Paul McNamee made an interesting point as the former Australian Open tournament director thinks Jannik Sinner’s team should have “negotiated some point” and at least accepted to miss the Rome Masters.
When the news came out that the three-time Grand Slam champion settled with the WADA on a three-month doping ban which started on February 9 and will end on May 4th, the date of the suspension was one of the first things that many noticed.
Instantly, some started throwing out conspiracy theories, alleging that Sinner was allowed to play the Australian Open – picked when he wanted his ban to start – and then return just in time for his home tournament and the next Grand Slam tournament.
Before the settlement was reached, the WADA said that they wanted the CAS court to ban the world No. 1 for one to two years.
“Stigma around Jannik Sinner is perception he has escaped Scot-Free. Sinner’s advisors would have been better served if they’d negotiated some pain from the deal with WADA,” McNamee wrote on X.
“Even not playing Rome, where he’ll receive a hero’s welcome back, would seem more equitable. Something no?”
Stigma around Jannik Sinner is perception he has escaped Scot-Free. Sinner’s advisors would have been better served if they’d negotiated some pain from the deal with WADA. Even not playing Rome, where he’ll receive a hero’s welcome back, would seem more equitable. Something no?
— Paul McNamee (@PaulFMcNamee) February 23, 2025
McNamee: If Sinner missed Rome, that would have still been something
“If he missed Rome critics would still say he was able to miss no slams,” one person asked the Australian.
The ex-Australian Open boss responded: “True, but it’s something.”
True, but it’s something
— Paul McNamee (@PaulFMcNamee) February 23, 2025
Meanwhile, the public criticism even led to WADA general counsel Ross Wenzel publicly addressing it and strongly denying that Sinner was given preferential treatment because of his status in tennis.
Tennis World USA