Novak Djokovic backed group offering huge boost to players fighting doping bans

Novak Djokovic’s attempts to set up a ‘players union’ have struggled to get off the ground, but now his Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) have announced a hugely significant financial boost to its members.
Djokovic and fellow ATP Tour player Vasek Pospisil created the PTPA in 2020 with the stated aim to “support, protect and advance players’ wellbeing on and off the court”.
That ambition has been halted as the sport’s regulations block players from joining a player’s union, so the ethos behind the organisation has been modified accordingly.
Now the PTPA said its Athlete Counsel & Equity (ACE) Program, will “provide professional tennis players navigating complex legal challenges with expert pro-bono support”, so ensuring “equitable access to world-class legal expertise, regardless of a player’s financial standing and personal resources”.
The leader of his group is an interesting choice, with British player Tara Moore fronting the PTPA ACE programme after her failed doping test resulted in her being banned in May 2022.
Moore tested positive for nandrolone metabolites and Boldenone while competing in the Colombian capital Bogota the previous month.
Her provisional suspension was followed by a 19-month battle to play again, having tested positive for two anabolic steroids and has alwasy protested her innocence.
An independent tribunal determined contaminated meat was the source of the prohibited substances and that she bore no fault or negligence in December. The ruling is being challenged by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA).
“All players are entitled to due process – financial constraints or a lack of resources should never stand in the way of their rights,” said 32-year-old Moore, who had reached a career-high doubles ranking of 77th in the world at the time of her provisional ban.
“The fight to prove my innocence left me with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and overwhelming emotional distress.
“My hope is that the PTPA ACE Program and these incredible legal teams will ensure that no player has to face these challenges alone – especially in cases involving integrity issues.
“Every player deserves the chance to defend themselves without fear of financial or emotional ruin.”
This latest development shines a fresh light on doping in tennis after Grand Slam champions Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek failed doping tests last year.
Swiatek served a one-month suspension after the ITIA decided she was not responsible for a banned substance entering her system via a contaminated medication.
Sinner was also cleared of wrongdoing by the ITIA and avoided a lengthy suspension, but that decision has been challenged by the World Anti-Doping Agency.
Tennis365 spoke exclusively to ITIA CEO Karen Moore, as she explained the process of what happens next in the Sinner case.
The cream used by a member of Sinner’s team to treat a cut that found its way into the player’s system and resulted in his positive doping test was not contaminated, as the packaging confirms it contains clostebol, the anabolic steroid that showed up in his test.
Sinner did not directly take this substance and it found its way into his system via his team member and that will be a factor in his case.
This is why the Sinner case has significant contrasts when compared to the Swiatek case, with ITIA chief Moorhouse explaining the guidelines that CAS will be working with when they reach their verdict.
More Tennis News
Length of Jannik Sinner’s suspension would send shockwaves through tennis says former world No 7
“If you test positive for a banned substance, your starting point for a possible sanction is four years,” Moorhouse told Tennis365 in an exclusive interview.
“If you can demonstrate that it was not intentional, that reduces to two years. Then, if you can prove there was no fault, there is no sanction.
“In addition, a decision of ‘no significant fault or negligence’ could fall between a reprimand and two years. That applies to any cases around a contaminated substance.
“It’s the same rules and the same processes for every player. 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 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).
“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 complication with the Sinner case is the positive test was not a result of a contaminated product. That is the difference between Swiatek and Halep. There is no contamination here.
“The product that the masseuse used on his finger was not contaminated. That is exactly what it said the product contained on the packaging.
“And so because it is not a contaminated product, the range for a sanction is one year to two years.”
READ NEXT: Jannik Sinner facing shockingly long ban from tennis if he loses doping appeal