Inconsistencies for Maria Sharapova, Richard Williams, and Oracene Price
Dear ITHOF,
On 27 August 2024, the International Tennis Hall of Fame issued a press release stating that Maria Sharapova, the Bryan Brothers and Daniel Nestor had been added to the International Tennis Hall of Fame ballot for the Class of 2025. These tennis icons reached this stage of the induction process after scaling the scrutiny of the Eligibility Committee, Nominating Committee and Official Voting Group. In October 2024, the ITHOF will announce the Class of 2025 inductees who will be inducted in August 2025.
At face value, nothing is amiss with these players making it to the ballot. The Bryan Brothers are the greatest tennis double team on the men’s tour, while Daniel Nestor is an Olympic gold medalist and has won over 90 titles. Maria Sharapova is a five-time Grand Slam winner and one of the most accomplished players of her generation. Despite Sharapova’s accomplishments on the tennis court, one wonders why the ITHOF has not factored her activities off the court to determine her suitability to make the ballot.
In June 2016, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) suspended Maria Sharapova for two years after she tested positive for the banned substance meldonium. According to the ITF, Sharapova “Admitted an anti-doping rule violation under article 2.1 of the TADP in that Meldonium, a Prohibited Substance, was present in the urine sample collected from her at the Australian Open on 26 January 2016.” Meldonium, which is on the World Anti-doping Agency’s list of banned substances, has performance-enhancing features. It has a positive effect on energy metabolism and stamina. According to the ITF, “The manner of its use, on match days and when undertaking intensive training, is only consistent with an intention to boost her energy levels. It may be that she genuinely believed that Mildronate had some general beneficial effect on her health. Still, the manner in which the medication was taken, its concealment from the anti-doping authorities, her failure to disclose it even to her own team, and the lack of any medical justification must inevitably lead to the conclusion that she took Mildronate for the purpose of enhancing her performance.” As a result of Sharapova’s doping violation, she became the “First premier tennis star in history to fail a doping test.” Following Sharapova’s appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, her two-year doping ban was reduced to fifteen months. Despite the reduction in her ban, Sharapova was not cleared of doping.
The decision to include Maria Sharapova on the Hall of Fame ballot by the ITHOF not only raises questions but also casts a shadow on the integrity of the International Tennis Hall of Fame nomination process. This is particularly evident when one considers her doping violation and the repeated exclusion of Richard Williams and Oracene from the Tennis Hall of Fame. The nomination process is at risk of losing its integrity.
Although Sharapova has been nominated in the Player Category and submissions were made for Richard and Oracene’s nomination in the Contributory Category, the eligibility criteria for the two categories have one similar criterion. To be considered for inclusion in the Player and Contributor Category of the Tennis Hall of Fame, they must prove they demonstrated “Integrity, sportsmanship, and character attributes.” In my submission for Richard Williams and Oracene Price, I wrote they had demonstrated integrity, sportsmanship and character by stating, “They instilled in them (Williams sisters) the importance of abiding by the rules and not to get involved in the use of the performance-enhancing substance to boost performance.”
It is incredulous to see someone who has brought the game of tennis into disrepute now within striking distance of getting inducted into the Tennis Hall of Fame, while two black individuals who coached the greatest tennis double act in tennis fail to reach the ballot stage for the third time in seven years. One then wonders how the ITHOF Eligibility Committee, Nominating Committee and Official Voting Group determined that Sharapova had demonstrated integrity, sportsmanship and character. Since when did getting banned for two years for doping demonstrate integrity? Since when did gaining an advantage over your peers by taking a banned substance demonstrate integrity? Since when did engaging in an activity that brought disrepute to the sports demonstrate character? If doping demonstrates integrity, sportsmanship, and positive character attributes, then it is time for the ITHOF to remove integrity, sportsmanship, and character as criteria for Hall of Fame eligibility. The inconsistency between the treatment of Sharapova’s nomination form relative to Williams and Price’s form is another manifestation of the bias I have been talking about for the past seven years.
In August 2025, hundreds of well-dressed guests will likely gather at the well-maintained lawn at 194 Bellevue Avenue, Newport, for an event that will be live-streamed worldwide. We will hear speeches about how Sharapova has received the so-called ultimate honor in tennis. The photographers will jostle for position to capture the moment the ITHOF ring is put on Sharapova’s finger. After that, she will be presented with a plaque and a certificate. The following day, the media outlets will report, “Maria Sharapova was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame on Saturday evening in Newport, where family, friends and fans packed into the famous horseshoe court for a memorable evening.” Members of ITHOF will congratulate themselves on a successful event and then proceed to view the Hall of Fame List, which once again excludes Richard Williams and Oracene Price. My only hope is that once the euphoria has died, the ITHOF will look into the mirror and ask whether To Thine Own Self It has Been True.
Selah.
Ahmed Olayinka Sule, CFA
September 2024
@Alatenumo
