Facts
The Rugby Football Union ("RFU") charged Jack Warrington (the "Player”) for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 10 November 2012, provided a urine sample for a doping control test. The sample returned an adverse analytical finding which highlighted the presence of Methylhexaneamine (“MHA”) which is classified as a prohibited substance.

History
The player used several supplements, some were indicated not being the source of the contamination, others couldn't be tested. The Player made no further representations as to the inhaler he bought on holiday in Portugal being the source of the MHA.

Decision
The sanction imposed for this anti-doping rule violation is a period of ineligibility of two years for the Player commencing 23rd November 2012 (the date upon which the Player was notified of the adverse analytical finding and provisionally suspended) and concluding on (but inclusive of) 23rd November 2014. In the meantime, the Player’s status is that governed by IRB Regulation.

Facts
The Rugby Football Union ("RFU") charged Aaron Mason (the "player") for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. The player was selected for a doping test on 15 April 2013. His sample showed the presence of methandienone (commonly known as Dianabol). The player admitted the doping offence.

History
The player didn't supply information about how the prohibited substance entered his body.

Decision
A period of ineligibility of two years was imposed.

Appeal
An appeal can be made within the regulations of RFU.

The Rugby Football Union ("RFU") charged John Freeman (the "player") for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 2 April 2013 the player was selected for a doping test. The sample tested positive on the presence of Benzoylecgonine a metabolite of cocaine and 11-nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol a metabolite of cannabis. Both substances are listed on the WADA prohibited list 2013 as non-specified stimulants and cannabinoids. The player did not request for a hearing in person.

History
The player is a non-professional player and was asked to replace a professional player. On 11 May 2013 the World Anti-Doping Agency increased the threshold level for cannabis to 150ng/mL. The player's level was 71.8ng/ml below the new threshold level. Because of the new threshold for cannabis the player can only be sanctioned for the metabolite of cocaine.

Decision
The sanction imposed is a period of ineligibility of two years for the player commencing on 18 April 2013 and concluding on 18 April 2015.

Costs
The RFU recognizes the player's amateur status and his position within the game and does not seek any award or costs against him.

Appeal
The decision can be appealed by the player or others according the RFU Anti-Doping regulation.

The French Basketball Federation (FFBB) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
The FFBB decides a 4 month period of ineligibility. This decision is adopted by FIBA.

Facts
The Rugby Football Union ("RFU") charged James Comben (the "player") for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 26 November 2012 the player was selected after a match for a doping test. His urine sample tested positive for methylhexaneamine (MHA) a specified stimulant. The B sample analysis was not carried out because the player admitted the doping offence.

History
He said that he ingested a dose of Oxylean 1-3d at about 8 am on the morning of the match, but at the time he did not know he was to play that evening. By e-mail he disclosed he had used the medication. He had used the medication to control weight gain because he is a model for clothing.

Considerations panel
The panel agrees that the medication wasn't taken to enhance sport performance. However he failed to check the ingredient of the supplement and to disclose it during the doping test. Considering the personal circumstances of the player who is young and unexperienced to doping test the panel considers a reduction of the standard 2 years of ineligibility.

Decision
The player is ineligible to take part in any capacity in the game of Rugby Football Union for a period of six months from 21 December 2012 to 20 June 2013. He may participate again on 21 June 2013.

Cost
No applications for costs are made.

The Russian Basketball Federation (RBF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone and 19-noretiocholanolon (metabolites of nandrolone).
On July 20 2009 the RBF decided a 3 month period of ineligibility. The RBF also imposed a lifetime ban on the club medical doctor for administering nandrolone.

In March 2010 the Player was heard for the FIBA Disciplinary Panel.
The Player stated he had suffered several injuries and fractures in a period of 18 months and was treated by his club medical doctor who performed two injections on the Player without informing him about the substances injected.
The Panel finds the Player acted negligently because of Player’s responsibility that no prohibited substance enters his body.
Considering Player’s statement and the circumstances the FIBA Disciplinary Panel decides a 1 year period of ineligibility.

In January 2009 Federação Portuguesa de Basquetebol (FPB), the Portuguese Basketball Federation, has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
Previously in 2003 the Player was suspended for a 1 year period after he tested positive in Italy for cannabis.
In September 2009 the FPB imposed a sanction of 1 year ineligibility.
In October 2009 the Player was heard for the FIBA Disciplinary Panel.
The Player stated he had smoked cannabis, had no intention to enhance his performance and expressed his regret for the violation committed.
Considering this is Player’s second anti-doping rule violation the FIBA Disciplinary Panel decides a 1 year period of ineligibility.

In January 2009 the Turkish Basketball Federation (TBF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance metenolone. In April 2009 TBF Disciplinary Board decided a 8 month period of ineligibility.

In July 2009 the Player exercised his right to be heard for the FIBA Disciplinary Panel.
The Player stated he had purchased “over the counter” medication; was not aware that the medication may contain prohibited substances; argued that he suffers from a chronic medical condition in his knees; and that he had received treatment at a medical clinic.
The Panel has serious doubts about Player’s statement and he failed to provide any scientific evidence in support of his argument.
The Panel finds the Player acted negligently without ensuring that the medication does not contain a prohibited substance. The Panel is unable to find a connection between the Player’s knee injury and the anti-doping rule violation.
Therefore the FIBA Disciplinary Panel decides a 2 year period of ineligibility.

Fact
The UK Anti-Doping Organization ("UKAD") charged Mark Edwards (the "athlete") for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. The athlete retired on September 14, 2010. On September 15, 2010, an out-of-competition drug test was taken. His sample showed the presence of exogenous testosterone and a metabolite of clostebol.

History
The athlete is a shot putter who has competed over 20 years in national-level competitions and various overseas meetings and competitions. The athlete can't explain how the prohibited substances entered his body.

Considerations panel
The athlete claims to have retired on September 14, 2010, but there is no evidence that he resigned from his club.

The athlete should receive an period of ineligibility of 4 years due to aggravating circumstances. But he runs a sports therapy business, has a history for working with disabled athletes and attending the Paralympic Games as a full time employed UK athletics ("UKA") performance coach.

Decision
1. A doping offence has been established.
2. The period of ineligibility will run for three years from November 3, 2010.

Appeal
An appeal can be made by the Athlete, UKA, UKAD, IAAF and WADA.

Facts
The Football Association ("FA") charged Lewis Gibbon (the "player") for an omission of the Anti Doping Rules ("ADR"). On September 22, 2012, he provided a sample of urine which contained benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) and 11-nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carbosylic acid (cannabis). Cannabinoids are classified as Specified Substances; cocaine is a Non-Specified stimulant. The player waved his rights for a B sample analysis and admitted the use of the substances.

History
The player had tried “a small joint and a little bit of cocaine” at a party during the early evening of September 21, the day before the match in question.

Considerations panel
We consider the appropriate way to deal with this case is to treat it as a single anti-doping violation committed by the presence of multiple substances in his sample.
There is a situation of aggravating circumstances but because of the prompt admission an increase in the suspension of two years was not justified.

Decision
1. Lewis Gibbons committed anti-doping rule violations, namely the presence in his urine sample taken on September 22, 2012 of benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) and 11-nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carbosylic acid.
2. The appropriate penalty is a period of suspension from all football and football activities for a period of two years.
3. The suspension is effective (i.e. commences) from the date the FA provisionally suspended the player, namely 18 October 2012.
4. He will be subject to target testing for a period of two years from October 18, 2014.
5. The hearing fee is to be retained by the FA.
6. There is no order for costs of the hearing.