There was no shortage of entertainment in the 2024 season! We saw some extraordinary displays of tennis in the last few months but in the middle of the action, doping controversies involving two of the biggest stars in the tennis world – Jannik Sinner & Iga Swiatek rocked the smooth sailing season. Both cases sparked a major debate in the tennis world. Jannik Sinner tested positive in two separate doping tests in March and a decision to clear him of wrongdoing was appealed by the WADA in September. A final ruling is expected from the CAS in February 2025. However, amid all these, WADA came up with a change! What does the sports world think of this?

On December 5, WADA’s Executive Committee met, and, as reported by Ubitennis, a series of changes were approved to be introduced in the anti-doping regulations, coming into effect on January 2027. What does this new rule say? Well, these changes aim to better manage so-called ‘involuntary doping cases,’ where athletes are found to have ingested some banned substances unintentionally. The first change is the changing of the concept of “contaminated product“ to “contaminated source“ with the definition of the latter being very different from the former.

Interestingly, had this been in place at the time of Jannik Sinner’s incident, things could’ve turned a bit different and perhaps, nothing would have happened. The second change is set to be introduced in 2027 and it involves the potential establishment of minimum concentration levels below which the presence of a non-threshold substance would not constitute a positive result. Both these changes are net positives for the sport because they’ll make the process much simpler and transparent. However, recently, the renowned Italian swimmer, Federica Pellegrini shared her thoughts on this.

During an interview with La Stampa, the 36-year-old swimmer said, “I am curious to understand. I am convinced that he (Jannik Sinner) did not voluntarily take doping substances, but that is not the point. Up to now, they have always told us that the athlete is responsible regardless. Now it seems that there are circumstances in which this may not be the case and the matter becomes slippery.“

She further highlighted the case of her fellow swimmer Federico Turrini adding, “Turrini was on the other side of the world with a serious eye infection. They prescribed him cortisone eye drops, which came back positive. Two years of disqualification, even though the contamination was evident. If the vision changes, precise rules are needed. The appeal for Sinner will give indications on the path they want to take.”

Recently, the legendary Romanian tennis player, Ilie Nastase claimed that Jannik Sinner would have been banned for a similar 2-3 years if he wasn’t the world number one and was Romanian. So, these controversial comments will keep on coming until and unless we see an end to this case, but will this change in rule affect Jannik Sinner?

Renowned tennis journalist reacts to WADA’s rule change following Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek doping case

After hearing all these questions one may wonder, whether these changes will affect Jannik Sinner‘s case or not. Well, Sinner will not benefit from the new regulations as such. Reason? He will have to testify in 2025 and the change will take effect in 2027! However, Jannik Sinner’s defense strategy doesn’t necessarily have to be weakened.

At the moment, the Italian superstar is busy getting ready for the 2025 season. He was recently spotted undergoing a training session in Dubai at the facilities of the Patrick Mouratoglou Academy. Although, there will be a bit of tension always creeping into his mind until and unless he gets to know the final hearing, still, this big positive change from WADA may give a sigh of relief for all the players like him and Swiatek.

What do others think about this change though? Well, renowned journalist, Jose Morgado recently also shared his thoughts on the same. He tweeted, “Interesting rule change from WADA that will avoid things like what happened with Sinner and Swiatek… Odd that they appealed against Sinner and now changed the rule….“ What are your thoughts on this change, though? Let us know in the comment box.