Former Italian Olympic gold medalist Federica Pellegrini called Jannik Sinner “well-liked” but also stated that she has no slightest of doubts that the 23-year-old’s doping case was handled differently.
After testing twice for a banned steroid in 2024 March, the world No. 1 quickly proved it came through contamination and that it was due to the negligence of his physio, who apparently used a contaminated spray to treat one of his open cuts but then didn’t put the gloves on – and as he massaged the Italian tennis star, a prohibited substance got into the star’s body.
Sinner didn’t get provisionally suspended and he was allowed to keep playing while the investigation was ongoing. Later, the ITIA fully cleared the three-time Grand Slam champion and he didn’t face any suspension.
But the WADA didn’t agree at all with one thing and that was Sinner getting away with any responsibility and sanction.
The two sides were due to go to a CAS court before ultimately settling on a three-month ban.
Italian swimming legend Pellegrini: One rule applies to all athletes and it wasn’t applied in the Sinner case
“However, I believe his case was handled differently from 99% of other athletes.
The complexity of an athlete’s life is constantly subject to doping controls, 12 months a year,” the 2008 Beijing Olympics gold medalist told La Repubblica.
To prove her point, Pellegrini argued that there is “the strict liability” rule, which is there to hold athletes accountable for potential mistakes of their teams.
“It’s important to explain how it works to fully understand what’s behind the Sinner case.
The discussion also touches on strict team liability, an often underestimated but central concept in anti-doping regulations,” Pellegrini added.
It’s not my fault if my physio drinks a beer and knocks someone over, but it becomes my responsibility if he uses cream on me and I test positive.
This isn’t the case with Sinner, which is strange. It applies to all athletes. So why should this case be handled differently?”
Sinner has maintained his innocence since Day 1 and he strongly rejected claims that he received preferential treatment.
