Jannik Sinner’s nomination for the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year award was revoked after the athlete was handed a three-month ban due to a doping violation.
The Laureus World Sports Academy chairman, Sean Fitzpatrick, admitted: “Following discussions by the Laureus Academy, it has been decided that Jannik Sinner’s nomination for this year’s Laureus World Sportsman of the Year Award is to be withdrawn.”
He added: “We have followed this case, the decisions of the relevant global bodies and – whilst we note the extenuating circumstances involved – feel that the three-month ban renders the nomination ineligible… Jannik and his team have been informed.”
Sinner’s doping allegation
Sinner tested positive for trace amounts of the banned substance clostebol in March of the previous year. Clostebol is an anabolic steroid that is often associated with performance enhancement.
Following the positive result, Sinner was initially cleared of any wrongdoing by an independent tribunal, which determined there was no intentional doping. However, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) disagreed with the ruling and decided to appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration (CAS). This led to further scrutiny and resulted in Sinner receiving a three-month suspension.
The 23-year-old athlete, who triumphed at the Australian Open in January, will be sidelined until May after negotiating a settlement with WADA.
This controversy has been a hot topic in tennis, and Novak Djokovic shared his thoughts after the World No. 1 player accepted the settlement with WADA.
Djokovic said: “It’s not a good image for our sport, that’s for sure… There is a consensus, or I would say a majority of the players that I’ve talked to in the locker room, not just in the last few days but also the last few months, they are not happy with the way this whole process has been handled… The majority of the players don’t feel that it’s fair. The majority of the players feel like there is favouritism happening.”
He added: “It seems like it appears that you can almost affect the outcome if you are a top player, if you have access to the top lawyers and whatnot…. We have to choose. The inconsistency is something that frustrates all the players…. It’s like if you are going to treat every case individually or independently, which is what’s happening, then there is no consistency, then there is no transparency. Some cases are transparent, some are not.”