One strike

[darkcloud]

ONE strike and the doper is out for life.
Thoughts?

 

[Catwhoorg]

Would just strengthen omerta.

I used to believe it would help, but its really only having the ability to get (former ?) dopers to turn in their suppliers, the methods, the docs, the team managers that you can really address the root of the issue.

To get them to do that, you need to dangle a carrot, of reduced sentence for co-operation.

 

[the asian]

Life bans will discourage whistle blowers.

IMO life bans for first time offenses are also too harsh.

Also what about contamination. Contamination is a genuine probability and if a athlete is unable to prove contamination he may also face a life ban.

I would prefer a harsher ban for 1st time offenses for EPO, Blood doping, Testosterone , steroids gene doping, and the standard two year ban for other drugs.

Though if any potential big impact new drug hits the market, there could be a problem.

 

[Martin318is]

Its a great way for a Lance type personality to eliminate dangerous opponents. Imagine if some with a history of not quite winning, like Poulidor, could arrange for a dodgy bidon to go to his opponent - or spike a drink at a bar,etc,etc. They are out with no possibility to ever come back.

Suddenly makes the capacity to appeal or come bqck after first offense seem a reasonable idea doesnt it.

 

[darkcloud]

You guys have made some valid points. There has to be a line drawn somewhere, though, on meaningful punishments.
Backdated suspensions and other tomfoolery like that just isn't going to cut it.
Hmm...

 

[ElChingon]

Not ever life banning anyone also allows for doping to continue as its always has.

 

[Martin318is]

Not ever life banning anyone also allows for doping to continue as its always has.

Yep thats the real problem. Nobody ever seems to get the proper penalty for a second offense, etc. Once there is scope for minor doubt. Twice, there is none.