That stupid UCI charter

iainf72

Now they want to extend it to continental teams.

And the managers are not too happy about having to sign it because why should they pay if someone in their team does something dodgy off their own back (Hi Pat Sinkewitz)

What is the next waste of time they can come up with?

Kléber

I don't think it's so bad. It is a stunt but it's better than nothing.

Yes it's legally useless but it has a moral purpose. Suppose Rider X gets busted for doping but refuses to pay back his past salary (does he have to pay the tax back too?) and successfully defends himself from the UCI pursuing him. So legally he's safe, he keeps the cash.

But what about the moral side? What if Rider X wanted to join a Pro Tour team again? What if he wanted to ride the Tour de France or ASO's Liege Bastogne Liege? Would a rider who refused to repent be allowed to compete properly again? The answer is probably no.

So riders at the end of their careers who get busted might ignore the rule but anyone hoping to resume their career in time might feel obliged to follow the charter. It makes the cost of doping for some more expensive and so could help discourage younger riders.

jimmythecuckoo

Something is better than nothing I suppose.

Not that I think Vinos year salary will ever end up in the UCI coffers.

CarlosFerreiro

iainf72 wrote:

And the managers are not too happy about having to sign it because why should they pay if someone in their team does something dodgy off their own back (Hi Pat Sinkewitz)
What is the next waste of time they can come up with?

Well the thinking is obviously to get the managers / teams / sposnser to the point where they have way more to lose themselves and so more interest in "preventing" things, rather than maybe just "not encouraging" them.
I guess similarly the removal of whole teams on one failure in the TdF.... gives the sponsers a lot more to risk.

You can see the idea... whether it works out or not is a different thing.....

andyp

iainf72 wrote:

And the managers are not too happy about having to sign it because why should they pay if someone in their team does something dodgy off their own back (Hi Pat Sinkewitz)

Does it penalise team managers though? They are going to pay the rider's wages anyway so that's money they've budgeted to pay out already.

It's still daft mind. I await with baited breath which daft idea they come up with next. Something tells me it'll be Pro Tour races in Australia and the USA in January/February.

bigdawg

have any ofthe caught riders been made to pay up yet??

iainf72

http://www.uci.ch/includes/asp/getTarge ... MzI0NjU%26

Open to interpretation I suppose.

Riders would only need to pay if they got a 2 year ban. Oh, and the document wouldn't stand up in any court so I doubt anyone will be paying.

bigdawg

how many riders in the last however many years have received the full 2 year ban??

From memory even Basso (the highest profile case I can remember) only got 18 months...

timoid.

bigdawg wrote:

how many riders in the last however many years have received the full 2 year ban??

From memory even Basso (the highest profile case I can remember) only got 18 months...

Off the top of my head:

Heras, Hamilton, Perez, Hondo (eventually), Camezind (although he retired), Millar