Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges James Paterson (the player) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 27th September 2011, the Player provided a urine sample during an In-Competition Test conducted on behalf of the Rugby World Cup (RWC), the Tournament Organiser of RWC 2011 held in New Zealand. His sample tested positive on for the substance Oxycodone. Oxycodone is classified as a narcotic under s.7 of the World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) List of Prohibited Substances and Methods. It is a specified substance.

History
The player used several medications because of the pain he suffered from a shoulder injury. The medication included the strong pain killer Oxycodone, an opium derivative narcotic. He did list the medication on the doping control form.

Decision
For the reasons outlined, the sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of ineligibility of four months from October 13, 2011 (being the date upon which the Player's provisional suspension commenced) and concluding (but not inclusive of) February 13, 2012.

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 her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of dagga (cannabis) and was therefore confused after she had been notified about the positive test. She explained that she suffered from flu symptoms and had used Benylin. She had also received an injection from her doctor, but this had caused an allergic reaction.

Thereupon she approached a traditional healer (a family member) who gave her a traditional herb remedy (an imbiza/concoction). Following her positive test she confronted the traditional healer who confirmed that there was dagga in the herb that the Athlete was using. She had been using the herb for a number of months. This was the first test she underwent and she apologised for what had happened.

The Committee concludes that the Athlete had not intention to enhance her performance and had no knowledge that the traditional herb remedy contained dagga.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 28 September 2011 to 28 December 2011.

Furhter the Committee notes that it was regrettable that a representative of Boxing South Africa (BSA) was not present at the Inquiry. The facts of this matter highlighted the desperate need for education of athletes on issues of anti-doping in the sport of Boxing.

The ignorance of the Athlete as to anti-doping rules; the use of traditional remedies and the socio-economic circumstances of the Athlete highlight the challenges facing athletes in this sport. Urgent intervention is required by BSA and/or SAIDS to ensure that the above facts are not repeated.

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 methandienone.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete admitted his guilty and stated he used Dianabol (methandienone), provided by his friend. He had taken the steroids knowing he felt good after taking them and that they would enhance his performance.
The Committee finds that there were no grounds for elimination or reduction of the sanction.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting from the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 8 August 2011 to 7 August 2013.

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 and the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete pleaded guilty and stated prior to the match he was at a party where he took some puffs of a hubbly bubbly apparatus which contained dagga (cannabis) without his knowledge.
Hereafter he admitted he had smoked cannabis daily since his injury some three week prior to the testing.

Considering the Athlete had used cannabis many weeks prior to the match and without intention to enhance performance the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 2 February 2012 to 3 May 2012.

Related case:
IRB 2009 IRB vs Andre De Klerk
March 15, 2010

Fact
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Andre De Klerk for a second violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 14th August 2011 the Player provided a urine sample during further Out of Competition Testing. The analysis of his sample showed a testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 6.5. Testosterone is listed in Section 1 Anabolic Agents on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List 2011.

This is the first occasion when an IRB Board Judicial Committee ("BJC") is required to consider a second anti-doping violation by the same Player. As will become apparent the second infraction has very serious consequences for a young player.

History
the Player identified a supplement he had been taking, known as "Animal Stak", which he indicated contained (according to its marketing) "the powerful 1-2 punch of testosterone and growth hormone in one formula".

Decision
The sanction imposed for this second anti-doping rule violation is a period of ineligibility of eight years commencing from 27th November 2011 (being the date upon which the Player's provisional suspension commenced) and concluding (but inclusive of) the 27th November 2019.

Costs
Written submissions should be provided on time.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Ryohei Yamanaka for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 9-4-2011 the player provided an urine sample during an Out of Competition Test. The sample tested positve for the substance Methyltestosterone and/or Methandriol.

History
The Player explained that acting on the advice of his barber towards the end of January 2011 he purchased without a doctor's prescription, two tubes of a product branded as "Microgen Pastae" ("the Product") commonly used in Japan for the purpose of generating hair growth. He intended growing a moustache to complement his beard. At the time of purchase the Player unfortunately omitted to ascertain whether the product contained a prohibited substance. This product constains the prohibited substances methyltestosterone and testosterone.

Decision
On 9 April 2011 the Player committed an anti-doping rule violation.
The sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of Ineligibility of two years, commencing on 28th April 2011 (the date upon which the Player was notified of the adverse analytical finding and provisionally suspended) and concluding on (but inclusive of) 27 April 2013.

Costs
Written submissions should be provided on time to the panel.

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 methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete pleaded guilty and stated he had used a supplement Jack 3D which he purchased at a local sports shop.
He regretted the incident and stated that he was wholly unaware of the WADA-prohibited list of substances and the strict rules relating thereto.

The Committee accepts that the Athlete had not intention to enhance his performance but finds that the Athlete could be expected to know more of his responsibilities with regard to anti-doping matters.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on 12 April 2012 to 11 October 2012.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Joji Tu’ipulotu for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Following a match in Fiji between the Tau’uta Reds and the Fijian Barbarians, the Player was selected for doping control. His sample showed the presence of metabolites of cannabis in a concentration of 36 ng/ml.

History
Less than a week before playing in an IRB tournament, the Player went to a party and used cannabis. He knew that the use of cannabis is prohibited in rugby and that he could be tested for cannabis and other substances, but thought that he would not get caught. He did not consider the consequences of his actions until he sobered up. Even then, he elected to play in matches when he knew that the consequences of his cannabis use may not have been eliminated from his system. His use of cannabis was recreational and not intended to enhance sport performance.

Decision
The degree of fault of the Player, and the circumstances, warrant a five month sanction. The Player had sufficient experience and seniority to have known better.
The fact that a five month period of Ineligibility may have financial consequences for the Player is not a valid factor in determining the appropriate period of Ineligibility. Indeed, it is important to emphasise that the sanctioning regime for anti-doping rule violations is a universal one and applies equally to professional and amateur players of the Game.
The period of Ineligibility should be regarded as having commenced on the date of the Player’s provisional suspension, namely 18 June 2010. The period of Ineligibility expired on 18 November 2010.

Costs
Written submissions should be submitted on time.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Martin Nuñez Lasalle (the player) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 4 December 2010, while playing for the Argentina team in the World Sevens Series Tournament in Dubai, the Player underwent in-competition drug testing. The sample of the urine specimen which the Player provided was positive for the prohibited substance, 19-Norandrosterone a metabolite of nandrolone at a concentration of 14 ng/ml.

History
The player suffered from a shoulder injury, for the treatment he used a number of drugs – dexametasone, meprednisone, deca-durobolin and amitriptiline. Deca-Durabolin labels and containers clearly refer to Nandrolone.

Decision
On 4 December 2010, the Player committed an anti-doping rule violation. The sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of Ineligibility of 15 months, commencing on 23 December 2010 (the date upon which the Player was notified of the adverse analytical finding and provisionally suspended) and concluding (but inclusive of) 22 March 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 Testosterone.

The Athlete indicated that he is not guilty and explained that he had used the supplement Testoboost purchased over the counter. When he purchased the supplement he was told it is safe and contains natural substances. In addition the Athlete did research the ingredients of the supplement before using it. He took four capsules before the event where he was requested to provide a sample.

Considering the evidence the Committee finds there is no basis to reduce the sanction. Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on 28 June 2012 to 27 June 2014.