| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bartali
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 7730
Location: Hertfordshire
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:10 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| bbnaz wrote: | Bartali,
That is pretty much what it boils down to isn't it? Rules are rules and most rules are abitrary. What may be legal (within the rules) now could very well be illegal (against the rules) next month if the powers that be decide so.
So if someone is staying just below the "illegal" line in testing, are they actually cheating?
I don't know and I would be inclined to say if the rules don't prohibit, then no. |
I completely agree. Now ... of course there is a difference between staying just within the rules and straying outside the rules but not getting caught. The latter is cheating the former is not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bartali
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 7730
Location: Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chasm wrote: | | Rules must have some basis in right and wrong if they are to survive. |
Not at all. They are completely arbitary. In football you cant touch the ball with your hands. In golf, you can't use the wrong end of the club. In cycling your bike has to weigh more than 6.8kg. All arbitary. You can't take a PED on the banned substance list, but you can take a PED that isn't. All arbitary. Nothing to do with morals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bartali
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 7730
Location: Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| shimouma wrote: | I'm with the good Doctor Ferrari on this one:
If it you don't test positive for it, then you're not doing anything wrong.
The test determines whether you've been doping or not, and if it shows nothing out of the ordinary, then you're not breaking the rules. |
Can't agree with you and the good doctor on this one.
There is a difference between not cheating, and cheating but avoiding detection. The latter is breaking the rules. Now ... I think we both agree that in the modern pro peleton (virtually) all riders are juiced. ITo me they are therefore cheating - whether caught or not. Is it a major 'crime' in my eyes? Should those that are caught face the consequences - yes ... but we shouldn't have a system where it deprives you of your livlihood. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bartali
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 7730
Location: Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| naspa wrote: | Bartali - what is your position on the likes of Merckx. Merckx and others failed tests (ie against the rules of the time) but were not banned (as per the rules of the time) and were thus able to go out and set records and win races etc. For example if Pantani had been racing under the same set of punishments as Merckx he would have won another Giro. If Merckx had been riding under the WADA code he would have been banned for 2 years.
Moser as I recall failed 7 tests in one season but wasn't banned and hence carried on winning. |
Don't really know enough about the rules at that time, but I would say:
1. Moser, Merckx etc cheated
2. If the rules of the day were applied properly (ie no bans for 7 failed tests was by the book), then that's fine.
Personally, IMO this whole drugs issue has been blow out of proportion. It is simply breaking the rules of the game. To take away someones means of supporting themselves and their family is much too severe. No one would do the same if Tiger Woods holed the ball with the wrong end of the club! Trouble is taht this is an issue with today's society and requires change on a massive scale. Today all drugs (and artificial additives are considered 'bad' - despite the huge amount of good they have done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chasm
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 371
Location: North East England
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bartali wrote: | | chasm wrote: | | Rules must have some basis in right and wrong if they are to survive. |
Not at all. They are completely arbitary. In football you cant touch the ball with your hands. In golf, you can't use the wrong end of the club. In cycling your bike has to weigh more than 6.8kg. All arbitary. You can't take a PED on the banned substance list, but you can take a PED that isn't. All arbitary. Nothing to do with morals. |
I don't think all these analogies really stand up, Bartali. You can't compare the fact that you have to kick rather than handle the ball in football with questions about doping. The former is something that defines what football is. The latter is about how we expect footballers (and cyclists) to behave. The analogy with bike weight is sounder.
As it happens, I don't think there is anything in the rules of golf that would prevent you using the club like a snooker cue if you wanted to. You wouldn't win many Open Championships, though.
_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bartali
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 7730
Location: Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll defer to greater experts than me on the golf question. Smarauder might know.
Maybe its like a foul in football. Against the rules, but the punishment is so mild it's built into the game itself. Still think the best analogy is simply that many PED are known, but not banned, whilst others are on the list. Entirely arbitary IMO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Wierd
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 407
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
You can't use a golf club like a cue. It has to do with not being able to lineup behind the ball in line to the target.
With that, (i just finally looked at this thread) I totally agree with Bartali.
Regarding Merkx and Moser doping. Riders of a different era, who also had different era of governing body, they had different attitudes then, thats the way it was.
_________________
A.S.O. + U.C.I. spells hypocrisy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CapeRoadie
Joined: 15 Oct 2006
Posts: 9583
Location: The sandy windswept peninsula
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bartali wrote: | | naspa wrote: | Bartali - what is your position on the likes of Merckx. Merckx and others failed tests (ie against the rules of the time) but were not banned (as per the rules of the time) and were thus able to go out and set records and win races etc. For example if Pantani had been racing under the same set of punishments as Merckx he would have won another Giro. If Merckx had been riding under the WADA code he would have been banned for 2 years.
Moser as I recall failed 7 tests in one season but wasn't banned and hence carried on winning. |
Don't really know enough about the rules at that time, but I would say:
1. Moser, Merckx etc cheated
2. If the rules of the day were applied properly (ie no bans for 7 failed tests was by the book), then that's fine.
Personally, IMO this whole drugs issue has been blow out of proportion. It is simply breaking the rules of the game. To take away someones means of supporting themselves and their family is much too severe. No one would do the same if Tiger Woods holed the ball with the wrong end of the club! Trouble is that this is an issue with today's society and requires change on a massive scale. Today all drugs (and artificial additives are considered 'bad' - despite the huge amount of good they have done. |
Viagra is a legal performance enhancing drug. It's inventors won the Nobel Prize in medicine. Funny how performance enhancing drugs in sport and the doctors who prescribe them are considered bad because of the arbitrary rules of sport. It makes no sense whatsoever.
_________________
END THE MADNESS
I dduw bo'r diolch
"This bike is so pimp it hit your mother and all she could say was 'Thank you, sir!'". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kathy
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 7141
Location: Formerly Hen Wlad fy Nhadau, now, Murcia, Spain
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
