Dopers suck

['Dale]

What do I think?

 

I guess they way I worded it deserves this response and I apologize.

 

Rule 32 of Friday Fight Club: Never ever apologize or show any form or remorse.

[Danger Dassie]

The problem is that the sentence punishes the crime not the attitude.

 

Once you cross that line and dope it shows lack of moral fibre - perhaps the shock did correct the moral problem - or not. All we know is that she has the ability to bend her morals into cheating. And sadly (for her) you can't prove you're better because people have proof that you were worse.

 

Or it could be that she did unintentionally take a masking agent. Only she knows that answer.

 

And grammar nazi comment of the Day - it's "above reproach" :-)

 

How is it possible to punish the attitude, reality of human nature is that we can only punish the crime. Attitude requires reform, and that doesn't necessarily go in hand with punishment. For any crime.

 

Punishing attitude wouldn't solve anything, we'd just end up in a space of judging people and accusing them while claiming to have the master moral code. Vengeance is a dangerous place to be.

[Danger Dassie]

Without the name-calling, what is your position on the matter in this discussion as it is a delicate topic?

Why can this performance be credible?

From what I recall with YDV's case is that it left more questions than answers. The ruling was applied retroactively due to circumstances in her appeal/argument. Indicating that CSA and/or SAIDS slipped up somewhere.

 

As far as her recent result, it's doesn't really have bearing. Robyn unfortunately took a wrong turn, we'd probably agree though that she still would have won regardless.

 

Holding a national champ status under those conditions must be bitter sweet, for anyone. For an athlete with a former doping sanction, some might say karmic.

 

TBH I'm pretty surprised she beat the field there. Amy Beth, Sarah Hill, Theresa Ralph, Hayley Preen, Tiffany Keep, Courteney Webb etc ...

 

Does this make the performance questionable or suspicious though, not perse and I wouldn't say so against her previous doping case. The lack of testing on the day though doesn't build confidence either.

[Chris_]

Pretending one has the master moral code that will allow you to judge anybody else absolutely is a dangerous place to be.

 

*Tom Cruise of Minority Report likes your post.

[DieselnDust]

From what I recall with YDV's case is that it left more questions than answers. The ruling was applied retroactively due to circumstances in her appeal/argument. Indicating that CSA and/or SAIDS slipped up somewhere.

 

As far as her recent result, it's doesn't really have bearing. Robyn unfortunately took a wrong turn, we'd probably agree though that she still would have won regardless.

 

Holding a national champ status under those conditions must be bitter sweet, for anyone. For an athlete with a former doping sanction, some might say karmic.

 

TBH I'm pretty surprised she beat the field there. Amy Beth, Sarah Hill, Theresa Ralph, Hayley Preen, Tiffany Keep, Courteney Webb etc ...

 

Does this make the performance questionable or suspicious though, not perse and I wouldn't say so against her previous doping case. The lack of testing on the day though doesn't build confidence either.

 

 

The other ladies are focused on the XCO season and Olympic Qualification rather than marathon. The main contenders were actually all in Europe already as they couldn't travel back to SA and then back to Europe. So her performance isn't measured against the inform riders.

Not taking anything away from her achievement, to win you have to enter, and cross the finish line and then be the first legit rider across. 

The information we have at hand says she won it fair and square.

 

PS: the doping sanction she received was for a diuretic that she was taking due to a vestibular issue she had recovered from. Pharmaceutical mistakes are not uncommon but are also a common excuse. That doesn't place her squarely on either end of the doping spectrum.

[Skubarra]

The problem is that the sentence punishes the crime not the attitude.

 

Once you cross that line and dope it shows lack of moral fibre - perhaps the shock did correct the moral problem - or not. All we know is that she has the ability to bend her morals into cheating. And sadly (for her) you can't prove you're better because people have proof that you were worse.

 

Or it could be that she did unintentionally take a masking agent. Only she knows that answer.

 

And grammar nazi comment of the Day - it's "above reproach" :-)

 

Where I disagree with you is the insinuation that every positive test is proof of intentional doping (in hubland a positive test is of course proof that the athlete doped during his/her whole career prior and post the test)

 

I feel sometimes mistakes are made through carelessness/naiveness and its fine that those mistakes carry consequences. But I don't share the the hub thinking that going full pitchfork mob on everyone who ever had a positive test will somehow help in cleaning up the sport.

[Eldron]

How is it possible to punish the attitude, reality of human nature is that we can only punish the crime. Attitude requires reform, and that doesn't necessarily go in hand with punishment. For any crime.

 

Punishing attitude wouldn't solve anything, we'd just end up in a space of judging people and accusing them while claiming to have the master moral code. Vengeance is a dangerous place to be.

 

It isn't and that is exactly the problem. 

 

Once someone has cheated they're tainted - would you trust your partner more if they had never cheated on you or cheated once and apologised? Would you keep using your accountant if they stole from you?

 

Expecting the public to accept riders back with open arms when they have cheated is unrealistic.

 

Plus - a ban from the sport isn't really a punishment anyway - all it does is dry up 1 single revenue stream and give the rider a year or two to do whatever it is that no pro cyclists do every day of their lives and call "life". 

 

Also - judgment and claiming moral high ground are 2 different things. She was found guilty - saying she is guilt has no bearing on your own moral standards.

[Eldron]

Where I disagree with you is the insinuation that every positive test is proof of intentional doping (in hubland a positive test is of course proof that the athlete doped during his/her whole career prior and post the test)

 

I feel sometimes mistakes are made through carelessness/naiveness and its fine that those mistakes carry consequences. But I don't share the the hub thinking that going full pitchfork mob on everyone who ever had a positive test will somehow help in cleaning up the sport.

 

Agreed and that is why I mentioned that she could have taken the substance unintentionally and that the only person that will ever know if that is true or not is Yolande.

 

Plus she got a 1 year sentence - sentences for anabolics/EPO etc are way stiffer.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Eldron

[eddy]

the only one who I felt behaved like an absolute d*ck was our first RWC captain.  That surprised me.  .

That doesn't surprise me.

 

I saw the way he treated his caddy and was appalled.

 

The way a "celebrity" behaves towards minions and/or when the cameras aren't present is telling. He failed badly.

[gtr1]

There is no excuse for any elite athlete to take any drug unknowingly or unintentionally. Or any athlete. There is a anti doping app and it takes a few seconds to check any medication and whether allowed or not.

 

I do it before taking any meds, and I am no longer an elite athlete. I ride masters and have never been tested.......over 40 years, and having competed at a national elite level years ago.

 

But I still check the app. And if you are competing you have a moral obligation to do that.

 

So unless the substance was in some other food(like steaks) that there is usually no chance of a doping product being in it.......no excuse.

[Kranswurm]

There is no excuse for any elite athlete to take any drug unknowingly or unintentionally. Or any athlete. There is a anti doping app and it takes a few seconds to check any medication and whether allowed or not.

 

I do it before taking any meds, and I am no longer an elite athlete. I ride masters and have never been tested.......over 40 years, and having competed at a national elite level years ago.

 

But I still check the app. And if you are competing you have a moral obligation to do that.

 

So unless the substance was in some other food(like steaks) that there is usually no chance of a doping product being in it.......no excuse.

So you have never been tested,.Then you are no different to anyone.

[Christie]

Who would invest with a broker who has been busted before and served time for running a ponzi scheme?

Somehow the equivalent is ok in cycling ? (Not just in SA - Valverde stll races too)

Edited May 7, 2021 by Christie

[W@nted]

From what I recall with YDV's case is that it left more questions than answers. The ruling was applied retroactively due to circumstances in her appeal/argument. Indicating that CSA and/or SAIDS slipped up somewhere.

 

As far as her recent result, it's doesn't really have bearing. Robyn unfortunately took a wrong turn, we'd probably agree though that she still would have won regardless.

 

Holding a national champ status under those conditions must be bitter sweet, for anyone. For an athlete with a former doping sanction, some might say karmic.

 

TBH I'm pretty surprised she beat the field there. Amy Beth, Sarah Hill, Theresa Ralph, Hayley Preen, Tiffany Keep, Courteney Webb etc ...

 

Does this make the performance questionable or suspicious though, not perse and I wouldn't say so against her previous doping case. The lack of testing on the day though doesn't build confidence either.

This sums up my thoughts. Like you said, the other pro ladies were present, so not exactly a B field of competitors on the day. Given her (and cyclings) history, I am just sceptical of her performance.

 

If she is racing clean, well done to her. It takes a monumental effort and commitment to race at that level.

Edited May 8, 2021 by W@nted

[Patchelicious]

Was thinking the other day.............it all is a bit of a shitshow really.

 

Our current Elite MTB XCM champ is a caught doper and banned for life at the epic but 6 years later she kicks everyone's ass at Nationals.

 

How can one trust any result these days?

 

Edit: Marathon champ

The same one who podiumed at R2S?

[Jewbacca]

For me it's a bit silly how gullible some people are and how gullible some people choose to be when it comes to stuff like doping.

 

'She/he was taking (said known masking agent/diuretic/contaminated gel capsule) for some wonky donky illness' bla bla bla

 

No... you were told she was taking it to treat said obscure wonky donky illness because that was the 'get out of jail free card' or angle which was chosen to create a technicality, create some doubt and potentially reduce any sanction.

 

Sorry guys and gals, the number of these yarns surely shows you that they are just that, yarns.

 

It happens WAY too often in a very small pool of persons DESPITE the obvious and apparent lack of testing.

 

The thing is, something as basic as taking a Myprodol will put you on the naughty list if you are tested as it has Codeine in it. The argument saying 'anything you take by accident' starts really coming into question though as Codeine doesn't hide/mask a PED.

 

Masking meds are usually (not always) quite difficult to get hold of as they are quite often discontinued for another 'less controversial'  treatment, even or especially for rare blinky blonky illnesses that sportsers have made popular to stand behind.

 

As an aside, I have been tested a number of times at various sportsings since the 90's. Twice as a school boy in South Africa. 

 

Call me a keyboard warrior or whatever, but yeah..... If you cheat, no matter how remorseful you are, find whatever god you like etc, your career should be over. If a lawyer makes 1 bad decision, breaks the law and is criminally charged and convicted, his career is kaput.

 

If an investment broker is caught with his hand in the cookie jar etc..... So many professions have a 'no mistakes' policy. I don't know why sport is different, especially as it drives massive chunks of economy.

 

Even Riccardo Ricco has made peace with his cheatings and moved on. If he can, then anyone can!

Edited May 9, 2021 by Jewbacca

[gtr1]

So you have never been tested,.Then you are no different to anyone.

 

Not sure what that has to do with anything, or what your point is ??

 

Yes I have never been tested. Not a good thing in my opinion. Especially as I have won national titles, and won some major races, as well as competed in tours etc back in the day for the national team. Been to world champs.  So sad state of affairs for doping that I have never been tested. But at the same time, I am still cautious as to any meds I ever take. Because i know my luck. The 1 day I take something without checking, will be the day I have my 1st dope test.

 

But I have also been witness to doping taking place and being swept under the carpet for well known athletes. Probably not to damage the image of the sport. So I have also been on the receiving end of competing against people that have doped.

 

So my point is, if I can be cautious, then no excuse for any elite athlete, or any athlete, especially as the tools to check are simple and available.