change.
Can't say I like the disdain with which she treats her fellow players either. Nothing to admire in that. Though that is irrelevant in terms of any drugs ban and wild cards etc, it has obviously made other players more ready to speak out against the giving of wild cards.
Well, all we have to go on are the facts at our disposal, clearly not the whole story, but no way should anyone just assume anything! Those who are saying she cheated don't actually have any proof that it is not the mistake Sharapova says it is. ie. yes she took the drug, but she didn't do it deliberately. And as for Bouchard .... she should know better than to spout so hotly when she has no facts. Never liked her anyway but she should be very careful or she could be sued ....
As for wild cards, we all have our opinions but Andy Roddick, Mark Petchy and others are right when they say that like it or not these tournaments are business and also like it or not Sharapova pulls in the punters and the attention. She will put bums on seats and make the tournament money. They have to see it that way, they have no choice if they want to be a success.
agree about Genie Caro , she should concentrate on her own game , which has gone down the toilet
Josephine
27-04-2017, 12:50
She is entitled to her opinion, same as us.
It's true I should be working - but I think I will be able to concentrate on my work after a bit of diversion here.;)
RosieBear
27-04-2017, 13:45
Why Maria chose to keep her drug taking secret isn't an important issue because it wasn't banned for the vast majority of the time she was taking it. Whether people feel it should have been banned earlier because it give an advantage is an entirely different question. The *fact* is it wasn't banned until 1st Jan 2016. It is quite right that Maria was penalised for taking the substance after it was banned, but what she took before Jan 1st, and who she told, is entirely her business so long as it wasn't on the banned list, which meldonium wasn't. The people taking the harshest view on Maria are the same people who criticised Novak's use of the 'pod' even though it wasn't prohibited. It's a similar situation - just because you might not agree with using the pod, as long as it isn't a breach of rules then Novak was within his rights to use it. The rulebook is there to provide a standard for all players. Any player that breaks the rules should be punished, as Maria rightly was, but personally I don't understand the angst about actions that don't contravene rules.
I thought it was mandatory for all players to advise the authorities of any drugs they are taking for medical reasons - am I wrong in that?
RosieBear
27-04-2017, 14:05
Players advise authorities of what they are taking for medical reasons so they can get therapeutic exemption. But exemption not needed if not on banned list.
goldfish
27-04-2017, 15:26
Not at all enthusiastic about Maria being given WCs but I feel there would have been much less controversy if she had waited just one more week. I realise that a Porsche-sponsored event is more likely to offer her a WC though. Pity. I certainly would have been more understanding.
Sharapova wins 7 - 5, 6 - 1 :boogie: :boogie:
Also if tennis as a whole is a business rather than a sport, then why bother with drugs testing at all? The same could apply across any sport. By the business argument then why bother hounding Lance Armstrong- he was a "name", put plenty of bums on seats, and made the races and organisers vast sums of money, and got lots of would be Lance Armstrong's on their pedal cycles. Surely the sensible thing would have been just to take the money and run?
Sorry, but that is ridiculous! Of course tennis is a sport and of course there should be drug testing! But as I said "like it or not", tournaments have to be financially viable otherwise we have no tournaments. Maria has served her ban and whether you, me or anyone else agrees with her being given the wildcard, she is now entitled to play. Before her ban, she was a big draw player and that is not going to change, she always has and always will put bums on seats regardless of her recent ban.
My main objection is that at the beginning of the tournament Maria was not eligible to play. The TD arranged the schedule so that she could play her first match on Wednesday. If she had started her comeback next week I don't think there would have been nearly as much controversy. Personally, I think Maria enjoys the adverse publicity on the basis that all publicity is good publicity.
Raspberry strawberry.
I said it before, I'll say it again.
It's not what you do (Maria) it's the way that you do it.
The conscience of the tournament organisers will be clear they are only bean counting really, any back lash will be way
compensated at the turn styles.
Maria's conscience?
Only she has to wrestle with that. On the other hand, the decisions she makes, and taking the "we can delay
your day 1" speak volumes to me. And maybe a lot of others, though probably not enough to bother her, just like the Tournament organisers.
If she's happy to take the easy way with what she considers a "I've payed my dues" attitude.
Then she obviously can but I have one word of warning for MS.
In the words of a very wise man.
Well there ain't no point in moving on
Until you've got somewhere to go
And the road that I have walked upon
Well it filled my pockets
And emptied out my soul.
I know for I was that soldier.
Josephine
28-04-2017, 10:00
Good to see Sharapova now has a medical specialist to help with her heart and diabetes issues - an orthopaedic doctor, no less.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-4452396/Maria-Sharapova-opportunity-make-Wimbledon.html
roytennisfan
28-04-2017, 11:03
port360°Verified account @Sport360 1h1 hour ago
More
Maria Sharapova will learn her @rolandgarros fate on May 16 via a FFT Facebook Live.
Stuart FraserVerified account @stu_fraser 23m23 minutes ago
More
Sharapova in Stuttgart quarters at 1pm UK. Two wins away from guaranteeing place in French Open & Wimbledon qualies.
JAMES4578
28-04-2017, 13:46
Well Sharapova through to the semis anyway after 6-3, 6-4 win over Kontaveit (who put out Muguruza last round).
roytennisfan
28-04-2017, 15:39
Seems the seeds are boycotting playing Sharapova, should have faced Radwanska R2, Muguruza in QF and Kerber in SF. All 3 lost before, any conspiracy theories?
If she beats Mladenovic she will definitely meet a seed in the final, either Pliskova or Halep.
I wonder if Masha will be motivated to play Kiki. :whistle:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-grpJsVwAEN_qI.jpg
roytennisfan
28-04-2017, 18:28
Seems deliberate timing to try and wind Maria up, let's see if it works tomorrow
Probably half the players criticising her were also taking it when it was legal.
roytennisfan
28-04-2017, 21:47
Halep the only seed left in Stuttgart semis with Pliskova beaten by Siegemund
Josephine
28-04-2017, 23:51
Seems deliberate timing to try and wind Maria up, let's see if it works tomorrow
Think these quotes were from months ago (in fact March 2016 for Kiki)
Josephine
28-04-2017, 23:52
Probably half the players criticising her were also taking it when it was legal.
Does that include Andy? Should he be under suspicion for speaking out so strongly about people taking drugs?
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 14:32
Maria already 4-1 up
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 14:49
6-3
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 14:57
Early break 2-0 Maria
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 15:03
Kiki breaks 2-2
Does that include Andy? Should he be under suspicion for speaking out so strongly about people taking drugs?
I presumed Linda was referring to the female players, as if she included any male players that spoke out against doping, that would include Rafa & there is no way Linda would accuse Rafa......just my thoughts!:)
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 15:33
Maria double fault, Kiki 2 points from winning set
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 15:51
Kiki 7-5 game on
JAMES4578
29-04-2017, 15:54
A few doubles crept in for Sharapova and Kiki certainly challenging her, how crucial was that penultimate game-all to play for in 3rd.
Kiki has 0-40 on Sharapova's serve .......... c'mon!
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 16:27
4-2 momentum with Kiki
Now Maria has 0-30 on Kiki's serve.
Kiki comes back to take the game 5-2. Maria serving to stay in it.
Kiki fails to serve it out and we're now back on serve at 5-4.
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 16:45
Still has a chance on Maria's serve 0-15
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 16:46
0-30 2 points from victory
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 16:48
40-A mp
roytennisfan
29-04-2017, 16:49
Kiki wins 6-4 in decider
............... and Kiki breaks to take the match! :yahoo:
JAMES4578
29-04-2017, 16:54
Tight match but Kiki takes in the end,good win. Sharapova though will likely feel she let it slip but first tournament back.
Good win from Kiki. Quite pleased that Shrieky didn't win in her first tournament after ban.
How do u guys stand watching her , not personal , but that shriek is just too much for me
How do u guys stand watching her , not personal , but that shriek is just too much for me
It's easy. Just mute.
yeah I guess , but that kills the enjoyment of a match for me
roytennisfan
03-05-2017, 17:13
Andy expects her to get a Wimbledon wc into qualifiers, if she needs one
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/39785177
If Nastee has been band, surely if he's ever allowed back into wimbey he has to make it of his own doing.
Should it not be the same for MS?
Other than £'s I can see no reason for a WC.
Although they have just announced that the prize money is to increase considerably.
Maybe that's where they think it's gonna come from???
Either that or from the sale of green ear muffs on entry to her matches!!
;)
....................... but surely Wimbledon doesn't need the pull of a name like Sharapova to put bums on seats - they are sold out every day anyway. I cannot see any legitimate reason for them to give her a wild card.
....................... but surely Wimbledon doesn't need the pull of a name like Sharapova to put bums on seats - they are sold out every day anyway. I cannot see any legitimate reason for them to give her a wild card.
My post was very very tongue in cheek.
Note green ear muffs? Also the ;)
I agree totally btw.
Also they would be doing themselves a dis-service if they did imo.
Although Andy seems to think Wimbledon will.
So hmmmmm......
I'm not getting at you, Jagmag - just hopeful that Wimby will do the right thing. I will be so disappointed if they give her a wild card.
Rosalind
04-05-2017, 20:17
I'm not getting at you, Jagmag - just hopeful that Wimby will do the right thing. I will be so disappointed if they give her a wild card.
Yes and at the expense of someone genuine obviously. Tennis doesn't need her.
angiebabez
04-05-2017, 23:09
Shes an arrogant stuck up ****. Cant stand her
This giving her wild cards is just sending the wrong message to up and coming youngsters. A player has been banned for live for match fixing. The same should go for drug cheating which I consider a greater crime
supergran
05-05-2017, 08:45
This giving her wild cards is just sending the wrong message to up and coming youngsters. A player has been banned for live for match fixing. The same should go for drug cheating which I consider a greater crime
I agree. Drug cheats should be banned for life.
Shes an arrogant stuck up ****r. Cant stand her :laugh::laugh::laugh: Never been a fan either.
I'm just not sure "drug cheat" is the right label in this situation. There's never enough information and we will never know the true story ...
roytennisfan
05-05-2017, 11:09
The wildcards get allocated according to criteria eg Wimbledon considers British Interest, current form and Past record at Wimbledon which unless she has a couple of bad r1 defeats in Madrid and Rome she probably ticks 2 of those 3, same goes for Roland Garros, that is probably why Andy was thinking she may get one. The other issue of course, is the power of the sponsors pushing for her, although they may not carry weight in slams, they do in most other tournaments. I was still shocked that she was allowed to enter a tournament which started before her ban finished, the WTA should have stepped in and not allowed that.
:laugh::laugh::laugh: Never been a fan either.
I'm just not sure "drug cheat" is the right label in this situation. There's never enough information and we will never know the true story ...
I am sure she said that she was using ten different medications per day for many years.
Sallydaisy
05-05-2017, 22:34
I am sure she said that she was using ten different medications per day for many years.
I look after 11 senior citizens who regularly take more than 10 different medicatons per day for many years - mainly so they stay alive! It surely doesn't mean they can be labelled 'cheats' even though the meds are being use to 'cheat' both time (for them to stay alive) or 'cheat' their bodies into thinking they're a lot better than they really are.
My point is that an awful lot of people make 2+2 = 5 and sometimes truth really can be stranger than fiction. Oh, and whilst I'm on my soapbox, I'm guessing that there is NO-ONE on this forum who has not made a significant mistake. Except I'm also guessing that NONE of you were subjected to mass uninformed villification in the media when that happened.
Would any of you like to confess? Especially those who have been so quick to condemn?
;)
supergran
05-05-2017, 23:06
What significant mistakes do you mean? Talking about elderly people taking medication most of them, including suoergramps, know what they are taking and what each one is for and what it does. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken but she was banned for taking a substance which was on a list of prohibited substances, she did not inform her team that she was taking it, she claimed it was for a medical condition and she took it a number of times before a Grand Slam tournament.
This was something taken over a long period of time and when it was banned she carried on taking it. To compare this to people with long-term conditions taking life-saving drugs and preventative medication is a poor comparison. She was found guilty and banned from her sport for a period of time. That period of time, in my opinion, should have been for life. I shall now ponder on any significant mistakes I have made which could have helped me in my professional and personal life. This by the way is the most I have written about Sharapova publicly.
I look after 11 senior citizens who regularly take more than 10 different medicatons per day for many years - mainly so they stay alive! It surely doesn't mean they can be labelled 'cheats' even though the meds are being use to 'cheat' both time (for them to stay alive) or 'cheat' their bodies into thinking they're a lot better than they really are.
My point is that an awful lot of people make 2+2 = 5 and sometimes truth really can be stranger than fiction. Oh, and whilst I'm on my soapbox, I'm guessing that there is NO-ONE on this forum who has not made a significant mistake. Except I'm also guessing that NONE of you were subjected to mass uninformed villification in the media when that happened.
Would any of you like to confess? Especially those who have been so quick to condemn?
;)
I take not far short of that many each day to enable me to retain the ability to move. I do not think the two situations are remotely comparable. For a start I do not make any attempt to hide what I am taking. Like your senior citizens I imagine the bottles and packets are fully documented and on open display. I don't nip behind the bike sheds to swallow my pills. There are certain situations when I would get into trouble if I didn't declare what I was taking. I am always a bit wary if I am traveling because I usually have some codeine based painkillers about my person. If a drugs dog showed interest, I would expect to questioned, and possibly get into trouble if I didn't have appropriate documentation.
If I equally decided to indulge in a little canabis as a means of pain control, I have to accept that given it's illegal (I think), I run the risk of legal action following.
I just don't think the two situations are comparable. As I understand it the drug she was taking and got nailed for, has no medical benefits at all. It was designed to increase and enhance stamina in Russian troops. Given that fact, I personally think she was on dodgy grounds morally even whilst it was legal. Once it became banned she should have stopped taking it.
The fact she went to such lengths to hide what she was taking, doesn't suggest a mistake to me, it suggests premeditation.
Sorry with the best will in the world I can't see Sharapova as the victim in this.
Josephine
06-05-2017, 10:18
I look after 11 senior citizens who regularly take more than 10 different medicatons per day for many years - mainly so they stay alive! It surely doesn't mean they can be labelled 'cheats' even though the meds are being use to 'cheat' both time (for them to stay alive) or 'cheat' their bodies into thinking they're a lot better than they really are.
My point is that an awful lot of people make 2+2 = 5 and sometimes truth really can be stranger than fiction. Oh, and whilst I'm on my soapbox, I'm guessing that there is NO-ONE on this forum who has not made a significant mistake. Except I'm also guessing that NONE of you were subjected to mass uninformed villification in the media when that happened.
Would any of you like to confess? Especially those who have been so quick to condemn?
;)
The drug Sharapova was taking is unlicensed in the US where she resides - are any of these old people taking drugs which are unlicensed in the UK?
Also there are many drugs which ordinary people can take which are on the banned list for athletes and which should only be taken with a TUE - these of course have also been used in questionnable ways. Not referring to meldonium here - just that you cannnot compare people on many drugs due to being elderly and in ill-health to a young athlete taking drugs which are either against doping rules to take or are not recognised as helping any medical condition.
If Sharapova wants to emphasise her innocence all she needs to do is explain which drugs she is now taking to help her medical condition. Of course she claims that is no-one's business and she has a right to privacy. But if she wants to stop doubters then why not release the info?
I've also made many mistakes in my life - I don't feel that I got off scot-free from the consequences. I also haven't made millions by exploiting my fame in the media and using it to sell sweets to children.
banskogirl
06-05-2017, 21:32
Andy said: “I read that 55 athletes have failed tests for that substance since January 1. You just don’t expect high level athletes at the top of many sports to have heart conditions.”
:) did Andy think it was a mistake?
roytennisfan
07-05-2017, 21:02
Eugenie plays Maria tomorrow evening, can her racquet do the talking as well ....interesting...however, if Maria wins she won't need the wildcard to enter Wimbledon (quals) but if that is the case I reckon they will give her one into the main draw to avoid the circus at Roehampton, even with the new £5 entry and maximum 1,000 spectators
banskogirl
07-05-2017, 21:05
Eugenie plays Maria tomorrow evening, can her racquet do the talking as well ....interesting...however, if Maria wins she won't need the wildcard to enter Wimbledon (quals) but if that is the case I reckon they will give her one into the main draw to avoid the circus at Roehampton, even with the new £5 entry and maximum 1,000 spectators
I read somewhere that Genie said it will be an extra incentive for her to win. Put her racket where her mouth is!
Josephine
08-05-2017, 09:11
http://www.tennisworldusa.org/news/news/Maria_Sharapova/43133/maria-sharapova-s-agent-apologizes-to-caroline-wozniacki-and-her-family/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I read somewhere that Genie said it will be an extra incentive for her to win. Put her racket where her mouth is!
Her mouth is nearly as big as her racket!
I get what everyone is saying and I understand why people are completely anti Sharapova. I have never been a fan and have never defended her per se .... BUT what I have said and what I think Sally was trying to say is that we all have our opinions, we can speculate all we want but none of us have any proof and none of us have all the facts. And sometimes as Sally said, 2+2 can so easily be made to = 5 when not all the facts are at our disposal.
So much so that I'm sorely tempted to draw a line under this. Here it is...
__________________________________________________
Well , the match between these 2 just started , hoping to see some drama:lol:
It;s a real needle match. Bouchard had break points of Sharapova's last service game but didn't convert and now Sharapova has break points on Bouchard's serve.
.............. and Sharapova converts. You should see the face - if looks could kill from both sides of the court! I hope I'm wrong but I can't see Genie staying with her.
Sharapova staring daggars at her :lol:
This is good stuff - break points galore on either side. They are definitely bringing the best out of one another but there's more at stake than a tennis match here - it's most definitely personal.
................ and Bouchard breaks to go 6-5 up and is serving for the first set.
RosieBear
08-05-2017, 19:19
Go on Maria! :hide::rolling: - do not like handshake refuser Bouchard :p - I wonder if Genie will shake hands at the net with Maria, is it just Fed Cup oppo she snubs? :shrug: ...will be interesting...
............... and Bouchard takes the first set 7-5. I don't particularly like Bouchard either but in this case it's the lesser of two evils as far as I'm concerned. Good match though!
Sharapova's shrieking is getting louder and louder. It's so off-putting - something should have been done about it years ago.
I can't/don't watch her (unless playing a Brit, when I force myself).
I don't either usually but I was interested to see this match tonight and, so far, it hasn't disappointed.
I haven't seen Bouchard play as well as this for years - it's certainly brought the best out in her.
greatunclebulgaria
08-05-2017, 19:44
for the first time in years I'm willing Bouchard to win a match :lol::faint::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:
WimbledonWestie
08-05-2017, 19:47
This is a cracker of a match! Was disappointed at missing my own tennis due to being late home from work- but this is fair compensation M
Sharapova has grabbed back the momentum - Bouchard struggling to hold serve to stay in this set.
......................... and Sharapova wins the second set 6-2 and we go to a third with Sharapova serving first.
RosieBear
08-05-2017, 19:58
Think Maria will take the decider - extremely tough competitor.
wish they could both lose :whistle:
wish they could both lose :whistle:
An interesting thing for a Canadian to say, ljs - I take it you're not a Bouchard fan.
nope Alis , I used to be , until that horrible display from her at Fed Cup , that totally turned me off her , she was representing out Country , and thats not Canadian at all !!!!
Yes, I can see where you're coming from on that one - that certainly wasn't a crowd pleaser.
RosieBear
08-05-2017, 20:21
nope Alis , I used to be , until that horrible display from her at Fed Cup , that totally turned me off her , she was representing out Country , and thats not Canadian at all !!!!
I respect your stance, ljs. I'm the same with the English footie team - gave up supporting because of the way they behave. And no it's not Canadian - Canada is amazing, with amazing people which is why brother and his wife-to-be have chosen there for their honeymoon (marrying on 25th May, but doing Canada in Oct so they can see polar bears in Churchill). And so the Scots don't feel put out, my brother got engaged in September last year while doing the North Coast 500 - said it was the most stunning road trip they'd done, and they've done a good few together.
Soooo off topic :shamed: - C'mon Maria - she's done her time as far as I'm concerned.
Bouchard had 0-40 on the Sharapova serve but couldn't convert, now Sharapova has 0-40 on the Bouchard serve. Hang on - we're back to deuce. This is a really good match.
............ and Bouchard holds - it's all square at 2-2. I defy anyone to pick a winner in this!
Bouchard has 0-40 again on the Sharapova serve - can she do it this time?
................. and Sharapova manages to salvage a hold.
I respect your stance, ljs. I'm the same with the English footie team - gave up supporting because of the way they behave. And no it's not Canadian - Canada is amazing, with amazing people which is why brother and his wife-to-be have chosen there for their honeymoon (marrying on 25th May, but doing Canada in Oct so they can see polar bears in Churchill). And so the Scots don't feel put out, my brother got engaged in September last year while doing the North Coast 500 - said it was the most stunning road trip they'd done, and they've done a good few together.
Soooo off topic :shamed: - C'mon Maria - she's done her time as far as I'm concerned.
Wow , thats amazing Rosie , I love polar bears !!!
I have really tried to like Genie , I really have & I feel kinda guilty not supporting her being Canadian , but just cant :(
Bouchard breaks and is serving for the match but it's 15-40.
.............. back to deuce. C'mon Bouchard!
A lucky net cord saves Sharapova.
:crying: :crying: but what a match!!!
................ and Bouchard takes it. I would rather it was someone else that put Sharapova out but well done Eugenie Bouchard - that was an amazing match.
well , good for her , thats the best I have seen her play for quite a while
RosieBear
08-05-2017, 21:03
I don't like her, but fair play to Bouchard. Not easy to out tough Maria, but she did it.:clap:
Sallydaisy
08-05-2017, 21:03
Genie finds some magic to beat Shrieky
Mike DicksonVerified account @Mike_Dickson_DM (https://twitter.com/Mike_Dickson_DM) 3m3 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/Mike_Dickson_DM/status/861687921006567424)
Tough as old boots at the end from Bouchard, knocks Sharapova out 6-4 in the third. MS still short of making Wimbledon qualies by right.
Stuart FraserVerified account @stu_fraser (https://twitter.com/stu_fraser) 48s48 seconds ago (https://twitter.com/stu_fraser/status/861687693511725058)
Eugenie Bouchard defeats Maria Sharapova 7-5, 2-6, 6-4. Sharapova must reach semis in Rome next week to make Wimbledon main draw by right.
Josephine
08-05-2017, 21:04
Well done Genie!! Great result!
Very happy with that result. Was rooting for Bouchard.
well , good for her , thats the best I have seen her play for quite a while
Absolutely! Credit where credit is due - that was sheer determination. I don't think I have witnessed a women's match quite like that before - the venom from both sides of the net was tangible.
goldfish
08-05-2017, 21:16
Well done Genie for winning and to both for shaking hands at the end. Genie may actually need to thank Maria for giving her the impetus to play so well today. Hopefully a big confidence boost.
Stuart Fraser is replying to himself Sally.... :)
Stuart FraserVerified account
@stu_fraser
Following
More
One win in Rome would be enough for Sharapova to earn a place in qualifying draw for Wimbledon. Squeaky bum time at the All England Club...
Sallydaisy
08-05-2017, 21:19
Stuart Fraser is replying to himself Sally.... :)
:lol:
I saw that ... AND Ben Rothenberg messed up a tweet about Sharapova!
Those journos need to get a life ...
;)
JAMES4578
08-05-2017, 21:55
Would've preferred Sharapova to come through but great battle, all credit to Genie for great win when she's been struggling of late.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.