Do Athletes Implicated in Doping Scandals Deserve a Second Chance?

Many sponsors have pulled out of the sport of professional cycling which has been plagued by numerous steroid and doping scandals e.g. Phonak, iShares and T-Mobile. But the doping scandals have not deterred new sponsors from making large financial investments in cycling. Michael Ball, cycling enthusiast, head fashion designer and CEO of Rock and Republic has committed to a 5-year sponsorship of Rock Racing, a national professional cycling team; the team is also supported by Cadillac, Scott USA and Shimano. (HED withdrew because of doping controversy.)

This is good news for the sport of cycling. And it is good news for everyone who believes in second chances. Controversy has surrounded Rock Racing after they have embraced signed or had discussions with numerous athletes who have been implicated in doping scandals including Floyd Landis, Tyler Hamilton, Oscar Sevilla and Santiago Botero.

The 2006 Tour de France victory was taken away from Floyd Landis after he failed a doping test; the Court of Arbitration for Sports determined a doping violation had occurred, specifically “the charge of exogenous testosterone found in the sample by the Carbon Isotope Ratio analysis is established in accordance with the UCI Anti-Doping Regulations.” Floyd is appealing the decision.

Tyler Hamilton, Oscar Sevilla and Santiago Botero were all implicated in the Operation Puerto blood doping scandal. Hamilton recently finished a two-year suspension for blood doping.

Do athletes implicated in doping scandals deserve a second chance especially if they have served their suspensions? Michael Ball responds:

The truth of the matter is that he was penalized; he did his time. He struggled through it. It is a drag, in terms of the situation the guys go through. But I’m here to support the riders. At the end of the day, I’m here to support the riders and give those individuals an opportunity.

Or does the public require that they somehow admit guilt before the public is accepting of second chances as Floyd Landis suggests?

But if you want to create a punishment of some kind for lying, then create a punishment for lying. But right now what you have is a system where, if a person is convicted, they get a suspension of a defined amount of time. There’s nothing that says we’re going to treat you like shit afterwards if you don’t admit to it, and if you do admit to it, you’re fine. If you want to add that to the rules, add it to the rules.