yaco said:
Again you have it wrong - A Four year penalty under the WADA Code is when you wilfully take a banned substance and it can be proven you are deliberately cheating and if you fail to admit guilt
Are you suggesting that the team doctor held Yates down & forced the inhalor into his mouth, to administer the Terbutaline ?
Yates has admitted he took it, & he has acknowledged that he has ever had a TUE for the substance. The fact that he knew he needed a TUE, is itself an acknowledged that he knew it was a banned substance. Any admitting of guilt is irrelevant, they know he's guilty, the test sample told them that.
So go ahead & tell us how his positive wasn't wilful & deliberately !
The rules are absolutely explicit that the responsibility is on the rider; both for what drugs are in their body, & that the correct TUE's are in place. So the fault isn't the Doctor, the Team, the UCI, or anyone else, its solely & completely the Riders.
yaco said:
This is the maximum penalty under this scenario - A two year penalty (read Sharapova ) is when you test positive, acknowledge your guilt and can prove you didn't know the substance was banned - This is the maximum penalty under this scenario and of course there can be discounts for various reasons.
Did you actually read the rules I posted !
yaco said:
I will give you a hint - Why do athletes appoint lawyers when according to your ' Black and White' interpretation of the WADA Code all penalties must be 4 years ? Why would an athlete waste money on lawyers ? Why are their specialist Anti-Doping legal Firms and lawyers who are in demand ? Simply because there are provisions in the WADA Code to reduce penalties after taking into account individual circumstances.
To suggest Yates should have got a four year penalty based on publically available information relating to his case is laughable.
Because the anti-doping process is rife with corruption, & favoritism, at every level, & NADO's are only too happy to let the guilty off on the flimsiest of excuses, (see Impeys case), & I don't know how many documentary investigations in the last 30 years have confirmed this. The UCI is more concerned with box office than cheating, which is something it has in common with ITF, & with Reedie running WADA, its now
following exactly the same agenda.