Just ln:Zverev Questions Sinner’s ‘Strange’ Doping Ban: ‘If He’s Not Guilty, Why Suspend Him?… see… more 

In a development that has sparked debate within the tennis world, Alexander Zverev has openly questioned the recent three-month doping suspension handed to rising Italian star Jannik Sinner. Speaking candidly to reporters following his match at the Rome Masters, Zverev labeled the decision “strange” and challenged the rationale behind punishing a player who, according to official statements, was not found guilty of deliberate doping.

Sinner, 23, was handed a retroactive three-month suspension by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) after testing positive for a banned substance earlier this year. The agency stated that Sinner bore “no significant fault or negligence,” leading to the backdated and shortened ban. He has already served the suspension and is now free to compete.

But Zverev, currently ranked No. 4 in the world, expressed skepticism over the logic of the ruling.

“If someone is not guilty, why are they getting suspended for three months?” Zverev said. “And if they are guilty, why is it only three months? It’s a very strange decision, and it raises a lot of questions.”

Zverev’s comments have reignited the discussion surrounding transparency and consistency in anti-doping rulings in tennis. The German star did not accuse Sinner directly of wrongdoing but made it clear that the message sent by the decision was confusing for fans and players alike.

“I’m not here to judge Jannik, he’s a great player and a good guy,” Zverev clarified. “But the system needs to be clear. Either someone breaks the rules and faces the consequences, or they’re cleared. There shouldn’t be this grey area.”

Sinner’s team responded quickly after the ITIA announcement, maintaining his innocence and stating that the banned substance entered his system through a contaminated supplement. They provided evidence supporting the claim, which the ITIA accepted, resulting in a reduced penalty. However, the fact that the suspension was not publicly disclosed until after it had been served also fueled speculation and concern about the transparency of the process.

Veterans of the sport and former players have chimed in with mixed opinions. Some support Zverev’s stance, agreeing that the anti-doping framework needs more consistency and clarity. Others argue that the ITIA’s role includes considering mitigating circumstances and that a one-size-fits-all approach to doping violations would be unfair.

This is not the first time a doping case has stirred controversy on the ATP Tour. In recent years, players such as Marin Čilić and Richard Gasquet have also received shortened bans due to unintentional ingestion or minimal fault. But the closed-door handling of these cases often leaves the public—and fellow athletes—grappling with more questions than answers.

Zverev’s remarks also raise broader concerns about player communication and trust in governing bodies. As one of the sport’s most prominent figures, his public questioning of the ITIA’s logic carries significant weight and could prompt a review of how such cases are handled and disclosed in the future.

Meanwhile, Sinner has returned to competition and is focusing on the remainder of the season. He has not commented directly on Zverev’s statements but has previously expressed relief that the case is behind him.

Whether Zverev’s comments will lead to changes in the ATP’s approach to anti-doping policy remains to be seen. For now, his words have thrown a spotlight on an issue that continues to divide opinion in the tennis world—and leaves many wondering whether justice in sport is being served equally and transparently.

Would you like a graphic or social media caption to go along with this article?