skip to Main Content

Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Daniel Ryan


Anti-doping – athlete tested positive to D-Methamphetamine and D-Amphetamine – athlete initially filed defences that substances taken “out of competition” as he believed his season was over when he took the substances (he was called in at the last minute to play by the team coach) and that the substances had not been taken for performance enhancing purposes – subsequently withdrew these defences and indicated did not require a formal hearing, would accept the violation infringement and would not challenge the mandatory penalty of two years – withdrawn defences could not have succeeded anyway under Sports Anti-Doping Rules – presence of prohibited substance in sample collected in competition is a violation regardless of when substance was taken by athlete – infringement is that competing with prohibited substances in body – whether a substance was taken for performance enhancing reasons or not is only relevant when the substance is a “specified substance” under the Rules which these were not – athlete asked Tribunal to note his position that, while out drinking, he was given a pill that he thought was a “legal party pill” which he took for relaxation and stress relief and that he would not have taken the pill if he knew what it really was – Tribunal further noted that circumstances, whatever they may be, were not relevant to the decision which it was required to give in this case under the Rules – mandatory penalty of 2 years’ ineligibility imposed (commencing from date of provisional suspension)

Back To Top