Does anyone else seem to be seeing a somewhat disturbing trend that has been recently highlighted by controversey at the worlds: overzealous pursuit of doping?
Naturally, I believe that those who cheat should be punished and we should do everything we can to ensure those that cheat are caught...this may be hard to do- hard to prove- but I think that's what has to be done.
Cases in point:
Di Luca is out of Worlds because of charges that have been around for a long time but have never really been made into much- a prosecutor dropped them in Italy, but CONI continues to pursue it.
Landis, innocent or guilty, showed that there are some flaws in the system. It is prone to human error, but prosectors are willing to overlook errors in favor of upholding convictions and continuing a fight.
Worlds organizers wanted to exclude Zabel because of his admission of doping YEARS AGO.
Valverde was almost excluded from Worlds because of charges that were dismissed by a judge. His name was cleared in his own country, but, apparently, not in the eyes of the doping authorities. This wouldn't be a problem if it seemed that the authorities actually had enough to make a case out of it. How long have they had this info and Valverde has gone unpunished? It's either lethargy on their part, a lack of evidence or both- in any case, Valverde's exclusion is highly questionable.
The UCI has allowed participation by Allan Davis and Rene Andrle for "reasons of equity" related to Valverde (both are in situations similar to Valverde). This indicates that the UCI would otherwise bar them from competition, but they realize they have no hope of that because of the CAS decision for Valverde.
Then there's this whole mess about Bettini, testosterone and the ethics agreement. In any case, he hasn't been shown to be guilty of anything, he has apparently satisfied the UCI and now looks like he won't race.
I'm for a clean sport, but not if it means that we go after everyone who even looks like they might be doping. Imagine if our legal system worked like this- that if you were charged of a crime, went through a trial and were found innocent, then, say, an employer could hold that against you because they felt like it. Or a state could bar you from certain priveleges because it saw suspicion, but could not find evidence of a crime itself.
Naturally, I believe that those who cheat should be punished and we should do everything we can to ensure those that cheat are caught...this may be hard to do- hard to prove- but I think that's what has to be done.
Cases in point:
Di Luca is out of Worlds because of charges that have been around for a long time but have never really been made into much- a prosecutor dropped them in Italy, but CONI continues to pursue it.
Landis, innocent or guilty, showed that there are some flaws in the system. It is prone to human error, but prosectors are willing to overlook errors in favor of upholding convictions and continuing a fight.
Worlds organizers wanted to exclude Zabel because of his admission of doping YEARS AGO.
Valverde was almost excluded from Worlds because of charges that were dismissed by a judge. His name was cleared in his own country, but, apparently, not in the eyes of the doping authorities. This wouldn't be a problem if it seemed that the authorities actually had enough to make a case out of it. How long have they had this info and Valverde has gone unpunished? It's either lethargy on their part, a lack of evidence or both- in any case, Valverde's exclusion is highly questionable.
The UCI has allowed participation by Allan Davis and Rene Andrle for "reasons of equity" related to Valverde (both are in situations similar to Valverde). This indicates that the UCI would otherwise bar them from competition, but they realize they have no hope of that because of the CAS decision for Valverde.
Then there's this whole mess about Bettini, testosterone and the ethics agreement. In any case, he hasn't been shown to be guilty of anything, he has apparently satisfied the UCI and now looks like he won't race.
I'm for a clean sport, but not if it means that we go after everyone who even looks like they might be doping. Imagine if our legal system worked like this- that if you were charged of a crime, went through a trial and were found innocent, then, say, an employer could hold that against you because they felt like it. Or a state could bar you from certain priveleges because it saw suspicion, but could not find evidence of a crime itself.
