BRITISH tennis star Tara Moore has been banned for FOUR YEARS for doping.
The 32-year-old was previously cleared by an independent tribunal 18 months ago.
However, an appeal over the decision to clear her has been upheld, which means Moore is again banned from the sport.
The ban comes into effect immediately – but it will be reduced.
This is because she has already served 19 months of the ban, as she was provisionally suspended when the case first emerged back in 2022.
The ace was cleared and allowed to return to tennis after an independent tribunal that ruled contaminated meat was the source of the positive test, and that Moore “bore no fault or negligence”.
But an appeal was lodged by the International Tennis Integrity Agency.
It was sent to the Court of Arbitration where the ban was then upheld.
Moore was previously Britain’s top-ranked doubles player when she was first hit with the ban in 2022.
She tested positive for nandrolone and boldenone during an appearance at a tournament in Bogota, Colombia.
Moore returned to the ITF World Tour in April 2024 and was in the draw for Wimbledon and the US Open.
She was also featured at the Australian Open in January this year.
However, she will now be on the sidelines until at least the start of the 2028 season.
A court statement read: “After reviewing the scientific and legal evidence, the majority of the CAS Panel considered that the player did not succeed in proving that the concentration of nandrolone in her sample was consistent with the ingestion of contaminated meat.
“The panel concluded that Ms Moore failed to establish that the ADRV (Anti-Doping Rule Violation) was not intentional.
“The appeal by the ITIA is therefore upheld and the decision rendered by the Independent Tribunal is set aside.”
ITIA’s chief executive Karen Moorhouse insisted that Moore’s explanation was not “adequate”.
Her statement read: “For the ITIA, every case is considered according to the individual facts and circumstances.
“Our bar for appealing a first instance decision is high, and the decision is not taken lightly.
“In this case, our independent scientific advice was that the player did not adequately explain the high level of nandrolone present in their sample. Today’s ruling is consistent with this position.
“We understand that players and their support teams may have questions about this decision, and we will answer these fully once we have reviewed the details of the ruling.”
Read the full article here
