Should drugs cheats be allowed in the Olympics?

The British Olympic Association (BOA) has been urged to scrap its policy of issuing lifetime bans to drugs cheats.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/15159806.stm

Some think Britains ruling on those who've failed a drug test is unfair, Travis Tygart, chief executive of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada), said it was contrary to globally agreed procedures, others like Colin Jackson say "If we decide we don't want anybody who has taken drugs to be our ambassador then so be it. I have very little room for movement on the subject of drug-taking."

Personally I'd like us to have the balls to say we won't allow anyone who's failed a drugs test to compete at next years Olympics, I know everyone would be against it but if we refuse visas a month before the games begin, what would anyone actually do about it, I doubt if any nation would pull their team out on a matter of principal, especially if that principal is it doesn't matter if you've cheated, you can still compete even if you've had an advantage over everyone else.

Drug cheats should be banned for life.

To knowingly cheat, in any sport, is inexcusable.

ReallyReal

we can't act unilaterally like that because of the pressure the IOC would put on the London organisers and the Government. As it is, there has been a change to the drug ban rules, whereby anyone who has served a ban after the last Olympics is banned from participating in this one.

I want the BOA to retain their hardline stance on lifetime Olympic bans on British athletes who have failed drugs test. After all, the chance to participate in the Olympics should be in the gift of the BOA rather than considered a 'professional' right of an athlete regardless of their previous behaviour. It isn't restraint of trade because people like Dwain Chambers and David Millar are still able to make their living as professional athletes or cyclists, but simply can't compete at the Olympics (where there is no money to be made directly anyway).

In an ideal world, all national associations would apply this rule, but sadly many other countries have a much more lax attitude to the use of PEDs.

If we leave it late enough, say 2 months before the games begin, we can get away with pretty much anything, simply because there would be no time to change venues.
A few countries would huff and puff and moan and whinge, but would any boycott the games just to get one of their cheats into the competition, it would be too easy to spin the story to make out that said country advocates cheating?
We could also introduce a special law whereby any athlete/coach found with performance enhancing drugs could get a similar prison sentence to those who supply illegal drugs, severe punishments and the threats of them are the only way to stamp anything out.

David Brailsford the head of British Cycling ... says that there should be a level playing field - all national bodies should adhere to the regulations of one international body (WADA as well as IOC I guess), rather than having their own individual penalties. I think his opinion carries weight.

I suppose it is all politics. The BOC won't kowtow to WADA's more lenient approach, whereas the heavyweight USADA is legally forcing IOC to adopt a more lenient approach (so that they can force LaShawn Merritt Olympic participation). It's all a bit of a mess and risks leaving a sour taste in the mouth. The over-ruling of the IOC lifetime ban is a shot in the arm we could have all done without.

My view is that participation in international sport should be considered a priviledge rather than a "human right". I am sure that the BOC will maintain their stance and I would hope that spectators etc could organise demonstrations against the individual cheaters (those that would have been banned from the Olympics). I wonder whatever happened to the Olympian ideal and Corinthinian Spirit - oh well I suppose there is no room for these in a capitalistic globalised society.


Head of British Cycling, David Brailsford, viewpoint. Click here.

I don't think that any drugs cheat should be allowed to take part in the Olympics. It goes against the spirit of the games.

They will still be able to 'earn a living' in other events such as the Diamond League and Grand Prix and would still have the World Championships to aim at but the Olympics should remain pure.

sportsville wrote:I don't think that any drugs cheat should be allowed to take part in the Olympics. It goes against the spirit of the games.

They will still be able to 'earn a living' in other events such as the Diamond League and Grand Prix and would still have the World Championships to aim at but the Olympics should remain pure.

Not true in the case of Athletics at least in Europe. Dwain Chambers can testify to that.

The real problem is that bans are too short. 4 years seems a much better arrangement. I would then give offenders that co-operate a second chance once that period has expired. Second time offenders would be banned for life.

This should then be the standard adopted by all countries.

They should be banned for life. It is stupid that the IOC would try to undermine the BAA by allowing drug cheats the chance to participate at the Olympics.

Any over-rule would certainly discredit the athletes involved and the IOC. I do not understand why the IOC would want to further ruin sports and their reputation.

The Olympics would soon become an after thought if cheats allowed to participate after smearing the records in history.

I wish the IOC would encompass 'moraility' into it's values.

I second on – Drug cheats should be banned for life. It’s totally inexcusable.

Pack 'em off to the Tower!

A 4 year ban is enough. After that wipe the slate clean. Everyone deserves a second chance.

I'm afraid I'm not very good at this politics business and can't speak with any sort of authority, but I've got a rather... some may say.... romantic view of things.

At the start of these Games, a British athlete took the Olympic vow on behalf of all the competitors. Part of that vow was to eschew doping and drugs abuse. Surely that should actually mean something.

Various governmental organisations can make any decision they wish, but the International Olympic Committee should have a policy whereby any athlete who has taken drugs has broken that vow and therefore is not worthy to hold the title of "Olympian".

I know this is a rather romantic view and in the hard headed world of political manoeuvering and back stairs bartering on such matters, it won't count for much.

But it's how I feel. If the Olympic Movement doesn't make a stand for purity in sport, then what the heck is it there for...?


.

No...!

Absolutely unequivocally no.