Sun Yang Vs WADA Verdict: Damning Eight-Year Ban Ends Career Of Chinese Controversy

Sun Yang - Photo Courtesy: Becca Wyant

Editorial content for the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Games coverage is sponsored by GMX7.
See full event coverage. Follow GMX7 on Instagram at @GMX7training #gmx7

Sun Yang Verdict: WADA Vs Sun Yang & FINA at the Court of Arbitration for Sport

Sun Yang ‘s swimming career is over. In a damning judgment, a panel of three senior judges at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) handed the Chinese Olympic champion an eight-year ban. The penalty is not backdated and starts this day, ruling Sun out of the defence of the 200m freestyle title at Tokyo 2020.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) welcomed the ruling saying that it “confirms those concerns and is a significant result”.

That rang true for the testing team that visited Sun’s home in September 2018 only to be met with refusal and, from some of Sun’s entourage, threats, and those who have made a stand against not only Sun but the circumstances and organisations perceived to have given him a lenient, easy ride and even helped to protect him.

Read the statements from CAS and WADA below
Other coverage:

Swimming World’s coverage of Sun Yang & FINA Vs WADA At the Court of Arbitration for Sport

Mack Horton, who in 2016 called Sun a “cheat” before beating Sun, the defending champion in the Olympic 400m freestyle final, told Swimming World today:

“My stance has always been for clean sport. It is not, and never will be about individuals or nations. Today’s outcome does not change my stance.”

The other man involved in podium protests against Sun’s presence at World titles last July, Duncan Scott, of Britain, told Swimming World:

“I fully respect and support the decision that has been made and announced by the Court of Arbitration for Sport this morning. I believe in clean sport and a level playing field for all athletes and I trust in CAS and WADA to uphold these values.”

(L-R) Second placed Mack Horton of Australia keeps his distance to winner Yang Sun of China while they pose with their medals for photographers after competing in the men's 400m Freestyle Final during the Swimming events at the Gwangju 2019 FINA World Championships, Gwangju, South Korea, 21 July 2019. Gabriele Detti of Italy finishes third.

Mack Horton, left, keeps his distance to Sun Yang for the photo-op with bronze medallist Gabriele Detti after medals in the 400m free at world titles in Gwangju … podium protests followed after Sun Yang’s latest brush with anti-doping authorities – Photo Courtesy: Patrick B. Kraemer

Horton was backed by sports authorities in his country and The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, which said:

“ASADA welcomes the CAS decision as it restores faith in the anti-doping system. We hold our athletes to the highest possible standards and we expect that those standards are upheld globally.”

In the picture: Gregorio Paltrinieri ITA, 003659

Gregorio Paltrinieri – Photo Courtesy: Arena

One of Horton’s friends and great rivals of both the Australian and Sun, Gregorio Paltrinieri, the Italian Olympic 1500m freestyle champion, told SkySport Italy:

“To me this whole story leaves only so much sadness, as always in all cases of doping. I really can’t celebrate because one of my rivals is found positive for doping. I don’t find anything beautiful, I just can’t rejoice. I will say a paradox, I am almost sorry that this news came out “.

Pressed to say whether he felt sorry for Sun Yang or for the credibility of the anti-doping system, Paltrinieri replied:

“Sorry for him certainly not. My displeasure stems from the fact that Sun Yang has marked my professional growth as an athlete. Since I was a child he has always been my point of reference, he was the champion I wanted to beat, I worked hard to be able to compete face to face with him, I dreamed of challenging him side by side in lanes 4 and 5 (in swimming the lanes of best) and I managed to do it. Knowing now that there has been the help of doping, really, behind some of its competitions, takes away a little from everything “.

Ian Thorpe, five-times Olympic champion, weighed in with:

“I definitely supported Mack’s stance at the Olympics and I also felt that the sport should’ve done a better job in making sure there was never a situation where Mack had to stand up on the podium in the first place.”

And fellow Olympic champion of Rio 2016, Kyle Chalmers, the 100m freestyle gold medallist, had the back of his teammate, saying:

“I am in full support of my teammate Mack … I support Mack and what Mack stands for.”

Adam Peaty, the Olympic 100m breaststroke champion from Britain, hailed the verdict a triumph for clean sport.

Leading coaches joined the chorus of celebration in swimming, Jon Rudd, now the head of Swim Ireland – in the land of Michelle Smith, the last swimmer to have news of her doping case broken by this author before a public hearing at CAS spelled the end of her career, back in 1998 – said:

“Thats of to CAS … the sport has been rescued: it’s literally that big.”

In the United States, Olympic teamster and 4x200m free gold medallist of 2008 and 2012, Ricky Berens told Swimming World:

“I don’t want to say, ‘it was good to see’, because I hate seeing negative attention brought to our sport. This decision effects a lot of people, Sun Yang, but also the people that he has competed against and knocked off podiums. I can’t remember a penalty like this while I was competing, which goes to show how strong the evidence was stacked against Yang. This decision sends a message to not only our sport, but all sports, that cheaters never win. This Sun Yang saga has been going on for far too long. I hope that this puts an end to it and our sport can move on from it.”

Questions For FINA As Sun says he will appeal

FINA, the international federation, now faces huge questions about its handling of a case in which it’s role was, at the very least, to remain neutral. The case goes down in swimming and anti-doping history as a thumping reminder that sports federations cannot serve as both police and promoter, the two roles representing a huge conflict of interest.

In its statement on the CAS decision, FINA did not refer to any of the issues that demand urgent review of the governance structures, checks, balances and accountability within the organisation. A FINA statement read:

FINA has noted the judgement published by CAS today in the case of WADA versus Chinese swimmer Sun Yang.

Notwithstanding any further legal action, and as directed, FINA will implement CAS’s decision with regard to disciplinary action against the swimmer. FINA has also noted CAS’s provisions with regard to the modification of competition results.

Sun Yang’s Last Stand: Appeal To Swiss Federal Tribunal

Sun Yang and his counsel, Ian Meakin – Photo Courtesy: Craig Lord

The decision of the CAS brings to an end one of the most controversial careers in swimming history.

There is one option left to Sun and his legal team: they can challenge the CAS verdict at the Swiss Federal Tribunal, a legal authority beyond CAS in Switzerland, where the Court of Arbitration, as well as FINA, is based. Sun has already said that he will appeal the ruling.

The Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT) has the power to issue a stay on any decisions in sport pending judgement of the Swiss court. That could leave the door to Tokyo 2020 ajar. However, in past sports cases, the Swiss court has only issued a stay where there have been no objection from the opposing party, in this case WADA. It is highly unlikely that that WADA would let a plea for stay in Sun’s case go unchallenged under the circumstances: where other cases have involved issues of financial recompense or human rights, the swimmer’s case and judgement speaks to the WADA Code, the CAS decision based on anti-doping rules not wider international conventions and precedents.
The Tribunal’s role: The CAS is subject to the more general legal framework of international arbitration in Switzerland regulated through the Swiss Private International Law Act (Swiss PILA). The Swiss PILA emphasizes the parties’ autonomy in the conduct of the arbitration proceedings and limits the intervention of state courts to the strict minimum. Within this context, arbitral awards are final upon their notification and can only be challenged before the Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT) on a very limited number of grounds, exhaustively enumerated in Art. 190(2) PILA. Although a “limited” role tis bestowed upon the SFT, Switzerland’s Supreme Court has so far rendered numerous judgments in motions to set aside CAS awards. The SFT has significant influence on how CAS operates and CAS judges are aware of relevant conditions when they make their judgements. The SFT controls both the legality of CAS as an arbitral institution and the legality of CAS awards. The SFT may confirm, reject or more generally interpret some of the procedural provisions of the CAS Rules and the law applicable to the merits of cases.

Those With Questions Yet To Answer

If one aspect of the story ends this day, the CAS decision does not bring an end to the issues that led to a decision that affects a swimmer but leaves in place, as things stand, the entourage of doctors and scientists and anti-doping agents and bosses who contributed to the downfall of an athlete.

There is also a question left for FINA to answer: Doping Rule DC 10.8 requires the federation to cancel all results from the date of the offence, which was September 4-5, 2018. As such, Sun Yang should forfeit his 2019 World titles over 200m and 400m freestyle. However, the CAS ruling specifically says that given a lack of evidence of actual doping in September 2018, the rule for cancellation of results should kick in from this day of the CAS judgment. Sun would also escape under the rule that allows cancellation of results achieved up to six months prior to an offence: February 28 leaves us at August 28, 2019 going back six months: a few weeks after Gwangju action and the controversy of podium protest by the now-vindicated Mack Horton and Duncan Scott, both warned and heavily criticised by FINA, were history.

Below are the CAS decision; the statement from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) welcoming the verdict; and a backgrounder on the saga:

The CAS issued the following statement:

SUN YANG IS FOUND GUILTY OF A DOPING OFFENSE AND SANCTIONED WITH AN 8-YEAR PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY

Lausanne, 28 February 2020 – The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has upheld the appeal filed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against the Chinese swimmer Sun Yang and the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA). As a consequence, Sun Yang (the Athlete) is sanctioned with an eight-year period of ineligibility, starting on the date of the CAS award.

Following a conflictual anti-doping test at the residence of Sun Yang in September 2018 which resulted in the testing not being completed, the matter was initially referred to the FINA Doping Panel (FINA DP) which found that the International Standard for Testing and Investigations (ISTI), the protocol adopted by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for the conduct of doping controls, had not been properly followed. Therefore, the FINA DP invalidated the sample collection. As a consequence, the FINA DP determined that the athlete had not committed an anti-doping rule violation.

WADA filed an appeal at CAS against that decision, asserting that Sun Yang had voluntarily refused to submit to sample collection and requesting that a period of ineligibility between a minimum 2 years and maximum 8 years be imposed on him.

The arbitration on appeal was referred to a panel of CAS arbitrators, composed of Judge Franco Frattini (Italy), President, Mr Romano F. Subiotto QC (Belgium/UK) and Prof. Philippe Sands QC (UK), which held a hearing on 15 November 2019. Further to the parties’ request, the hearing was conducted in public.

The CAS Panel unanimously determined, to its comfortable satisfaction, that the Athlete violated Article 2.5 FINA DC (Tampering with any part of Doping Control). In particular, the Panel found that the personnel in charge of the doping control complied with all applicable requirements as set out in the ISTI. More specifically, the Athlete failed to establish that he had a compelling justification to destroy his sample collection containers and forego the doping control when, in his opinion, the collection protocol was not in compliance with the ISTI. As the Panel noted, it is one thing, having provided a blood sample, to question the accreditation of the testing personnel while keeping the intact samples in the possession of the testing authorities; it is quite another thing, after lengthy exchanges and warnings as to the consequences, to act in such a way that results in destroying the sample containers, thereby eliminating any chance of testing the sample at a later stage.

Considering that, in June 2014, the Athlete was found guilty of a first anti-doping rule violation (ADRV), the Panel concluded that, in accordance with Article 10.7.1 FINA DC, an eight-year period of ineligibility, starting on the date of the CAS award, has to be imposed on the Athlete for this second ADRV.

Considering

that FINA refrained from seeking the imposition of a provisional suspension on the Athlete when charging him with an anti-doping rule violation

that doping tests performed on the Athlete shortly before and after the aborted doping control in September 2018 were negative, and

that in the absence of any evidence that the Athlete may have engaged in doping activity since 4 September 2018, including on the occasion of the FINA World Championships in Gwangju, South Korea in July 2019, the results achieved by the Athlete in the period prior to the CAS award being issued should not be disqualified.

The Arbitral Award will be published on the CAS website in a few days, unless the parties agree that it should remain confidential.

WADA issued the following statement:

Play True – Photo Courtesy: WADA

Montreal, 28 February 2020 – The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) welcomes the ruling of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in relation to WADA’s appeal against the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA) disciplinary panel decision in relation to an incident that led to a doping control involving Chinese swimmer Sun Yang not being completed as planned.

WADA had lodged the appeal on the basis that Sun Yang voluntarily refused to submit to sample collection as per the terms of the World Anti-Doping Code (Code) and the related International Standard for Testing and Investigations. WADA notes the sanction handed down by CAS and is satisfied that justice in this case has been rendered.

WADA Director General Olivier Niggli said:

“WADA decided to appeal the original FINA ruling having carefully reviewed it and having concluded that there were a number of points that seemed to be incorrect under the Code. Today’s CAS ruling confirms those concerns and is a significant result. We will now need to take time to review the decision in full, and we will continue to review diligently all anti-doping decisions taken by Code Signatories to ensure they are in line with the Code and, when warranted, to exercise our independent right of appeal.”

The Background

Sun Yang was handed an eight-year ban after a panel of three senior CAS judges upheld the charge of “tampering” brought by WADA

At a hearing in Montreux last November, WADA challenged a January 2019 ruling by a three-man FINA Doping Panel to issue only a caution to Sun, 28, over a four-hour argument that raged through the night with out-of-competition anti-doping testers outside his home in Zheijiang Province in September 2018.

The FINA decision was to have been kept private but a Sunday Times report by this author on January 27 last year revealed the severity of the caution handed to Sun – and promoted WADA to delve more deeply before it lodged a case with CAS last March.

The swimmer, who failed to deliver a urine sample on the night of September 4-5, 2018, submitted to a blood test, signed off the sample but was then, two hours into the session when his doctor, Ba Zhen, arrived, party to arguments that led to a security guard being asked by Sun’s mother Ming Yang, to fetch a hammer.

According to Sun and the CAS hearing, the blood sample has been removed from the chain of custody by Dr Ba Zhen, who was twice penalised for supplying a banned substance to Sun in 2014 – once for the offence and then a second penalty for having worked with Sun at the Asian Games at a time he should have been serving a suspension.

Sun Yang and his legal team arrive for the hearing, FINA counsel to the left – Photo Courtesy: Craig Lord

Once the Sun entourage had taken the sample back from testers, the outer casing of the vial was smashed with the hammer by the security guard as Sun shone his smartphone torch on proceedings.

Sun and his lead team had argued that the three testing officers who arrived at his home had not presented valid proof of identity and authority. This was rejected by the CAS judges.

Instead, they sided with WADA lead counsel Richard Young, who stunned the CAS hearing when he revealed what WADA aimed to catch Sun for:

“Tearing up the form, smashing the bottle, I mean that is pretty sensational but he was nailed on a tampering violation before any of that happened.”

Sun’s penalty is the first eight-year ban to be imposed on China since then-deputy head coach to the country, Zhao Ming was barred for the same period in the wake of the China Crisis of the 1990s, when more than 60 swimmers, all barring a couple teenagers, tested positive for a range of banned substances, including steroids, human growth hormone, blood booster EPO and diuretics.

Remaining questions revolve around Sun’s entourage and what penalties they may face, though the Chinese Swimming Association said that it would support Sun’s appeal to the highest Swiss court. That case is unlikely to be heard before the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, where Sun had hoped to defend the 200m freestyle title he claimed in Rio in 2016.

Brent Rychener – Photo Courtesy: Craig Lord

In Montreux at the hearing last November, WADA Counsel Richard Young referred to “concerns over intimidation and protection issues”, while his co-counsel Brent Rychener highlighted several times in cross-examination of witnesses the threats and warnings, as he described them, made by members of Sun’s entourage to the testing officers, including exchanges involving the swimmer’s mother, the head of the Chinese Swimming Association and two doctors, namely, Dr Ba Zhen, a man twice-penalised by WADA in 2014-15, and Dr. Han Zhaoqi, head of the Zheijang Anti-Doping Centre.

Those characters, among others in the Sun Yang story, go unmentioned in the overview CAS ruling but there is a case, giver that Sun said that it was Dr Ba Zhen who had taken the blood vial back from the chain of command, for imposing a third and final penalty on a doctor described by a source close to the international federation as “more dismissive of the WADA Code than is healthy for any athlete or sport.”

Name*

Email*

Welcome to our community. We invite you to join our discussion. Our community guidelines are simple: be respectful and constructive, keep on topic, and support your fellow commenters. Commenting signifies that you agree to our Terms of Use

Name*

Email*

45 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Andrew Evans

4 years ago

Poor Cornel Marculescu, who is he going to hug on poolside now? Good riddance!

Dee Carr

4 years ago

Justice!

Matt Ramey

4 years ago

Wowwww ?

Jeff Blackburn

4 years ago

How unusual cheating chinese

Sandeep Nagar Anthal

4 years ago

Nisha Millet Chatterjee

Katie Maloney

4 years ago

Adam McIntyre ??

Johnny

4 years ago

8 years is too much.
The staffs were not qualified. How could an athelete trust them? It may ruin his career life.
We should give atheletes more support.

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to Johnny

Not if they don’t follow the rules: Sun’s positive test and then his actions in 2018 now judged by WADA and CAS to have violated the WADA Code do not add up to “we should support…”

Bing

4 years ago

Reply to Craig Lord

So, Craig, your point on the unqualified tester is fine then regardless that CAS agreed on that front?

The whole case surrounding this has two sides, one on the tester and the other on the athlete.

Now even CAS agreed that SY is clean of his achievement, only editors like you read into it a lot that the authorities themselves didn’t say.

I read your one-sided comment, tbh, which is very biased. Have you heard anything from SY’s side of the story before you make the call or are you just willingly imagining the whole picture by yourself? Many judges others without any knowledge and I certainly hope you are not one of them.

Should the case is fair treatment on SY, then let the same treatment be done to all swimmers who went against being tested, which Mack Horton’s team member should serve another 4 years.

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to Bing

Bing, your comment is riven with misinformation. CAS neither agrees nor disagrees on the subject of whether Sun is ‘clean’. How could it: the man has a positive doping test to his name and in its ruling CAS notes that as precisely why he had to be handed an eight-year ban and not the two-four year ban it might have been in other circumstances. There is nothing one-sided about my view. Why is it that you find it so hard to believe that a young Chinese woman doping agent working for IDTM was telling the truth; why can you not be open to that? Why is it that you appear to think it acceptable for the towering figures of Sun, his mother a security guard, a twice-banned doctor and two other powerful players on the telephone putting pressure on that one young woman in a doping control room to be a part of a simple testing procedure that includes a protocol used by all other swimmers around the world AND the rest of the Chinese team: if you have concerns, register them on the paperwork, you have nothing to fear, safe in the knowledge that your sample will be clean. That is the protocol and trust that exists around the world. If there is a one-sided view here, it is yours.

Bing

4 years ago

Reply to Craig Lord

Craig, please fix your site. I don’t get an email note on your reply. I have to go through lengthy browsing history to find the article that I commented on.

Below is my reply to your question, and why I think your view is one-sided:
First of all, I am not closed to the possibility that he took the drug, and I have gotten your view. But the articles published on this site do not allow a neutral response. Many news and media, including yours, only focus on one side and exaggerate. In one of the comment sections, I see you call a different perspective that makes you uncomfortable, propaganda, which IMHO, close-minded.

On the other hand, the same series of questions you asked me above can be flipped back to you from my side. Due to the complexity in the case, it is simply not possible to pinpoint what had happened. Even you have mentioned, the latter drug-taking event is a belief, it is not a proven fact. Hence maybe you can answer this – would the uncertainty allow journalists/editors to start filling in the non-existent details, tint readers’ view and make them accusations that often read by most as facts?

An extension to our whole argument becomes a question – why would you defend against my observation of your previous articles and comments yet calling another possible belief problematic?

I think understanding this would certainly help you understand my point of view.

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to Bing

Bing, your view is mute. A decision has been taken – the CAS report in full shoots down every lame argument Sun and team came up with and exonerates the testing team (also all Chinese and people who were put under enormous pressure and have had to endure bullying and intimidation in this case). You may reason what you wish and you are entitled to your view and take on events. I beg to differ – and my view (based on having studied the original FINA report and my understanding of the FINA rule and WADA Code) is the one now backed up by the legal argument and decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in this case.
On your site comment: it isn’t ‘my site’. I’m the editor. I will alert tech team to your comment – they may fathom what you mean (I’m genuinely not sure I know what you mean. We all get alerts when comments are added to articles we have commented on … and the comments remain precisely where they were at first posting, as far as I can tell)

Richard

4 years ago

Reply to Johnny

Staff most likely were qualified, if sun thought they weren’t qualified he shouldn’t have “consented” to the blood sample, chances are sun would have given the urine sample, but things escalated when his tiger mother and doctor arrived and they knew that he would be rumbled, hence the arrive of the hammer,

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Richard

Sun explained that he became suspicious after he realized the Urine Tester started taking photos of him and that was after he had his blood drawn.
Google abc.net.au: Sun Yang has been painted as a ‘drug cheat’. Let’s look at it in context
“Sun became aware the man, known as a doping control assistant (DCA), had been taking photos of him and instructed the DCA he could not do that.
He asked to see the DCA’s accreditation and that of the nurse who had taken his blood. Then the night began to unravel.
According to the DCA’s own written statement, he was “very excited” to see the athlete, and “took two or three pictures” of him from behind.
Although the DCA did not testify in person, the CAS panel accepted his written statement, which was confirmed by the testimonies of several witnesses, including the doping control officer (DCO) in charge of the operation.”

Lorraine

4 years ago

FINA has already said WADA hadn’t follow the rule to take samples. CAS is not justice. At least there should be some punishment to WADA.

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to Lorraine

Fina is not the ultimate judge – and now a higher court has judged how FINA got it wrong… FINA is the promoter and regulator of swimming… it can’t be the policeman too, right?

reid

4 years ago

It’s like I can go to Mr. Horton’s house and take his blood. He can’t reject as that will end his career.

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to reid

Nonsense… it’s nothing like that. Try reading the reports in full.

Angel

4 years ago

Reply to reid

You can’t. First, you need to display WADA’s letter of authentication and your own qualification certificate and ID, secondly, the assistance taking blood sample needs to display nurse certificate and ID, the assistance in charge of urine sampling needs ID.
If the athlete challenge your qualification, you have to show the online registration information of this test on WADA’s official website.

Please, man, try to keep up with the truth.

Jarod De Vos

4 years ago

Caelum de Vos

Julie Austin

4 years ago

Those who have nothing to hide
HIDE NOTHING!

Mary Whitney

4 years ago

Matt Skinner

Scott Young

4 years ago

He…smashed…his…samples…with…a…hammer. Earned the ban.

Rik Parker

4 years ago

Reply to Scott Young

THIS.

Regardless of any other thing. THIS.

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Scott Young

Why he “smashed” the blood sample:
“the doping control officer’s paperwork was incomplete and two of the three members of the anti-doping party had no proper identification.

He said his name did not even appear on the documentation, which he considered to be highly unusual.

He should know, he has gone through this process hundreds of times.

His entourage — including his doctor Ba Zhen, the chief doctor of the Zhejiang College of Sport, Han Zhaoqi, and on the phone the team leader of China’s national swim team Cheng Hao — refused to let the testers take his blood vials now sealed inside a tamper-proof casing. The testers refused to leave without their casing.

His team claims a security guard broke open the container so the drug testers could take it while the blood vials allegedly remain stored in the hospital where Sun’s doctor works.
You would not know this from the media coverage, but the blood vials were not smashed with a hammer, only the container.”

Google abc.net.au: Sun Yang has been painted as a ‘drug cheat’. Let’s look at it in context

Thomas Inwood

4 years ago

Finally – the cheater got what he earned

Samani Bhusumane

4 years ago

Matt Kovacs

Eric Parr Johnson

4 years ago

Cheater

Marcy Mestel Gold

4 years ago

finally got what he deserved

Mark Stewart

4 years ago

Was the guy cheating in this instance? Well the truth is nobody will ever know.

Was the guy a dumbass for breaking his sample after he already consented to and allowed it to be taken? Yes.

So I will just call him what he is based on the facts, a complete and utter dumbass that brought all of this speculation on himself (right or wrong) through his own doing.

Maureen Fluehr Carll

4 years ago

No empathy.He had ample warning and thought the rules didn’t apply to him.Bye!

Mark Ryan

4 years ago

About time!

Matt Healy

4 years ago

Good! Always trying to buck the system

Alberta Haynes-Carlson

4 years ago

Good! and Goodbye!

Emily J

4 years ago

FYI, Thomas Fraser-Holmes is banned for 12-month for missing THREE doping tests, and Sun is banned for EIGHT years just becasue he refused to take the nonstandard doping test (the two assistants were not qualified , one of them was bulding worker and started shooting video while entering Sun’s apartment)??????????

Even if Sun’s behavior was controversial, does he really deserve the most strict punishment which will directly end his career? At least the doping test agency IDTM should take half the blame. Sun is banned for 8 years, and you call it justics?

THIS IS RACISM

SHAME ON YOU

Author

Craig Lord

4 years ago

Reply to Emily J

Absolute nonsense… nothing to do with racism… read the reason why its eight years… he was handed a three-month lenient retrospective ban for testing positive in 2014, so, its his second offence… in 2018, you might have imagined that he and his entourage would have thought more deeply about that when removing a blood sample from the chain of custody. There is nothing racist about any of this… that is precisely the term lobbed at athletes, coaches, media and more in the 1990s when we all questioned astonishing off-the-chart Chinese performances… we were all racists, apparently… though the accusation did die down somewhat when the count of positives exceeded 60, most of those young teens under the guidance of abusive forces masquerading as guardians while plying their young charges with health-harming and prohibited substances. Try thinking about that and where it leads your mind.

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Craig Lord

Craig: “a three-month lenient retrospective ban for testing positive in 2014”

The ban in 2014 wasn’t without controversy. Google “time.com: Is It Really Fair to Call Chinese Swimmer Sun Yang a Drug Cheat?”
“To be sure, Sun was banned from competition in 2014, but it was for only three months and for a proscribed substance, trimetazidine, that had been prescribed for angina, a heart condition. When Sun took the drug, it had been on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s list for less than five months, and today is no longer recognized as a stimulant by doping agencies.”

Well, actually trimetazidine is back in the WADA list again but it isn’t a big performance enhancer. And the drug was only in the list in 2014 for five months when Sun was tested positive. That’s why the “lenient” punishment?

Google “springer.com: Review of WADA Prohibited Substances: Limited Evidence for Performance-Enhancing Effects”
“Another inhibitor of free fatty acid oxidation, trimetazidine, was reported to improve maximal walking distance in patients with peripheral arterial disease [87], but there is no evidence of such an effect on exercise performance in healthy or trained individuals.”

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Craig Lord

“Thomas Fraser-Holmes is banned for 12-month for missing THREE doping tests” and Craig Lord still said there is no racism?
Any fair minder person will agree that Sun isn’t a clear cut case. WADA and FINA did not dispute Sun’s account of the urine tester taking photos of him (which never happened in all his previous tests). Yes, you can say Sun over-reacted (as WADA itself said in its report *). To ban somebody for 8 years for over-reacting smacks of over-reacting and racism on the part of CAS/WADA.
From the CAS panel report:
“He sought to shift the blame to the DCO, the BCA and the DCA, and at no point, in the appreciation of the Panel, did he confront the possibility that he might have overreacted in his actions.”

Angel

4 years ago

Reply to Emily J

Maybe some speculations on Sun are not right, but this judgment definitely is not racism. The is Sun’s second time of doping violations. According to rules, double doping deserved 8 year ban. Please note that the first 3 month ban on him was enforced by Chinese authorities themselves.

If you’ve got a chance to look at the verdict, you will find out that:
1. WADA didn’t do anything wrong in this procedure. The test was fully qualified. It’s Sun and his team misinterpreting the rules and documents. Even though one of assistance is a contractor, it’s still adequate as long as this assistance is registered in WADA system and given a proper training. Remember, this male assistance’s only job there is to watch Sun pee.
2. Even Sun argued about the qualification of testers, according to rules, he has right to file a complain later after blood and urine samples are collected. If his claim is verdict, this test will be declared void, everyone is happy. But on the contrary, Sun refused to give urine sample and smashed blood vial after several vocal warnings, which made it impossible to prove his innocence and doping test was doomed to fail.
3. Sun was really overreacting and making a scene. Can you image the guy smashed the blood vial with a hammer? What a drama! Even FINA said that Sun was stupid gambling his whole career.

You said that other athletes with more severe offense still got mild punishment? I don’t think that’s the case. Do you even really know about the case you mentioned? I don’t think so as you don’t even know a lot about Sun’s case.

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Angel

Angel: “Remember, this male assistance’s only job there is to watch Sun pee.”

And his job is also to take photos of Sun??? (CAS/WADA did not dispute that the tester took photos). This never happened in all the hundreds of tests Sun had been through and that’s why he became suspicious.

Google abc.net.au: Sun Yang has been painted as a ‘drug cheat’. Let’s look at it in context

Why did Sun’s team smash the blood sample:
“his name did not even appear on the documentation, which Sun considered to be highly unusual.
He should know, he has gone through this process hundreds of times.
His entourage — including his doctor Ba Zhen …. refused to let the testers take his blood vials now sealed inside a tamper-proof casing. The testers refused to leave without their casing.
His team claims a security guard broke open the container so the drug testers could take it while the blood vials allegedly remain stored in the hospital where Sun’s doctor works.
You would not know this from the media coverage, but the blood vials were not smashed with a hammer, only the container.
“To the panel’s knowledge,” the blood vials remain in the possession of Dr Ba (although they are no longer eligible to be tested because the chain of custody was broken).”

Yes, you could say Sun over-reacted or was overly paranoid. But there isn’t evidence that he cheated or tried to cheat. It’s obvious that the testing team was unprofessional. To slap Sun with a 8 year ban is actually an over-reaction by CAS.

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Angel

Angel: “You said that other athletes with more severe offense still got mild punishment? I don’t think that’s the case. Do you even really know about the case you mentioned?”

Thomas Fraser-Holmes is banned for 12-month for missing THREE doping tests.

From the CAS panel report:
“He sought to shift the blame to the DCO, the BCA and the DCA, and at no point, in the appreciation of the Panel, did he confront the possibility that he might have overreacted in his actions.”

Okay, so maybe Sun over-reacted. But to slap him a 8 year ban smack of over-reaction and racism on the part of CAS.

Coach Jim

4 years ago

Reply to Emily J

Racism? You’re nuts.

Mamba

4 years ago

No one can tell what exactly happen at that night in Sun‘s home. But it is not the core of the case.

The logic is that:
1、Fact: what qualification documents did IDTM show to Sun?
2、Regulation: what is the qualification rule of IDTM staff that WADA and ISTI regulate?
3、Fact to regulation: did the document IDTM had obey the regulation in question 2?

Key1: WADA set the regulation of the qualification of IDTM staff(Question 2). So Sun can never win. (The answer for question 3 is yes)
Key2: WADA had delivered thousands of test in this way. So, if Sun wins, then those thousands of test before will be questioned. So sun can never win.

Conclusion:
1、Sun’s reaction ruined his career. His team should also be responsible for that. Because athelet focuse on training, and his team should take care of those things.
2、WADA should improve the process to help athelets to understand the regulation and to communicate better.
3、Media should also take the responsibility that Sun is not a treater but a rule breaker. (His gold medals before are still qualified)
4、For Sun: you can hardly reverse the result. You are still a great athlete. Life is long. Swim is not your whole life. Wish you all the best.

peter

4 years ago

Reply to Mamba

Re. Mamba:

I agree with your comment, which is way more clear and fair than the entire article posted by a so called “Editor-in-chief”.

the take-away messages are:
1. Sun Yang is a rule breaker. But he is not a “cheater” as the narrow-minded article conveys.
2. WADA needs to set up rules to protect athlete’s rights when they send in unqualified staff to take samples.

To the “Editor-in-chief”:
your biased article and comments are like jokes. They confirm my opinion that your “Swimming world magazine” is such a third class tabloid. Long live the white supremacy in your fxxxing blood!

Don’t you dare to remove my comment. I will SPREAD THIS PAGE TO MY STANFORD FRIENDS TO ENTERTAIN THEM

Richie Young

4 years ago

Reply to Mamba

To Mamba: You wrote: “WADA had delivered thousands of test in this way. So, if Sun wins, then those thousands of test before will be questioned. So sun can never win.”

Sun had been through the process hundreds of times (perhaps more than any other swimmer in history), and yes, the test on September 2018 was DIFFERENT (the tester taking his photos) and that’s why he objected to his samples taken away.

“Sun became aware the man, known as a doping control assistant (DCA), had been taking photos of him and instructed the DCA he could not do that.
He asked to see the DCA’s accreditation and that of the nurse who had taken his blood. Then the night began to unravel. According to the DCA’s own written statement, he was “very excited” to see the athlete, and “took two or three pictures” of him from behind. Although the DCA did not testify in person, the CAS panel accepted his written statement, which was confirmed by the testimonies of several witnesses, including the doping control officer (DCO) in charge of the operation.”

Google abc.net.au: Sun Yang has been painted as a ‘drug cheat’. Let’s look at it in context

It is obvious that the testing team acted very unprofessionally. You could say Sun Yang over-reacted but there isn’t evidence to prove that he cheated or tried to cheat.