First, a bit of context for the uninitiated, and the area where I will try to leave personal feelings towards her aside, at least initially: Maria Sharapova has been one of the most successful tennis players in the world over the course of the past decade and a half. Since her surprise victory over Serena Williams in the final of the 2004 Wimbledon tournament, she has remained a fairly consistent presence in the upper echelon of the WTA rankings. Despite dealing with injury problems on and off, she has endured mightily, winning all four Grand Slams at least once in her career. Since her breakthrough 2004 campaign, she has only finished the year twice outside of the world's top 10 - the back to back seasons of 2009 and 2010, when she was dealing with recurring shoulder issues. For whatever weaknesses exist in her game (and they are certainly there), she does deserve credit for how much she's been able to wring every ounce of talent she has into achieving a Hall of Fame career.
It is very, very difficult to speak about Sharapova without letting personal biases get involved; by all accounts, she is a highly polarizing figure on the WTA tour, inspiring both a legion of devoted fans and a rather large group of naysayers. She has admitted to not going out of her way to cultivate friendships on tour, preferring instead to march to the beat of her own drum, a move which has only served to heighten her polarization. In many ways, her fame exemplifies what it means to be a successful tennis player - the individual who is responsible for their own personal conduct, branding, and marketing persona, as opposed to the team sports, certainly the North American variety anyway, who will often let personal controversies slide in the name of improving the on the field product. One need look no further than the NFL in that regard, where several high profile domestic violence and/or sexual abuse incidents haven't stopped players from being able to continue on with their professions unabated (Jameis Winston, Josh Brown, and Greg Hardy, to name a few; the only reason why Ray Rice isn't still in the NFL is almost certainly because his offense was caught on video). This is why the Sharapova situation is such a big deal for tennis; it's the first time a player with a profile as high as hers was caught in such a situation. There have been several cases of players in the sport who had offenses that were ultimately deemed minor (Marin Cilic, Guillermo Coria), one high profile case of a player caught with HGH (Wayne Odesnik), and a few instances I can recall of a player testing positive for recreational drugs (Andre Agassi, whose case was not publicized at the time, Martina Hingis, albeit after her prime, Richard Gasquet), but Sharapova is a much different case; she was the highest-paid female athlete for many years - despite their lopsided head to head record (19-2, of which the last 18 victories have been consecutive) and the large gulf that exists in major titles (currently 23 to 5), it took Serena Williams nearly winning a calendar year Grand Slam to finally knock Sharapova off of that pedestal in 2015 - and is still among the brightest stars the sport has in modern times, which makes both the facts of her case and the response to it very remarkable and telling.
With all that being said, here are the basic facts of what happened: Sharapova reached the quarterfinals of the 2016 Australian Open tournament, where she lost to the eventual runner-up, Serena. Citing a forearm injury, Sharapova didn't play in the next few tournaments that she was scheduled to enter in; her Australian Open loss ended up being the last match she would play in 2016. In March, she called a press conference that was rife with speculation in regard to its nature; what followed was not the retirement announcement that many expected, but rather, a shocker: Sharapova had failed a drug test at the Australian Open. She claimed to have been administered a drug under the name mildronate for many years, but was unaware that the medication, also known as meldonium, had recently been added to the World Anti-Doping Agency (or WADA) banned list. Where things get hairy are the reasons why Sharapova claimed to be taking the drug in the first place, as well as her reasons for failing the test: she claimed to have taken the drug for a decade to address a magnesium deficiency, irregular heartbeats, and diabetes, a longtime family concern. She also claimed to have overlooked the updated list of banned substances, despite evidence surfacing later that she received at least five indications that meldonium was newly added to the list, and the fact that meldonium has only been recommended for use in up to a four-to-six week period and is primarily prescribed to the elderly.
Needless to say, this news sent shockwaves through the tennis world, including lots of opinions on both sides of the coin. Never the most popular figure amongst her peers, Sharapova received little to no support publicly; players on both the WTA and ATP criticized her failed test to varying degrees, with some, perhaps Dominika Cibulkova most notably, going out of their way to highlight what an unliked figure Sharapova was on tour. In June, the ITF announced that a two-year ban would be given to Sharapova; outlining their decision in a 33-page report, they noted that Sharapova continuously neglected to add the medication to her doping control lists, and noted the irresponsibility of her, her inner circle, and particularly her agent, Max Eisenbud, in their failure to stay on top of the banned substances list and note what items had been added to it. Sharapova appealed this suspension, and following hearings by the Court of Arbitration of Sport, or CAS, in September, her ban was reduced from two years to 15 months; while not totally absolving her of guilt, the CAS did reiterate many of the points that the ITF's tribunal had already come to, namely the fault of her agent in the whole process (something which Sharapova has repeatedly seized upon as ammo for her defense).
I write all of this not necessarily in defense of nor to condemn Sharapova, although if you've read certain entries on this blog before and you're able to read in between the lines with this post (or if you follow me on Twitter) you already know where I stand on the issue. No, regardless of how I feel bout her as a player and a person, the real reasons as to why this situation fascinates me so much and has been stuck in my craw ever since it happened are multifaceted: the ongoing current political climate between the United States and Russia, the contrast in how other sports have handled the issue of PEDs in comparison to this, tennis' first true high profile case, and the degree to which Sharapova's celebrity, her appearance, and frankly, the largely unstated role of white privilege, have played out in the media, especially as Sharapova seems keen on painting herself as a victim throughout all of this.
It is worth noting that since meldonium has been added to WADA's banned list, some 100+ Russian athletes have tested positive for the drug, including an entire team (the nation's under-18 hockey crew). Whether this is indicative of a nationwide doping scandal or merely selected incidents, I don't have enough knowledge on to say, but it obviously is a trend that doesn't seem to be coincidental. Given the tensions between the two nations - in addition to all of the nonsense that is Donald fucking Trump's presidency, don't forget that Russia also hacked sensitive WADA information on several U.S. athletes at one point last year as well - it would seem on the surface that nationalist politics would play some role in what is going on, especially since (as has already been noted) Sharapova has been using inherent bias as part of her defense. Again, what degree this plays into the whole situation, I haven't the foggiest, but it is very much worth pointing out that Sharapova is but one of many Russian athletes who appear to have had a history with this drug - whether telling or coincidental, you be the judge.
The larger issues for me, though, stem from the fact that her return is evidently being painted as something to celebrate - as I mentioned at the very beginning of this long screed, it's as if the WTA and many of the tournament sponsors are framing her return as if it is akin to a long injury absence or maternity leave, not the drug-related suspension that it actually is. This bothers me on several different levels: of my lifetime, the sport that I can recall being hit with the most issues of PED usage is almost certainly major league baseball. I can't recall any of baseball's most prominent PED users being welcomed back with open arms and the red carpet treatment; indeed, much controversy surrounded two of the most notably accused, Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire, as they returned to the game as hitting coaches a few years back, and Rafael Palmeiro memorably needed to wear earplugs to combat booing upon his return from a 2005 suspension. In these, and many other instances of PED usage over the years, I can't recall a single instance of a sporting organization going out of their way to promote the return of an athlete who was returning from a drug suspension. This is where tennis has seemingly failed mightily in comparison to other sports that have dealt with this issue; being mindful of the fact that Sharapova is one of the highest earners in the sport, it makes sense that sponsors and promoters are pissing their pants in anticipation of her return. But what they fail to realize that by portraying her return as a cause for celebration, they're neglecting to account for what she did to receive such a prolonged absence in the first place. As mentioned before, this is not an instance of returning from injury or another set of adverse circumstances - this was a suspension for taking a banned substance. Whether or not she knowingly did so is up for debate (depending on who you believe), but the fact of the matter remains that she took a banned substance and was rightfully suspended for doing so. That fact has to be acknowledged and surely should cast at least some aspersions toward her return and what it means for the sport as a whole.
To what degree does Sharapova's earning power and looks play into this situation? Here is where I get into my biggest beef regarding all of this - it seems fairly clear to this amateur critic that Sharapova, being the epitome of the white, "pretty" blonde athlete is both expecting a free pass for and, in at least some instances - certainly based on the WTA's promotion of her return, at least - is getting a free pass based on her value to the tour. Oh sure, she lost a good chunk of sponsorships once the news of her positive test hit, but at least one major retailer (Head, her racket sponsor) has loudly stood behind her, and the potential for revenue and viewership shares certainly remains higher with Sharapova on tour than off it, especially in the aftermath of Serena's pregnancy-related hiatus and a lack of a truly dominant figure on the WTA tour aside from the younger Williams sister (and note that I specified the lack of a dominant player, not lack of great players in general - I love the WTA!). You think the tour doesn't realize that? This is where her portrayal of herself as a victim is particularly effective; she has made several comments to the effect of feeling singled out for her actions, even going as far as to say recently that she felt that she shouldn't continue to be punished for a crime that she's already served time for. The comparisons to other sports and the way these situations were handled there are rankling my nerves in comparison to this one, particularly since it seems that athletes of color were always taken down with particular relish; I can't recall anyone using this argument for Sammy Sosa or Marion Jones or any other disgraced (
I don't know if I have an accurate summary for everything I've typed up, because all of this, like life in general, has been one giant clusterfuck of a situation. What does any of this mean for the future? Does the return of Sharapova and the so-called "celebration" of her return devalue the use of PEDs in tennis? Do sports in general need to reevaluate where they stand on PEDs? Does one's status as a high earner and a potential marketing chip outweigh a failed drug test? Do you agree with me that white privilege plays a part in how her return is being perceived? Lastly, how would you feel if your favorite athlete were busted for using performance enhancers - would you continue to root for them, unabated, or would you have second thoughts?
No matter what the potential responses to these and many other hypothetical questions are, the fact remains that for better or worse, one of the most divisive figures in women's tennis has done little to change that status as we mark her return to the game - in fact, Maria Sharapova may be even more divisive than ever. Her return to the sport on Wednesday marks the official end of one of the most controversial incidents in tennis' recent history, and it remains to be seen how she will be accepted by the crowds, or whether or not she can regain her prior form. Here's hoping that for her sake, she (and her agent) will have actually read the anti-doping lists this time around.
