He dominated the last two Grand Slams, but just weeks after his Happy Slam triumph, Jannik Sinner is making headlines for all the wrong reasons. A controversial doping deal has handed him a ‘three-month’ ban, sparking accusations of favoritism and shaking faith in clean sport. Even Stan Wawrinka voiced his discontent, stating he did not “believe in a clean sport anymore” But the plot thickens even further Sinner’s lawyer now reveals a new version of behind the scenes that might forecast the Sinner’s version from all the incidents. And, as shockwaves ripple through the tennis fraternity, one question lingers: what’s the real story behind this stunning turn of events though?
To grasp the full story, we must rewind to August last year when an independent tribunal cleared the three-time GS winner of wrongdoing after he failed two dope tests at Indian Wells. The panel accepted his explanation that traces of “Clostebol” an anabolic steroid, entered his system through accidental contamination from his physio during a massage. But WADA challenged the ruling that Sinner bore no fault or negligence – pushing for at least a one or two-year ban at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). However, as the case neared its decisive April hearing, WADA reconsidered the situation. In a surprising turn, officials approached Sinner’s team twice in pursuit of a resolution which led to the controversial agreement of a 3-month ban, now shaking the tennis world.
Under the terms of the agreement with WADA, the Italian will be eligible to return to competitive action on May 5, just in time for the Italian Open on his home turf and ahead of the French Open later that month. Until April 13, he can only train in isolation, avoiding contact with professional players. Moreover, he remains barred from attending ATP, WTA, or ITF events in any capacity until his ban is lifted. And, with the decision finalized, his lawyer has now shed light on a critical aspect of the case, one that may change how the sport views justice and fairness: why would the World No. 1 accept a ban for something he insists he is innocent of?
According to the BBC – WADA approached Sinner’s team seeking a settlement twice – with Jannik hesitant to accept any ban:
“With time ticking before the CAS hearing in April, Wada made two approaches to Sinner’s team for the case resolution agreement.”
His lawyer Singer… pic.twitter.com/dOJQFEvQWe
— Olly Tennis (@Olly_Tennis_) February 23, 2025
Speaking to BBC Sport, Sinner’s lawyer Jamie Singer said, “It was quite tricky to convince Sinner to take the offer. When I was saying ‘well, look, maybe we should settle for three months’, he was saying ‘well, why would we do that if the first independent tribunal found it was no ban at all, why would I accept three months now?”
He continued, “My advice was ‘one never knows what’s going to happen at a hearing, we know that Wada are pushing for a year, if we don’t accept their offer then they will go to court looking for a year and who knows what those three judges could do. So the possibility of three months, in my view, was a good possibility,”.
The timing of the controversial deal came as a shock, as the Italian’s primary hearing was originally set for April 16. And, with the clock ticking before the CAS showdown, WADA made two attempts to negotiate a case resolution agreement with Sinner’s side. The first approach was rejected, as Sinner’s team insisted on presenting their full defense in the first place by submitting it on January 31. However, in early February, following WADA’s second approach, serious negotiations began between the two parties.
As the dust settled and the Italian top seeder, who had been training in Doha for the Qatar Open after his AO win, was forced to withdraw, questions arose worldwide about the controversial ban. With growing scrutiny from players and fans alike, WADA officials finally stepped forward with much-needed answers, attempting to justify the decision.
“This was a case that was a million miles away from doping” — WADA officials statement regarding the ban
WADA believed the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA), the worldwide anti-doping agency of tennis, should have penalized the Italian under strict liability, holding him ultimately accountable for his two failed drug tests in August. Officials also believed that enforcing a suspension was crucial to upholding the principle that athletes must take responsibility for the actions of their entourage.
As soon as the 3-month ban was issued, WADA addressed the controversy that ignited debate across the tennis fraternity. Ross Wenzel, Wada’s general counsel, said, “This was a case that was a million miles away from doping. The scientific feedback that we received was that this could not be a case of intentional doping, including micro-dosing. I’m not sure that a sanction of 12 months in this case – if we’d have forced the tribunal into that position – or a case of ‘no fault’ would have been a good outcome. One would have compromised an important principle under the code. The other one, in our view, would have been an unduly harsh sanction”.
Later in the year, we can expect a warm welcome for Sinner on his home turf, as he is likely to make a comeback at the Italian Open. But the big question is: will he be able to show the same sort of dominating form after the break as well? Only time will tell!
The post “Why Would I”: Intriguing Revelations Emerge Behind Jannik Sinner’s Reluctant Acceptance of WADA’s Controversial Ban appeared first on EssentiallySports.
