Punish the DSes?

[Ferminal]

I favor two mechanisms. The first is based on the idea that it is very difficult to detect doping with enough certainty to sanction individuals. If results were averaged over a team though, there would be enough certainty to impose a penalty on the team. Ashenden has talked about similar concepts in the past. I suggest the penalty would be the loss of world tour points.

The UCI already factors some subjective fluff about ethics into world tour licence criteria. Why not remove this fluff but, for example, deduct points if a team has multiple riders showing positive at the 90% confidence interval, although this wouldn't equate to an individual AAF? For this idea to work though, penalties would have to be based on objective measures, which were fairly monitored across all teams. So, until the UCI governance structure is reconfigured into something less inherently corruptible, no such deterent/penalties could be effectively implemented.

Nice idea but it doesn't sound legally viable?

Applying doping penalties in cases where it hasn't been proven (to the accepted legal standards) that doping has occurred. Maybe it would have a better chance if it was under the framework of "health checks".

I agree though that something like this is the only way to go, any extra punishment whilst still relying on current methods for detecting dopers isn't going to change anything.

 

[MarkvW]

If the system was such that the DS's were not the ones organizing the doping and hiring the best medical help to get it done then you might have a point. I do not believe that to be the case in pro cycling. Who is the innocent one? Riis? Bruyneel? Vaughters? Any of the Spanish or Italian or Belgian DS's? How 'bout the rest of management? Ex racers all, mostly (at this point) from the height of the EPO era. Yup a lot of interest in "clean cycling" there.
I thought you were capable of pure cynical thought...........disappointing.

I'd read that during 'Festina Time' the doping was really organized along team lines, but that things had decentralized since. Then we learn about the Posties and their team-centric (or Lance-centric) doping plan. On the one hand, there are Manolo Saiz type organizations, and on the other hand we have Fuentes, who caters to the lone-wolf dopers. It's hard to figure out what the deal is nowadays.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'd read that during 'Festina Time' the doping was really organized along team lines, but that things had decentralized since. Then we learn about the Posties and their team-centric (or Lance-centric) doping plan. On the one hand, there are Manolo Saiz type organizations, and on the other hand we have Fuentes, who caters to the lone-wolf dopers. It's hard to figure out what the deal is nowadays.

Fuentes had both individuals and teams, but I think the point is that in either case there would be guys within the team who would help out with the logistics. You may be confusing the designer with the mechanic, there are (and have to be) both involved.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Nice idea but it doesn't sound legally viable?

Applying doping penalties in cases where it hasn't been proven (to the accepted legal standards) that doping has occurred. Maybe it would have a better chance if it was under the framework of "health checks".

I agree though that something like this is the only way to go, any extra punishment whilst still relying on current methods for detecting dopers isn't going to change anything.

Not sure about the legality, but it would be a contractual relationship between the teams and the governing body so might be possible. It wouldn't take many 90% +ve results for it to be beyond reasonable doubt that some doping had occurred somewhere on the team, if one felt inclined to set such a threshold of certainty. WADA would need to add such a mechanism to the code though, or it will end the same way as the lifetime Olympics ban.