Tennis legend Ilie Nastase has stirred controversy by claiming that world No. 1 Jannik Sinner received preferential treatment regarding his failed doping tests, suggesting that both his status in the sport and his nationality played a significant role in the lenient outcome.
In August, the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) made an announcement that Sinner would not face a suspension after testing positive for a banned substance. The Italian had failed two doping tests in March—one on March 10 and another on March 18—during and following the Indian Wells Masters. These tests revealed traces of clostebol, an anabolic steroid, prompting an independent tribunal to investigate. Sinner explained that the substance had entered his system when he received a massage from his former physio, Giacomo Naldi, who had used a spray containing the steroid to treat a cut on his finger. The tribunal ruled there was “no fault or negligence” on Sinner’s part, and as a result, the player faced no suspension, although he did lose the 400 ranking points and $320,000 in prize money he earned from reaching the semi-finals in Indian Wells.
However, this decision didn’t go uncontested. In September, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed the ruling to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), challenging the verdict and advocating for a ban of up to two years. WADA’s statement emphasized that it believed the tribunal’s conclusion of “no fault or negligence” was incorrect under the established rules, although they did not seek a disqualification of results other than those already lost.
Despite the controversy, Sinner has had an outstanding year in 2024, winning eight titles, including two Grand Slams and three Masters 1000 events, and he has held the top spot in the ATP rankings since June.
In a recent interview with Romanian outlet Golazo, Nastase expressed his thoughts on the matter, arguing that Sinner’s punishment was merely a “symbolic” one. “Well, of course it is [a symbolic punishment],” said Nastase, suggesting that the ITIA was perhaps cautious following the case of his fellow Romanian, Simona Halep. “Maybe they were scared after Simona [Halep] returned the result to the CAS.”
Nastase pointed out that if Sinner were not ranked No. 1 and instead had been Romanian, the outcome would likely have been much harsher. “If the Italian wasn’t number 1 and was Romanian, how long do you think he would have been suspended? Still two to three years,” he stated.
This comparison to Halep’s case adds another layer to the debate. Halep, who tested positive for the banned substance roxadustat at the 2022 US Open, was handed a four-year ban in September last year. However, after appealing the decision, the Court of Arbitration for Sport reduced her suspension to nine months in March, allowing her to return to competition immediately.
The contrasting cases of Sinner and Halep have sparked intense discussion regarding the fairness and consistency of doping sanctions in tennis, with many questioning whether top-ranking players benefit from more lenient treatment than their peers.