Deyo commented on Sinner's case: The relevant institutions are biased in favor of Sinner, and many players think everything is unfair

Djokovic also mentioned Sinner's ban in his post-match interview at yesterday's tennis tournament in Doha, but he believes that the most critical thing at the moment is that there are big holes and flaws in this doping management system.

Djokovic first admitted Sinner's innocence in the interview, but only on the premise that he believed it was because Sinner was a top player and had the best team of lawyers, so that almost affected the final result. But is Sinner innocent and therefore not guilty? Apparently not. Due to mistakes and negligence on the part of some team members during the tour, Sinner will be banned for three months. But this is also obviously strange, because the agencies claim that Sinner is innocent and that he is not guilty, but on the other hand, they claim that Sinner is guilty and should be suspended, which is very inconsistent.

Djokovic said: "It's something that I find strange personally and many other players. I've spoken to a couple of players in the dressing room, not just in the last few days, but in the months before that, and most of them weren't happy with the whole process and didn't think it was fair. Many people believe that there is favoritism. We've seen the cases of Halep, Moore and other players who may not be so well-known who have spent years trying to figure out their own long-term suspensions. ”

"I think it's time to take action and address this because it's clear that the current structure doesn't work that way," Djokovic said. ”

What is clear is that the reason why the Sinner case is now mentioned again and again by the players, and there are so many voices of opposition, is because of the "procedural injustice" of the judicial body. As an international anti-doping agency, it said last year that it would have to ban Sinner for 1-2 years, but this year it said it had settled, which makes it hard to believe that there is no deal at all. In addition, is there a rule basis for a quantitative standard for the "three-month suspension of Sinner"? And has WADA taken into account the penalty scale of all similar cases in the past? Apparently not, so all of this is the key to making people criticize the results of such punishments.

"If you deal with each case independently, you can't have consistency and transparency," Djokovic admits. We either agree that all cases should be transparent from the outset, or that they should remain private until the outcome is in. But now, it's shocking, it's an earthquake for the whole world. Another world number one, Swiatek, was also banned without anyone knowing, and it was an offseason, and it's clear that the level of trust in these institutions is getting lower and lower, and I personally hardly trust these cases, and in general don't trust all of them. These have obvious flaws. ”

Zverev also agreed with Djokovic's opinion, and he questioned why there was such a big difference in attitudes before and after WADA. And the question is, if Sinner is innocent, then why ban him in the first place?

"It's a strange situation because it's obviously a very long process, first he is proven innocent, then WADA obviously wants to review again, and so on. For me, I think, you know, there are only two options. Either you're not wrong, you shouldn't be banned, because if you're not wrong, then you're not wrong, and you shouldn't be punished. But if you're really at fault, then I don't think a three-month ban is really a big deal for a steroid like that. ”

In this regard, some netizens said, "The main reason why fellow players continue to speak out is the double standard of the case itself and the opaque operation process." Some netizens said, "The world is so big, how can there be so much fairness and justice!" Every industry is the same, and there are many people who secretly cheat for personal gain! Some netizens also said, "A person who is positive twice, the final result is actually a "three-month vacation", no wonder so many players feel unfair, it seems that the reputation of Yao Jiaxin does not matter, only take the follow-up honor, and no matter how high the follow-up achievements are, they will be accompanied by the controversy of knocking drugs! ”

However, one netizen put forward a different opinion, he said, "I don't understand the logic: if athletes generally believe that the previous punishment of Halep was too harsh and the channels for appeal were not smooth, which led to her career being in trouble, why would Sinner and Swiatek also suffer the same injustice? Is there anything wrong with them hiring the best lawyers to defend their rights? In this regard, a netizen replied, "You obviously have reversed the facts, the problem is that the institution that handles the incident has not changed, but they have adopted different scales and different standards for different players." As NO.64 Bonzi said when he said about Sinner's three-month ban, "I'm pretty sure that if this happened to me, I would have been sentenced to two years!" "Different trial standards bring not only questions about fairness and justice, but also panic about the same incident falling on you!"(Source: Tennis Home Author: Lu Xiaotian)