Lawyer Angelo Cascella, former member of the CAS in Lausanne, expressed his opinion on the controversial Jannik Sinner’s doping challenge.
Interviewed by the Italian web site Sportmediaset, the professional in worldwide sports activities legislation gave his opinion on the thorny case involving the ATP #1, particularly in relation to the brand new WADA guidelines.
“Since analyses have been carried out and the existence of doping traces has been demonstrated, the athlete risks a sentence of one to two years. In these cases, there may be intent or fault or negligence. In the first case, the sentence can go up to four years of disqualification, in the second, as requested for Sinner, it goes from one to two years,” he stated.
He then continued, explaining the rationale for WADA’s enchantment to the CAS, highlighting if prohibited substances are present in blood or urine checks that the athlete and employees are completely conscious of, on this case the athlete is liable. In reality, the athlete is answerable for the substances which are present in his physique and, in Sinner’s case, a few of them have been detected within the checks carried out.
Sinner© Stream screenshot
The brand new rule, which can come into pressure in 2027, is a latest improvement, which might result in the cancellation of circumstances like Sinner’s.
“The rule will be in force starting in 2027, which means that it does not affect the decision of this case which is prior. The case will therefore have to be decided on the existing rules. There is a risk of a conviction, but at the same time it is possible that the parties will hear from each other in these months and a settlement agreement can be found on something that is good for both and the hearing can be suspended since it will not arrive before spring 2025,” he added.
After the aggressive season ended with the victory of the second Davis Cup in Malaga, consideration has returned in latest weeks to the doping case involving Sinner. Sadly, we are going to nonetheless have to attend to know the decision of the CAS on the Clostebol case, however a number of professionals have spoken out on the topic, giving their opinion.
