AFP

Clijsters slams 'harsh' bans for Belgian duo

Sat, 07 Nov 17:10:49 2009

BRUSSELS (AFP) - Belgian star Kim Clijsters on Saturday slammed the "extremely harsh" sanctions imposed on compatriots Xavier Malisse and Yanina Wickmayer for missing drug tests.

US Open semi-finalist Wickmayer and Malisse were on Thursday handed one-year bans by the Flemish Doping Tribunal (VDT) for falling foul of doping regulations.

Wickmayer, the world number 18, was suspended for failing to fulfill the controversial "whereabouts rule" while Malisse was also punished for missing a drug test.

"To receive a one-year ban because of this seems extremely harsh and is potentially career-ending for both of them," US Open champion Clijsters said on her Twitter message system.

"While they may not have followed correct administration, they did not register a positive doping offence either.

"I feel I have to write about this. Its very, very unfortunate what?s happened to Yanina and Xavier this week."

"I hope the authorities and athletes can work together on finding better solutions to keep our sports clean."

Both players can appeal against their suspensions to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Wickmayer was accused of failing on three occasions to fulfill the ADAMS (Anti-Doping Administration and Management System), under which athletes are obliged to tell national anti-doping authorities where they will be at a chosen hour each day for a three-month period.

Malisse was punished for missing a dope test and for twice failing to fulfill the ADAMS.

The sanctions came as a surprise as only last month it was expected that the two players would escape with just a reprimand.

The suspensions on Malisse and Wickmayer run until November 4, 2010.

The International Tennis Federation (ITF) said on Saturday that it backed the decision taken by the Belgian authorities.

"The ITF recognises and respects the decision of VDT, and shall take all steps necessary to enforce and give effect to it," said a statement.

 

Comment 1 - 6 of 6

Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated
  1. Andrew Broad(comment 3),you have a broad array of brain­ bolt malfunctions.Serena has nothing to do with whether­ a Belgian was caught doping or not.Jealousy and hatred­ will finally reward you with a gangrene consommation­ if you don't do away with this attitude.Bitter­ people will always display these traits.
    Honestly tell­ me why you have to blame Serena for these Belgians'­ ban.Get a life you small-minded numskull.

    From Eel, on Mon 9 Nov 7:04PM
  2. I agree with the honeybeecro7. Players know the rules­ and if they do not follow them they should be punished.­ However I would suggest taking away one year earnings­ (the immediate past 52 weeks) as a punishment instead­ one year ban to play.

    From pavlikj20, on Sun 8 Nov 9:13AM
  3. They should ban Novak Djokovic he's always cheating­ anyway

    From kim.clijsters, on Sun 8 Nov 1:01AM
  4. Whereabouts-bans are ridiculous. If they're going­ to treat tennis-players as criminals, why not fit them­ with electronic tags? A classic case of the innocent­ being punished, while the guilty (Serena Williams and­ Agassi) are probably going to get off practically­ scot-free.

    From Andrew Broad, on Sat 7 Nov 10:40PM
  5. Who cares about missing a test...All athletes at one­ time or another took something to gain an­ advantage.....hormone shots when recovering from­ injury; cold medication when battling flu; antibiotics­ when trying to rid themselves of flu: steroids after an­ injury; pot when partying and relaxing; alcohol when­ celebrating a victory...Stop the moral doping police!!!

    From Ned, on Sat 7 Nov 9:58PM
  6. Of course this is harsh-but rules are the same for­ all-if they failed to notify anti-doping authorities­ only once then I could understand that but three times­ means that they are either reckless or have something­ to hide.Players have plenty people around them to­ remind them of these kinds of things.If all players­ were allowed to get away with this it would be­ chaos.But really harsh financial fine would be a better­ solution and if they do it again then ban them for a­ year.At least some charity would benefit rather than­ bureaucracy.

    From honeybeecro7, on Sat 7 Nov 7:23PM
Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

Not already a Yahoo! user ? to get a free Yahoo! Account