Kathusha pays De Lucas fíne for doping

[Per Bolvig Hansen]

Kathusha pays De Lucas fíne for doping

It should be banned for teams to pay fines for riders who convicted of doping.
It must be the rider himself who pays his fine and it may need to be dokumented throug tax information .
That teams pay these fines is a new bad habit of cycling.
Per

 

[ElChingon]

I see nothing wrong with it. They pay his salary which is used to pay his expenses, the fine being one of them, this way it goes directly to the UCI, no middle man, no late fee, no excuses of a confusion in payment, etc.

Its paid off, lets race is all Katusha is saying.

 

[hrotha]

Hypocritical as it was, I kinda miss the days of the ethics code.

 

[spalco]

What difference does it make? I'm assuming they'll just deduct it from his salary or something.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I thought he was riding for free this year?

Maybe I missed an update.

 

[JPM London]

Well, if his salary is the same as the fine he's kinda racing for free...

Don't forget the UCI rules - he cannot not have a salary.

 

[ferryman]

It should be banned for teams to pay fines for riders who convicted of doping.
It must be the rider himself who pays his fine and it may need to be dokumented throug tax information .
That teams pay these fines is a new bad habit of cycling.
Per

+1 Per.

If this is true I don't like the message this sends out at all.

 

[roundabout]

So much for the melodrama of Di Luca's return announcement.

 

[Topangarider]

What difference does it make? I'm assuming they'll just deduct it from his salary or something.

If the fine is paid by the team and then deducted from his salary then he's paying the fine with pre-tax dollars. Not sure where he pays his income taxes but I am guessing that this saves him
lots of money.

 

[JPM London]

Personally I don't see the problem.

There are two parts to this...

1) A ban. Now, you can easily argue that he didn't quite get the ban that he probably should have, but nonetheless he got a ban and served it. With that he's served his time and is free to ride again pending number 2:

2) A fine. In order to ride under UCI he's got to pay a fine. Now here you could easily argue that a lot of other riders have either not had to pay a fine after a suspension or been asked to pay one and challenged it. Nevertheless, there is and cannot be any sort of stipulation as to where the money comes from.
What would be the point? That the money to pay the fine is earned in a "sufficiently difficult" manner?

Have you considered turning it upside down? He's actually not run away from the fine. Now, you can argue (as someone else did) that the ethics of hiring a rider who's just back from a ban goes against what the teams agreed a few years ago, but that's got nothing to do with the fine in itself.

 

[Ferminal]

Good on them... sounds like the people you would want to work for.

 

[ElChingon]

Good on them... sounds like the people you would want to work for.

Right, at least they believe in him enough to pay his fines. No matter how wrong or what kind of message it may send to some people, they're sending the message that he's going to race for Kathusha in 2011.

 

[Merckx index]

It should be banned for teams to pay fines for riders who were convicted of doping while racing for another team.
It must be the former team itself that pays that fine and it may need to be dokumented throug tax information .
That teams pay these fines only makes sense, since they usually instigate the doping, certainly approve of it, and stand to benefit mightily from it.
Per

I think this is what you meant?

 

[barn yard]

for the russians, handing over 8,000 euro is about as big a deal as asking our own employers to leave 5 mins early on a friday

 

[JPM London]

I think this is what you meant?

I agree far more with your version, although I'd say that instead of moving the liability from the rider to the team, there should be liability on both parties.

One can say that if the rider is charging on their own, then it's unfair to punish the team if it's not knowing about it, but as it is now there's too little incentive for the teams to fight doping.

A bit like safety in workplaces. I think in many countries nowadays a company is liable if an employee disregards safety regulations - no matter if the company knows about it or not. The company is supposed to enforce the safety regulations and is liable for the employee's (idiotic) actions.

 

[python]

It should be banned for teams to pay fines for riders who convicted of doping.
It must be the rider himself who pays his fine and it may need to be dokumented throug tax information .
That teams pay these fines is a new bad habit of cycling.
Per

congratulations on joining the forum but your 1st and only post appears baseless.

not saying it's untrue and no one would be surprized but i tried to find a source (because you apparently not provided it) and i can't find anything...neither the cn article nor anything else in print support your assertions. they only state 'diluca paid'

i search katusha's site, the uci site, tuttobici, gazzetta della sport, and some blogs.

please reference your source.

 

[fatandfast]

It should be banned for teams to pay fines for riders who convicted of doping.
It must be the rider himself who pays his fine and it may need to be dokumented throug tax information .
That teams pay these fines is a new bad habit of cycling.
Per

I agree the team should give the rider his paycheck and he should go to the bank and cash it. Then deposit the money in his own account and then write another personal check for the amount of the fine. I can see were this makes a huge difference..I think the rider should also have to file a tax return with the UCI and any big race he wants to do. I think Prudhomme and Zomegnan should really go deep into the riders finances..I think the riders should have to show a rec for anything they buy over 100 dollars just in case somebody is giving them side cash for an illegal sunglasses sponsorship

 

[flicker]

I heard in 2009 or 2010 this team was one doping positive from becoming redundant. Haven't Katusha had quite a few positives in the past?

 

[BotanyBay]

If the team pays it, it's only that much less they'll have to pay him in salary, so whatever. No biggie.

 

[luckyboy]

Are fines consistent with salary? Because these seem all over the place. I mean, surely Frei has paid less % of his salary than most of the others here seem to have. Also that would mean Astarloza and Di Luca were on similar salaries

Di Luca paid his €173,600
Vino didn't have to pay €1.2million
Astarloa refused to pay €35,000
the Szczepaniaks got huge bans and about €1,000 fines
Astarloza had to pay €154,570
Bosisio - €9,625
Nozal - €17,500
Colom - €46,958
Jimenez Sanchez - €8,400
Frei - €1,500
Serrano - €23,100
De Bonis - €13,750

Contador's one year ban means he doesn't have to pay anything (would've been €3.1million).

I have no idea what fines Pfannberger, Lhotellerie, Fuyu Li, Caucchioli and Axelsson got.

 

[rxgqgxnyfz]

congratulations on joining the forum but your 1st and only post appears baseless.

i search katusha's site, the uci site, tuttobici, gazzetta della sport, and some blogs.

please reference your source.

And from my side none of usual russian news sites has said anything about it.

So yeah.

SAUCE or BS