Ask Stuart Miller about transparency and provisional suspensions, and he'll bury you in verbiage.
But when it comes to this particular rule change, the man can't shut-up:
"The tennis anti-doping rules are likely to be changed in 2014 to say that, where a player refuses or fails to provide a sample (as Mr. Troicki did), the doping control officer should try to offer the player an opportunity to speak to the event supervisor or referee to confirm the player's responsibilities under the program," Stuart Miller, the ITF's anti-doping manager, told CNN.So, what happens if a player claims that the "event supervisor or referee" assured him (or her) that it was "ok" not to give a sample?
When asked if the change of thinking was due to the Troicki affair, Miller added: "I think it's fair to say that the Troicki case highlighted the issue.
"Given this only happened in 2013, I think it's looking at the problem pretty quickly and trying to find a solution."
The WADA Code is pretty clear on the consequences of failure to provide a sample. Can someone explain how the ITF's rule change will solve any problems?