Ernesto Colnago urges lifetime bans for drugs cheats to stop cycling "destroying" itself

breeze91 wrote:

Rumpo, what you've got to remember is that most rider evidence wasn't volunteered in the way you say. There's not many riders over the years who have, as you say, 'ratted' on others. Some have come clean and stated how it was but not really named names. This case is different in that these guys were giving evidence under oath initially to the FDA, with consequences for lying under oath potentially much greater than a 2 year ban. I do agree that some kind of whistle blowing process could work, maybe not with the current UCI though!!

The evidence gathered by the Federal Investigation into USPS was not handed over to USADA. They had to get their own. I'll agree with you that whistleblowers are in short supply (particularly with a governing body that ignores their concerns, and calls them "scumbags" and bad for cycling), so I think it's right that assistance given to an anti doping agency is taken into account when sentencing.

stumps wrote:

So we just forgive and forget eh ?

I dont think so.

Christian Vande Velde
Tom Danielson
David Zabriskie

To name 3 who have never been banned due to drugs and they still came forward.

Sorry Stumpy, I just don't get this one at all. These three riders have all received bans for doping. Either they were ratted out by another rider or they thought they were about to be. OR of course they may just have come forward to clear their consciences, and get a ban they would otherwise have missed, but I don't think so.
The ability of riders to inform on each other is one of the best weapons against orchestrated doping. I am not saying forgive and forget, but the situation does need a more pragmatic approach than automatic life bans without exception.

antonio wrote:

'Knee jerk reaction'? where have you been this last thirty years? It's time to clear the cheats out lock stock and barrel. Omerta? it's the trade mark of cheats, as proved with Armstrong there is almost always a day of reckoning.

Witnesses against Armstrong had their punishment reduced for their cooperation with USADA. Lifetime bans would have meant they had nothing to gain by telling the truth.

The Rumpo Kid - You've just said they had their punishments reduced. The same incentive would have been there with lifetime bans too. Lifetime bans for riders and more importantly managers and doctors would get them out the sport if caught and might make them think more about going down the drugs route. The reason Omerta and the widespread use of drugs exists is because of the lax punishments that have been handed out in the past. Doping cheats are welcomed back with a pat on the back and allowed to compete and win events such as the Olympic RR. If you can remember as far back as the late 70's in the history of our sport, riders would be handed out a small fine and a 10 minute penalty in a Grand Tour for a failed doping control.

breeze91 wrote:

The Rumpo Kid - You've just said they had their punishments reduced. The same incentive would have been there with lifetime bans too. Lifetime bans for riders and more importantly managers and doctors would get them out the sport if caught and might make them think more about going down the drugs route. The reason Omerta and the widespread use of drugs exists is because of the lax punishments that have been handed out in the past. Doping cheats are welcomed back with a pat on the back and allowed to compete and win events such as the Olympic RR. If you can remember as far back as the late 70's in the history of our sport, riders would be handed out a small fine and a 10 minute penalty in a Grand Tour for a failed doping control.

I don't see how lifetime bans would give anyone an incentive to give evidence against a teammate. And the history of British Olympics would tend to show they are not a deterrent.