Arguments against life ban for first offence

[Cycle Chic]

Doping Agencies

Doping Agencies

The problem seems to be financial outlay for WADA. Simply not enough manpower or money to impose the rules.

So how about a privately funded Company/ies to do it...agencies.

Each sponsor of a team puts in a percentage of their backing to fund these companies.

If a Company's work is testing and catching dopers there's incentive to do a good job and get results.

 

[hrotha]

An antidoping agency that ultimately depends on the teams for its survival. Yeah that'll be independent alright, no conflict of interest.

 

[Cycle Chic]

No..it Could be funded by the teams and the agencies would be paid by WADA.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

IMO there needs to be a better incentive to collect intelligence, and more emphasis on a detective style intelligence approach to anti-doping.

Difficult when it's an international problem with little criminal consequence in most jurisdictions.

edit: I don't mean it needs to be criminalised, just that the intelligence approach should be used more, if resources permit

 

[Almeisan]

This is like politicians promising harder punishment of crime.

 

[laurel1969]

This is like politicians promising harder punishment of crime.

If that is true, then who are the politicians and more importantly who is the constituency to whom they are making promises?

Is it the teams?
Is it the sponsors?
Is it individual riders?
Or is it the spectators?

 

[Almeisan]

Thinking that harsher punishment will reduce the rate of offense.

 

[laurel1969]

When politicians say that, they don't necessarily believe it but they say it to appeal to their constituency voters.

Who is the constituency in cycling? Not sure its the fans. It might be clean teams and riders.

 

[Catwhoorg]

The single biggest argument against automatic life bans for a first offense is that it empowers doctors and team leaders/bullies to enforce the omerta.

"If I go down, you all go down with me."

Some sort of reduced sentence for co-operation and providing intelligence has to be part of the solution.

 

[Almeisan]

When politicians say that, they don't necessarily believe it but they say it to appeal to their constituency voters.

Who is the constituency in cycling? Not sure its the fans. It might be clean teams and riders.

The only analogy is that it is wrong in both accounts. Same as citizens who call for harsher punishment.

 

[RedheadDane]

My personal argument, which I've seen expressed around here, is the basic notion that everybody deserves a second chance.
Sometimes a person makes a really bad choice and - maybe after having some time to think about it (ie. a shorter ban) - honestly regrets it.
In fact I'd much rather have a rule-set which allows people who regret to come back, even if it means letting some who doesn't back into the club (and come on; those are probably just gonna dope again, at which point a lifetime ban might be in order, since they clearly didn't learn the lesson the first time), than I'd have a rule-set which booted everybody in their first offence, with the risk of permanently losing Someone who really regrets, and could have been a valuable team member.

I definitely agree that each case needs to be look at with more individuality. It has changed, but honestly; for a while it seemed like everything was given a 2-year-ban.

 

[robertmooreheadlane]

How about dealing with it on a team basis
You employ the rider and you are responsible for him/ her and their behaviour
First offence on a team and the rider gets a ban and the team gets to miss one of the GT's that year. Second positive and the team gets to miss all GT's
third offence and the team loses its pro tour license

Once the money men start to get hit in the pocket - watch the teams clean the sport up themselves.

Problem with this is that it will pit the UCI against ASO and would need those two to be on the same side which has rarely happened.

 

[The Hitch]

First offence on a team and the rider gets a ban and the team gets to miss one of the GT's that year.

On Lotto, BMC and some other teams, this will actually encourage doping

 

[RiccoDinko]

Negative on Life 1st time, chance for ingesting wrongly.

The Riccodinko Scale 1st offense.

6mth-2yrs on substances like clem, inhaler over usage , case by case

1-3yrs on Blood Passport, case by case

5yrs on EPO, Blood Doping, hardcore positives

 

[Archibald]

How about dealing with it on a team basis
You employ the rider and you are responsible for him/ her and their behaviour
First offence on a team and the rider gets a ban and the team gets to miss one of the GT's that year. Second positive and the team gets to miss all GT's
third offence and the team loses its pro tour license

Once the money men start to get hit in the pocket - watch the teams clean the sport up themselves.

Problem with this is that it will pit the UCI against ASO and would need those two to be on the same side which has rarely happened.

Saunier Duval, anyone? Team went under and all lost their jobs due to the stupidity of one member...

 

[sponsor]

Thinking that harsher punishment will reduce the rate of offense.

A team benefits from the PED use/cheating of the one, regardless of if the teammates know about it or not.

For any team sports that benefit from cheating using PEDs or anything violent, or significant cheating (think biting an opponent) the whole team should be penalized and results nullified.

Teammates likely know as well as anyone what their teammates are doing. Riders do have some choice on who they ride for, and I believe the riders have a pretty good idea what they are getting into, before they do it.

I see two possible outcomes from this.

If cycling is primarily clean, this would help ensure the team was clean.
If cycling is primarily dirty, likely the team would remain dirty.

In either case, penalizing the team seems appropriate.

 

[Benotti69]

Saunier Duval, anyone? Team went under and all lost their jobs due to the stupidity of one member...

Yeah Millar ratting out the team sank Duval.........

 

[Archibald]

Yeah Millar ratting out the team sank Duval.........

thought sponsor pulled the plug immediately upon Ricco's bust and team folded, no?

 

[sida-mot]

Cheating professional athletes have violated the fundamental ethics of their trade. They should not be allowed back - same as we treat most other instances in society that is associated with a certain code of conduct.

Proved systematic doping or doped beyond reasonable doubt should equal life time ban from ever working in sport ever again.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Cheating professional athletes have violated the fundamental ethics of their trade. They should not be allowed back - same as we treat most other instances in society that is associated with a certain code of conduct.

Proved systematic doping or doped beyond reasonable doubt should equal life time ban from ever working in sport ever again.

but won't solve the problem.

sanctions are meaningless without adequate detection.

 

[mrhender]

Life bans for first offence could result in:

1. An elite of dopers decimating clean talent
2. Even more sophisticated doping meassures
3. Increase corruption
4. possibilty of unjust life-time bans

In my opinion we need help from the dopers to clean up the sport.
Who would be a better detector than experienced offenders...?

Think about it..

Often the people working with preventive meassures in other parts of society, are former "users"..
Why? because they know the game...!

I'd say that there are countless examples of social work dealing with issues the exact same way, and this is not a coincidence..

Why is that Dopers should be forgotten and leave the sport?
I believe they are the only ones able to make a difference...

The key thing is how to make them genuinely cooperate with "pure" intentions.
I don't know the answer, but I do think that demonising this group., suffering and performing under their wrong-doings won't help much..