Kohl lifetime ban

[Magnus]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-given-additional-lifetime-ban

And how will this change things for the better?

Surely this will only help to enforce omerta.

 

[thingswelike]

It does seem odd to focus on the one person recently who seemed to completely spill his guts.
It's basically going to reinforce the opinion that you're better off just denying everything. If he'd done like everyone else or called it a "one time thing", then he would have only been given 2 years.
Very very odd.

 

[Escarabajo]

So here is the Doping Dilemma:

1- If you talk and confess all your doping faults you get a Life Ban.
2- If you talk and confess all your doping faults, but give names and cooperate with authorities you get 4 years and be assured that No Pro-Tour team will ever hire you again.
3- If you don't talk and play stupid but play along with the UCI game that the tests are very good, you get 2 years and probably be back in a Pro-Tour team.

So which one would you pick?

I think we are going in the wrong direction.

 

[hfer07]

this is just another example of stupidity exercised by the Cycling Executive branch-- When Kohl gave up all the info/secrets on doping-he imposed himself a lifetime ban, since nobody in Pro level would ever hire him again after snitching. but I guess the announcement has to be made public to enforce the "fantasy" of tough measurements against doping

 

[Anonymous]

that decision is complete and utter bullsh1t

 

[luckyboy]

"However, during the investigations, Kohl co-operated with all authorities and gave the names of those who had helped him. Under those circumstances, the NADA can shorten the additional ban, which it has done."

 

[Anonymous]

This is exactly the opposite of what needs to happen to people who admit their doping and name names. Yes, he would never have ridden again because he did so and no Pro Tour team would hire him, but it seems strange that their justification was that he admitted doping since at least 2001 and that caused them to impose a lifetime ban. Guess we will hear more Basso excuses from now on.

 

[Benotti69]

the chances of Kohl getting a ride in pro team are nil anyway....unless so called clean teams will give him one...

but why should a rider who doped to a system and then when caught blow the whistle....he loses everything anyway by blabbing because no one who is part of the omerta is going to give them a place on a team...

lifebans should be for second offences...or those caught dealing PEDs to other riders as in the case of LA/Hog...

lifetime bans are good...it really puts the scare on riders...and in the case of Kohl, he co-operated only so much and still got a 4 year ban.

the winds of change appear to be blowing in cycling at the moment with Landisgate, the vuelta ignoring LA/Hogs team and as suggested the TdF might not have invited 'roughshack' either if Landis had spilled the beans before the team invites got sent out..

maybe the vuelta know something is coming down the track and dont want a team with all the bad publicity that is gonna explode with it in their race at the time it happens....

as for Kohl i bet he didn't give a tenth of the info Landis gave..

 

[Magnus]

"However, during the investigations, Kohl co-operated with all authorities and gave the names of those who had helped him. Under those circumstances, the NADA can shorten the additional ban, which it has done."

But wtihout the cooperation, there wouldn't have been an aditional ban.

I suppose it's like when Ricco (at some point in the legal procedures) had his ban shortened by 6 month because he cooperated and given an additional 6 month ban because of the things he admitted cooperating.

 

[roundabout]

Kohl retired in May 2009.

And wasn't the gist of his confession that it was him and his manager and nobody else from Gerolsteiner had anything to do with his doping?

 

[Polish]

Making "deals" with dopers will encourage doping.
Will make the rewards from doping less risky.
Sure, the doper will have some extra record keeping duties to help him snitch if he gets caught, but big deal.

Giving LifeTime Bans will discourage doping.
Politely escort the dopers away from cycling.

How do you think riders feel about lifetime bans for cheaters?
The honest ones will like it!
TP will be twittering a "good riddance" to kohl shortly....

 

[131313]

How do you think riders feel about lifetime bans for cheaters?
The honest ones will like it!

Well, as a clean rider I think it's complete B.S. and I'm really disappointed.

Even more so since he's retired. I don't know what his federation's intentions were, but it sends a message of "keep your mouth shut if you want back in the game".

 

[Polish]

Well, as a clean rider I think it's complete B.S. and I'm really disappointed.

Even more so since he's retired. I don't know what his federation's intentions were, but it sends a message of "keep your mouth shut if you want back in the game".

"keep your mouth shut if you want back in the game"?
Why should we put dopers back in the game? c'mon.

That is a BIG part of the problem.

Forgive the dopers - yes.
And politely escort them from the sport.
"Spend more time with their families" should be the reason for kicking a rider out for BioPassport fail. No big deal.

And Dopers do NOT need to keep their mouths shut.
Dopers can "sing" to their hearts content.
Dopers can name names if they feel so inclined.
They can shout it from the top of rooftops if they want.
While they are cleaning out the chimneys....

 

[spanky wanderlust]

it seems to me that the lifetime ban would have applied to him potentially being in some sort of management position, no? can someone banned for life be a ds down the road, ala bjarne riis, for example? or is this just for riding?

it seems that the federation was at least kind enough to not completely preclude his involvement with a team down the road.

 

[Magnus]

"keep your mouth shut if you want back in the game"?
Why should we put dopers back in the game? c'mon.

Well, it seems to be the reality at the moment.

And given recent history of riders getting caught:
If you want to return to the peloton then you do have to keep yout mouth shut.

 

[MacRoadie]

it seems to me that the lifetime ban would have applied to him potentially being in some sort of management position, no? can someone banned for life be a ds down the road, ala bjarne riis, for example? or is this just for riding?

it seems that the federation was at least kind enough to not completely preclude his involvement with a team down the road.

A good question for Paddy McQuaid.

While you're at it, you can ask him how an athlete, banned from competing in the Olympics, can be elected to a position on the IOC.

I guess apartheid ain't what it used to be...

 

[hrotha]

The UCI is in dire need of a PR crash course.

 

[Ripper]

I still think the UCI are going in the wrong direction. Move quickly on any doping results, publish them, fine the rider and give a brief suspension, but no room for appeal. The monetary and PR hits will do the trick over time if the same riders keep getting popped, and the less severe punishment means you do not have to fight a major legal case every time you line up to 'ban' a big name. I just do not think criminalizing doping is working very well.

 

[Dewulf]

Agreed with 90% of the posts here - coming down hard on someone who fully fessed up is not the message we want to give to riders.

Also though, i think the decision to hand out a heavier penalty because Kohl had been doping for years is missing the point. We don't know/can't prove that riders busted for "intending" to dope for example, were not actually doping for years. We do know they were prepared to cross that line, and really, all of their prior results have to be regarded as potentially suspect. Especially if they're not forthcoming with other details on their illegal activities.

As per earlier comments, i think life ban should be for repeat offenders and providers. Even without naming names Kohl should be treated as per Basso, and with the snitching, should be treated more leniently (though 2 years should at least be a minimum).

Perhaps if bans were for 5 years, reducible to 2 years for concrete information leading to further convictions (of riders, doctors, providers, whoever). Saw that suggested on another forum, relatively new here so I spose it's probably been mentioned already, but it's certainly what I'd like to see happen. Enough to break the omerta? Maybe, maybe not. But 5 years out would be the end of a lot of careers realistically, and that might make a difference.

 

[Benotti69]

A good question for Paddy McQuaid.

While you're at it, you can ask him how an athlete, banned from competing in the Olympics, can be elected to a position on the IOC.

I guess apartheid ain't what it used to be...

Exaclty Paddy McQuack banned form Olympics, head of UCI, it does not compute does it.....

 

[Polish]

You guys realize this "lifetime" ban is NOT from the UCI.
(Read the article)

Isn't his UCI ban set to end soon?

 

[MacRoadie]

Exaclty Paddy McQuack banned form Olympics, head of UCI, it does not compute does it.....

 

[MacRoadie]

You guys realize this "lifetime" ban is NOT from the UCI.
(Read the article)

Isn't his UCI ban set to end soon?

Yes, we realize it is from the Austrian Federation, and it is also curiously scheduled to be set aside after four years (whatever that means).

The point is that there is such disparity between cycling federations, and such a disconnect as well as distrust between them and the UCI that we have these stories as a result.

Whether it's the Spaniards, the Italians, the Swiss, the Germans or the Austrians, the responsibility for the disparity and chaos in cycling still falls on the shoulders of McQuaid. Say, for example, a lifetime ban WAS warranted, how can McQuaid with his history be a strong proponent for that punnishment?