Interesting idea

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Was that in the press or on the box? Can you send me the link

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/life-after-rugby-stardom-2951929

 

[Bala Verde]

Dunno if I mentioned this before in another thread.

What if the UCI - assuming they're keen on improving the sport - use the money 'donated' by the riders, taken from their wages or money from the teams to participate in the blood passport, to set up some kind of a 'witness protection' program.

The UCI starts a cycling team for riders who come clean. The team and cyclists who break the Omerta, get a contract with the team and receive a salary that is basically funded by other teams/rider's salary, in return for their depositions/declarations.

You got a roster of 22-26 riders who broke the silence, and can still continue doing what they loved doing, while not being financially harmed or socially stigmatised. On top of that they have to do some stints/ads/promos/workshops to educate young cyclists.

In the end, they don't have to go back to paint houses, and they promote a clean sport.

I failed to mention this but the idea described above - yes by me - could be a catalyst to make doping even more expensive and less widespread.

As a user you know your usage has to be concealed from the public eye. The best doping is therefore very expensive and not easy accessible to all riders. If part of your wages - or some other construction where money is pooled together for the benefit of a UCI 'witness protection team' - supports 'moles', you are increasing the cost of doping even more.

Secondly, I am assuming that doping is continued partly due to a system or community facilitating the use doping - a self regulating infrastructure exists - in terms of quantities and dosages, transportation, out of competition training sessions together, discussions on where, how what. Trust is key to induction, spread and distribution. Perhaps by supporting whistleblowers, you diminish the level of trust, and if they can't trust you or anyone, they'll not let you enter their 'community/culture'. Hence, you are somehow stopping the spread, hence continuation of doping amongst youngsters?

There was a good article in this month's economist about 'decriminalisation of drug usage in Portugal'. Possession and usage are still penalizable offenses, but it is pulled out of the criminal (juridical) sphere, because the dissuasion panel/comission you need to appear before after an arrest, decides on your case. The panel is not focusing on punishing you, but treating you inste. So they try to assist addicts by offering them medical, psychological rehab help instead of making them appear before a judge and sending them to jail. One of the experiences was that more addicts dare to seek treatment, because they know they are not committing a criminal offense that will land them in jail.

Treating, not punishing

 

[kiwirider]

There was a good article in this month's economist about 'decriminalisation of drug usage in Portugal'. Possession and usage are still penalizable offenses, but it is pulled out of the criminal (juridical) sphere, because the dissuasion panel/comission you need to appear before after an arrest, decides on your case. The panel is not focusing on punishing you, but treating you inste. So they try to assist addicts by offering them medical, psychological rehab help instead of making them appear before a judge and sending them to jail. One of the experiences was that more addicts dare to seek treatment, because they know they are not committing a criminal offense that will land them in jail.

Treating, not punishing

Awesome link! Thanks for posting it. It covers the sorts of points I've been trying to argue on here for a few posts. Here's hoping that it encourages a couple more people to look beyond sanctions and penalties to try to identify the true root causes of PED use.

 

[tifosa]

The lure of future money will not entice a cyclist to ride straight. Dopers of all ilk look for the quick fix; they want high-risk, short-term or immediate gain. It been this way since the inception of recreational drug use; it's been this way since the inception of pro cycling.

Cyclists that dope could give a **** about escrow accounts. It's all about their unchecked need for glory - cost be damned.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Awesome link! Thanks for posting it. It covers the sorts of points I've been trying to argue on here for a few posts. Here's hoping that it encourages a couple more people to look beyond sanctions and penalties to try to identify the true root causes of PED use.

I am one of those in favor of higher penalties in particular longer bans on riders - however this is in conjunction with many other deterrents.

Kiwirider - I believe we are almost of the same opinions on how to tackle this issue and I agree a socioeconomic study would be interesting - however with the UCI in charge there is little possibility of this happening soon.

One of the biggest problems in Pro Cycling is that there is already a doping culture within the sport. This has been in place for many years and there are many of the 'old-gaurd' still involved in Cycling - they are protected by the Omerta within the sport.
When a rider gets busted there is usually little consequence on the team management , the DS, Doctors etc.

My reasoning on a higher penalty for PED use in Pro Cycling is more to break the omerta within cycling. My view is the standard ban for using PED's should be 4 years - however a rider who co-operates can get a reduction in the sanction to 2 years.

This I believe would be a significant incentive for riders to offer up information and would be a way of catching and removing those who are running the doping practices in many teams.

*Also should we take this discussion back to the "BikePure" thread - as I feel it was an excellent thread with many good ideas there.

 

[craptastic]

One of the biggest problems in Pro Cycling is that there is already a doping culture within the sport. This has been in place for many years and there are many of the 'old-gaurd' still involved in Cycling - they are protected by the Omerta within the sport.
When a rider gets busted there is usually little consequence on the team management , the DS, Doctors etc..

I know this is a bit unrealistic but maybe a another way is that if a someone tests positive, the entire team gets suspended. This includes the team management not just the cyclists. So managers are banned from working with a team for a set time. 3 strikes and managers are banned from the sport for life. Whistleblower policy to encourage reporting violations of others before a positive test. Might make the riders police each other because they're at greater risk to be suspended if one of their team members goes rogue. Might make them report managers and doctors and start cleaning out the old guard. Sponsors might be stricter about funding since their team won't be at the starting line of races if someone tests positive.

A bit unpractical to implement in the real world but just a thought. Also assumes the UCI and WADA are credible and can't be bought so again not entirely realistic.

Just lobbing that out there.

 

[kiwirider]

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/life-after-rugby-stardom-2951929

Cool thanks ... now I've just got to get the damn link to work - possibly a Mac thing or just a slow link back to NZ ....