Decisions

Anti-doping – UK based club cricket player (CW) admitted violations of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 rule 3.2 and 2015 rule 2.2 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including online purchase of prohibited products by CW in 2014 and 2015 – attempted use prohibited substance – provisionally... suspended without opposition – admitted violation of SADR and asked to be heard as to sanction – sanction for multiple violations based on violation with most severe sanction – 2015 SADR 10.2.1 – four year period of ineligibility if intentional – no evidential basis to conclude CW knew or turned mind to breach of SADR– period of ineligibility reduced to two years under 2015 SADR Rule 10.2.2 – CW did not seek to establish no significant fault or negligence in seeking a reduction of the two year period – 2015 SADR 10.11.1 and 10.11.2 – commencement back dated to 1 January 2017 given delays not attributable to CW and timely admission and co-operation – Tribunal noted with concern DFSNZ’s stated intention not to bring all relevant facts before it – as DFSNZ likely to appeal to CAS over recent decisions on Medsafe cases – Tribunal instructed DFSNZ to bring full submissions in this case - urged NSOs to extend drug education to all levels of competitive sport

Anti-doping case · Cricket · 22 December 2017

Anti-doping – basketball player (D) tested positive for prohibited substance higenamine in sample taken from him after NBL game on 27 May 2017 – provisionally suspended – admitted violation of Sports Anti-Doping Rules 2017 (SADR) Rule 2.1 and asked to be heard as to sanction – positive test due... to use of supplement Oxyshred – unintentional use of specified substance – presumptive period of ineligibility two years – second anti-doping violation subject to “twice the period of ineligibility” – did not attend hearing scheduled – adjourned pending advice of rescheduled time and consequences – D cautioned subject to substantial mandatory penalties – D declined to attend – D exercised no caution to ensure compliance with SADR – D experienced athlete with a previous suspension was aware of high standards and obligations under the Code – applicable period of ineligibility is four years – no factors to eliminate or reduce mandatory period – small allowance for prompt admission and credit for provisional suspension period – suspended for 4 years from 31 July 2017.

Anti-doping case · Basketball · 17 December 2017

Anti-doping- Appeal against decision of Sports Tribunal to Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) - M alleged to have coached cyclists while banned and tampered with doping control by providing fraudulent information- Tribunal concluded rule violation not established and application dismissed - CAS allowed... appeal against Tribunal decision - CAS found M had committed anti-doping violation by coaching but dismissed tamper allegation - Tribunal decision set aside - two year sanction imposed

Anti-doping case · Cycling · 15 December 2017

Anti-doping – ice hockey player (MF) admitted violation of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 rule 3.2 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including online purchase of prohibited product by MF in 2014 – attempted use prohibited substance – provisionally suspended without opposition... – admitted violation of SADR and asked to be heard as to sanction – SADR 14.2 sanction two year period of ineligibility – SADR 14.5.2 period reduced if MF could establish no significant fault or negligence – no reduction of two year period – no caution exercised or consideration of risks – strict obligations imposed under SADR – breach of high standards – 2014 SADR 14.9.1 and 14.9.2 – commencement back dated given delays not attributable to MF and timely admission and co-operation

Anti-doping case · Ice Hockey · 11 December 2017