Di Luca, Why No Lifetime Ban?

[John the Monkey]

I was discussing this with someone earlier today.

Having (perhaps unjustifiably) some faith in CONI & Mr. Torri, I assumed that there was some technicality or similar that meant that Di Luca's first suspension didn't count in some way. Is that the case? I know he was suspended for 3 months in 2007, so why "just" a two year ban (now reduced) in '09?

 

[Chuffy]

I was discussing this with someone earlier today.

Having (perhaps unjustifiably) some faith in CONI & Mr. Torri, I assumed that there was some technicality or similar that meant that Di Luca's first suspension didn't count in some way. Is that the case? I know he was suspended for 3 months in 2007, so why "just" a two year ban (now reduced) in '09?

I have no idea. Given that CONI bust a gut to nail valv.piti I'm really surprised by this.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

The first suspension was Oil For Drugs, wasn't it? IIRC, he wasn't actually caught with anything - he was just recorded talking about how and when to take EPO with Santuccione. Clearly innocent!

But I guess the lack of physical evidence meant the shorter suspension, and consequently no life-time ban after the 2009 CERA.

Of course, all this is in addition to his bizarre hormone levels from the 2007 Giro - investigations into which are still ongoing, I believe.

If there was any justice, he shouldn't be allowed within a country mile of the sport. He positively stinks.

 

[gavintc]

I do not understand the Di Luca decision. There must be more to this than has been reported in the Cycling press. However, from I have read - not content.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

At the risk of pointing out the obvious to Maggot, you are quoting several people out-of-context.

There is a major ethical distinction between someone getting caught, admitting that they were wrong and reforming, and someone who continually reoffends, refuses to change or claims that they did nothing wrong.

I am entirely in favour of lifetime bans for the latter (and I think most of the people you quoted would probably say the same).

 

[Flying_Monkey]

[QUOTE 1220850"]
There is no major ethical debate to this at all.
[/quote]

Well, clearly there is and that's demonstrated by the fact that many people disagree with you!

And yes, numbers matter a little. But it is, and I repeat, the demonstration of both repentance and reform that matter the most - a point which you appear to be avoiding. The point of having any systems of justice is not just to punish people but to give them opportunities to change and to act as examples for others.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

[QUOTE 1220852"]
So numbers are important,
[/quote]

I said 'a little'. I then went on to say what was the important aspect - which you are still ignoring.

 

[Stange]

I'm sure I heard that he "helped with enquiries"..........