Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Evile Telea (player) for violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Following his evidence given in the previous cases of Salanoa and Moala the IRB alleges the Player has committed five anti-doping rule violations, namely:
1. Use of a Prohibited Substance (Salbutamol – administered by oral means) on or about May 2008 without a valid TUE as required by 2008 IRB Regulation 21.5, contrary to IRB Regulation 21.2.2;
2. Possession of a Prohibited Substance (oral Salbutamol) on or about 10 May 2008 in contravention of IRB 2008 Regulation 21.2.6(a);
3. Trafficking of a Prohibited Substance (oral Salbutamol) to a Player (Salanoa) on or about 10 May 2008 in contravention of IRB 2008 Regulation 21.2.7;
4. Possession of a Prohibited Substance (oral Salbutamol) on or about 22 May 2008 in contravention of IRB 2008 Regulation 21.2.6(a); and/or
5. Trafficking of a Prohibited Substance (oral Salbutamol) to a Player (Moala) on or about 22 May 2008 in contravention of IRB 2008 Regulation 21.2.7.

Decision
The sanction which is imposed for the Player’s anti-doping rule violations is a total period of four (4) years ineligibility commencing from 8th January 2009 (the date upon which the Player’s provisional suspension commenced) and concluding (but not inclusive of) 8th January 2013.

Costs
Written submissions should be submitted on time.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete admitted he was guilty and stated he did not know that the flu medication he had used contained Dagga (cannabis) and he had not previously used any illegal substances. His mother gave him this medication every year in the winter without telling the him what she put in her medication.

Considering the circumstances and without intention to enhance his performance the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the notification, i.e. 27 September 2011 to 27 November 2011.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_26 WADA vs Nzuzo Ngxongo & SAIDS – Appeal
May 3, 2012

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide.

The Athlete stated that he had been given the tablet "a small white pill" by a person whose identity he did not wish to disclose and that he did so in order to define his muscles in that a diuretic would reduce the water in his system and consequently "make him more ripped". The tablet was ingested the day before the competition.

Considering mitigating factors the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decides to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on 30 August 2011 to 28 February.

Hereafter WADA appealed this decision.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_ 26 SAIDS vs Nzuzo Ngxongo
November 15, 2011

On 15 November 2011 the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decided to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete for committing an anti-doping rule violation after he tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide.

WADA appealed against the SAIDS decision to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete because it does not agree that the considered mitigating factors are indeed mitigating factors. WADA argued that in order to qualify for a reduction the Athlete must show that he exercised the utmost caution and made every conceivable effort to avoid taking the prohibited substance. This he failed to do.

The Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal of South Africa decides to set aside the Decision of the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee which is substituted with the following:

1) A 2 year period of ineligibility is imposed on the Athlete from date hereof;
2) The Athlete is to be credited with the period of ineligibility he served from 30 August 2011 to date hereof;
3) The period of ineligibility therefore expires on 29 August 2013.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Jovan Popuke (the player) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Jovan Pupuke ("the player") is a rugby player who plays most of his sport in New Zealand where he has lived all his life. Because of his ancestry, he was selected to represent the Cook Islands at the IRB Junior World Trophy Tournament held in Santiago, Chile. On 19 April 2008, following the Cook Islands/Romania match, he provided an in-competition urine sample. His sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and regarded as a specified substance.

History
In response to questioning, the player discounted any suggestion that he smoked cannabis to enhance his performance. He did so while socially interacting with his three friends at a party during the evening of 29/30 March 2008. The player has established on a balance of probabilities that his use of cannabinoids was not intended to enhance sport performance and, if so, to decide the sanction that should be imposed for a first violation by the Player.

Decision
A period of suspension of four months reduced to three months on account of the player's early acknowledgment of guilt, his expressed regret and remorse that his conduct has tarnished the image of rugby in the Cook Islands.

Costs
Written submissions should be provided on time.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
After the notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete indicated that he was guilty of the charge. He had smoked Dagga (cannabis) two or three week before he participated in the event.
Considering the circumstances and without intention to enhance his performance the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 4 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 28 September 2011 to 27 January 2012.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
After the notification a provisional suspension was ordered and hereafter the Athlete failed to attend the hearing of the Committee.

Considering the presented evidence the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee concludes that the Athlete has violated the SAIDS rules and decides to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the notification, i.e. 19 July 2012 to 18 January 2013.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Nicolas Venegas (the player) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 22 November he represented Chile in a South America Championship match against Uruguay. He was selected for an in-competition doping test which resulted in a positive finding for Cannabis metabolite 11-nor-9-carboxy-⌂9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Carboxy-THC) at a concentration of 64ng/ml (+/- 5 ng/ml). Carboxy-THC is listed under S8 Cannabinoids on the WADA List of Prohibited Substances 2008. The presence of Carboxy-THC in a person’s bodily sample at a concentration which is greater than 15ng/ml constitutes an anti-doping rule violation under IRB Regulation and under the World Anti-Doping Code.

History
The Player initially told that he was not a habitual user of marijuana. He would use it a maximum of twice a year. This evidence was then revised somewhat when he claimed that he had only ever used marijuana twice, those occasions being on 13 and 15 November 2008. As noted already, the first of these occasions was during a farewell gathering for a friend. He claims that the marijuana had no effect on him the first time he used it, which is why he tried it again two days later. The domestic rugby season in Chile had just ended and although he had played for Chile against Argentina on 8 November, the Player said that he had not initially been selected for the Uruguay match so that when he used marijuana he had no concern that he might be playing rugby again a few days later.

Decision
On 22 November 2008, the Player committed an anti-doping rule violation. The sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of Ineligibility of four (4) months, commencing on 4 January 2009 (the date upon which the Player was provisionally suspended under Regulation 21.19) and concluding (but inclusive of) 3 May 2009.
No Player or Person who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in a Match, Series of Matches and/or Tournament (international or otherwise) or activity authorised or organised by the Board or any Member Union.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges that, on 19 June 2008, Andrey Sorokin (the “Player”) committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation by reason of an Adverse Analytical Finding for Indapamide, which is Prohibited Substance, classed under S5 Diuretics and Other Masking Agents. The Player does not dispute the finding.

History
The player asserts that the finding arose from his medically-prescribed use of a medicine called Noliprel to treat a serious cardiac condition. Noliprel contains indapamide.

Decision
On 19 June 2008, the Player committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation by reason of the presence of Indapamide in his bodily Sample. Indapamide is a Prohibited Substance under both Regulation 21 and the World Anti-Doping Code, classed under S5 Diuretics and Other Masking Agents. The sanction imposed for this Anti-Doping Rule Violation is a warning and a reprimand. The Player’s provisional suspension is lifted with immediate effect and he is, subject to compliance with all other applicable laws and regulations, eligible to participate in the Game.

Costs
Written submissions should be submitted on time

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone and 19-noreticholanolone (metabolites of Nandrolone). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete was unable to confirm that he had taken any other substance or medication other than that declared on the Doping Control Form. He stated that he had not received any injections since 2008.
Considering the Athlete’s statement and the evidence the Committee concludes that it is unable to establish how the nandrolone entered the Athlete’s body. The Athlete was unable to produce any evidence at all in this regard.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 17 June 2011 to 16 June 2013.