Doping git thread

[mjr]

An ignominious end to a long career..

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/katie-compton-banned-for-four-years-by-usada/

Must hurt a bit when Betsema got off essentially scot-free. Something Compton was outspokenly critical of at the time..

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/betsemas-back-dated-six-month-doping-ban-is-bullshit-says-compton/

What am I missing? Why is it 4 years not 2? Not that it seems it would make a difference in this case, so close to retirement.

 

[bitsandbobs]

What am I missing? Why is it 4 years not 2? Not that it seems it would make a difference in this case, so close to retirement.

Isn't 4 years the standard for intentional doping?

 

[Adam4868]

Dodgy burger ? Whatever it's the end of her career...can we trust any of her wins ?

 

[mjr]

Isn't 4 years the standard for intentional doping?

Well, yes, but how can it be intentional when Compton is still saying even while accepting the ban that "I have never intentionally or knowingly put anything like that into my body"?

UCI regs say "the term “intentional” is meant to identify those Ridersor other Personswho engage in conduct which they knew constituted an anti-doping rule violation or knew that there was a significant risk that the conduct might constitute or result in an anti-doping rule violation and manifestly disregarded that risk."

 

[bitsandbobs]

Well, yes, but how can it be intentional when Compton is still saying even while accepting the ban that "I have never intentionally or knowingly put anything like that into my body"?

I guess USADA doesn't believe her!

Her bio passport was pinged first and then old samples were reanalyzed. Will be interesting to see if USADA releases any more information.

 

[mjr]

I guess USADA doesn't believe her!

Surely that alone isn't sufficient to prove intent? I'm sure we can all think of cases where it's difficult to imagine how doping wasn't intentional but it couldn't be proved and the doper got only a 2 year ban.

If that's the article she's been banned under, it's rather odd that she has been deemed to have "accepted" the verdict when she continues to protest her innocence. Hopefully the USADA announcement of the ban will explain a bit more.

 

[matticus]

So she's doing both: Publicly protesting her innocence, but accepting the ban from USADA. A kind of Schrodinger's doper.

I don't really see a problem?

It's always possible for any legal-type system to get things wrong. And the accused can believe something different to the truth. Either way, it's possible to believe you're innocent, but accept that you cannot change the court's verdict.

(Like accepting that you've been dumped - crying about it won't bring him/her back!)

 

[Adam4868]

I don't really see a problem?

It's always possible for any legal-type system to get things wrong. And the accused can believe something different to the truth. Either way, it's possible to believe you're innocent, but accept that you cannot change the court's verdict.

(Like accepting that you've been dumped - crying about it won't bring him/her back!)

Yea right...I could really see her holding her hands up and saying "fair cop,you've got me bang to rights,I've had a good run"

 

[Dogtrousers]

I don't really see a problem?

Neither do I. Just quoting the relevant section, pointing out that she wasn't just "deemed to have accepted", she had indeed accepted the verdict.

 

[mjr]

I don't really see a problem?

The main problem is how it's ended up as 4 years. Even Riccò didn't get banned for intentional doping the first time, despite him confessing and eventually getting a reduced ban on appeal to CAS for cooperating with the authorities.

It'll be interesting if the verdict is actually published, or at least what article the charge was!

 

[bitsandbobs]

The main problem is how it's ended up as 4 years. Even Riccò didn't get banned for intentional doping the first time, despite him confessing and eventually getting a reduced ban on appeal to CAS for cooperating with the authorities.

It'll be interesting if the verdict is actually published, or at least what article the charge was!

The WADA code has changed somewhat since Riccò was doping. The 4 year ban for intentional doping was introduced in 2015.

 

[rich p]

The WADA code has changed somewhat since Riccò was doping. The 4 year ban for intentional doping was introduced in 2015.

Ricco should have had an extra ban for being a complete twat

 

[ColinJ]

Ricco should have had an extra ban for being a complete twat

I don't think that the threat of it would have deterred him though - he was apparently quite happy to risk the death penalty!

 

[bitsandbobs]

Ricco should have had an extra ban for being a complete twat

Apparently, he now has a no needles policy..

https://cyclingtips.com/2021/01/riccardo-ricco-doesnt-want-to-be-injected-with-who-knows-what/

A complete loon

 

[GuyBoden]

An ignominious end to a long career..

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/katie-compton-banned-for-four-years-by-usada/

Must hurt a bit when Betsema got off essentially scot-free. Something Compton was outspokenly critical of at the time..

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/betsemas-back-dated-six-month-doping-ban-is-bullshit-says-compton/

History is trying to inform us that eating beef is not a very good idea for professional athletes. So, why take the unnecessary risk?