Related case:
NADO Flanders 2018 Disciplinary Council 20186760 - Appeal
January 18, 2019)
In 2018 NADO Flanders has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the golf player for evading sample collection after been notified by NADO Flanders during a competition. After notification the Athlete was heard for the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission.
The Doping Control Officers (DCO’s) reported that the Athlete was duly notified and that he had signed the Notification Form. Hereafter the Athlete failed to attend the Doping Control for sample collection because he had left the competition nor did he respond the telephone calls. Afterwards the Athlete contacted the DCO but it appeared that he already went back home and it was too late to provide a sample.
The Athlete asserted that he received an unclear Notification and he was unaware thereupon he had to attend himself the Doping Control Station while instead he continued playing golf. He explained that during golf he was interrupted by a telephone call from his girl friend that emotionally ended in a relation break off. After that the battery of his mobile phone was empty when he returned home and only at home he discovered the missed calls about the Doping Control.
Considering the Athlete’s explanations the Disciplinary Commission holds that there are several inconsistencies in the Athlete’s story regarding the Notification, his phone call he had that day and his written submissions. Consequently the Commission concludes that there was no alleged language problem regarding the Notification, nor a valid compelling justification that prevented him to provide a sample.
Therefore the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decides on 2 October 2018 to impose a fine and a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the decision.
Fees and expenses for this Commission shall be borne partially by the Athlete.
