^ But what exactly was prohibited? Glucose isn't a banned substance so it sounds to me from the article that there was something added to the glucose of which Cilic wasn't aware because he didn't read the label.
Flash back to the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City where Scottish skier Alain Baxter, the first Brit to win a skiing medal, was stripped of his bronze when he failed a drug test after the event. In his case he had bought a Vick's inhaler in the US which, unknown to him, contained a (banned) substance not added to the UK version. After an appeal, funded by the BOA and his sponsors, the IOC finally agreed that he had ingested this substance unwittingly, but said that, as he had a duty of care to read labels on over-the-counter medications, he should be stripped of his medal, although he would be free to continue his skiing career.
The difference here is that glucose isn't considered to be medication, so why would anyone bother to read the label?
He has a phobia of needles, which doesn't assist circumstances here.
So how has he coped in the past?
Troicki got 18 months, not the standard 2 years, suggesting there was SOME doubt. If there's any at all, he shouldn't be punished, surely?
I agree Nigel! They either think he's guilty and ban him for the full two years, or if there's any doubt, not at all!
If there is some doubt but no compelling evidence to find him guilty, then they should do what the Scottish courts do in these circumstances, i.e. apply the Not Proven verdict. That would leave him free to compete but there would be a question mark hanging over him, which means that the doping authorities could keep a strict eye on him for the rest of his career. That, to me, is the fairest way to deal with any player in the same situation.