‘Angry’ Sakho sues WADA for £13m over Liverpool ban ‘error’

Joe Williams

Mamadou Sakho is suing the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for £13m after accusing them of a drug test-error that ended his career at Liverpool.

The current Crystal Palace defender was provisionally banned for 30 days on April 28 2016 after being notified by European football’s governing body of an anti-doping offence relating to a test taken after March’s Europa League quarter-final against Manchester United at Old Trafford.

UEFA launched their own investigation at the time into whether the fat-burning substance the centre-back took should even be on the banned list.

The ban meant ‘angry’ Sakho (as per the Daily Mail) missed Liverpool‘s crucial Europa League final defeat to Sevilla, while Sakho claimed at a High Court hearing that it cost him a place in Didier Deschamps France squad for Euro 2016.

Higenamine, the substance Sakho was banned for using was found not to be on WADA’s prohibited list and Sakho was subsequently cleared by UEFA.

The Guardian explains: ‘The governing body then published a report that was hugely critical of Wada, suggesting there were doubts among experts about whether higenamine was among a group known as B2‑agonists, all of which are banned by Wada, and pointed out that Wada’s laboratories do not routinely test for the substance.’

It has been argued by Sakho’s lawyers that a move away from Liverpool had a big impact on his salary and that it represented a loss of £13m in earnings.

In court, Stuart Ritchie QC, who is Sakho’s barrister, said: “Although [Crystal Palace] is a distinguished Premier League club, it does not have the worldwide reputation or brand recognition of Liverpool with the value which this brings to a player and his associated image rights.

He added: “Only recently has he been re-selected to play for the French national team.”

However, WADA denies responsibility for his transfer from Liverpool, arguing that “disciplinary issues” and a “personality clash” with Jurgen Klopp were the root causes.

The Guardian adds: ‘At the end of the hearing, the judge ordered that the trial on liability – whether Wada was negligent – should take place before the amount of compensation is considered.’