As the title, Im very wary of anyone who fits the category (regardless of nationality).

Millar may have his ban overturned in a few wks & maybe allowed to race at the Olympics. Bauge (who has a doping conviction) & is racing at the Olympics are 2 that spring to mind.

I for one advocate a zero tolerance when it comes to drugs in sport. If youre caught, youre out for life. No arguments.

It might help clean things up a bit..

It might help clean things up a bit..

It’s a bit like the death penalty for murder, it doesn’t allow for reformed characters. The olympics is a difficult one as IIRC its BC who’ve banned him (or refusing to select him), the UCI/IOC will allow him to race so he’s not banned, just that his team won’t pick him?

Maybe if the testing worked and anyone who doped was caught and anyone who hadn’t doped couldn’t test positive.

Pretty much every walk of life allows people a chance to redeem themselves. Why should Olympic sport be any different?

Maybe if you cheat on expenses you never get another job? Maybe if you break a traffic law you never drive again?

The whole issue is quite complex…

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden

I’m mostly in favour of lifetime bans but do understand some of the pressure some of the pros are under, if it’s your livelihood and it’s a question of keeping a contract for next year or not then I’d probably be tempted myself. I agree with a lifetime ban from Olympic competition though, although in Bauge’s case it was a missed test rather than a positive test result so don’t personally have an issue with him riding.

But if the substance is ‘dual use’ one that can be used both as a performance enhancer and unknowingly ingested in a medicine?

I fail to understand what the difference is between the Olympics and other competitions. The ethos of purity? Don’t give me that BS!

BOA are the ones whove imposed a lifetime ban on Millar.

Reformed characters? I dont know. Doping is so far ahead of the controls that I find it hard to believe that many cyclists are 100% clean. As for other sports? Well football has its question marks as does rugby & athletics..

Sadly I think its rife & far more widespread than we like to think.

Im really looking forward to the Olympics but the spectre of doping seems to hang over most sports nowadays..

I fail to understand what the difference is between the Olympics and other competitions. The ethos of purity? Don’t give me that BS!

Calm down a little hey.

No my point is whether its pro or amateur doping is still wrong.

And yes I do think the ethos of purity is still important.

after reading millars book i realised that banning athletes is not the be-all & end-all of stopping doping. bans need to target teams and staff as well.

It seems a little unfair that WADA can dictate the rules to how the BOA pick their teams. why shouldn’t we be able to have harsher than dictated rules.

and unknowingly ingested in a medicine?

Doesn’t the pro peleton have a vey high average of asthma sufferers? 😉

I for one advocate a zero tolerance when it comes to drugs in sport. If youre caught, youre out for life. No arguments.

Whilst understanding your sentiment, the death penalty hasn’t been a particularly great deterrent, so I wouldn’t expect this to be any more successful.

And pragmatically in sport, you either win or you don’t. If can’t win without drugs, then threat of not being able to compete doesn’t seem quite such a loss.

Read Millars book before you tarnish him, I think the way he has come back to the sport with a vocal Anti-doping presence has been good for everyone. (someone like vino who came back without this im less sure of)

Then you have the question of WADA catching up. Pros taking a substance which isn’t banned yet. Still drug cheats but ahead of the detection curve.

It’s a bit like the death penalty for murder,

Well, no, not really. Most murders are not pre-meditated, therefore a conscious, or at least rational, decision is not taken to commit the offence.

Doping is different. An athlete makes a decision to dope, and with that decision comes an acceptance of the risk of getting caught and the subsequent punishment. In the case of a British athlete, you know that if you decide to dope and caught, that you will no longer be eligible to compete for the UK at the Olympics.

You may regret your decision after the fact, you may subsequently ‘reform’ and push the anti-drugs message (a la Miller), but at the time that you took the decision you accepted the potential consequences. So, in short, tough, the ineligibility should stand.

Most murders are not pre-meditated, therefore a conscious, or at least rational, decision is not taken to commit the offence.

As I understand by definition a Murder *is* premeditated. It’s manslaughter that isn’t. Could be wrong though.

I wonder if athletes who have doped, and have served their bans can be prevented from entering the UK and competing in the games?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9181584/London-2012-Olympics-Home-Office-could-block-Victor-Contes-London-visit.html

I think they should let them return after serving an appropriate ban.
especially if they are going to win stuff and are British.

Lifetime ban for a second offense seems (to me, at least) reasonable, for a first offense it’s too harsh. I’d increase testing on anyone caught, too – including during the period they’re serving their ban.

“iDave – Member

The whole issue is quite complex…

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden “

That link is astonishing. Thanks.

what idave said

why shouldn’t we be able to have harsher than dictated rules.

what like no blacks and no catholics or just illegal ones you agree with ?

ay ethat is a good read and complicated

Seems to me that it is pretty convincing that Bertie doped from that

I have read bits and pieces of the media and noted that Contador has championed the panel’s ruling as evidence to reassure the public that he did not knowingly dope. (Editor’s note: Contador just did so again today.) Before the ruling was announced, he had referred to supplement contamination as a preposterous speculation. I can’t help but reflect on paragraph 467 of the ruling which notes that Contador’s testimony was that he did not take any supplements on the Tuesday or Wednesday. So according to his sworn testimony it was an impossibility that the clenbuterol came from a supplement.

To keep the debate going all I can say is Lucky Lance a man so good he could beat dope cheats without doping

IHN no there is nothing about premeditation to making it murder! There are defences which turn murder to manslaughter, alas how do you know most aren’t pre-meditated! I think you will find a lot of them are.

The 06/03/2012 BBC4 Law in Action (available as podcast) has an interesting segment on sports regulatory bodies, which is moderately relevant to this stuff.

what like no blacks and no catholics or just illegal ones you agree with ?

not sure i follow but illegal under what law?

Doesn’t the pro peleton have a vey high average of asthma sufferers?

Weird isn’t it.

It appears to me that elite sport and medicine is just about pushing the boundaries between “nutrition” and “doping.

I.e. if you are declared as asthmatic you can use a Ventolin inhailer. Ventolin being a brand name for Salbutamol, which is on WADA’s banned list. So find yourself a friendly doctor and viola, legal doping.

(An interesting bit of data would be the % of pro riders registered as asthmatic and how many of them had the condition diagnosed before they were a pro rider)

And on this basis life bans seem quite harsh. Within a culture of “take everything you can, as long as its legal” it must be quite easy to get sucked into something which is legal.

Unfortunately this has the adverse affect giving leniency to people who systematically break the rules on purpose to cheat.

Within a culture of “take everything you can, as long as its legal” it must be quite easy to get sucked into something which is legal.

hence the introduction of the ‘no needle’ policy.

When I used to do time trials it always amazed me how many asthma inhalers would appear among the riders. This was at local club TT level. Time trialling can be very addictive. I think the term is “exercised induced asthma”. Then go and see your doctor.

illegal under what law?

One of those is LaShawn Merritt, the American 400 metres sprinter, who won gold in his event at the Beijing Olympics in 2008.

Merritt won a case in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) after challenging the IOC’s rule 45 which states that anyone banned for a doping offence for six months or more should miss the next Olympics – even if their suspension has expired.

CAS declared rule 45 “invalid and unenforceable” and the British Olympic Association’s (BOA) lifetime ban is even more draconian and now that could also be under threat.

The CAS decision gives hope to cyclist David Millar and sprinter Dwain Chambers, who have both served bans for drugs in the past, being able to be part of Team GB next year.

Probably better if i has said not legal to enforce the ban rathe rthan illegal

For anyone in Edinburgh tomorrow:
http://www.edinburghrc.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=14204.0

if you are declared as asthmatic you can use a Ventolin inhailer. Ventolin being a brand name for Salbutamol, which is on WADA’s banned list.

Salbutamol is banned but allowed on a prescribed basis (diagnosed asthmatic). There are also some strict limits on the urine concentrations allowed. These limits may be “adjusted” depending on the state of dehydration at the end of the race. You can fail, despite having taken a prescribed dose if in a highly dehydrated state.

It is however, surprising the prevalence of asthma in professional athletes.

It is however, surprising the prevalence of asthma in professional athletes.

Is it surprising or just naive to think that it wouldn’t be the case.

One example that I have seen was on the BBC website. There is an article somewhere that goes through the England rugby teams pre-match routine. At one stage the are some quotes from one of the props about what they do immediately before the game.

Basically the pre-match routine was to take as many stimulants and supplements as possible. All 100% legal but definitely stuff that you wouldn’t normally think of as necessary to eat/drink before a rugby game.

It can seem arbitrary that this is OK but some other chemicals are not allowed.

e.g. Why is it not OK to take EPO when training to boost red blood cells, but creatine is allowed to boost muscle mass. Both are naturally occurring in the body and both can be boosted naturally (train at altitude, eat red meat) but only one is banned while one can be purchased in Holland and Barratt.

To use the “death penalty for murder” analogy, the lifetime ban for drugs would be like only having a death penalty for murdering people with blue eyes.