In September 2008 the Agenţia Naţională Anti-Doping (ANAD), the National Anti-Doping Agency of Romania, has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Marius Mitrache after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance stanozolol.
Therefore on 17 November 2008 the ANAD Sanction Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of decision.
In September 2008 the Agenţia Naţională Anti-Doping (ANAD), the National Anti-Doping Agency of Romania, has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Lucian Doru Pantea after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance stanozolol.
Therefore on 11 November 2008 the ANAD Sanction Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of decision.
Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) charges Taligatuli Moala (the player) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Following the final match played on 23rd May 2008 between Upolu Samoa and Tautai Tonga in the IRB Pacific Rugby Cup Tournament 2008 Taligatuli Moala (the player) during in-competition testing, provided a urine sample which subsequently tested positive for the substance Salbutamol. Salbutamol is classified under S.3 of the World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) 2008 List of Prohibited Substances.
History
Due to an injury the player asked his physiotherapist and team manager for pain relief. Instead of Voltaren tablets he took the tablets wih salbutamol. His representations claims no significant fault or negligence.
Decision
The sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of ineligibility of two years commencing from 7th July 2008 (the date upon which the player's provisional suspension commenced) and concluding (but not inclusive of) 7th July 2010.
Related cases:
- KNVB 2007 KNVB Decision Disciplinary Committee 2007082 T
August 15, 2007
- Dutch District Court 2008 Athlete 2007082 vs KNVB
June 18, 2008
On 15 August 2007 KNVB Disciplinary Committee decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Belgian Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance amphetamine.
In the previous disciplinary proceedings the Athlete denied the use of doping and he produced the results of a hair test as evidence that he didn’t use doping. In addition he reffered to jurisprudence about a KNVB case which resulted in the acquittal of the Athlete after sloppy disciplinary proceedings.
The KNVB Disciplinary Committee concluded that the Athlete’s hairtest wasn't performed in an accredited laboratorium and under the WADA Rules such a test is not allowed as evidence. Therefore the statements of expert witnesses about the hair test were not relevant to consider in this case. The filed jurisprudence about another KNVB case was not similar with the circumstances in this case.
In review of the case the KNVB Appeal Committee decides on 14 November to uphold the decision of 15 August 2007 of the KNVB Disciplinary Committee and to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.
Facts
The French Federation of American Football (Fédération Française de Football Américain, FFFA) charges respondent M65 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on March 9, 2008, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.
History
The respondent uses cannabis occasionally for many years, he had no intention to enhance sport performance. He already was sanctioned for the same violation by the decision (one year period of ineligibility, with six months conditionally) on June 20, 2006, by the disciplinary committee of the FFFA.
Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the French sport federations.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.
Facts
The French Federation of American Football (Fédération Française de Football Américain, FFFA) charges respondent M66 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on July 5, 2008, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.
History
The respondent had used cannabis four day before the match, he uses cannabis occasionally but has no intention to enhance his sport performance.
Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFFA.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.
Facts
The French Federation of American Football (Fédération Française de Football Américain, FFFA) charges respondent M65 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on March 22, 2008, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.
History
The respondent didn't provide any explanation about how the prohibited substance had entered his body, also he failed to appear before the hearing.
Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the French sport federations.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.
Carbon isotope ratio (delta13C) values of urinary steroids for doping control in sport / Adam T. Cawley 1 , Graham J. Trout, Rymantas Kazlauskas, Christopher J. Howe, Adrian V. George . - (Steroids 74 (2008) 3 (March); p. 379-392)
Abstract
The detection of steroids originating from synthetic precursors in relation to their chemically identical natural analogues has proven to be a significant challenge for doping control laboratories accredited by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Endogenous steroid abuse may be confirmed by utilising the atomic specificity of gas chromatography-combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS) that enables the precise measurement of differences in stable isotope ratios that arise as a result of fractionation patterns inherent in the source of steroids. A comprehensive carbon isotope ratio (delta(13)C) profiling study (n=1262) of urinary ketosteroids is reported that demonstrates the inter-individual variation that can be expected from factors such as diet, ethnicity, gender and age within and between different populations (13 countries). This delta(13)C distribution is shown by principal component analysis (PCA) to provide a statistical comparison to delta(13)C values observed following administration of testosterone enanthate. A limited collection of steroid diol data (n=100; consisting of three countries) is also presented with comparison to delta(13)C values of excreted testosterone to validate criteria for WADA accredited laboratories to prove doping offences.
Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M64 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on July 5, 2008, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a erythropoietin (EPO) especiallly of the type CERA which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.
History
The respondent denies the use of EPO and holds the detection method for CERA as not valid. But this is ignored by the panel.
Decision
1. The sanction is period of ineligibility of two years in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by French sport federations.
2. All the results obtained at the cycling event of July 5, 2008, are cancelled. Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.
Related case:
ST 2010_17 DFSNZ vs Rodney Newman
January 31, 2012
Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Boldenone and Testosterone.
After notification the Respondent voluntarily accepted a provisional suspension. Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal.
Respondent admitted the violation which he indicated must have been the result of a variety of supplements he had been taking. Respondent voluntarily withdrew from further competition upon being notified of the positive test and accepted that the mandatory penalty for his violation was a two year period of ineligibility.
Respondent submitted that the suspension should not commence from the date of the Tribunal hearing but should start earlier, from the date he was notified of the positive test as he had voluntarily not competed since then.
The Tribunal concludes that suspensions can be backdated earlier than the hearing date and accepts that in certain situations, voluntarily withdrawal from competition may be akin to a voluntarily accepted provisional suspension and may justify starting the suspension earlier than the Tribunal hearing date.
In the circumstances of this case the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting from the date of notification of the positive test.
