"Ernst Noch" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>> B. Lafferty wrote:
>>> "Tom_A" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Velo Reaper wrote:
>>>>> Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
>>>>> USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
>>>>> right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
>>>>> affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".
>>>>>
>>>>> Sing it brother.
>>>> Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
>>>> impartiality of the process.
>>> AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
>>> supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official
>>> functions.
>>>
>>> And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be
>>> flushed.
>>>
>>>> Excellent job.
>>>>
>>
>> Considering how many storms Pound has weathered over the past 6 years,
>> I'd say it is a fair bet that the IOC must have given him quite a bit
>> of free-reign to do and say what he wants. They must have quite a bit
>> of faith in him if they can ignore the NHL, Lance Armstrong, numerous
>> other sports organizations, etc.
>>
>> Pound wins. He gets what he wants. Unfortunately, we're left with a
>> doping penalty process that no one but he respects.
>
> He's playing a role which the IOC needs. Imagine professional (olympic)
> sports without a WADA which constantly plays the hardliner against doping.
> 2 times a year trainers, teams, athletes get busted by government
> organizations. For the public professional sports as a whole (as opposed
> to only, say, cycling) becomes synonymous with an organized criminal
> underground occupied with producing, distributing and consuming illegal
> substances.
> All the actions of Pound, including the finger pointing against cycling,
> fit perfectly to a strategy of damage control from the IOC. Being unable
> to really solve the problem of doping endangering its position, they have
> created a scenario where they at least can distance themselves from doping
> as far as possible.
He is playing the role the IOC (or at least some of its leaders) think they
need. But those anti-doping hunters should try to be a little more lucid,
considering what's happening with cyclism, Cyclism is possibly the main
target for the anti-doping politics, with disastrous results. A necessary
condition for such a politics to be effective is that the risk of being
caught should be much higher than the possibility of taking advantage of it.
Of course that's not the case. I estimate that the percentage of
participants to the Tour de France who had used banned substances during or
just before the Tour and have been caught, about 1 % (although I might a bit
too optimistic). The only effective way to catch the so-called "dopers" are
apparently house searches, police-raids, etc. Quite possible that those
measures are becoming more frequent, because - as Leblanc noted in a recent
interview - providing of illicit products is more and more business of
organized crime - which of course is one an the inevitable results of the
anti-doping policies (have they never heard of the Prohibition?). And that
is not the only disastrous consequence. Another is that cycling seems to be
dominated by the theme doping. A racer cannot perform an outstanding feat
anymore without immediately coming under suspicion. An ex-pro told me not so
long ago - he is in his eighties - "Previously people came to see me to ask
about Coppi, Bartali or Bobet. Nowadays they only seem to be interested in
what kind of doping we were taking." Before the Festina scandal in 1998 the
UCI followed the only possible line. They didn't harbour the illusion that
doping could be eradicated, so they tolerated it up to a certain point.
Unfortunately, Verbruggen's successor seems to be a diehard. I can only hope
he is just pretending. Of course, compared to the IOC, the WADA, etc., the
UCI is almost powerless and unable to turn the tide. But they should at
least try to find a realistic solution to the problem. Joining the fanatics
and inciting the police to keep riders under surveillance is not part of it.
Neither is expelling riders to participate to the Tour, because they are
vaguely suspected.
Benjo
