Millartime - says Cav

rebs

Max ban DM could have got was 4 years. Or so he said in his book.

symo

iainf72 wrote:

symo wrote:

True that BOA have signed up to the WADA code; however if they choose to have rules/laws/statues in excess of that it has nothing to do with WADA. BOA would be still in line with WADA, it's just DM is in the wrong country.

No, there isn't provision for them to have stricter rules. The rules need to be uniform so it's the same everywhere.

IS there something in the WADA code that specifically states "Associations must not impose any longer suspensions/penalties in excess of the WADA guidelines" then?

There is this caveat in the WADA code :

"These model rules and regulations will provide alternatives from which stakeholders may select. Some stakeholders may choose to adopt the model rules and regulations and other models of best practices verbatim. Others may decide to adopt the models with modifications. Still other stakeholders may choose to develop their own rules and regulations consistent with the general principles and specific requirements set forth in the Code."

Pretty clear WADA is a framework; kind of like the HSWA, on which other HSE regulations are hung.

tremayne

Symo - interesting. Thanks for that.

Perhaps the challenges (by the Athletes) will be more along the lines of 'level playingfield' (ie infringement of their human rights etc etc)?

Jez mon

Is a lifetime ban from a specific event after the first offence consistent with the principles? As far as I can see the general principle is you get a two year ban from all events upon your first offence, after which you are free to compete.

symo

I think it does lie within the code of conduct of WADA. After all these are quite clearly the 'minimum guidelines' that WADA expect ,but the bit I previously quoted shoots itself in the foot.

I think the BOA have made a stance, Millar not happy with it others are. I think getting money into UK cycling is dependent on the doping issue being resolved forcefully and this is the means the UK are using.

Shame that the UCI and many other countries doesn't have the BOA's cojones. I personally think that UK cycling should be proud of it's testing regime, the missed Cavendish test shows how seriously it is taken in the UK, unlike in other sports like football where a player is mysteriously injured in training but comes back with no loss of form whatsoever.

iainf72

I think you're not interpreting the rules correctly. The athlete is sanctioned by their federation and the BOA need to respect what the federation does. It's one of the main principles of WADA. So if someone cops a 2 year ban, they do the ban and that's the end of it. You can't punish someone twice for the same offence.