According to sources that may or may not have a clue the active substance used was higenamine which under that and its' other two names is not on the WADA list (which UEFA uses).
-
-
Mamadou Sakho still set to miss EURO 2016, despite being cleared of doping
Since yesterday, Mamadou Sakho has been given back the right to play professional football.
UEFA, who suspended him until further notice because of a drug test that was taken on the 17th March, after the Europa League encounter between Manchester United and Liverpool, have decided not to prolong his suspension any further, being fully expected not to take any further action against Sakho.
Between now and Tuesday, a committee of UEFA experts are due to meet in order to make a definitive decision in this case. They were leaning yesterday towards a decision not to punish Sakho, taking the player’s English lawyers’s arguments into account.
The 26 year old, who will not make any public statement until an official decision is announced, maintained his claim throughout this case that the products inside the fat burner that he was found to have been taking, were not on UEFA’s official list of banned substances.
Turns out that Sakho was right.
The particular substance found in Sakho’s urine, that was present in the product that the French international was taking, is called higenamine. The presence of this substance in the product was clearly marked on the packaging, according to L’Équipe.
It is a substance that combats asthma but also has the ability to burn fat as well.
This substance is not listed on the AMA’s list of banned substances, even though it belongs to a category, beta-2 agonists, that is banned. A mistake by the authorities, but legally, Sakho has not made a mistake.
What’s more, when one types higenamine into the UKAD and AFLD websites, neither authorities’ page recognises the molecule.
In accordance with article 10 section 2 of the UEFA antidoping regulations, when there is an absence of significant negligence, the sanction is minimum a warning and maximum a two year ban.
Should UEFA, as expected, decide not to punish Sakho further, then it will be because they believe there is an absence of significant negligence on the part of the defender.
However, whatever UEFA’s decision, there is the possibility that the AMA doping agency decides to appeal the decision in front of the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Should UEFA, as expected, imminently announce the relaxation of Sakho’s suspension, then he is technically available for selection by Didier Deschamps for EURO 2016.
However, it seems that this turnaround has come too late for Sakho. Deschamps is almost certainly not going to pick him, mainly due to the fact that he has not played any professional football for an extended period of time…
http://www.getfootballnewsfrance.co....red-of-doping/
Interesting.....What a mess
Comment
-
Seige is from Runcorn dude.Originally posted by Assassin View Post
3rd place. Worst champions ever.
Comment
-
Well presumably they'll add higenamine to their list, but a retrospective ban would be against the spirit of fair play and clearly easy to challenge so I expect UEFA will not attempt to impose one.Comment
-
My guess is he will get off on a technicality. UEFA have fcuked up imo.
Comment
-
Barney Ronay crying so many salty tears.
Football without Origi is nothingComment
-
-
-
-
Technicality??? If it's not on the banned list it's not a technicality & he's done nothing wrongOriginally posted by marcus50bucks View PostMy guess is he will get off on a technicality. UEFA have fcuked up imo.
Innocent until proven guilty ...
But then again there's no smoke without fire eh?
Ban him anyway, it must be true people on here said so.
NAIL HIM UP I SAY!!! NAIL SOME SENSE INTO HIM!!!
We only want do Gooder God fearing players on our team
I think I need a lie down.Comment
-
Not going to the EURO's.Comment
-
I reckon they'll find what he took should be banned, but that there is currently dubiety over it. Obviously once France are out of the euros.Really?Comment
-
Didier Deschamps: "Call up Sakho? I have never thought about it. Or I would no longer have any respect for those that I have selected."Comment
-
If it wasn't on the banned list when the substance was found in his system they can't add it to the list and ban him retrospectively.The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.Comment
-
why not? They might have a general prohibition against beta 2 agonists. There may just be dubiety over whether this drug is one of those.Really?Comment
Comment