Rusedski vows to prove innocence on drugs charge

GREG RUSEDSKI last night vowed to prove his innocence after confirming he has tested positive for the banned drug nandrolone.

The Canadian-born British number two faces an ATP hearing in Montreal on February 9.

In a statement, Rusedski said: "In response to media inquiries I confirm that I have been advised by the ATP anti-doping administrator that a sample I provided tested positive for a low concentration of nandrolone metabolites.

I wish to make it clear that I do not and never have taken performance enhancing drugs.

"This is a very complex situation which once understood will clearly demonstrate my total innocence.

"There is a hearing to be held in Montreal on February 9 which I shall attend. I fully expect to be found innocent."

Earlier this week Rusedski laughed off suggestions he had returned a positive drug test when asked by a journalist in Adelaide, where he lost the second match of his comeback from injury today, going down 6-2 6-2 to unseeded Frenchman Cyril Saulnier.

The 30-year-old had been on the sidelines since losing both his singles matches in last September's Davis Cup defeat in Morocco.

It is believed the test dates from a tournament he played in July in Indianapolis, a month before he made a disappointing first round exit from the US Open at the hands of France's Gregory Carraz. The highpoint of Rusedski's career was a run to the final of the US Open in 1997 when he leapfrogged Tim Henman to become British number one but lost to Australia's Pat Rafter.

Former British number one Andrew Castle was shocked by the news: "Of all the people to have been found guilty of taking a performance-enhancing drug, Greg would have been bottom of my list."

David Hitdon, a spokesman for the ATP, said: "We will not comment on any individual case until the process is completed, regardless of any statement made by a player concerned."

The system used by the ATP is much the same as that applied in athletics. If a player fails an A test they are requested to explain to the ATP why they think it may have happened, and if there are any possible extenuating circumstances.

They then undergo a B test. If this is also positive the player is informed and has the right to appeal.