Has it ever happened to you that a “canary” caught you when you forgot your monthly baby at home? Stupid situation. You explain that you have the ticket, but not with you. The inspector just shrugs and repeats: “Okay, okay, some ID with a photo please, or we'll call the police.” Some “witty” passenger on the side repeats, referring to your ticket: “Yes, annual invisible.”
Finally, the controller issues a ticket and invites you to clarify the situation at the office of the municipal transport company or something similar within 7 days. You come back home, find the ticket and go to complain about the ticket at the office that the “kanar” showed you. And there it turns out that you do not have to pay a fine, but only a small fee for issuing the document. You return home with relief in your hearts. But when you're sitting on the bus the next day, you hear from behind you: “Look, it's the free rider.”
Cheering? No, Iga Świątek did not take doping
Iga Świątek found herself in a similar situation today. Suddenly the news broke that “Polish woman caught doping”. Of course, the case is full of nuances, because the tennis player was not doping. Trimetazidine, a drug used in heart ischemic diseases, was detected in her body. For athletes, it can actually be helpful in endurance disciplines. But this was not Iga's case. As Łukasz Jachimiak from Sport.pl found out: “expert opinions and a number of independent tests clearly confirm that contact with the banned substance was completely unintentional, accidental and had no impact on the tennis player's form.”
I encourage you to read it with the whole articlebecause it explains the whole thing in detail step by step. That is, the circumstances of the test, the reactions of anti-doping authorities and the explanations of Świątek herself.
Iga Świątek punished because she could have done more
Anyone who has read this already knows why I compared Iga Świątek's crime to being caught stowaway on public transport when you have your ticket at home. Even the punishment that Światek is currently serving is not a suspension for the prohibited substance found in her body. Agnieszka Niedziałek talked to the representative of the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA), Adrian Bassett and quotes in his article on Sport.pl: :
“Players are advised to use products on the so-called white list. – So she could take a closer look at the product. She could find a drug that had been previously tested and have a prescription and treatment plan from her doctor,” Bassett enumerates.
Świątek proved her innocence at her own expense
It can therefore be said that Świątek was suspended because she did not exercise due diligence to ensure that no prohibited substances entered her body.
On the other hand, you may get the impression that this is some kind of madness. Why was the athlete punished at all, even though she proved that the amount of the drug she took did not in any way increase her athletic abilities, and that she had never used it before? This was confirmed by the tests that Iga Świątek underwent at her own expense to defend her innocence. And that's weird too. As a matter of common sense, those who make the accusations should prove the Polish woman's guilt. That she benefited athletically from using one drug or another. Meanwhile, none of the 20 anti-doping tests that Świątek underwent this year revealed the slightest doubt.
Iga Świątek asks for fans' support
In the video that Świątek posted on Instagram, she asks fans for support because the whole situation was very emotionally costly for her. Indeed, her entire career suddenly came into question. Fortunately, the matter was resolved. However, what Iga Świątek needs most now is not fan support, but patience and understanding of human frailty. Because when the news about the Polish woman's suspension broke, a machine of slander, disinformation and conspiracy theories began.
It is difficult to defend yourself against all this other than by patiently explaining to everyone how it really happened. That the cases of Simona Halep, Jannik Sinner, Nikola Bartunkova or Kamil Majchrzak are not the same as her case. The only thing they have in common is that they all play tennis and tests found banned substances in their bodies. However, when it comes to details, it's a completely different matter. It is therefore difficult to expect that all four would be treated the same.
The worst is yet to come. Świątek needs to prepare
Świątek will also need patience to bear the fact that this case will drag on for many years. Fortunately, he is aware of this. As indicated by the words: “This will stay with me for the rest of my life.”
And even those who know the details well will play dirty with “doping” to achieve their goals. The Russians, for example, play it politicallyto show that their Kamila Waliyeva, who also had trimetazidine in her body, was treated unfairly. The Polish woman's case serves to justify that the West has started a conspiracy against Russia. But they forget that they themselves admitted that Valieva took pure trimetazidine, which her grandfather was supposed to treat her heart disease.
Świątek will also need patience with her rivals. Many of them will want to throw the Polish woman off balance in order to have an advantage over her. Many people will talk three by three out of jealousy. In fact, it's already happening.
However, I would like to deal with one argument, namely that the Pole was treated so leniently because she is the world's top player. I would like to ask here why she shouldn't be treated more leniently than a little-known tennis player from the second or third hundred of the rankings? This is not about equality before the law. After all, even in judgments of common courts, the judge may mitigate the sentence if the accused previously enjoyed an impeccable reputation. Yet Świątek has repeatedly proven her honesty and was repeatedly tested for the presence of prohibited substances. Unlike the players from the second or third hundred, she was constantly in the spotlight. Anti-doping authorities knew their every move and whereabouts. Świątek really worked hard to trust her explanations.