Riccardo Ricco

I read the ProCycling interview with Ricco and I think that they were justified in putting him on the cover because he was the biggest story in the mag - and his astounding and unguarded arrogance reveals the rider for what he is. ProCycling didn't glorify Ricco by any means - they gave him enough rope and he hung himself. I also think that, unfortunately, doping is still part of the sport so it needs to be covered by the cycling mags - readers who are horrified that it would be discussed are just putting their heads in the sand.

As for coming back from his ban, the rules don't say anything about having to be contrite for your crimes, so he and Vino have as much right to come back as David Millar. But we see the measure of the man and I don't think we need to worry about Ricco being in the peloton for long, as with his attitude, no doubt he'll be caught again and probably quite quickly.

I agree jezzzer, I'm sure it would be extremely tempting when at that level and being pushed for results, the issue I have is with the fact that he is seen in a different light, almost as if he was a victim, whereas the likes of Ricco and Vino are seen as arch villains.

I'm not saying that Ricco and Vino aren't villains, in my book they are a real blight on the sport, but I struggle to see Millar in much of a different light.

He was happy to get results at the expense of clean riders, and this continued until such a point as he was uncovered as a cheat. The main difference being that he played the game much better after being caught.

simon - good link, thanks for that.

dasy - of course, contrition rings more true if you suddenly renounce your mistake unbidden ... most anyone can sound fairly convincingly sorry when caught.

but the world of elite cycling must be a funny sort of place, and i don't think that i can cast the first stone knowing that i wouldn't be tempted if i allowed myself to believe that all those around me were doping and winning more on account of it.

my occasional competitive endeavours on 2 wheels haven't tempted me to reach for the tourniquet, but it's not really the same, is it?

Millar only came clean after being caught by the Police in a raid on his flat that uncovered EPO capsules. He then admitted it in detention, he hardly just turned himself in.

He admitted doing EPO for years, and I wonder how long he would have continued had it not been discovered. His contrition could easily be seen as the only way he could salvage a pro biking career. I am not convinced by him.

Cavendish is obviously looking for a bit of aggro:

Quote:

The HTC-Columbia sprinter called Riccò a “parasite” and said the unrepentant Italian doesn’t deserve a warm welcome from the cycling community.

Good on him for not mincing his words. (Link to Velonews story). Posters on Bikeradar are questioning why Ricco was Procycling mag cover star. I know it's winter but does he really deserve the attention?

I would suggest that all transgressors, even drug cheats, deserve a second chance. How they are subsequently viewed depends very much on whether the penalty they were given made any difference.

In Millar's case it certainly did; the lad is trying hard to help change things for the better, and not just for himself. Interesting NY Velocity interview from last month.

With Vino and Ricco I have seen no evidence to date that they feel they wronged their colleagues or damaged the sport of cycling. The quotes I saw before his ban indicated Ricco was a first class w@nker, I doubt an enforced holiday would change much.

The sight of Vino back in the Pro ranks is a kick in the teeth for most cycling fans too, but it does always raise the question of whether they deserve a second chance, and if not should we not be looking to evict David Millar too...

Contrition after the event doesn't make what Millar did any better, it's a tough call.