Manly under-20 player suspended over drug test

[Granty]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/19/2603462.htm?section=sport

Manly under-20 player suspended over drug test

The National Rugby League (NRL) has hit Manly under-20 player Shane Gray with a provisional suspension after he tested positive to the banned substance Clenbuterol.

The substance can be used as a slimming aid to accelerate weight loss in athletes, and is the same substance that landed Cronulla first-grade player Reni Maitua a two-year ban on Monday after a positive test.

The NRL said Gray's test is still at the 'A' Sample stage, and if the 'B' Sample confirms the initial result, Gray faces a two-year ban under the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA) Code.

Under the WADA Code, Gray is entitled to be represented when the 'B' Sample is tested.

If the second sample does not confirm the initial result, the matter will not be pursued.

[Granty]

http://www.nrl.com/newsviews/latestnews/newsarticle/tabid/10874/newsid/56441/gray-suspended-for-two-years/default.aspx

Gray suspended for two years

NRL
Wed, 26 Aug 2009

The National Rugby League has today imposed a two-year suspension on Manly Under 20’s player Shane Gray over a positive test to Clenbuterol, which is classed as an anabolic agent.

The positive sample was collected in an Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority out of competition test during June 2009 and confirmed through subsequent sample analysis by the ASADA.

Mr Gray has elected not to contest the matter before a hearing and accepted the two-year sanction under the World Anti-Doping Agency Code.

He has made it clear that he has at no time sought to deliberately break the WADA code and remains unaware as to how the substance entered his system.

Mr Gray has been provisionally suspended since June 18, 2009 and will next be eligible to play on June 19, 2011.



Note: Clenbuterol is prohibited both in and out of competition under the World Anti-Doping Authority Code 2009 Prohibited List S1 (2). A finding of a doping offence in relation to the presence of this substance in an athlete’s sample would see an athlete face a two-year penalty subject only to that athlete arguing a reduction through the ameliorating provisions within the policy including the ‘No Significant Fault or Negligence’ clause (to do so the athlete needs be able to show how the substance entered his/her system) or through providing substantial assistance in ‘Discovering or Establishing Anti-Doping Rule Violations’.