PDA

View Full Version : Hey! I've got a GREAT idea! . . .


BumbleBeeDave
07-16-2009, 02:19 PM
Let's pile on Tyler! At least, that's what the ethical pillars at WADA seem to be thinking as they sit there in their conference room discussing how to stop doping in cycling.

Good on you, guys! Let's teach that unrepentant miscreant and his chimeric twin a REAL lesson!

BBD

==================

WADA seeks longer Hamilton penalty
By Charles Pelkey
Published: Jul. 16, 2009

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has appealed the agreement between the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and former pro Tyler Hamilton on the grounds that an eight-year suspension for a second doping offense does not constitute sufficient punishment.

In a papers filed with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), WADA has asked an arbitration panel to set aside an agreement between USADA and Hamilton in which he accepted an eight-year suspension without contesting a positive doping test for testosterone.

Contacted by VeloNews, WADA spokesman Frédéric Donzé said that even though the original eight-year ban falls within provisions of the World Anti-Doping Code, the agency felt the agreement warranted independant review.

"A full legal consideration of this case pursuant to the World Anti-Doping Code shows that the applicable sanction for a second offence of this nature (in combination with the athlete’s first offence) is between a minimum of eight years to a lifetime ban," Donzé wrote in an email. "Given that the eight-year sanction was the result of an agreement between USADA and the athlete, WADA considers that it warrants scrutiny from an independent tribunal. WADA has consequently appealed the agreement reached on a national level to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

"This appeal is pending and WADA cannot comment further at this stage in order to protect the integrity of the proceedings," he added.

“We were surprised,” said Hamilton’s attorney Chris Manderson. “I only just learned about it and really can’t offer much of a comment until we assess the situation.”

Hamilton tested positive for testosterone or its precursors in February. He later acknowledged the positive test, declined to ask for further confirmation of the result and announced publicly that he had taken DHEA as self-medication for depression.

Hamilton announced his retirement from cycling on April 19 of this year, when he also confirmed that he had tested positive following the February out-of-competition test.

Hamilton could have faced a lifetime ban due to his 2004 suspension for homologous blood doping, a violation first noted by anti-doping officials at that year’s Olympic Games. While the Athens sample was not confirmed, testers took another sample on September 11 of that year, after Hamilton won the eighth stage individual time trial at the Vuelta a España.

In June, Hamilton signed an acceptance of sanction form and USADA agreed not to pursue the case further.

At the time, U.S. Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart said the agreement was enough to ensure that Hamilton would not participate in competitive sport again.

“In the sport of cycling, eight years' ineligibility for a 38-year old athlete is effectively a lifetime ban, and an assurance that he is penalized for what would have been the remainder of his competitive cycling career,” Tygart said in June.

According to recent revisions to the WADA Code, penalties for a second doping offense can range from eight years to life. The revisions give anti-doping officials a degree of latitude when considering factors such as an athlete’s cooperation, age and other factors.

Tygart told VeloNews on Thursday that the eight-year agreement was a reasonable outcome of the case, particularly considering Hamilton's age.

"If he'd have been 24, for example, we'd have never gone for it," he said.

But WADA officials exercised their right under Article 13 of the World Anti-Doping Code to appeal the decision and seek the maximum penalty in the case. WADA will bear the cost of the appeal.

According to WADA, a decision in the case should be rendered within four months.

merckx
07-16-2009, 03:05 PM
Of course his racing career was over with an eight year ban, but now a career in any capacity on a Protour team is not possible.

johnnymossville
07-16-2009, 03:18 PM
8 is more than enough.

jhcakilmer
07-16-2009, 03:33 PM
8 is more than enough.


+1......plus, how many former cyclist/former dopers are involved with cycling as managers, DS, agents, etc......if we banded them all for life, cycling would fall apart......8 years is a long time, and fits the crime.

BumbleBeeDave
07-16-2009, 04:45 PM
. . . given his experiences in cycling these past few years, I would highly doubt that, 8 years down the road, he would suddenly want to get back into it. Or that any team organization would hire him. Sad, but I wish him luck in whatever he ends up doing. It may not be as glamorous as pro cycling--he might end up managing a Dunkin' Donuts in Marblehead for all we know--but I hope whatever he ends up doing he finds some peace of mind and some happy times.

BBD

WadePatton
07-16-2009, 05:48 PM
8 is more than enough.

***? more? give everybody a break!

them's the rules.

change the rules, but leave tyler the eff out of it. he plays by the rules he was riding under.

rustychisel
07-16-2009, 07:29 PM
Don't know what your issue is, to be sure. Maybe 'they' are trying to make an example of him, maybe, but [deep breath] is sounds like you're arguing that as a serial doper and unrepentent cheat he isn't as bad as say those filthy Eyetalians of Kazahks.

Sure, he's just a very naughty boy.

Len J
07-16-2009, 07:32 PM
The issue is preserving their rights should the same thing happen with a 24 YO rider.................

This isn't about Tyler, it's about presidence.

BTW...if it makes no difference to Tyler's future carreer, whay does he care?

len

djg
07-17-2009, 11:36 AM
Don't know what your issue is, to be sure. Maybe 'they' are trying to make an example of him, maybe, but [deep breath] is sounds like you're arguing that as a serial doper and unrepentent cheat he isn't as bad as say those filthy Eyetalians of Kazahks.

Sure, he's just a very naughty boy.

Well, I don't no what's bothersome to anybody else, but, without defending TH, it seems to me like pointless piling on. At 38, 8 years means the end of his pro career (at the elite level, certainly), and a much-deferred, if ever possible, transition to another role on a pro tour team. It's a pretty serious penalty for TH, plus a pretty serious message to send to anybody, much less young pros or aspiring pros for whom an 8-year window likely seems an eternity. So if you have all sorts of issues in cleaning up the sport, and limited resources, what's the point of this particular appeal?

BumbleBeeDave
07-17-2009, 12:33 PM
. . . it seems to me like pointless piling on.

. . . of my original post. This is the prosecutional equivalent of stepping on an ant--then continuing to grind it's remains into the ground beneath your heel for several more minutes until there is nothing left of it.

As I understand from what I've read of this so far, the penalty that Hamilton accepted from USADA may not have been the most serious possible penalty, but it was certainly within the acceptable range of penalties that USADA could hand out.

His attorney Chris Manderson said, “WADA’s insistence on a lifetime ban against Tyler is a vindictive, personal and ruthless attempt to destroy a man who suffers from a serious illness, has ended his career, and has already accepted the penalty imposed upon him."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hamilton-responds-to-wadas-life-ban-request

Sounds about right to me. The guy's career is over, the trophies and Olympic medals he won mean nothing now, his wife left him, his mother has been diagnosed with cancer, AND he's battling clinical depression himself. Not only that, but in the current anti-doping climate, which I think is likely to continue, what pro team 8 years from now would even think of hiring this guy to help them do anything?

Piling on, indeed . . . I think his defense efforts pissed somebody at WADA off big time and this is nothing but revenge. Ortherwise, what's the point? There isn't one.

BBD

rwsaunders
07-17-2009, 12:39 PM
Just take the approach of Boonen and other French-speaking athletes...do coke and it's ok...

French tennis star Richard Gasquet is being allowed to carry on playing after he got into trouble because he had tested positive for cocaine.

23-year-old Gasquet had been provisionally suspended in May after his sample given at the Miami Masters in March was found to contain benzoylecgonine, which is a metabolite of cocaine.

The International Federation (ITF) accepted Gasquet’s claim that "the cocaine entered his system through inadvertent contamination in a nightclub". Gasquet had claimed in his defense that the cocaine got into him when he kissed a woman.

Acotts
07-17-2009, 12:41 PM
Don't know what your issue is, to be sure. Maybe 'they' are trying to make an example of him, maybe, but [deep breath] is sounds like you're arguing that as a serial doper and unrepentent cheat he isn't as bad as say those filthy Eyetalians of Kazahks.

Sure, he's just a very naughty boy.

Correct me if i am wrong, wasn't he caught using anti-depression drugs.

Seems like they are letting the rules get in the way of what is right. Actually worse, they are changing the rules.

I dunno, im sure that guy has been on suicide watch for a while now. Wouldn't be the first pro to go down like that.

I dont know all the issues, but this doesn't feel right in my gut.

shiftyfixedgear
07-17-2009, 12:59 PM
Ask Bjarne Riis about former dopers who don't get ostracized in the sport. The man admits he used EPO to win the TDF and the matter is neatly swept under the rug and they (the asswipes in the UCI and the Societe TDF who pretend to try and promote AND police the sport) don't even make a fuss. Hmm . . . Jan Ulrich, same team wins the tour the very next year after
Riis . . . could he have been on EPO also ? Different set of rules for Europeans compared to American's. Different set of rules when they want to make an example vs. when they simply want to turn a blind eye and not lose sponsors and $$$ because too many pros test positive.

Does anyone honestly think Floyd Landis would have been treated the way he was if he was French. Hah Hah ! He could have pissed radioactive waste and the samples would have disappeared and/or been "negative".

goonster
07-17-2009, 01:40 PM
Correct me if i am wrong, wasn't he caught using anti-depression drugs.
He says he knowingly took an over-the-counter anti-depressant supplement containing a precursor (DHEA*) of a precursor (androstediol/androstendione) of testosterone.

* = the substance found in the positive test

I agree with BBD. The WADA doesn't necessarily have a problem with the sentence, it has a problem with the fact that Tyler made a deal with the USADA (minimum sentence for non-contention of test). The anti-doping orgs should set their own house in order, and this matter should never be allowed to waste the time of CAS.

maddog17
07-17-2009, 01:47 PM
seems to me they want to make Tyler an example. send out a warning to others that this will happen to them too. leave the guy alone already. he didn't fight the second test, he retired and took the 8 yr ban with no complaints. why the F do you need to pile on more? there has to be some revamping of the system. one body needs to make the final decision and that's it. no more of this "we don't feel the ban is long enough" crap. some type of supreme court if you will makes the final decision. all bodies interested should make their point during the hearing, the top court rules and that's that.

goonster
07-17-2009, 01:51 PM
some type of supreme court if you will makes the final decision. all bodies interested should make their point during the hearing, the top court rules and that's that.
You have just described CAS.

BumbleBeeDave
07-17-2009, 02:15 PM
. . . but unfortunately just like our own Supreme Court, cases only seem to go to this court on appeal. First the cases have to work their way through the "due process" system of whatever sport organization is governing each specific sport. That means that in cycling very few riders have the financial resources to pursue appeals to that level. I think the UCI counts on that and that's part of the reason for this apparent wish for total destruction for Hamilton. They want to drive home the point to all the other riders that it's impossible to challenge the UCI's authority.

The way the sport is set up now, despite the glamor of success the riders are the lowest form of independent contractor. I've said it before and I'll say it again--sooner or later some seminal event will happen that will get enough riders angry enough to let some enterprising sports agent or labor organizer step in and get a riders union with some real power organized. It may take some sort of court challenge like the Curt Flood case in baseball. But it will happen eventually.

BBD

Lincoln
07-17-2009, 02:47 PM
I really don't care if they "pile on him" or not. He's a major cheat and has what is most likely an unearned Olympic medal at home. He deserves zero sympathy for anything that may come as a result.

My only issue is that WADA could probably be using their time and resources more wisely.