Can football players delegate their anti-doping responsibilities to their club? The case of Shir Tzedek

Published 26 June 2018 By: Boaz Sity

Football in front of white coat

Shir Tzedek is an Israeli professional football player for Hapoel Beer Sheva (the Player). On 22 August 2017, Tzedek played in a UEFA Champions League match against NK Maribor and was required to provide a urine sample for doping control purposes. One month later, on 22 September 2017, the Player was informed the prohibited substance Octopamine was detected in his urine sample. Octopamine is a specified stimulant and is only prohibited in-competition.

Subsequently, UEFA opened disciplinary proceedings against Tzedek for anti-doping rule violation, in accordance with the UEFA Anti-Doping Regulations (ADR). On 7 December 2017 UEFA's Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB) decided to suspend him for a period of eight months (decision available here1 – see page 117).

This article reviews the proceedings before the CEDB, focusing on:

  • The Player's position;

  • The CEDB decision;

  • The scope of suspension under the ADR; and

  • Comments and observations.

 

Get access to this article and all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport

Register here

Already a member?

Username or email   Password   Remember Me     Forgot Login?   Register  

Articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts

 

Related Articles

Author

Boaz Sity

Boaz Sity

Boaz Sity is a Partner at Ron Gazit, Rotenberg & Co in Israel.

Subscribe to our update emails