Pat McQuaid, President of the UCI yesterday confirmed that the organisation would double the length of the statutory ban for those convicted of doping if it considered them to have been wilfully cheating. Commenting on the latest doping scandal to hit professional road racing he confirmed that if Schumacher, Kohl and Piepoli had commited their offences at next year’s Tour they would be facing a four year ban. "In these cases, considering that these guys were given the product and then went and took it for the Tour de France, it would be very much classified as wilful cheating. "Next year, a rider in that position would face a four-year ban." McQuaid makes no secret of the fact that he would like to see convicted drugs cheats banned from cycling for life, but admits that up until now the UCI’s hands have been tied by the fact that it is signed up to the world anti doping code which lays down statutory punishments for convicted dopers. One of the reasons that the code’s sanctions go no further than a two year ban is that the bans have to be able to stick in legal jurisdictions across the world. Up until now it has been felt that longer bans would open governing bodies and the anti-doping agencies up to legal challenge in both Europe and the United States. From January 2009 though the code allows for more flexibility and for governing bodies to judge each case on its merits. The UCI will impose sanctions on a case-by-case basis, said McQuaid, and cyclists will be judged on the gravity of the infringement and in particular the nature of the substance.
Doping cheats face four year ban from January
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@mitsky the ban would require him to move his family He was just telling a tale- it would be easier and cheaper to just pay for a driver/ chauffeur! Bet he doesn't move.
@mdavidford Or even A Clockwork Orange, another dystopian classic by Tim Burgess.
It also tells you NOT to overtake on the approach to a junction or a bend, and specifically and repeatedly admonishes cyclists to take great care passing vehicles near junctions. The driver may well have seen the cyclist on the approach and reasonably assumed that they wouldn't make a suicide dive up the inside of the turn. They should have indicated, but I'm not convinced it would have made any difference to the situation.
The clip states that Ben Cabango pled for mercy as the ban would require him to move his family. This is an "exceptional hardship" plea. Which was ignored. That is the most serious one I've heard of (having to move family), alongside others such as "losing job" etc. So if that sort of plea can be disregarded, why can't other lesser pleas?
@the little onion Should have gone to Lancashire!
"Ben Cabango has been hit with a six-month driving ban and over £1,000 in fines" Good. Every infringement of traffic law while driving a lethal weapon should be treated that seriously. Drivers routinely do things that they know are illegal, reinforcing the habit until it becomes natural, and aren't punished until they kill or injure someone. While punishment is part of the solution, as another thread on here says, we should make such behaviour socially unacceptable. As well as banning and fining criminals, we should also require them to be retrained and to pass a more stringent test. But, as ever, society loves their cars, and not much changes. Reminds me of the closing scene in 'How to get ahead in advertising' when he's riding a horse and listing the things that they can sell the gullible, especially cars. Great movie.
On the footballer being 'banned' after being caught on the phone - as I understand it, a straightforward phone offense is just 6 points* on the license, insufficient for a ban. In other words, the man has previous, so it can't be blamed solely on so-called 'vigilante' cyclists (i.e. upstanding members of the public). *cue football joke about the easiest 6 points that Swansea FC will get this season.
I refer the Honourable Squirrel to the discussion of August 31st in Another Place.
@Smoggysteve Based on the clip being old, having been reported on previously with no apparent new information making it worth re-reporting now, and the "reporters" knowing what the resulting online commentary would be... Could they be sued/tried for incitement to violence?