• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Dopers get to do 2012

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
Visit site
... I have just been listening to Colin Moynihan, who won a bronze medal for swimming in the 2004 Olympics, being interviewed on BBC Radio 4.

He argued against athletes being allowed to compete in the Olympics after a doping ban because they had cheated their team mates out of the chance of competing/winning in the Olympics and other competitions, and that the Olympics are different because they are the pinnacle of sport.

I have never heard or read any cyclist speaking out so vehemently against doping. Makes you think ...

Before Moynihan, someone from ?BOA was interviewed and said that hw was confident that the BOA ban would continue and that the majority of UK athletes supported this.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
Visit site
Square-pedaller said:
As a British person, I am proud of the fact that UK athletes are banned permanently from competing in the Olympics if they are caught doping, and will be disappointed if this is revoked.

I do not want even ex-dopers to represent my country at the Olympics, especially if my tax money is being used to support them.

Do you consider your punting on the National Lottery that provides funding to UK sport, particularly cycling, is your tax money? :)
 
Jul 13, 2009
283
0
0
Visit site
Square-pedaller said:
... I have just been listening to Colin Moynihan, who won a bronze medal for swimming in the 2004 Olympics, being interviewed on BBC Radio 4.

He argued against athletes being allowed to compete in the Olympics after a doping ban because they had cheated their team mates out of the chance of competing/winning in the Olympics and other competitions, and that the Olympics are different because they are the pinnacle of sport.

I have never heard or read any cyclist speaking out so vehemently against doping. Makes you think ...

Before Moynihan, someone from ?BOA was interviewed and said that hw was confident that the BOA ban would continue and that the majority of UK athletes supported this.

I think you might have got that mixed up. I think the Swimmer was Steve Parry and the bloke from the BOA was Moynihan.
 
May 24, 2010
855
1
0
Visit site
Heard something on radio on the way home regarding the ruling and the theory is that the IOC is a signatory of the WADA code therefore has no jurisdiction to add sanctions to what is proscribed in the WADA code, ie if an athlete is banned for two years the IOC and from our perspective in Britain the BOA cannot then ban or sanction further.

While I kind of agree with the BOA theory I'd be all in favour if they hadn't bowed to the O'horror woman and the high chance she had of gold in Beijing, that was shameful. Rules are rules and BOA and IOC need to respect that.

If all these federations and association have signed on the dotted line then they have to respect the code and it's ramifications, whatever they may be.
 
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
Visit site
Velodude said:
Do you consider your punting on the National Lottery that provides funding to UK sport, particularly cycling, is your tax money? :)

I take the point you're making. On the other hand, in the end the government gets a certain amount of income, and spends it on a range of different things. The lottery is just one source of income, and if the money isn't spent on sponsoring sport it would be spent on other things that the government spends money on. Similarly if there was no lottery income there would be some sports sponsorship from taxation.

Thanks to those who pointed out I can't tell my Colin Moynihan from my Steve Parry :eek:
 
Millar's response is interesting. On the one hand, I agree, everyone should be governed by 1 set of rules and each case handled individually. We don't need 4 different organizations, Countries etc...levying penalties randomly and contradictory to other organizations.

Yet, I find it interesting how he acts like his doping was just a "mistake" and that "education" and second chances are important for first time offenders (what he means if first-time caught).

Once again, another doper finally caught stone cold, and pleas ignorance that he is just uneducated and wasn't aware of what he was taking....yeah right.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
1
0
Visit site
Square-pedaller said:
... I have just been listening to Colin Moynihan, who won a bronze medal for swimming in the 2004 Olympics, being interviewed on BBC Radio 4.

He argued against athletes being allowed to compete in the Olympics after a doping ban because they had cheated their team mates out of the chance of competing/winning in the Olympics and other competitions, and that the Olympics are different because they are the pinnacle of sport.

I have never heard or read any cyclist speaking out so vehemently against doping. Makes you think ...
Before Moynihan, someone from ?BOA was interviewed and said that hw was confident that the BOA ban would continue and that the majority of UK athletes supported this.

Some cyclists (?) feel they are being cheated out of winning and being competitive if their team mates aren't doping with them. Ring a bell?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
zigmeister said:
Millar's response is interesting. On the one hand, I agree, everyone should be governed by 1 set of rules and each case handled individually. We don't need 4 different organizations, Countries etc...levying penalties randomly and contradictory to other organizations.

Yet, I find it interesting how he acts like his doping was just a "mistake" and that "education" and second chances are important for first time offenders (what he means if first-time caught).

Once again, another doper finally caught stone cold, and pleas ignorance that he is just uneducated and wasn't aware of what he was taking....yeah right.

Millar hardly pleas ignorance. He was well aware of what he was taking. I doubt though he knew that years later there would be an additional penalty.....not that it would have stopped him
 
auscyclefan94 said:
This is a good thing. Once you have served your suspension you should be free to race whatever race you like. Logic prevails.

This is a disgrace, the Olympics should be off limits for all former dopers in my opinion. The current rules should not apply to the Olympics. It is disgusting to see former cheaters compete in the finest of sporting event.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,392
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
Millar hardly pleas ignorance. He was well aware of what he was taking. I doubt though he knew that years later there would be an additional penalty.....not that it would have stopped him

The BOA by-law was in place long before Millar was bike racing. It's been there for about 20 years. It wasn't well known until Dwayne Chambers came along, so I expect he was quite probably ignorant of the by-law itself.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Visit site
Walkman said:
This is a disgrace, the Olympics should be off limits for all former dopers in my opinion. The current rules should not apply to the Olympics. It is disgusting to see former cheaters compete in the finest of sporting event.
I don't really have a problem with it - they doped, they got caught, they were sanctioned and paid the price, don't see any reason to keep on punishing them.

Besides, is it any different than allowing suspected dopers like Contador to compete? Personally, I'd prefer to watch a guy who got caught doping and did his time than a guy who most people suspect is currently doping.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Walkman said:
This is a disgrace, the Olympics should be off limits for all former dopers in my opinion. The current rules should not apply to the Olympics. It is disgusting to see former cheaters compete in the finest of sporting event.

That's an interesting thought, and one that the "one set of rules" argument ignores.

Unfortunately, the idea that the Olympics are somehow above professional cycling fails on a number of fronts:
- Various sporting bodies are seriously inbred. To wit, McQuaid is a member, and Verbruggen an honorary member, of the IOC.
- Professionals compete in the Olympics. If it were still a best-of-the-best of amateur sports, the "Olympics above all else" line of thinking would make more sense. But that ain't the case. The same people who dope their way through professional bike races all season race at the Olympics. Same dopers, same rules. Remove the professionals and I for one will take the Olympics much more seriously.
- Sadly, the IOC and many national Olympic committees set the definitive standard for corruption. Salt Lake City selection...Keirin the newest Olympic cycling discipline...Denial of China's environmental and human rights issues...the list goes on

The 'Olympic Movement' (I always snicker when an IOC member uses that in the media) is all about money. Same as professional cycling. If the IOC and the Olympics themselves were managed ethically, honestly, and transparently, the "Finest sporting event' argument would hold water. Thanks to those in charge, it doesn't

Same dopers = same rules
 
Thanks for those links.

I didn't realise there had been 27 sucessful appeals against the life bans(since 1992). Thats so high as to make the ban a mockery in itself.

Thats just 5 olympic cycles, so on average 5+ succesful appeals per cycle.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
The head of UKAD says BOA lifetime doping ban is impeding their work

http://www.insidethegames.biz/lates...ping-ban-is-impeding-our-work-says-ukad-chief

Here is the CAS ruling. It leaves no doubt that any athlete that brings a case would easily win.

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5314/5048/0/Final20award202422.pdf

The smart thing would be for the IOC and BOC to rescind the ban and save the legal fees

Ya' got that right! As of Dec 2010,
UKAD Article You Linked said:
There have been 27 successful appeals against the lifetime ban over the last 18 years
 
Just finished reading the CAS case.

The first general appeal to CAS about this BOA rule will easily get overturned on the same principles.

BOA needs to rescind its rule.
I don't quite know how I feel about that, but its clear thats the action that has to happen.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
ramjambunath said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/italian-federation-cas-ruling-changes-nothing

I think that the wording may have to change for the Italian federation to continue to enforce this. If they continue with the stance that past dopers are not picked they could well face lawsuits but if they don't pick past dopers on the pretext that they aren't suitable candidates then I'm sure nothing can be done by any cyclist.

The CAS ruling is very clear that he is wrong when it comes to the Olympics. They may be able to keep the rule for the Worlds and National championships.
 
FCI saying they'll continue to not select dopers.

I mean this ruling isn't going to force anyone to pick dopers is it? They could just pick a team and make up some reason why Di Luca, Basso etc. were left out.
Nothing anyone can do to stop that.
 
Jul 4, 2011
1,899
0
0
Visit site
luckyboy said:
FCI saying they'll continue to not select dopers.

I mean this ruling isn't going to force anyone to pick dopers is it? They could just pick a team and make up some reason why Di Luca, Basso etc. were left out.
Nothing anyone can do to stop that.

Yes, that's exactly what I said but I don't think they can continue to say we will not pick dopers for the Olympics.