Jannik Sinner‘s doping controversy continues to cast a shadow over his tennis career as he prepares to kick off his Australian Open 2025 campaign. Nearly a year after testing positive for clostebol in March 2024, Sinner was initially exonerated by an independent tribunal, which cited “no fault or negligence.” However, WADA has resurfaced this decision and has since reignited discussions about fairness in doping cases. While some players support Sinner, others, including Nick Kyrgios and Simona Halep, have raised concerns about inconsistencies in handling such cases. It looks like Nicolas Jarry has something to add to this discourse.

Jarry came forth with his opinion on the treatment given to Jannik during this time. For context, the Chilean was banned from the tour between December 2019 and November 2020 after testing positive for the banned anabolic steroids ligandrol and stanozolol—allegedly due to contaminated vitamin supplements. In the end, Jarry lost all his ATP points, and five years later, he still feels the sting of that experience, especially when contrasting it with Sinner’s case.

As he prepares to face Sinner in the first round of the Australian Open, Jarry expressed his feelings to Chilean newspaper La Tercera: “I would have liked the same support he got when it happened to me. That’s something that affects me personally.” What is this support he speaks of?

On Saturday, Sam Querrey and Reilly Rogers chimed in on Sinner’s doping case during the Tennis Channel Live podcast. They believe the controversy won’t shake Sinner’s focus as he aims for success at the Australian Open 2025. “I don’t think it will affect him,” Querrey stated, recalling how Sinner triumphed at last year’s US Open despite similar distractions. Reilly echoed this sentiment, saying, “It hasn’t seemed to affect him, which is absolutely incredible. I would be a complete basket case going through all of this.”

On the contrary, Halep expressed her frustrations over treatment disparities when news of Sinner and Iga Swiatek‘s cases broke. She took to Instagram, questioning why there seemed to be different standards for top players like herself and them, specifically Swaitek. Reflecting on her tumultuous appeal process—which she called a “big pain”—Halep revealed the mental toll it took on her: “I lost my sleep again,” she admitted, emphasizing the difficulty of managing negative thoughts during that challenging time.

However, it’s not been as smooth sailing for Jannik as he makes it out to seem. While he has admitted to “sleepless nights” and losing the ability to trust those around him, he still managed to make it to the top. But even with that, he still faces criticism going into the Australian Open, especially now that WADA has revealed the date of his hearing.

Kyrgios takes a dig at CAS regarding Sinner’s case

The Aussie recently reacted to Jannik Sinner’s upcoming closed-door hearing with CAS. He took to X, posting, “At least we know it’s behind closed doors this time 😭😂 this is all so shady haha.” He later questioned the lack of transparency, stating, “Why is it behind closed doors? If you did nothing wrong, then let us have the transparency.” Earlier, he had called the situation “ridiculous” and demanded a two-year suspension for Sinner after his positive drug tests.

Other players have echoed concerns about fairness in the process, with Denis Shapovalov tweeting, “Different rules for different players.” She later clarified to Tennis Majors that his comments were not aimed at Sinner but at an anti-doping process that has not given other players the same swift attention that Sinner received from the ITIA.

Meanwhile, Karen Moorhouse, CEO of the ITIA, recently discussed the potential consequences Jannik might face if found guilty in his doping case. Speaking to Tennis365 on January 9, she stated, “If you test positive for a prohibited substance, the starting point for a possible disqualification is four years.” However, she noted that proving an unintentional violation could reduce the penalty to two years.

Moorhouse also highlighted the distinction between Sinner’s and Swiatek’s case, explaining, “In the case of Swiatek, we are talking about a contaminated product, while for Sinner there is the complication that he is an uncontaminated product.” She added that Sinner’s situation could lead to a disqualification period ranging from one to two years.

Now, as anticipation builds for his match against Nicolas Jarry at the Australian Open, all eyes are on how this controversy will unfold. What’s your take on this?