Since Maria Sharapova announced her positive test for the banned substance meldonium, a failure she says was accidental, the fallout has been quick and toxic. By Tuesday morning, Nike, Porshe and Tag-Heuer had all cut ties with the world's biggest female athlete. Doctors were giving quotes saying there's no way a healthy athlete would ever need to take such a drug. Sharapova's story of unknowing illegality has become less and less believable. And what had been a clear presumption of innocence has now turned into a healthy skepticism, if not downright suspicion.
Still there's a sort of sympathy for Sharapova. She got out in front of the story by making her own announcement (something that should tell you about the sway stars hold in tennis), made no excuses in taking full responsibility for the test even while subtly insinuating that it wasn't her fault and offered a reasonable, if eyebrow-raising story.
While the facts and opinions continue to pour in it's clear this isn't a black or white story. There's only one question that matters though: What should happen to Maria Sharapova?
(MANAN VATSYAYANA/AFP/Getty Images)
1. What are the usual penalties?
Draconian. Sometimes WAD can ban an athlete four years for a positive test. A two-year ban is certainly on the table. But because meldonium isn't exactly the type of stuff Ben Johnson was using at the 1988 Olympics, the full penalty would likely be less harsh. WADA president Craig Creedie told the AP that an athlete testing positive for meldonium would likely get a one-year ban. Then again, if a tribunal believes Sharapova's story, it could be far less. So what is that story?
2. The whole thing is far shadier than it seems.
(Photo by Scott Barbour/Getty Images)
During the press conference, the story seemed entirely plausible. Sharapova had taken a drug for 10 years, didn't notice that it was banned on Jan. 1, 2016 and tested positive during her first tournament of the season. One of the reasons Sharapova took the drug, she said, was due to a family history of diabetes.
But there are better drugs to battle diabetes and, generally, according to a doctor I spoke with, prevention is more about awareness rather than medicine. In other words, most wouldn't take a drug to prevent diabetes, they'd simply be made aware of the risk factors and try to minimize them. Other doctors quoted by the AP and British newspapers have suggested that meldonium would never be prescribed to a healthy, young athlete for a lengthy period of time. The normal treatment cycle is 4-6 weeks they say, though it doesn't necessarily mean it can't be taken for longer.
3. Do people use meldonium as a PED?
(Photo by Roberto Machado Noa/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Oh yeah. Even when it was legal, there were a lot of athletes taking the drug for what we can only assume were reasons other than fear of diabetes The Partnership for Clean Competition says that 2.2% of athletes had traces of the drug in their system while the ban was being considered last year. That was twice as high as any drug now on the banned list. The gist: This was basically a legal PED taken by athletes to increase endurance.
So far this year, at least seven athletes have tested positive for the drug that's only been illegal 68 days. They come from different countries and disciplines. Did all of them not read the new WADA guidelines for the start of 2016? That seems highly unlikely, doesn't it?
4. Speaking of the guidelines, was it difficult to find out meldonium was newly illegal?
(Clive Brunskill/Getty Images)
Sharapova said she didn't listen to a phone recording of new banned drugs, nor did she read the addendum to the WADA rules. You'd expect it to be an arcane, heavily wonky read that would be hard for athletes to understand, right? Wrong. Here is the entire document.
That's 569 words written in crystal-clear fashion. I read books to my two-year-old that are longer and more complicated. And the fact that Sharapova says she didn't read it is almost stunning. She was taking a drug that isn't approved for use in the United States and was known to be somewhat controversial, even when it was legal. And she's not staying hyper-vigilant in keeping sure that this iffy drug is legal? Nonsense. Maria Sharapova is considered to be one of the most with-it, self-aware, put-together athletes in the world. All of a sudden she's this irresponsible athlete who can't keep her medications straight?
This wasn't a mistake or oversight then; it's gross negligence. Even if Sharapova had no belief meldonium would one day become banned, you'd think the first thing she'd do on Jan. 1 is say "Happy New Year!" and then call the hotline to find out if anything she was taking could jeopardize her career as the best paid female athlete in the world. Accident or not, you deserve a four-month suspension simply for being too lazy to listen to the most important phone call of your year.
5. If meldonium was legal one day, why was it all of a sudden so bad to take the next?
(ANDREI GOLOVANOV/AFP/Getty Images)
That's the question I'm grappling with. How angry can you be with an athlete who was taking a drug that was legal on Dec. 31 and not on Jan. 1? It's completely arbitrary. When speed cameras go up or speed limits are lowered, there's often a grace period. It seems unfair that Sharapova would fail her first test in competition and not get a heads up saying "hey, this is illegal now." What would have been the harm in that?
Let's say she was taking the drug as a PED prior to Jan. 1. Who cares? It was legal. She doesn't have to defend herself for that. She's not a bad person or cheating athlete because she took a drug that was legal for decades and then, one day -- poof -- wasn't. That doesn't absolve Sharapova, it just makes me want to leave the pitchfork in the garage.
Compare meldonium to Novak Djokvoic's sleeping pod. That's completely a PED (performance-enhancing device). He believes it gives him an advantage. And the only reason he's allowed to use it is because WADA hasn't deemed it illegal. In November, meldonium was that sleeping pod. Now it's the scourge of the sports universe? Come on. That's ridiculous.
6. How is meldonium treated in other parts of the world?
(ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty Images)
With all the negative things about meldonium being out in the press over the past 24 hours, including the positive test of Russian ice dancing champion Ekaterine Bobrova, there's this interesting tidibit, from BBC Russia (via Piers Newbery): "In 2013, the Russian government put [meldonium] on a list of essential drugs â on a par with things like insulin â which makes it subject to certain price caps."
But even then, however, doctors in Russia say the drug has no clinical effect.
7. Could Sharapova have applied to take this drug legally?
The anti-doping agencies allow for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) that allow athletes to take banned drugs in special circumstances at special times.
The reading of the bylaws seem to suggest this is not an easy process. Documented asthma sufferers can take banned drugs (which aren't proven to be of any performance benefit anyway), for instance, but whether or not preventive use of a non-FDA medication would be allowed seems to be dicier. There's a difference between want and need. Still, none of that means Sharapova wouldn't have been cleared to take it, she just never took the trouble of finding out.
8. Is there a smoking gun in this case?
Yes, and it could be a big one. As the USASA website notes, athletes are allowed to fill out a "declaration of use" form before each drug test that lists which drugs the athlete is currently taking.
(Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)
Simply writing the name of a banned drug doesn't make it legal. You can't just jot down Stanozolol and expect it to be cool. Yet this list could be the key to Sharapova's defense. If she wrote down "meldonium" on the list, then WADA has every reason to believe the story that that was an innocent mistake, a lapse of poor preparation and decade-long routine. You won't advertise that you'er taking an illegal drug.
So if Sharapova didn't disclose the drug then the presumption has to be that she was trying to hide her use of a now-illegal drug for performance-enhancing effects.(The counter to that is meldonium had been legal for so long that Sharapova didn't feel the need to disclose it and thus, it was all still an accident.)
9. So what's going to happen?
My belief is that Sharapova may have been taking meldonium for health reasons but was almost certainly using it for other benefits as well. That it was in her body during the Australian Open is undeniable and illegal. That's entirely her fault and she deserves something -- if even a slap on the wrist -- for that.
(Photo by Bradley Kanaris/Getty Images)
But I gotta be honest: I have a hard time believing Sharapova was willingly trying to cheat in January. She's been around for 12 years. She's been the highest-paid female athlete in the world for 11 years. She's smart, quick and bright. It just doesn't jibe that Sharapova would risk it all for a drug that was considered so benign for decades that it wasn't even illegal. Maybe I'm way off though. Maybe I'm naive. I'm probably way off and naive.
Any offensive Twitter/Facebook/Instagram messages from a celebrity are inevitably followed by the same three words: "I was hacked." Positive drug tests are almost invariably explained away by "it was an accident."
(MOHD FYROL/AFP/Getty Images)
I'm torn here. I don't buy all of Sharapova's story, but I also don't put much stock in the alternative. The Olympics is in five months. Given the star system in tennis, I expect Sharapova to miss the French Open and Wimbledon, but be back playing under the Russian flag in Rio.
