Samir Nasri's doping ban extended to 18 months after Uefa appeal
The Frenchman cannot return to training with any club until November at the earliest
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Former Manchester City midfielder Samir Nasri has had his doping ban increased to 18 months following an appeal against the original six-month sanction.
The Frenchman was handed the original suspension in February after Uefa found the 31-year-old "guilty of using a prohibited method in accordance with the Wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) prohibited list".
The former France international's lawyer had said Nasri was sanctioned for receiving an intravenous drip treatment at a clinic in Los Angeles in 2016, when he was on loan at Sevilla.
"The player Samir Nasri is suspended for eighteen (18) months. This suspension will start running on 1 July 2017," Uefa said in a statement on their website.
"The player Samir Nasri is allowed to return to training, with any football club starting from 1 November 2018."
The European governing body said Nasri's amended suspension was a result of negotiations between the player, Wada, the French Anti-Doping Agency and Uefa's Ethics and Disciplinary inspector, who originally believed a two-year suspension was warranted.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments