PDA

View Full Version : Rethinking doping punishments



ehoch
August 7th, 2009, 10:42 PM
I watched the East-German women (and men) win plenty of medals they did not deserve - and I always thought the punishments for doping were almost too light - but now I am starting to change my opinion.

I am sick and tired of watching football, baseball and basketball players get a slap on the wrist at worst - for obvious doping violations, while swimmers (and track athletes and cyclists) get vilified for offenses that are the same or even less severe. Just in this last month there was an actual countdown for Manny Ramirez to come back to the Dodgers -- he got standing ovations after a 50 game or 2 months supsension -- they had special promotions and what have you not. If you read the responses on Jessica Hardy dopng ban reduction ( a few months ago), there are people out there who want to throw out of the sport for good --- that is just plain wrong.

I think a six months suspension was more than enough - and that crazy Olympic ban rule has to be some sort of joke. I will accept that as soon as the US basketball, hockey and baseball team has to go through the same testing the swimmers have to pass through.

knelson
August 7th, 2009, 11:46 PM
Did you see the thread over on collegeswimming? Some of the postings are awfully harsh, I must say! Yeah, Hardy deserved to be suspended, but to also prohibit her from swimming in 2012 just seems ridiculous to me.

Thrashing Slug
August 8th, 2009, 03:07 PM
I fully support the current rules including the Olympic ban. Dopers suck. I would even support a lifetime ban, with a stipulation that samples must be kept on file to enable future appeals.. in case one turns out to be innocent. For the guilty (the cheaters), I have no sympathy.

hofffam
August 8th, 2009, 06:09 PM
One difference with MLB, NFL, etc. is that the suspensions are served without pay. I know they are wealthy already, but a 50 game baseball suspension is VERY costly in money.

funkyfish
August 8th, 2009, 08:07 PM
If any professional sports organization wants to make a definitive statement regarding doping, I think the strongest one would be to ban the convicted player from competing for life, no exceptions, no excuses.

However, given that such a penalty would potentially get rid of many cash cows, I don't see that ever happening.

KeithM
August 8th, 2009, 08:52 PM
I do think it would be a bit harsh for her to be prevented from competing in two Olympics if there's verifiable cred to what her defense team alleges about Advocare.

However there's still a few things about Hardy's case that bother me. I would like her lawyers to release the full findings of the testing they conducted on her behalf. This way all that information is subject to the scrutiny of the sports science community at large. I do find it strange given Advocare's profile that there's no instance of its products triggering a positive test for Clenbuterol. Their list of clients extends into many sports and athletes that are tested and tested often. It's a bit of a wild west atmosphere for supplements but given some past litigation these companies have a lot at stake too especially if they're marketing this to athletes subject to doping controls. While some swimmers ditched Advocare I know a couple that still take it. Not smart to be sure but they still don't believe that their supplements triggered her positive test results, they basically think she just got caught.

lefty
August 8th, 2009, 09:31 PM
I would like her lawyers to release the full findings of the testing they conducted on her behalf. This way all that information is subject to the scrutiny of the sports science community at large.


I get what you are saying, but do remember that it was an independent panel that concluded it was advocare's fault, not someone with an agenda. If this happened to you, wouldn't you just want the whole thing to go away? Would you really want to be subject to arm-chair scientists speculating on the matter? This girl got completely screwed (not saying she shouldn't have been suspended, though. A positive test is a positive test). I think people just need to get the heck off her back.

orca1946
August 8th, 2009, 10:29 PM
Ok suspend us for 5 meets & go back at it !! By the way we don't go back to $500,000 a meet??:badday:

KeithM
August 8th, 2009, 10:44 PM
This girl got completely screwed (not saying she shouldn't have been suspended, though. A positive test is a positive test). I think people just need to get the heck off her back. Kirk linked to a good blog from the Seattle columnist in the previous topic. Some of the behavior of the panel re: a possible reduction of the ban to 6 months to allow Olympic participation seemed to go above and beyond the mandate of that panel. They were exploring the option of tailoring the suspension to suit Hardy. Not claiming there's anything untoward about the process. But it would definitely clear up any reservations if she wins her CAS hearing and WADA's appeal against the AAA's ruling is rejected.

However, my opinion is that if someone deliberately cheats then I support a lifetime ban. If they can present a case otherwise then a suspension is fine. But I don't like the comparisons to other sports particularly ones such as baseball. I don't want to achieve parity with the least common denominator when it comes to punitive anti doping policies. The self serving and hypocritical reactions of fans in other sports don't concern me.

ehoch
August 8th, 2009, 10:47 PM
This girl got completely screwed (not saying she shouldn't have been suspended, though. A positive test is a positive test). I think people just need to get the heck off her back.

Totally agree -- this is entirely different than intentional use / cheating. Lifetime ban ??? That's like giving somebody the death penalty for involuntary manslaughter.

KeithM
August 8th, 2009, 11:14 PM
Totally agree -- this is entirely different than intentional use / cheating. Lifetime ban ??? That's like giving somebody the death penalty for involuntary manslaughter. If someone supports a lifetime ban in such cases then that is extreme. But do you agree with a lifetime ban for doping offenders that cannot present a case that their use wasn't intentional?

If an athlete deliberately cheats then they are forever tainted.

ehoch
August 9th, 2009, 12:43 PM
But do you agree with a lifetime ban for doping offenders that cannot present a case that their use wasn't intentional?


Yes - I would even go further. I would strip them of all previous accomplishments and make them return all medals.

lefty
August 10th, 2009, 11:27 AM
Intent is hard to prove, that is part of the problem. Example: 16 year old vs 24 year old being given steroids by their coaches. I have a lot easier time saying that the 24 year old should have known. A 20 year old should know better but is still in the stage of life where it is common to point to others for moral guidance.

Swimmy83843
August 10th, 2009, 02:22 PM
Why don't we join the issues of the Tech Suit and Doping. Keep the full length rubber suits, but if you get caught doping, you can still compete. But only in Lycra Briefs/Jammer or std womens suit.