Mikael Ymer has provided further details and context behind his recent 18-month ban from tennis by the International Tennis Federation (ITF).
The ATP world number 51 was banned after missing three doping tests within a 12-month period. Ymer initially contested the charge and was cleared by three arbitrators in June 2022, although the ITF later appealed that decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Ultimately, the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that Ymer had broken the rules and was subsequently suspended from tennis. The controversy has naturally caused difficulty and upset for Ymer, and the 24-year-old took to Twitter once again to explain why he missed his third doping test in early 2022 and to clear his name.
"After losing in the Paris Masters 1000 in 2021, I traveled to Roanne, France to play a Challenger. Often the tournament has a main hotel and a secondary one. I am usually booked into the main official hotel, and was told by my agent I was booked into the official hotel. However, when I tried to check in, it turned out I had actually been moved to the secondary hotel, which is an 8 min drive from the main hotel."
"This is not uncommon, so I didn’t think twice about it and went to my room in the secondary hotel with no fuss. It just happened to be, that WADA decided to show up for an out of competition test the following morning at the main hotel. The hotel were I tried to check in a few hours earlier, but was rejected."
In addition to his justification for missing the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) test in 2022, Ymer also criticised the ITF's actions and questioned its motive to follow through intently with the ban.
"The tribunal agreed with me and cleared me of wrongdoing, but the ITF felt compelled to appeal to CAS. That was utterly disappointing."
"The ITF is supposed to be a protector of our sport and its participants and should only reluctantly ban one of their players from being able to compete. I would think they would be happy to learn that an independant tribunal had decided there was no reason to move forward with a ban."
0 Comments