|
||||||||
The Tennis Thread (Part 31) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#7251 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,284
|
Kvitova having a run in Wuhan, first time all year she's won four matches at one tournament. As JoJo once sang, it's all a bit "too little, too late".
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#7252 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Mids
Posts: 42,957
|
Quote:
I can't see Konta making Singapore now. Still been a good year for her though.
|
|
|
|
|
#7253 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Mids
Posts: 42,957
|
Quote:
Kvitova having a run in Wuhan, first time all year she's won four matches at one tournament. As JoJo once sang, it's all a bit "too little, too late".
|
|
|
|
|
#7254 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26,690
|
Quote:
I can't see Konta making Singapore now. Still been a good year for her though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7255 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,401
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7256 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,284
|
The result of Sharapova's appeal is next week, what are our honest expectations? I'm thinking she'll have to get a reduction of some form, particularly when they ruled that she didn't intentionally break the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7257 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Mids
Posts: 42,957
|
Quote:
The result of Sharapova's appeal is next week, what are our honest expectations? I'm thinking she'll have to get a reduction of some form, particularly when they ruled that she didn't intentionally break the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
#7258 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,937
|
She's bound to get a reduction, because that's what CAS always does. However, they can't get away from the fact that Sharapova was apparently taking medication for a heart problem, and chose not to tell her physio, trainer, nutritionist, coach or her official doctor. Nor did she ever write it on the form under the section where you are supposed to list the drugs you are taking that you presume are legitimate.
The only reasonable conclusion is that she was taking it for performance enhancing reasons, and even if she thought it was technically legal, she knew it was morally murky. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7259 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,611
|
Quote:
She's bound to get a reduction, because that's what CAS always does. However, they can't get away from the fact that Sharapova was apparently taking medication for a heart problem, and chose not to tell her physio, trainer, nutritionist, coach or her official doctor. Nor did she ever write it on the form under the section where you are supposed to list the drugs you are taking that you presume are legitimate.
The only reasonable conclusion is that she was taking it for performance enhancing reasons, and even if she thought it was technically legal, she knew it was morally murky. Does anyone know what excuses the other players gave? I imagine they didn't all claim to have long term illnesses, which was a bad move from Sharapova, well the whole press conference was. Another reason for her to get a longer ban, she went off script doing that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7260 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,611
|
I'm surprised Petra has never beaten Simona before, although they have only played 3 times. That in itself is weird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7261 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Manchester
Posts: 9,779
|
Quote:
I'm surprised Petra has never beaten Simona before, although they have only played 3 times. That in itself is weird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7262 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,611
|
Quote:
I love Petra when she plays like this. Unstoppable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7263 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Mids
Posts: 42,957
|
Peak Petra right there! It would be just like her to rise from the dead and somehow qualify for Singapore.
|
|
|
|
|
#7264 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,494
|
Quote:
I'm surprised Petra has never beaten Simona before, although they have only played 3 times. That in itself is weird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7265 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
|
Quote:
She's bound to get a reduction, because that's what CAS always does. However, they can't get away from the fact that Sharapova was apparently taking medication for a heart problem, and chose not to tell her physio, trainer, nutritionist, coach or her official doctor. Nor did she ever write it on the form under the section where you are supposed to list the drugs you are taking that you presume are legitimate.
The only reasonable conclusion is that she was taking it for performance enhancing reasons, and even if she thought it was technically legal, she knew it was morally murky. I think she will get some sort of a reduction, but hope she doesn't, her time actually fits what the criteria says. She did take it deliberately, no matter if she was ignorant of the rules or not and she admitted to taking for the month of January when it was a banned substance. On another note, my god what have they done to the AO sign? It's awful! |
|
|
|
|
|
#7266 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: In bed with Rafa :)
Posts: 5,856
|
What about that masterclass from my Petra?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7267 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: exeter
Posts: 14,623
|
Quote:
She's bound to get a reduction, because that's what CAS always does. However, they can't get away from the fact that Sharapova was apparently taking medication for a heart problem, and chose not to tell her physio, trainer, nutritionist, coach or her official doctor. Nor did she ever write it on the form under the section where you are supposed to list the drugs you are taking that you presume are legitimate.
The only reasonable conclusion is that she was taking it for performance enhancing reasons, and even if she thought it was technically legal, she knew it was morally murky. That's just nonsense though, "technically legal" is just legal. Honestly ITF going after her for taking a legal drug is bizarre, and telling us that she took it for years, could only be relevant if they release every other tennis players "legal" medications. She took an illegal substance which has no proven Ped use for 3 weeks, a year would have been perfectly sufficient, and certainly much harsher than practically every other drug offence from them. Strycova, Gasquet, Cilic, so on. She's been making an example of, if you never liked her you are obviously are saying it's justified, but it really isn't, it has no precedents. A year is a big ban, and an huge part of her career, she also has the taint of drug cheat forever,surely that's your pound of flesh for a drug that is over the counter in Eastern Europe. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7268 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
|
Quote:
That's just nonsense though, "technically legal" is just legal. Honestly ITF going after her for taking a legal drug is bizarre, and telling us that she took it for years, could only be relevant if they release every other tennis players "legal" medications.
She took an illegal substance which has no proven Ped use for 3 weeks, a year would have been perfectly sufficient, and certainly much harsher than practically every other drug offence from them. Strycova, Gasquet, Cilic, so on. She's been making an example of, if you never liked her you are obviously are saying it's justified, but it really isn't, it has no precedents. A year is a big ban, and an huge part of her career, she also has the taint of drug cheat forever,surely that's your pound of flesh for a drug that is over the counter in Eastern Europe. It may or may not be proven, but what it does as medication, is obviously performance enhancing. It doesn't matter either, it is banned now, it is an illegal substance and she was warned about it a few times over and every Russian athlete was warned by Russia too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7269 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: exeter
Posts: 14,623
|
Quote:
I did like Maria and I think she deserves two years under the guidelines. It states she was negligent herself, which she was, she even admitted to it herself in her big production piece. Two years mean she held significant fault but no intention of cheating. Realistically, it sounds right.
It may or may not be proven, but what it does as medication, is obviously performance enhancing. It doesn't matter either, it is banned now, it is an illegal substance and she was warned about it a few times over and every Russian athlete was warned by Russia too. It has had constant tests by WADA, they've never found anything they could call performance enhancing it is a drug that is used to prevent heart conditions in the future, this nonsense about it being for a weak heart is a media contrivance based on claims by the manufacturer. many years ago. The tribunal said that it was an over-sight from her, they didn't say it was deliberate. Look she did something extremely negligent, but two years seems incredibly harsh and unprecedented to me. and political to me, if WADA wasn't going after Russians, doubt Meldonium would have even been banned with no evidence other then a lot of people wer taking it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7270 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Mids
Posts: 42,957
|
Quote:
On another note, my god what have they done to the AO sign? It's awful!
https://twitter.com/AustralianOpen/s...02472675213312 |
|
|
|
|
#7271 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
|
Quote:
They're just messing about until the proper reveal of the new logo next week.
https://twitter.com/AustralianOpen/s...02472675213312 |
|
|
|
|
|
#7272 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,284
|
Quote:
Hopefully a reduction of some sort, Lepchenko tested positive 4 times and still had her silent ban quashed.
Quote:
My feelings on the matter too. The whole excusing it away as medical was frankly, ridiculous.
I think she will get some sort of a reduction, but hope she doesn't, her time actually fits what the criteria says. She did take it deliberately, no matter if she was ignorant of the rules or not and she admitted to taking for the month of January when it was a banned substance. On another note, my god what have they done to the AO sign? It's awful! Quote:
Yes, but what about the others that have got lesser sentence. Hows that realistic if it's not been done before?
It has had constant tests by WADA, they've never found anything they could call performance enhancing it is a drug that is used to prevent heart conditions in the future, this nonsense about it being for a weak heart is a media contrivance based on claims by the manufacturer. many years ago. The tribunal said that it was an over-sight from her, they didn't say it was deliberate. Look she did something extremely negligent, but two years seems incredibly harsh and unprecedented to me. and political to me, if WADA wasn't going after Russians, doubt Meldonium would have even been banned with no evidence other then a lot of people wer taking it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7273 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,494
|
#that's so petra
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7274 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,438
|
The lesser Pliskova (Kris) makes it a double for Czech lefties today after Petra's win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7275 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,284
|
I'll be very disappointed if Petra makes it to Singapore from nowhere, she doesn't deserve to be there. And she's got previous form in Beijing so it's a possibility. At least Cibulkova will likely make it
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:01.




