A thought that has troubled me for a number of years:
Everyone comes down on the riders and teams for the doping issues. I can understand that, everyone needs to take responsibility. However, I think the problem is broader than that.
Let's look at the labs and cycling media.
As far as I understand it (perhaps someone can quote the WADA code of ethics for clarity), the process in terms of pronouncement of guilt in doping is as follows:
1. Riders undergo controls (2 samples are taken).
2. Samples are taken to labs for testing.
3. A samples are tested.
4. If found to be positive, the rider (and team management?) is contacted and asked if they would like their B samples tested, or if they'd like to admit to doping, or explain the values.
5. If they'd like the B sample tested, it is them tested with a witness there on behalf of the rider.
Up until this point, THERE IS NO ANNOUNCEMENT made.
6. If the B sample comes back positive, the rider is pronounced guilty and the process of discipline is followed.
This happens in other sports, but not in cycling. That leads me to ask who we can trust. If the labs are leaking evidence and not following the rules, then who is to say that (being dishonest in that) they are not tampering with the samples?
This is why I ask:
Riders dope to win
Winning means they are paid more.
Therefore, doping is about the money. If they doped only to win, it would not satisfy them as they would know they cheated.
Now the only reason someone in the lab would leak information would also be for money. Papers would pay lots of money to write stories before they hit the public.
Therefore they leak for money.
Now if they are corrupt enough to leak information, thus not following their own code of conduct (and doing this for money), who is to say then (as they can't be trusted either) that they would not tamper with evidence for money?
I don't know, but it seems like the core is rotten in more places than one!
Everyone comes down on the riders and teams for the doping issues. I can understand that, everyone needs to take responsibility. However, I think the problem is broader than that.
Let's look at the labs and cycling media.
As far as I understand it (perhaps someone can quote the WADA code of ethics for clarity), the process in terms of pronouncement of guilt in doping is as follows:
1. Riders undergo controls (2 samples are taken).
2. Samples are taken to labs for testing.
3. A samples are tested.
4. If found to be positive, the rider (and team management?) is contacted and asked if they would like their B samples tested, or if they'd like to admit to doping, or explain the values.
5. If they'd like the B sample tested, it is them tested with a witness there on behalf of the rider.
Up until this point, THERE IS NO ANNOUNCEMENT made.
6. If the B sample comes back positive, the rider is pronounced guilty and the process of discipline is followed.
This happens in other sports, but not in cycling. That leads me to ask who we can trust. If the labs are leaking evidence and not following the rules, then who is to say that (being dishonest in that) they are not tampering with the samples?
This is why I ask:
Riders dope to win
Winning means they are paid more.
Therefore, doping is about the money. If they doped only to win, it would not satisfy them as they would know they cheated.
Now the only reason someone in the lab would leak information would also be for money. Papers would pay lots of money to write stories before they hit the public.
Therefore they leak for money.
Now if they are corrupt enough to leak information, thus not following their own code of conduct (and doing this for money), who is to say then (as they can't be trusted either) that they would not tamper with evidence for money?
I don't know, but it seems like the core is rotten in more places than one!