Sharapova reveal setback for Big Tennis

In the game of tennis, sportsmanship–gra­cious winning or losing–is a prized trait in addition to superior athletic abilities. Tennis players and fans do not crave brutality. So what a sad day it was when Maria Sharapova admit­ted that she had tested positive for a banned substance in her blood during the Australian Open. Doping of athletes for enhanced perfor­mance is nothing new and has certainly made headlines often over the past decade–but not in tennis!

This sad news about a top player who has been doping also comes amidst recent allega­tions in the professional tennis world of “match fixing.” The importance of the development of any sign of sleaze in tennis cannot be over-em­phasized. Tennis has become a big business. The sport over the past decade has exploded in pop­ularity. Big dollars have entered the arena of the tennis world. The top players garner not only considerable prize money but also cash on com­mercial endorsements that often exceed their annual earning of tournament purse money.

Fans flock to tournaments paying handsome­ly for tickets, sports merchandise and many travel the world to watch the stars. Stores, ho­tels, restaurants, major cities all want these tournaments and benefit economically from the world of tennis. Sharapova was not only en­dorsed handsomely by Nike and HEAD, but also by Porsche, TAG Heuer, Avon cosmetics and Evian bottled water to name a few. Her annual endorsements totaled well over $25 million an­nually for the past 10 years.

Many a fan enjoyed watching the Russian beauty demonstrate her skills on the court. Ma­ria not only sold tickets, but TV air time and a wide array of commercial products. She has been described as a marketing dream, and she seemed to have it all. Not only is Maria conven­tionally attractive, but at the age of 28, she has also won five Grand Slams. She always appears gracious on and off the court. So yes, she had it all: athletic ability beyond the capability of most, beauty, and a gracious style. For all of these qual­ities she has been rewarded handsomely for it all with great wealth and a fan base that adored her.

So why would anyone in this elevated posi­tion take such a risk and continue to take Meldo­nium, a substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) watch list for about two years while under study for performance en­hancement and at the beginning of 2016 a banned substance? According to Sharapova’s public admission of using the drug, she said that her Russian family doctor (Maria has lived in the United States for many, many years) had urged her to take the drug (manufactured in Lat­via) due to abnormal electrocardiogram read­ings and some diabetic indicators. Meldonium is banned in Western European countries and in the United States. It is not banned in Eastern Eu­ropean countries. WADA banned the substance after study because it has been shown to aid ath­letes by improving their performance and ability to recover faster from strenuous exercise. The Latvian company that manufactures Meldoni­um says the normal course of treatment is only four to six weeks. Maria has admitted taking the substance for over 10 years. In addition, she admitted to receiving emails from WADA stat­ing the substance was under study and that in December of 2015, she did receive the warning that its use would be banned beginning in 2016. However, she says she did not review the email thoroughly and missed the upcoming status change for 2016.

Many other tennis professionals have criti­cized her for using the performance-enhancing drug. Many have scoffed at the idea that her ex­tensive training team and coaching staff missed the emailed information as well. Certainly this topic of banned substances is discussed often in all professional sports circles. It is also hard to believe that anyone with a serious heart con­dition or any medical condition could continue to play professional tennis year after year for 10 years, travel the world and train all year long, all the while conducting a full-time endorse­ment business of some of the most prestigious brands in the world. Maria certainly was able to maintain a strenuous schedule both on and off the court.

So all of this may add up to the fact that Ma­ria Sharapova took the performance-enhancing drug to improve and to cash in on her potential earnings both on and off the court. However, it is also possible that she took the drug at the urging of her professional support team. After all, with­out a champion to coach and coddle, their jobs would be in jeopardy. Sadly, the fact that Maria felt she needed to enhance her performance at all might also speak to a weakness of self-doubt­ing in a prized athlete and also the pressures at the top of the game.

What will really be interesting to see is how the WTA will investigate her case. Maria has a lawyer defending her so that she is not banned from the court for a long period of time. Report­edly, she could be suspended up to the full four years. This would mean that she would be un­able to play professional tennis again until she turns 32 years of age. Her tennis career and lu­crative endorsements would effectively come to an end. There is also the question of her major titles and whether they should be stripped from her under these circumstances. But also, the WTA would lose a highly popular female ten­nis star. The WTA and all of its affiliates make money off of the Sharapova name and brand too. In addition, Maria is still set to play for Russia in the upcoming summer Olympics. There will likely be a huge push from many directions to hold her penalty to a short time frame–maybe even only a few months.

It will be interesting to see if tennis will survive the world of the big business of sports enterprises with tennis becoming much like football and the NFL. Maybe all professional sports have succumbed to the pressures from all around to achieve economic success. Maybe professional sports has become just another en­tertainment venue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Miscellany News reserves the right to publish or not publish any comment submitted for approval on our website. Factors that could cause a comment to be rejected include, but are not limited to, personal attacks, inappropriate language, statements or points unrelated to the article, and unfounded or baseless claims. Additionally, The Misc reserves the right to reject any comment that exceeds 250 words in length. There is no guarantee that a comment will be published, and one week after the article’s release, it is less likely that your comment will be accepted. Any questions or concerns regarding our comments section can be directed to