Who is the most to blame?

[Benotti69]

I don't think the role of the UCI is that simple. They deal with conflicting interests.

Protect the market value of the sport we all love, protect the riders health, ensure a level playing field (or simply anti doping enforcement), protect the image of the sport.. just to name a few.

Biological passport along with the ongoing strict anti doping system, is propably the reason why the number of collapsing riders has declined, And at the same time it will help sell cycling as a clean sport, regardless of what happens in reality.

By no means would I assert that the UCI isn't deeply corrupt, but this corruption is actually very convenient, when you have to combine all of these conflicting objectives, it makes an organisation like the UCI run more smoothly.

Leading back to the original topic, I will simply ask the question. are the UCI escaping their responsibility in the fight against doping? or is it fair to say that they are just trying to keep the fight within reasonable limits, allowing the sport to avoid strangulation?

The answer probably lies in between these two poles.

if the sport was clean the market value would be high.

If the sport was clean riders health would be good.

If the sport was clean the image of the sport would be very positive.

So if the uci ran a tight ship on anti-doping and kept the sport clean it would have a high market value, healthy for riders and riding on their talents, abilities and mental strengths ensuring a naturally level playing field with a fantastically positive image.

UCI are making a big FUBAR.

 

[Sanitiser]

I voted the UCI but the individuals within the UCI have little to gain in making cycling clean with the good salary, nepotism, favours and kickbacks involved. The fish may not rot from the head but it looks like it rots from the inside.

 

[Bike Boy]

if the sport was clean the market value would be high.

If the sport was clean riders health would be good.

If the sport was clean the image of the sport would be very positive.

So if the uci ran a tight ship on anti-doping and kept the sport clean it would have a high market value, healthy for riders and riding on their talents, abilities and mental strengths ensuring a naturally level playing field with a fantastically positive image.

UCI are making a big FUBAR.

At the risk of continuing this discussion until it becomes pointless, I would argue that this collide with a few of the other options.

Clearly you displayed the lack of ability to think this problem through. Indeed if the UCI ran a tight ship it wouldn't make much of a difference or at least not ensure a clean sport.

I would appreciate it if the UCI suddenly decided to meet their moral obligations. Only one thing left to do. Make sure to hold riders, doctors, DS, the doping network (the black market) and the pharmaceutical companies responsible.

 

[BotanyBay]

I voted the UCI but the individuals within the UCI have little to gain in making cycling clean with the good salary, nepotism, favours and kickbacks involved. The fish may not rot from the head but it looks like it rots from the inside.

+1. So, in a nutshell, just like Hockey.

 

[ElChingon]

I blame us, the rabid fans. We never forget, we never ignore the obvious, we never look the other way, we never let the little things go, we never overlook the hypocrites, we never believe the media, we never believe fictitious facts (or is it points), we never leave anything unturned, we never default to the defacto bandwagon.

So since I am one of those rabid fans, I am to blame as well.

Other sports have the same issues (I'm a rabid fan of other sports as well), but for some odd reason the masses do the opposite of the first sentence

PS: I will never change my rabid ways either.

 

[ultimobici]

I've just finished reading "Sweat of the Gods" by Benjo Maso.

In it he highlights the rules of the Tour from 1930. Desgranges felt it necessary to spell out what the organisers would cover and what the riders were expected to pay for themselves. "stimulants, tonics & doping" were to be paid for by the riders themselves.

IMO, the people to blame for the use of doping products and methods are the organisers, participants, press & public in equal measure. However, the blame for the lack of action lies firmly at the UCI's door, in particular McQuaid & Verbruggen.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Always start with yourself.

 

[VeloFidelis]

I blame us, the rabid fans. We never forget, we never ignore the obvious, we never look the other way, we never let the little things go, we never overlook the hypocrites, we never believe the media, we never believe fictitious facts (or is it points), we never leave anything unturned, we never default to the defacto bandwagon.

So since I am one of those rabid fans, I am to blame as well.

Other sports have the same issues (I'm a rabid fan of other sports as well), but for some odd reason the masses do the opposite of the first sentence

PS: I will never change my rabid ways either.

I voted the Fans as well. For all of the railing against the injustice of doping and the perpetrators and facilitators, we are clearly the reason that doping exists. Everything about competitive cycling exists for the benefit and attraction of the Fan. And we never fail to turn out and tune in to support the latest round of super human performance. Because just like the latest video game or Super Hero cinematic blockbuster; it's a damn good show.

 

[scribe]

I'd have added 'society' to the list. As scientific developments from the 80's into the 90's were considered sporting achievement rather than cheating. It's evolved from one into the other over time. Cycling is not the only sport struggling with this conversion, as evidence of this.