Team Sky re-states zero tolerance on doping: riders and staff to sign up to "having no past or present involvement in doping"

Things have changed?
http://road.cc/content/news/69193-20-teams-dozens-riders-and-€30m-italian-doping-inquiry-bigger-operacion-puerto
For anyone who doesn't do bad news, that's allegedly a doping ring involving riders from 20 teams, with the investigation covering activities up to 2011.
I reckon I have a reasonable grasp of pro cycling's history and its context. What I have seen is a consistent failure over many years to really get to grips with the culture of endemic doping. There was a lot of talk about how things have improved, but I'm not convinced about how much substance there is behind this. Stories like the one above seem to suggest that it was business as usual. Perhaps the law enforcement authorities and anti doping agencies know more about what goes on in pro cycling than David Millar?

It is just possible that the fall out from the LA case will be so great that things will change significantly, and I think that is very positive for the sport. If Sky want to take a tougher stand as part of that change, I'm not going to criticise them.

Well Sky just decimated their Team ! Whilst i doubt that some Brits would have followed Sean Yates example , i feel sure that Rogers will be wondering what people think of his time at Team Telecom ?

John Fahey is mooting an " AMNESTY " and he had better get on and make it work before ALL SPONSORS decide they do not want to be compromised !

So many Sports have a " Doping Problem " so a GENERAL AMNESTY , which i have been blogging about , is the only situation which will gain support from NATIONAL Governments , and i feel sure that by involving IOC there will be a positive response form Athletes , both Past & Present !

At present Athletes in some countries risk " Double Jeopardy " in coming forward but " Suspension of the Penal Codes during an " AMNESTY for Dope Usage ", ONLY , will get good results ! Those that were engaged in Criminal activity such as Supply , will find an uncertain future awaiting them . Criminals control Sport these days through intimidation , so an AMNESTY will release many of their victims !

The first ones in the queue to declare their honesty are often the cheats, because they cheat.

kcr, if you truly understood the sport of professional mens road racing you could never have made that post. You talk about the "history of pro cycling", yet you don't seem to understand the context of that history. If you read between the lines, you will have realised that Vaughters has long been alluding to what he had done in the past (not just this year), and that he has been using his own experience of crossing the line to (1) help rehabilitate riders who have done the same thing and express contrition for their acts and (2) create a team environment that dissuades young riders from ever reaching that point in the first place. If you were to cut off from the sport all management people who had doped as riders, there would be no sport left to run - period. You might not even be able to put on a Premier Calendar, let alone a Grand Tour. The challenge is to excommunicate the bad apples (Bruyneel, etc) and rehabilitate the ones that actually want to make the sport a better place for the next generation.

And yes, things are undoubtably better for the current crop of young riders - have you not read what they say about the situation? Did young riders 10 years ago say the same thing?

Sky's approach is the right thing for their own sponsor, for their own commercial gain and for their own image. But no team is bigger than the sport, and a true fan loves the sport and not the team or rider. Vaughters and his teams are better for the sport, actively helping mend it rather than just profiting from it. Teams like Sky should thank them for it.

Vaughter's "recognition that the sport needs to face up to its past is entirely commendable"?
Are you talking about the same Jonathan Vaughters who didn't admit his own doping past until this year?

The past is not the past. It reaches forward and continues to shape today's sport. The history of pro cycling is that riders who operate in a culture of endemic doping bring their experience of these working practices into their post-race careers in team management and support. This just reinforces the status quo, and as long as everyone keeps quiet and doesn't rock the boat, it's a case of "as you were".

I am always puzzled when I hear David Millar saying that things have changed so much, and young riders today don't face the same choices and pressures that he did. This just doesn't seem to square with the news I continue to read about today's pro cycling.

Sky's approach adds another anti-doping deterrent. Not only do you risk losing your job as a rider; you are also jeopardising that essential post race career. Of course it won't stop doping, but it's the right thing to do.

Seriously one of the things I like about cycling is the lack of commercial bullshit compared to so many other sports and the fact that fans are treated like intelligent grown ups. So please SKY stop with the PR bulshit or I'm off to support Astana!

Does working with Leinders count as involvement with doping?

I would agree with what theclaw has written.

Brailsford & co publicly set the bar very high to begin with (naively so?). They had to lower it a bit and are now looking to set it even higher. PR whitewash isn't the same as doing it right, though I hope it gets the same end result.

The momentum for change must come from within the peloton as well as the teams and sponsors. We need to hear more voices like those of Taylor Phinney, Steve Cummings and Nicolas Roche.

Team Sky policy proves 1 thing: Jonathan Vaughters and the teams he has run have called the situation spot-on since the start, and have done the most to move the sport forward with their policies. Brailsford's policy is naive and idealistic, and whilst in some ways the "we are all clean as a whistle" approach was the easiest thing to do from a PR perspective, it has not helped the sport overcome its past, only driven people like Barry, Rogers, etc underground when their experience could be used for the ebnefit of younger generations(or maybe it is the policy of SKY PR, rather than Brailsford's - after all, who really calls the shots when they invest so much money into the sport these days?)

Vaughter's approach of targetted forgiveness and rehabilitation of athletes who show remorse is by far the more progressive and intelligent one, and also the more difficult and braver choice when he has to keep sponsors on board in a market where the dominant teams have ever increasing budgets. His recognition that the sport needs to face up to its past is entirely commendable. Honestly, who the hell at SKY HQ seriously thought Michael Barry, Mick Rogers, Sean Yates, Bobby Julich et.al. had never seen or touched anything??? Did they really have to see a USADA report for the penny to drop, or had they ignored the last 15 years of cycling history?

The SKY philosophy will doubtless win them fans. They will be able to profit from their stance commercially. But any true cycling fan with the long-term interest of the sport at heart would prefer to see past offenders spill the beans and unravel the corrupt network that enabled it, so the long-term sustainability of the sport is better served.

It's the only way to do it - a clear line in the sand and a new era. The sport will be stronger, more competitive and totally credible. I'd rather wait another 100 year's for the next brit Tour winner than win by cheating.

i think this 'we have no people associated with us therefore we're clean' attitude isn't great.

What you need is controls in place to monitor the situation. You could get someone completely clean (rider or admin) who starts causing problems.

Vilifying all who doped because everyone was at it is being hard on them. Yes there were people who were big wheels (bruyneel, armstrong, ferrari etc...).

Mind you if all these guys are getting sacked then there'll be plenty of room for guys like me who have a clean doping record... and zero experience

I can't see how Yates can stay now tbh.

Another person I am a tad disappointed in is Roger Hammond (not on Sky payroll afaik). Why? Because I always felt he was a clean rider and had a strong anti-doping stance yet I remember him being interviewed on ITV during the Vuelta coverage and saying that there was no doping in the team, etc. Was he the only one 'out of the loop?' - given the info that has come out so far it seems as if the whole team know about it tbh.

I hope I am wrong about him and his view. I really do.

So the stance is "tell us the truth and you'll lose your job". Not sure that is the best way to encourage openness ...

You know what - the past is the past. What people did then was wrong but surely we should draw a line under it like Sky is doing and say that what is important is the road ahead not road just travelled and in some cases many mils and years back.

It seems to be more about the people who doped and not about the sport and its future. if we keep harping back to past problems how ever extreme. They all doped it was a level playing field - get over it and leave it alone. Make the sport now for the future. I could not care less about the past except as a way to understand a way to act now and for the future.

However I don't expect this will happen when those that police the drugs war are hell bent on destroying the sport through past transgressions.

So they've shifted position again then, away from their recent concession that experienced staff with no dope-stains were hard to find, and back to 'no dope history at all'.

Think they would have been better off maintaining the status quo on the policy, and just focussing on Mick Rogers (since Barry's gone anyway). Even then, I'm not sure about them being sacked as per Levi - if there were any riders thinking of coming clean about their past, they certainly won't now unless put under the same kind of pressure.

I can't help but feel that Sky will be putting themselves at a competitive disadvantage by doing this for no other reason than appearances.

I don't think anyone realistically believes that Sky are involved in doping (I certainly hope not) and I don't see what effect having Sean Yates or Michael Rogers on the team will have on that. There are so many people in cycling who have 'a past' that it's not easy to find qualified, experienced, riders and directors untainted by doping. Especially for an english speaking team where the majority of english speaking people involved in running a team will probably have some connection to US Postal/Discovery.

I see why Sky are doing this but they're making a rod for their own backs, and either way, they're still relying on riders and team staff to be open and honest about their past which clearly didn't work when they recruited Barry.

bloody sean yates ....

We can not knock team Sky too much for their positive statement, it is a step in the right direction. One can always argue about past indiscretions, lord knows it is warranted but a sea of change is a good thing . But enough with the drug cheats let's even the playing field . Not for one moment suggesting they are whiter then snow but you have to draw a line in the sand at some point:)

Err... http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=&ObjTypeCode=FILE...

Few to go then......

Bye Bye Yates and Rogers then....