British Tennis Forum - Celebrating 20 Years!

Max Purcell - 18 month ban - Wimbledon champion too

www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/tennis/ex-wimbledon-champion-banned-from-tennis-and-forced-to-surrender-prize-money/ar-AA1DP4q7

He says he was unknowingly over the limit but:

'These messages indicate that: (i) the Player requested the Clinic staff not to keep receipts relating to his infusion; (ii) the Player discussed ways in which he could justify receiving infusions, including feigning illness; and (iii) the Player subsequently researched whether or not the infusion was prohibited under the WADA Code (specifically, whether it was the ingredient itself or the water that was relevant to the limit of 100 mL within 12 hours),' the ITIA wrote, outlining their investigation.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cj61g2j4xeko

I know she has her supporters on here but I've never really bought into her claim of ignorance about contaminated meat.

I know a few of us on here were incredulous that a Tennis Player would be ignorant of the dangers when there had already been a reasonably well publicised case featuring contaminated meat.

-- Edited by emmsie69 on Tuesday 15th of July 2025 07:05:31 PM

Wow, 4 years. Which means that she has almost 2.5 years still to serve. Does immediately mean today, or at the end of the week, as she is in the doubles in Canada.

JonH comes home wrote:

---

emmsie69 wrote:

---

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cj61g2j4xeko

I know she has her supporters on here but I've never really bought into her claim of ignorance about contaminated meat.

I know a few of us on here were incredulous that a Tennis Player would be ignorant of the dangers when there had already been a reasonably well publicised case featuring contaminated meat.

-- Edited by emmsie69 on Tuesday 15th of July 2025 07:05:31 PM

---

 But this is implying she hasnt proved it wasnt intentional or put another way, it was intentional. 

---

 CAS are basically saying that the evidence doesn't tally with her claim that it was unintentional ingestion of contaminated meat.

I vaguely remember Coup Droit saying she must have eaten a lot of meat to return the result she did.

It's not a criminal trial but a balance of probabilities I believe.

 

Well, that's her career over. Sad, but rules are rules. I do wish the authorities would act with the same level of dogged determination with bigger name players with money and influence behind them though - I mean Halep's doping process became a circus. And I remain completely unconvinced about the whole Sinner situation which stank then in terms of what was settled as being about minimising embarrassment to the sport as much as anything else.

The timing of this after two people who have served doping suspensions win Wimbledon is almost funny...

Oh well. Only she truly knows what happened - but clearly the evidence of what she ate and how much doesn't stack up with the sample levels.

-- Edited by PaulM on Tuesday 15th of July 2025 07:44:54 PM

Yes, I think there has to be ongoing questions about how the process is able to be speeded up and smoothed for high ranked players with the money to get the very best help and advice.

I am very doubtful that re final lengths of ban players do get treated differently.

When the explanation seems plausible ( especially with the levels involved ), eg. with Sinner, a short suspension is likely, and indeed the offence often deemed as inadvertent.

When the explanation seems less plausible ( especially the levels and possibly more than one banned substance involved ), eg. with Tara, a long suspension is liable to be the end result.

From what I have read, these two do not appear to be near the same page as to to the likelihood of a deliberate serious offence.