4 key revelations from latest insider scoop into Jannik Sinner doping ban

Jannik Sinner is away from tennis right now after accepting a three-month ban from the WADA, avoiding another trial where he might have faced up to a year-long suspension. This way he ensured that he’s not missing any Grand Slam this year while also avoiding any longer suspension which wouldn’t have been ideal for a player who is technically at the top right now.

The Italian accepting the deal created more questions in what already was one of the most bizarre doping sagas in the history of tennis as well as accusations of favoritism. Very few know what has actually happened but let’s go over some key takeaways from this whole thing.

#1 Late night calls sealed the deal

Sinner was in Doha getting ready for the Qatar Open when the deal to ban him for three months was struck. He was practicing on-site in case nothing happened but he knew that something could happen and he didn’t play.

According to reports from the BBC, it was Thursday, February 14 when Sinner’s lawyer spoke with the most senior lawyer of the WADA that the deal was agreed. The whole process wasn’t too long either according to Sinner’s lawyer; it happened over the course of a couple of days.

The mechanism which was used to agree to this deal hadn't always existed but it’s been in place for the past four years and for this case, it was triggered, allowing Sinner to not suffer major consequences which the WADA initially sought for him.

#2 Sinner was hesitant to take the deal

While all of this was going on, Sinner never claimed anything but total innocence. Taking a deal like that blurs the lines on that claim a little bit because as some pointed out, nobody innocent would take this deal which essentially at least in principle accepts that the party had some responsibility in it.

As the top player in the world it’s a damning thing on your legacy so for Sinner accepting this was not easy. His lawyer who spoke with BBC admitted that persuading Sinner to take it wasn’t easy as the Italian was reluctant to agree.

He was keen to go to court and clear his name much like he did after the initial trial. What ultimately happened is that the lawyer was able to demonstrate how the outcome of a second trial can never be known. It’s a court of three judges who could rule either way and the possibility of the suspension ending up being way more than three months is what ultimately ended up being something the player's team weren’t willing to risk.

#3 Why the deal was made?

This whole case from the start was marked by the WADA's insistence on getting a guilty verdict for Sinner. Some neutral observers have said that they seemed overly eager which in fairness has been often said of the WADA. So if making Sinner an example was the goal why did the organization settle for a minor three-month ban which ultimately isn’t much of a punishment?

He won’t be missing any major events or missing time. BBC was able to get a comment from WADA general counsel Ross Wenzel who essentially told them that nothing changed from their perspective.

"This was a case that was a million miles away from doping. The scientific feedback that we received was that this could not be a case of intentional doping, including micro-dosing," Wenzel to BBC sport.

He then essentially dropped something that got many to scream favoritism, admitting that 12 months which they officially sought at the second trial was probably too much. Let’s remind everyone that some players have been suspended for two years simply for missing tests for XYZ reasons. Surely that’s a bit too harsh as well but the organization didn’t really show any remorse about those suspensions.

#4 Backlash from players on Tour

One of the most underreported things about this case is the backlash that came from other players. Quite a few of them were left perplexed as to how this whole thing unfolded, especially from the procedural side and simply how it all concluded. Players like Nick Kyrgios, Stan Wawrinka, Simona Halep, and others have spoken about it with Novak Djokovic famously saying that none of this looks or seems fair.

"A majority of the players don't feel that it's fair,” Novak Djokovic said during his media duties in Qatar.

In the end, it has to be said that the conclusion of this case was suspiciously convenient as fellow player Liam Broady put it and truly it’s like that. Whether it was favoritism or whether Sinner simply had the monetary means to hire a good defense is hard to pinpoint but overall, it’s been a very bizarre case. Luckily it’s over now but the ramifications of it will be felt for years to come.