should dopers pay back their salary

[Polish]

The world would be a better place if the money was donated
to a charitable foundation. Let the rider choose which one.

 

[Anonymous]

The world would be a better place if the money was donated
to a charitable foundation. Let the rider choose which one.

livestrong?

F'in Ey! The world would be a better place then, and all you guys would be chuffed..

Doping fines to livestrong.. what a concept..

on a side note ive had a bit of a dig on the legal aspect (based on employment law) and it is littered with problems... is it a fine? is it just equivalent to their salary, or actually their salary, who collects the money, the UCI, or the team who then forward it to the UCI. its a mire.. for instance some US states it is legal for an employer to find a member of staff some it isnt.. is the law based on your place of work, your normal residence, the country in which your team is based, i just cant see it working.. even if CAS agree it a european can take it to the european court to judge, where do the americans go.. i just cant see how it can work..

 

[Bala Verde]

What if a rider doesn't receive a salary, ie he rides for free?

 

[Polish]

If Lance gets busted this year, he would have to donate his One Dollar Astana salary.
Geez, maybe they would give him a yellow bracelet

 

[Bala Verde]

Well I said it mockingly, but I wanted to hint at the incentives that are being provided to simply circumvent these rules. For example, just like some CEOs who sometimes try to bypass certain maximum renumeration limits, they started receiving most of their salary in shares/options etc.

Could riders not come up with payment schemes that would avoid huge losses, because some payment isn't really 'salary'? I haven't read the charter so I don't know what the 'letter of the law' entails...

Secondly, a fairness consideration perhaps. If someone earns a million per year, and a water carrier 50000, the water carrier's life could be financially destroyed. Although an absolute loss of 1 million is obviously much higher than 50000, it seems likely that he could still do well (enough) during his consecutive suspension. The water carrier who never achieved financial independence, loses 50000 for a year's work and gets slapped with a 2 year suspension, with nothing to fall back on.

Let alone that the 1 million dollar man has had the advantage of getting a better doctor/program.

thoughts?

 

[Anonymous]

one thing i do think, is that the UCI should make riders sign contracts that say if they are banned for doping they are not allowed to profit from it.. so they should not be able to receive any moneys for books, tv appearances etc (unless those books reveal names and details)..

why should a rider get banned at 34, retire, and rake it in from an autobiography..

 

[Beech Mtn]

"Fighting anti-doping". Don't you mean fighting doping?

Yes, I went back and fixed it. But on second thought, considering who it was that famously gave the UCI a big chunk of change to fight doping, perhaps my original Freudian slip had more truth in it.

 

[icefire]

one thing i do think, is that the UCI should make riders sign contracts that say if they are banned for doping they are not allowed to profit from it.. so they should not be able to receive any moneys for books, tv appearances etc (unless those books reveal names and details)..

why should a rider get banned at 34, retire, and rake it in from an autobiography..

Ban something and you've automatically created a black market for it. Uh... wait, isn't that what happens with drugs?

 

[Ripper]

I totally disagree. There is one spot where you can hurt a pro-rider and that's in his wallet. Branded a cheat in a world full of cheats? Who cares. Just clean up your act after the suspension, act like you're sorry and willing to fight for a clean sport and you will be welcomed back as a lost son.

I presume that the suspension already hits them in the wallet. I don't think there is employment insurance for "Banned due to doping".

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yes, I went back and fixed it. But on second thought, considering who it was that famously gave the UCI a big chunk of change to fight doping, perhaps my original Freudian slip had more truth in it.

Ah, ya beat me to it, and it was a stone cold setup too.

 

[Copied21]

I don't think life bans will also be effective. In America and other countries if you murder somebody you can face capital punishment, and yet people still murder other people.

Regards

Copied

____
dossier surendettement

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think life bans will also be effective. In America and other countries if you murder somebody you can face capital punishment, and yet people still murder other people.
]

i think there may be a slight difference between doping sportsmen and psychotically deranged criminals who murder people...

 

[Ripper]

i think there may be a slight difference between doping sportsmen and psychotically deranged criminals who murder people...

There might be less than you think!

 

[Anonymous]

There might be less than you think!

I would also point out that "in america and some other countries..." well america, and a load of very barbaric backward countries such as china, iran, iraq, half of africa, korea, syria, qatar, afghanistan........

but lets not go there...

 

[usedtobefast]

 

[usedtobefast]

dim what do you mean?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It's not the severity of punishment that is going to act as a deterrent, it's the certainty of it. In today's age, the lack of certainty, especially when most riders don't think they'll get caught, and are generally proven to be correct with their actions, is the problem.

Thus, I'm generally voting no. And I think it's time we stop focusing almost entirely on the riders.

Teams, doctors, soigners, managers, coaches, trainers. There is a big support system that exists under the surface of a rider who dopes. Anyone who thinks a rider makes connections on their own, buys doping products on their own, and injects said products on their own, and monitors their progress on their own, is really, really naive.

 

[python]

It's not the severity of punishment that is going to act as a deterrent, it's the certainty of it. In today's age, the lack of certainty, especially when most riders don't think they'll get caught, and are generally proven to be correct with their actions, is the problem.

Thus, I'm generally voting no. And I think it's time we stop focusing almost entirely on the riders.

Teams, doctors, soigners, managers, coaches, trainers. There is a big support system that exists under the surface of a rider who dopes. Anyone who thinks a rider makes connections on their own, buys doping products on their own, and injects said products on their own, and monitors their progress on their own, is really, really naive.

the underlined statement is certainly true. and i agree the blame as well as the financial penalties should extent to the enablers. but we also know that in many cases, particularly post festina, some riders themselves initiate and drive their doping. that act is tantamount to defrauding their team mates and their competition that in some cases results in entire teams disbanding.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

True, Python. But even in those examples you can simply remove the word "team", and the rider still has a support staff that facilitates their doping. Doctors, suppliers, etc.

 

[pedaling squares]

What a close poll. Obviously well put together.

I say no, because without consistency of application any penalties are at best a joke, at worst a fraud. If you accept that the UCI is not complicit with certain riders or even certain teams charging, then I am in the wrong. But if you suspect that some riders are sacrificed while others are protected or forced to be "ill" for a couple of weeks, then it appears that Moreni is paying a personal price while other riders, teams, sponsors, and UCI officials profit from doping. And forcing some people to pay while allowing others to profit is more disgusting than turning a blind eye to doping altogether.

 

[luckyboy]

In addition to the point about the penalties not being consistent (if applied at all), there is the question of who to give it to. To complicate it further, there is Alpe's point about not just focusing on the riders.

 

[auscyclefan94]

they have been paid and been cheats. they should pay all their slaries back to the teams and their prize money in the races they tested positive for back to the race organisers cos their race looks bad.