There is a chart on WADC Rules that is used to determine sanctions for 1st/2nd etc offences with types of offences also.
Scarponi and Ferrari
- Thread starter beastie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
Noodley
Guest
He does go on to demonstarte why it'll never bloody work tho, with his comments about Barredo.
His list of teams is hardly a list of teams renowned for their fight against doping!
The WADA has expressed interest in an Amnesty
The USADA have also been clear about lesser censures if you play their game and co-operate.
If this is the case then it will wipe out the present sanctions system and be on an individual basis.
This would suggest that a six month ban would be "negotiable", and not just in this case. A lot of guilty riders could get away with low bans, where perhaps far more serious penalties should be applied.
Welcome to the modern world
The USADA have also been clear about lesser censures if you play their game and co-operate.
If this is the case then it will wipe out the present sanctions system and be on an individual basis.
This would suggest that a six month ban would be "negotiable", and not just in this case. A lot of guilty riders could get away with low bans, where perhaps far more serious penalties should be applied.
Welcome to the modern world
oldroadman
Veteran
- Location
- Ubique
USADA live in a "justice" system where the plea-bargain is paramount. Which is a nonsense. Either you are guilty in front of a jury or not. But in the good old USA, if you agree to plead to a lesser crime - even if you have not done it!- you get a much reduced sentence, whilst all the time the prosecution (who have their targets to reach) hold a gun to your head. If you won't plead and go to trial, things happen - you can't afford proper representation, the evidence will be weighted, and a guily sentence will see the prosecutor asking for a maximum penalty. No wonder anyone caught up in this system looks for a simple way out!
So not unnaturally, they offer small sanctions for evidence of guilt of the main target, how credible that evidence is may be another matter, but when they have you for doping and 2 years is the standard suspension, why not turn in someone else in return for a meaningless six months?
This is no defence of LA, who appears to have got his just deserts, but it does make you wonder who else it could happen to.
Exactly the point, however all too many refuse to consider this except in the "defending Armstrong" context
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
It's really not nonsense - it's one of the only ways you get an in on complex, organised crime - mafia cases etc. Which, as plenty of people have pointed out before - and what I'm afraid Red Light and Cunoblein still don't seem to get - is exactly what the Armstrong case is most like.
Are you still banging on that Armstrong is not guilty and his vitriolic, hostile mates have all constructed their evidence to get a 6 month ban? They could have kept quiet and got no ban at all.
This is one of the posters who has as a single limited agenda, and anything that does not meet these criteria is interpreted as claiming Armstrong is innocent.
His imagination, and misinterpretation, but then again he is free to make these mistakes.
So not unnaturally, they offer small sanctions for evidence of guilt of the main target, how credible that evidence is may be another matter, but when they have you for doping and 2 years is the standard suspension, why not turn in someone else in return for a meaningless six months?
You do accept that the evidence from his team-mates was credible though? As everyone else seems to. And plea bargaining is a worthwhile tool to expose bigger crimes?
Limited agenda? Do you have evidence to back that up?
Just read this thread?
Limited agenda? Do you have evidence to back that up?
We are discussing Scarponi, and the reasons why he could be given a light sentence.
This is nothing to do with Armstrong whatsoever, it is a different case entirely.
Pointing out that the WADA is expressing interest in an amnesty and also in reducing sentences if the individual cooperates as in Scarponi's case is the way things are moving. The evidence is there for all to see that this is a possible future. This is nothing to do with team mates giving evidence, "big crimes" or any of your other Armstrong fixations.
it is all about Scarponi and the evidence he gives about his own activities and how this affects his interaction with the authorities Even you must see that?
However you have decided to throw your toys out of the pram again and twist these factual statements to fill your need to fixate on Armstrong (yet again) your agenda is limited to this .
That is all the evidence that is needed.
All great conjecture but where in WADC Rules does it allow for reduced sanctions for spliting on someone else (and what are the guidelines) and where does is say USADA had the authority to issue these sanctions?
To work within a justice system you need to use the rules and not ignore them as you wish, its not a justice system if yu make up as you go along, thats called something completely different to justice!
The DR's in question can also accept sanctions and continue to work as consultants to others who do not need to tell them, officially, who their Clients are. If they can prove they did not know and had no connection there shall be no crime so to speak.
Those at the top of these systems normally get away as we see in normal life.
To work within a justice system you need to use the rules and not ignore them as you wish, its not a justice system if yu make up as you go along, thats called something completely different to justice!
The DR's in question can also accept sanctions and continue to work as consultants to others who do not need to tell them, officially, who their Clients are. If they can prove they did not know and had no connection there shall be no crime so to speak.
Those at the top of these systems normally get away as we see in normal life.
FWIW, you and Oldroadman brought LA and USADA into this thread. I was posting about Scarponi - see posts passim!
Anyway, you're back on ignore again along with the verbose one!
FWIW, you and Oldroadman brought LA and USADA into this thread. I was posting about Scarponi - see posts passim!
Anyway, you're back on ignore again along with the verbose one!
Point proven then ?
