Nick Kyrgios launches brutal attack on Jannik Sinner after Tennis365 interview with tennis drug chief
Nick Kyrgios has launched his most stinging attack yet on tennis chiefs, after suggesting the fall-out from Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek’s failed drug tests was handled ‘horrifically’.
World No 1 Sinner escaped a ban despite producing a positive test result last March, with the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) accepting the Italian was not responsbile for the substance getting into his body.
That inspired 2022 Wimbledon finalist Kyrgios to question Sinner’s claim that the banned substance got into his system during a massage from one of his team, as he suggested his story was implausible.
Kyrgios was equally damning of the process that followed a failed doping test for five-time Grand Slam champion Swiatek, who was handed a one-month suspension last month after a positive test for the angina medication trimetazidine.
The ITIA concluded Swiatek’s level of responsibility for the positive test was minimal due to the product that resulted in the Polish star testing positive was contaminated, yet those two verdicts have been slammed by Kyrgios.
“I just think that it’s been handled horrifically in our sport,” Kyrgios told reporters in Brisbane, where he is making his injury return.
“Two world No 1s both getting done for doping is disgusting for our sport. It’s a horrible look.
“The tennis integrity right now, and everyone knows it, but no one wants to speak about it, is awful. It’s not okay.
“I know that people don’t like when I just speak out about things, be honest about things. For a kid that grew up playing tennis, I enjoyed the competition, I enjoyed playing.
“I can get emotional, I can throw a racket, but that’s nothing compared to cheating and taking performance-enhancing drugs. That’s ridiculous in my opinion.”
Kyrgios went on to question how two of Sinner’s doping tests returned positive results, even though they were conducted at different times.
“He did fail two doping tests at separate times, as well. It wasn’t one after the other. They were a different time frame,” added the Australian.
“So if you think that that’s the way that it got in his system. If that’s how you think it’s happened, then…
“But if he didn’t do anything wrong, why did they take his prize money and points (at Indian Wells) away? Obviously, they found something wrong with it. Obviously, WADA has appealed it because of this.”
ITIA CEO Karen Moorhouse spoke exclusively to Tennis365 about the Sinner and Swiatek false doping tests and compared the outcome to the case of Simona Halep, who was eventually handed a nine-month suspension after her failed test was also found to be due to a contaminated substance.
“It’s the same rules and the same processes for every player,” Moorhouse told Tennis365 in an exclusive interview.
“All cases are different and each case turns on individual facts. Cases can also be quite complex, so it isn’t right to look at two headlines and draw comparisons between two cases as the detail is always the key part.
“Let’s take Swiatek and Halep. The CAS tribunal found that her (Halep’s) supplement was contaminated. So just in relation to that finding, they said nine months (suspension).
More Tennis News
Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek failed drug tests should not ‘strike fear’ into tennis players
Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek failed drug tests – inside story on tennis anti-doping programme
“That was the tribunal deciding on the objective fault she had and the subjective fault she should have. So what should she have done in relation to the product that was found to be contaminated?
“In relation to Swiatek, the contaminated product was a medication. So it was not unreasonable for a player to assume that a regulated medication would contain what it says on the ingredients.
“Therefore, the level of fault she could accept was at the lowest level as there was very little more she could have done reasonably to mitigate the risk of that product being contaminated.
“Halep’s contamination was not a medication. It was a collagen supplement and her level of fault was found to be higher.
“The key point here is it’s rare to find two cases that are the same they will all turn on their particular facts.”
Questions over why Sinner and Swiatek’s positive doping tests were not made public until the outcome of both cases were decided have been raised, but this was the correct course of action according to ITIA protocols.
“Under the WADA code, all sports have an obligation to impose a provisional suspension when you have a positive test on an unspecified substance,” added Moorhouse.
“After that, they can use discretion on whether they announce provisional suspensions or not and there is a range of approaches taken.
“In athletics, they pretty much announce provisional suspension on day one. A lot of team sports don’t announce provisional suspension at all.
“Tennis took the decision that we don’t announce provisional suspension for at least 10 days. This allows time to test the B sample and it gives a player time to challenge the provisional suspension. If that appeal is successful and is made within 10 days, we don’t announce the provisional suspension.
“With Swiatek and Sinner, they appealed those provisional suspensions within ten days, they were successful and under our rules, we don’t announce anything at that point. While those rules are in place in tennis, our job is to follow those rules, which we did in both cases.”
The latest high-profile intervention from Kyrgios will add fire to the flames around this story, but the Aussie is making his claims without having all the facts of the Sinner and Swiatek cases at his disposal.
