Mon, March 23, 2026

ITIA v Marinko Matosevic

A decision in the case of International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) against Marinko Matosevic has been issued by the Independent Panel.

Mr Matosevic is a now-retired professional tennis player (the ‘Player’). The last Covered Event he competed in was at the Indian Wells Challenger Event (the ‘Event’) in February 2018. Mr Matosevic continued to be involved in tennis after he ceased playing professionally. He worked in Bali at a Professional Tennis Academy from 2019 to 2020. He then coached several professional tennis players.

On 24 April 2025, following an investigation into several professional tennis players and an interview with Mr Matosevic, the ITIA issued a Notice of Potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) against Mr Matosevic for the Use of a Prohibited Method and the Use and Possession of a Prohibited Substance. Mr Matosevic denied he had committed any ADRVs.

On 15 May 2025, the ITIA formally charged Mr Matosevic with the aforementioned ADRVs. The Player continued to deny that he had committed any ADRVs. The matter was subsequently referred to the Independent Panel on 10 June 2025 for determination.

The Independent Tribunal comprised of Mr Michael Heron KC (Chair), Dr Tanja Haug, and Marco Vedovatti.

On 16 September 2025, the ITIA issued the Player with a Second Pre-Charge Notice following interviews conducted in relation to an investigation into two alleged ADRVs committed by two other players, which led the ITIA to suspect Mr Matosevic’s potential complicity. Mr Matosevic rejected the charges, asserting that he had retired in February 2018 and was therefore not subject to the Tennis Agency Doping Programme (‘TADP’) during the relevant periods, while characterising the investigation as unfounded and the allegations being based on misinterpreted historic communications.

On 24 October 2025, the ITIA formally charged Mr Matosevic with ADRVs in relation to complicity. On 12 November 2025, Mr Matosevic did not object to the additional charges be added, however, he requested that his case, comprising all charges, be put before the Independent Tribunal so that he could defend himself.

On 2 February 2026, a personal statement written by Mr Matosevic was published by The First Serve Live (a tennis news and media platform), in which he admitted to blood doping in February 2018 and confirmed one of the charges, relating to the Use of a Prohibited Method, that he had previously denied. He also confirmed that he would not be attending the scheduled hearing.

On 5 February 2026, Mr Matosevic gave an interview to The First Serve Live explaining his version of the events and the allegations. He admitted to undertaking a blood transfusion. He additionally criticised the ITIA’s investigation and refuted the remaining charges.

In light of this, the Independent Tribunal gave Mr Matosevic the opportunity to submit a written statement, in lieu of attending the hearing, and informed him that the hearing would take place irrespective of whether he attended or not. Mr Matosevic provided no response, and no further statement was provided to the Independent Tribunal by the Player.

The hearing took place on 9 February 2026, without Mr Matosevic in attendance. The ITIA alleged that Mr Matosevic had committed five ADVRs: Use of a Prohibited Method, namely manipulation of blood and blood component; complicity in another tennis player’s Use of a Prohibited Method; Use of a Prohibited Substance, namely clenbuterol; Possession of a Prohibited Substance, namely clenbuterol; and complicity in another tennis player’s Use of a Prohibited Substance, namely clenbuterol.

In relation to the first charge, the ITIA argued that the text messages discovered during its investigation, namely messages exchanged between Mr Matosevic and another tennis player discussing payment, referring to transfusions and their physical effects, and in addition, Mr Matosevic’s public confession, formed a coherent picture from which the Independent Tribunal could be comfortably satisfied that Mr Matosevic Used or attempted to Use a Prohibited Method by blood doping.

In relation to the first complicity charge, the ITIA argued that the threshold for establishing complicity is low and that “any type of complicity” is sufficient. The ITIA submitted that the text messages that had been presented in relation to Mr Matosevic’s blood doping supported the charge of complicity in the other tennis player’s alleged Use or Attempted Use of that method, noting that the players had shared arrangements, exchanged information on transfusions, coordinated the procedures, and discussed the need to maintain confidentiality.

In relation to the charge of Possession and Use of clenbuterol, the ITIA submitted that Mr Matosevic admitted to the Use of clenbuterol in 2020 and, by extension, the Possession of a Prohibited Substance while he remained bound by the TADP. The ITIA further submitted that the text messages exchanged between Mr Matosevic and another tennis player, which occurred within a coaching relationship, demonstrated Mr Matosevic’s assisting or encouraging other tennis players to Use clenbuterol, and thereby, making him complicit in the other tennis players’ ADRVs.

The ITIA invited the Independent Tribunal to find that the five ADRVs committed by Mr Matosevic, be considered as one single violation and that a sanction of four (4) year period of Ineligibility be imposed.

Due to Mr Matosevic not being present at the hearing, the Independent Tribunal heard only from the ITIA, but also took into account Mr Matosevich’s written submission, including the written statement published on The First Serve Live.

As to the issue of Mr Matosevic’s retirement, the ITIA submitted that it was not notified of the Player’s retirement until 1 November 2024. The Independent Tribunal agreed with the ITIA’s case that Mr Matosevic did not formally retire until 1 November 2024 and remained bound by the 2018 TADP, and each subsequent version of the Programme until written notice of the Player’s retirement was received and thus made official.

The Independent Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that Mr Matosevic had undertaken a blood transfusion as he admitted the charge and the evidence provided by the ITIA was supportive of the same.

The Independent Tribunal was also comfortably satisfied that Mr Matosevic was complicit in the alleged Use or Attempted Use of the same Prohibited Method by another tennis player. The text messages evidenced intentional participation in, and facilitation of, the other player’s alleged ADRV.

The Independent Tribunal further found that Mr Matosevic committed the further ADRV in relation to another player’s alleged Use of clenbuterol. The cumulative effect of the information and reassurances Mr Matosevic provided to the player in the exchange of text messages, together with his deliberate failure to distance himself, or notify the relevant anti-doping authority, amounted to intentional complicity. Finally, further to Mr Matosevic’s own admission of Possession and Using clenbuterol, the Independent Tribunal found that he had committed those ADRVs as well.

The Independent Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that each of the charges was proven to the required standard. The Independent Tribunal thereby determined that a period of Ineligibility of four (4) years should be imposed. The period of Ineligibility commenced on the date of the decision of 16 March 2026.

In addition, the Independent Tribunal determined that Mr Matosevic’s results achieved at the Event in February 2018 shall be Disqualified, with all resulting Consequences, including forfeiture of all medals, titles, ranking points and Prize Money earned.

Sport Resolutions is the independent Secretariat to the International Tennis Integrity Agency Independent Panel.

A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related links tab on the right-hand side.

Related Documents

• ITIA v Marinko MatosevicDecision