Log in:  

Register

Why is there no whistleblower protection?

A place to discuss all things related to current professional road races. Here, you can also touch on the latest news relating to professional road racing. A doping discussion free forum.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Why is there no whistleblower protection?

08 Jun 2009 16:46

Why not have support, protection, and plea bargains for doping whistleblowers?

You would think UCI and the national federations should have a systematic, coordinated program like this to break omerta and the crucifixion of dopers who come clean.

Create a reserved pro tour spot for a quasi-official team of former dopers and whistleblowers, publicly supported with the money of UCI, national federations, and wealthy donors/sponsors (e.g. people like Doug Ellis of Garmin).

It might even be cool for co's or sponsors like Amgen, and legal supplement co's, and health food co's, what have you, who want to create a market niche of fair play and healthy living.

Let's see Jaksche, Heras, Manzano, Kohl, Schumacher, even Ricco (once he's done his time), and there are others, at the entire pro tour, with guaranteed spots/salaries. Would be intriguing/hilarious to watch all these guys on one team (a protected one), and a baseline point of comparison versus the omerta stooges who continue undetected. :D

*Team should be subject to biological passport thing, new types of dope tests, the whole nine yards. UCI and WADA could use them for testing purposes (new ones or new protocols), whatever. It's fair.
User avatar Parrot23
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,067
Joined: 11 Apr 2009 00:57

08 Jun 2009 17:35

It is great idea. Very expensive, complicated, open to abuse but a great idea and that shouldn't stop it.

The Katusa 5 x times salary fine (how is that boalio?) and UCI fines (if ever paid) could help pay.

Do you give the same level of support to everyone? Or should it be dependant on how much impact the whistle blowing has? Does it make a difference if you only blow the whistle when caught verses people who just come forward? What about if a rider is retiring, do they become part of the team management? What happens if too many people come forward?
User avatar Not Riding Enough
Junior Member
 
Posts: 282
Joined: 03 Jun 2009 10:19

08 Jun 2009 17:36

Parrot23 wrote:Why not have support, protection, and plea bargains for doping whistleblowers?

You would think UCI and the national federations should have a systematic, coordinated program like this to break omerta and the crucifixion of dopers who come clean.

Create a reserved pro tour spot for a quasi-official team of former dopers and whistleblowers, publicly supported with the money of UCI, national federations, and wealthy donors/sponsors (e.g. people like Doug Ellis of Garmin).

It might even be cool for co's or sponsors like Amgen, and legal supplement co's, and health food co's, what have you, who want to create a market niche of fair play and healthy living.

Let's see Jaksche, Heras, Manzano, Kohl, Schumacher, even Ricco (once he's done his time), and there are others, at the entire pro tour, with guaranteed spots/salaries. Would be intriguing/hilarious to watch all these guys on one team (a protected one), and a baseline point of comparison versus the omerta stooges who continue undetected. :D

*Team should be subject to biological passport thing, new types of dope tests, the whole nine yards. UCI and WADA could use them for testing purposes (new ones or new protocols), whatever. It's fair.

"No Way Jose".

I think all problems start with the UCI. Once we clean them up we can re-engineer the doping procedures, programs and anything we want to.
Thanks.
User avatar Escarabajo
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,337
Joined: 16 Apr 2009 18:38
Location: USA - Central Time

08 Jun 2009 17:41

Because the UCI is a corrupt organization, that has no interest in cleaning up the sport. They had great opportunities to do so in 1998 and 2006, and they still do today, with every new affair and positive test.
They simply don't want to tackle the problem of doping.
Whistleblowers are outcasts, and once you tell the truth, your career is pretty much over. Even if you don't tell all, you might get blackballed if Pat feels like it (Heras, Gil).
Had they given Anne Greiper free reign to clean up the sport, today we'd have a much cleaner peloton. And no, as so many pointed out, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference on TV between 48 and 55 kph. The fans would still be there, and we'd have a lot more sponsors ready to invest.
I'm all for reduced sentences, plea bargains, protection for whistleblowers... But with the current clique in power, I can't see things changing any time soon.
I keep following the sport in the hope things will change. If they don't, I'll still go out on my bike and enjoy riding.
User avatar Zoncolan
Member
 
Posts: 1,467
Joined: 01 Apr 2009 14:57

08 Jun 2009 18:22

The UCI shouldn't be anywhere near it except to give money and a licence etc.

If there was more whistleblowing wouldn't that force a change, including the UCI?

What are some of the other ways that full whistleblowing can be encouraged and the whistleblower protected or at least supported?

How about employing them in an anti-doping education program in schools or sports accademies? Although parents may not like the idea of someone who took anything trying to educate their kids not too.

Some of them might be over the whole sport. What non-cycling reated stuff could be done?
User avatar Not Riding Enough
Junior Member
 
Posts: 282
Joined: 03 Jun 2009 10:19

08 Jun 2009 18:48

The UCI should have done what it could to get Jaksche on a team. It did not and that says a lot.

Despite whatever the UCI may or may not do, how will anyone stop a rider from having a hard time in the peloton? If the rest of the mafioso on wheels feel that a rider has betrayed them then that rider will have a hard time. It will be a poisoned work environment that can only be changed if a signficant percentage of the riders are clean.
"Listen, my son. Trust no one! You can count on no one but yourself. Improve your skills, son. Harden your body. Become a number one man. Do not ever let anyone beat you!" -- Gekitotsu! Satsujin ken
User avatar BroDeal
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,318
Joined: 18 Mar 2009 00:41
Location: Above 5000 feet

08 Jun 2009 20:48

Escarabajo wrote:"No Way Jose".

I think all problems start with the UCI. Once we clean them up we can re-engineer the doping procedures, programs and anything we want to.
Thanks.


BINGO! But even if you dump the uci the next org will be corrupt, and the next and the next.

USADA (the U.S. anti doping agency) is corrupt. Its BIG MONEY and public interest in the form of ad spend and sales that drives Pro Sports. It has nothing to do with a solid level playing field.
User avatar BigBoat
Member
 
Posts: 1,284
Joined: 19 Mar 2009 14:27

08 Jun 2009 21:13

BroDeal wrote:Despite whatever the UCI may or may not do, how will anyone stop a rider from having a hard time in the peloton? If the rest of the mafioso on wheels feel that a rider has betrayed them then that rider will have a hard time. It will be a poisoned work environment that can only be changed if a signficant percentage of the riders are clean.


That is a big problem; it's the same in govt. bureaucracies.

People like George Stigler have argued that regulatory agencies (qua the UCI) become captured by the industries they regulate. The agencies can harm consumers (qua fans) and oddly give monopoly powers to producers (teams, i.e. the power to exclude riders who are caught and then talk).

Problem may be what's called "moral hazard": the more riders talk and come clean, the worse the UCI's image problem (a monopoly regulatory agency), because its testing will look inadequate and cycling look like the pits (re McQuaid's on Boonen's coke use supposedly harming the "image" of cycling, LOL).:D Look how fast he tried to shut Kohl up. So it's prob. not in UCI's interests to really clean up the problem, just to manage it at a low level.

But there must be a way of rewarding those who talk. A punitive regime never works with illegal drugs (like coke) or even in counter-insurgency, where you need the "locals" to talk. The latter only works when the locals feel safe, that they can cooperate with authorities vs. insurgents (qua the dope mafia). Drug testers/auths. should read the manuals on counter-insurgency and how the U.S. turned their "problem" around in Iraq (Petraeus and his new U.S. counter-insurgency manual for the U.S. army). It's a similar sort of problem: making the locals feel safe and getting them to talk and assume responsibility.

Riders don't feel it's safe to talk, and those who win don't want to, obviously. So what can be changed?
User avatar Parrot23
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,067
Joined: 11 Apr 2009 00:57

08 Jun 2009 22:20

Parrot23 wrote:Why is there no whistleblower protection?


Because the Doper Protection Program is much more powerful and has made the "whistleblower protection program" null in void. (psst Omerta)

Then again cement shoes may come into vogue soon enough. ;)
User avatar ElChingon
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,918
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 03:19
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI

09 Jun 2009 00:34

ElChingon wrote:Then again cement shoes may come into vogue soon enough. ;)


Thanks for that :D Lots of laughs on this forum.

P.S. Just wait till Lance and Hinault go at it on the podium on witness protection (meaning elimination) issues, LOL. All that muscle training in the garage this winter (for the world middle-weight title?) will finally come in handy.

Badger may bring his pitchfork from the farm, or start tossing manure.

Winner takes the "aggressivity" jersey (this is one of them Giro "eye-talian" prizes). "The Killer" awards it.
User avatar Parrot23
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,067
Joined: 11 Apr 2009 00:57

09 Jun 2009 00:50

Parrot23 wrote:P.S. Just wait till Lance and Hinault go at it on the podium on witness protection (meaning elimination) issues, LOL. All that muscle training in the garage this winter (for the world middle-weight title?) will finally come in handy.


I hope Hinault make Lance pick up any award off the floor when presenting, opps I dropped it :D, better yet if he never get to make it to the podium :p
User avatar ElChingon
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,918
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 03:19
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI

Cycling: one of the greatest Ponzi schemes in the sporting world!

09 Jun 2009 01:46

Cycling teams operate similar to a Ponzi scheme. What makes the Ponzi scheme so effective, is the victims are unwitting participants who actually believe they'll get that same return on investment as the guy at the top:

There are the "quick return on investment" cyclists:
either running on unbelievable athletic prowess alone, or the ones most likely to use some sort performance enhancing to achieve their victories.

There are "secondary investor" cyclists:
the ones assisting the first "investor" with achieving his goal while simultaneously bankrupting themselves (in all possible ways) for the benefit of the self-serving dude at the top.

A cynical view to be sure, but I'd bet money that some teams operate this very way. I'm not naming any names, I'm just sayin'... It's a shame these "secondary investors" don't realize their predicament. By the time they realize they've been swindled by the best, it's too late for whistle blowing and the victims are too effing embarrassed to admit they've been conned by the very best.
User avatar tifosa
Member
 
Posts: 503
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 01:09

09 Jun 2009 05:14

UCI is too corrupt.
Omerta too strong.
Nothing can be done to change it.

Certainly, if even people who actually want it to change have this attitude then nothing will change.
User avatar Not Riding Enough
Junior Member
 
Posts: 282
Joined: 03 Jun 2009 10:19

09 Jun 2009 06:03

tifosa wrote:Cycling: one of the greatest Ponzi schemes in the sporting world!


Name something that doesn't work that way.
User avatar ElChingon
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,918
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 03:19
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI

09 Jun 2009 12:59

ElChingon wrote:Name something that doesn't work that way.


Love doesn't work that way.

Hope, on the other hand has failed many.
User avatar tifosa
Member
 
Posts: 503
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 01:09

09 Jun 2009 15:26

I think a whistleblower protection plan that protected a rider and forced a team to sign/keep the rider would not likely work. But what could work is forcing the sponsor/team to keep paying him his salary for a certain amount of time allowing him to survive a period of unemployment and transition into another career, or even working his way back into professional cycling once everyone gets over his whistleblowing.

I agree that the UCI is conflicted on the issue of doping enforcement, but to say they don't want a clean sport seems a little ridiculous. I think the UCI would love a clean sport, but they are very aware of the reality that that is likely to never happen, but they have to be seen doing something, such as a the mysterious biological passport program.

Unfortunately, as the dopers will likely always be one step ahead of the detection. So what does the UCI do? They have to protect the product to a certain degree and that may involve some tacit acknowledgment that they are not going to catch all the dopers, but if they can catch some that is good enough. Perhaps the UCI should not be involved in testing at all and just let it be handled by a third party, such as WADA, thus removing the UCI from its conflicted position.
JayZee
Junior Member
 
Posts: 133
Joined: 08 May 2009 15:19

Why is there no whistleblower protection?

09 Jun 2009 15:28

Do you mean people like Vinnie and Guido? Come on let's be realistic about this. A simple positive/non-negative drug test can't even be kept secret from the press. A whistle blower would be front page news, for months. Until the cycling union, I use that term loosely, gets it s*** together whistle blowers have no where to hide.
Besides how many are going to blow the whistle?
Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades. - Eddy Merckx
User avatar quadsRme
Junior Member
 
Posts: 230
Joined: 02 Apr 2009 16:47
Location: in a house

09 Jun 2009 18:58

tifosa wrote:Love doesn't work that way.

Hope, on the other hand has failed many.


Your love statement must truly mark you as a female :p
User avatar ElChingon
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,918
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 03:19
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI

10 Jun 2009 03:01

ElChingon wrote:Your love statement must truly mark you as a female :p


Female, and loving it. ;)
User avatar tifosa
Member
 
Posts: 503
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 01:09


Return to Professional road racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandre B., Eshnar, Flax_Generous, Google Adsense [Bot], Hakkapelit, Iguana, Pantani_lives, Pricey_sky, rick james, Singer01, tobydawq and 53 guests

Back to top