Sharapova addresses the media at a Los Angeles hotel. Photo: Getty Images
If the possible, but unlikely, four-year ban hanging over Maria Sharapova's much-photographed head is duly imposed by the International Tennis Federation under its anti-doping program, her golden career is almost certainly over. For the almost-29-year-old with a history of comebacks from injury and – we now discover – illness problems, even a more probable two-year suspension may also mean the end.
If so, one of the world's highest-profile sportswomen would finish with five majors among 35 career singles titles, but only that famous first grand slam at Wimbledon in 2004 among the eight before the decade in which she admits to using the now-illegal performance-enhancing drug meldonium. Thus, one of the many questions being asked is whether anything achieved after 2005 must necessarily have an asterisk beside it.
Whatever Sharapova's motivation – and she was at pains to explain at a very careful, strategically pre-emptive news conference in Los Angeles on Monday that it was purely health-related – and regardless of however much or little it helped her game, there is no dispute about these facts: what she took, and when, and its legality before and now.
Which means it is far from a Lance Armstrong scenario, when the serial cycling cheat blatantly disregarded the anti-doping laws in place at the time, and deserved to be stripped of titles that were clearly compromised. In contrast, although never approved by the Food and Drug Administration in her adopted country of residence, the US, meldonium was not added to WADA banned list until January 1. But it was added for a reason, according to WADA: "because of evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance". How much it helped Sharapova we will never know.
Strictly speaking, as Sharapova's heavyweight lawyer, John Heggarty, was quick to point out, the rules were only broken for 25 days. But, for an athlete who has earned millions of dollars each year from the swoosh guys whose slogan was "image is everything", and who have already "suspended" what has been a long-term relationship, the full ramifications for the former world No.1's carefully-managed and highly-polished reputation are still to be played out.
The WTA was quick, too, with its statement regarding one of its marquee drawcards, speaking to Sharapova's integrity while reiterating its support for the process, and the outcome. But it was interesting not just that she was allowed to reveal the test results on her own terms, but also that the WTA said anything at all. Does that, it was asked rhetorically, mean there will be similar support forthcoming from those at head office when the world No.157 admits to being caught taking a banned substance? Wouldn't think so.
Elsewhere, opinion was sharply divided on whether this is an athlete guilty of a careless oversight, or something far worse. To Martina Navratilova, who first spotted the six-year-old Sharapova at a clinic near her home in Sochi, Russia, it seems to be "an honest mistake". In contrast, an almost irrationally angry Jennifer Capriati is leading the lynch mob with a series of tweets that stop just short of calling for the beheading of the game's glamour queen, demanding that Sharapova's trophy cabinet be stripped bare. At best, it is a very bad look from someone not known for them.
Sharapova's failure, as she explains it, to read the updated WADA list of banned substances emailed to her on December 22 – or have one of her minions to do it for her – seems hard to reconcile with the reputation of an athlete who is so professionally and meticulously prepared. Criticise her shrieking, yes, or dislike what can be an air of haughtiness. But sloppy? That is not the Sharapova way.
If her version of events, including the idea that she had never heard of meldonium, because her script has always been for mildronate – its other name, but scarcely relevant if she didn't look at the list, anyway – is accepted, the ban may be for as little as 12 months and the fallout mitigated somewhat. If not, it will be a stunning and disastrous fall from grace.
The only humorous moment came during the prepared speech that preceded question time, when Sharapova assured the shocked gathering that "If I was ever going to announce my retirement, it would probably not be in a downtown Los Angeles hotel with this fairly ugly carpet." Indeed, there had been heavy speculation that the reason for the impending media event was for Sharapova to announce her exit from the game.
Which, effectively, she may have been, but not on terms of her choosing. This was a red-face, rather than red-carpet moment. Unfamiliar territory, and, for a sport with more than enough problems, fairly ugly, too.
