December 20, 2009 Comments Off on Wickmayer-Malisse 1-0
More info has come my way on the Wickmayer case (via lievenodb). And I must say that with the added information, Wickmayer’s case is getting a little stronger.
This article, though extremely biased, has got some valid points in her defense.
“All the letters that I had to sign for upon receipt,” Wickmayer said, “were sent back to the Flemish Anti-Doping Agency, meaning that they did know that I had never received them.”
There’s something to say for that, but also something against it. Legally she’s right, she didn’t receive the letters. But even when you don’t sign for the letter, you receive a note in your letterbox saying that the postman has been with a certified mail. Now if you receive a certified mail from an anti-doping agency, under normal circumstances one gets a bit suspicious, no? Not Yanina (or agents)…
But there’s still the 7 week (!) delay in mentioning the password doesn’t work. How can a professional athlete get so sloppy? And then there’s the case of not filling out the forms correctly (which I’ve been confirmed by other athletes is not very hard!).
But I still don’t buy the ‘Privacy’ issues some people are claiming as a justification for not following the rules.
As I haven’t heard anything on the Malisse case, and the fact that Yanina can play again, but not Malisse, that makes the score: 1-0 😉