Remember when Richard Gasquet escaped a two-year drug ban because he claimed his positive cocaine test was the result of kissing a woman at a Miami club? It was so ridiculous an excuse (he remembered the name of the random girl, he was at a music festival featuring house music by a French DJ, an experience which practically demands heavy drug use) that I'd imagine even Gasquet was surprised when it worked, even if it happened to be true.
Who would have thought at the time that the case would set a groundbreaking precedent, the drug equivalent of Marbury v. Madison?
On Tuesday, Spanish cyclist Alberto Contador was cleared from his own positive drug test after using Gasquet's case as a reference. The three-time Tour de France champion claimed he tested positive for a banned substance after eating contaminated steak. Just like the tennis federation, the cycling honchos bought it and the charges against Contador were dropped.
Now, I know what you're thinking: If he had truly followed the Gasquet's path, Contador would have claimed he was making out with the cow. That's semantics though. I appreciate the inspiration.
We saw this sort of thing coming when Gasquet skated. With Contador having the same excuse work, it's only a matter of time before an athlete blames a positive cocaine test on having watched reruns of "Two and a Half Men" earlier in the day.