Van den Boomen suspended for violating anti-doping rules
Toulouse midfielder Branco Van den Boomen (26) returned to training late due to a penalty lost by the AFLD for violating anti-doping rules. The club claims an administrative error.
The reasons for the absence of Branco Van den Boomen (26) during the resumption with Toulouse on June 23, are becoming clearer. If Philippe Montanier, trainer, had not poured out on the subject by evoking a “private” reason, The Team explains that the player was in fact serving a suspension refused on June 10 by the French Agency for the Fight against Doping (AFLD).
A TUE application too late
The midfielder was found guilty of an “anti-doping rule violation” after dispensing banned substances (Prednisone and Prednisolone, as well as Terbutaline), drugs prescribed to combat inflammation of the airways. The best Ligue 2 player had been suspended for a month, until last Sunday.
>> Follow all the news from Ligue 1 LIVE
This positive control dates back to the start of his contract with the TFC, shortly after the summer of 2020. The club pleads an administrative oversight and his lawyer minimizes this sanction. “We are not talking about doping concerning Branco, it is a non-subject, confides Me Christophe Bertrand in L’Equipe. The reality is that there was a justified medical prescription, made by the club to its arrival, but also an administrative error. The request for TUE (Authorization for use for therapeutic purposes, editor’s note) was not formulated in due time. That’s all. Then there was a positive control at products, declared to everyone. Nothing was hidden. You have to remember that we were in the Covid period. The administrative side did not follow determined. That’s what happened. “
The Dutchman, who joined TFC in 2020 from De Graafschap, suffers from a specific form of respiratory condition. He played for two years under the threat of this sanction even if Damien Comolli, president of the club, claims to have lived this period very calmly. He assures that he will draw conclusions to improve processes if an error has been made.
The midfielder’s arguments were heard by the AFLD, which gave him a very lenient sanction during his vacation. “Although this athlete remains responsible for the substances contained in his body, he has demonstrated his absence of fault or significant negligence”, indicated the agency in its conclusions.