Summary: <br> NCR is back after an unforeseen delay (our apologies), and we start by catching up with the conclusion of the Maria Sharapova meldonium case, as Ben welcomes back guest Richard Ings, who had previously discussed Sharapova's positive test with us back <a href="http://nochallengesremaining.podbean.com/e/episode-145a-maria-sharapova-tests-positive-for-banned-substance/">on Episode 145A</a> when she announced it back in March. What have we learned over the course of this case? How much should this affect Sharapova's reputation, and should she be labeled a "cheater"? What can ITF do to prevent its athletes having similar pitfalls in the future? All that, plus transparency, TUEs, and more.<br> <br> <br> <br> Reading material referenced in this episode:<br> <br> The initial ITF decision against Sharapova<br> The CAS decision overturning the ITF decision and reducing ban from 24 to 15 months.<br> Ben's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/sports/tennis/maria-sharapova-doping-suspension-international-tennis-federation.html?ref=tennis">interview with Sharapova</a> in the New York Times<br> ESPN's <a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/17693288/tennis-pristine-image-performance-enhancing-drugs-which-no-accident">Outside the Lines report</a> critical of tennis anti-doping systems.<br> <br> <br> <br> And as always, thanks for liking us <a href="http://facebook.com/ncrpodcast">on Facebook</a> (leave comments on the episode thread!), following us <a href="http://twitter.com/ncr_tennis">on Twitter</a> (discuss this episode with hashtag #NCR167!), and subscribing/reviewin<a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/no-challenges-remaining/id583552127">g</a> on iTunes or whatever your podcasting app/platform of choice may be.<br>
