More on Telekom vs Stapleton
[Thank you to the commenter for the tip on this article.]
Speigel: Doping Whistleblower Jaksche Left Out in the Cold by Detlef Hacke
"For Telekom, Hincapie was just another image problem, a time bomb because he probably knows a great deal about Armstrong's miraculous trail of victories. But for Stapleton he was a solid rider with a clean record who was willing to conform to the team's anti-doping policies. Despite the company's attempts to convince him to change his mind, Stapleton insisted on hiring Hincapie.
The rift between Stapleton and Telekom had become so wide that the separation had to be painstakingly negotiated. On Nov. 6, the company's board of directors decided to examine ways to get rid of Stapleton immediately. The simplest approach was not an option. Although Stapleton's contract with Telekom included an exit clause, it only applied to a current doping case, of which there were none in November...
Stapleton took his time -- a full three weeks -- before finally signing an agreement with Telekom to dissolve his contract. In the end, the former partners were practically at each other's throats."
I am not sure what to think about this. Is it really possible that Hincapie was the final straw that gave T-Mobile the last needed excuse to quit? Why did Stapleton insist on hiring Hincapie? It seems in retrospect quite a dumb decision, yet Stapleton is not one who I would ever consider dumb. Perhaps a bit on the slightly naive, idealistic side but not dumb. He must have had his reasons to do it. Perhaps he decided that a clean split was the only way forward, but I really can't imagine that he would use Hincapie to force the final decision on the sponsorship question. Yet he must have known it would be a very sore point for Telekom, and so it was.
One guess is that Stapleton thinks the only way the sport can go forward is to accept the conversion of former suspected dopers and their domestiques to the anti-doping point of view. If riders of the older generation, who presumably doped to one degree or another, are not allowed to join the new clean teams, then they have no hope of taking part in the real future of the sport. You can't expect riders who are left out in the cold in such a way to show any commitment to helping cycling's future, thus they will be likely to keep right on doping and dragging the sport into further disrepute. Perhaps the best if extremely risky way to get portions of the old guard into step with the idea of clean cycling is to cautiously and judiciously welcome certain of these riders into the clean teams, as long as they are ready and willing to embrace and abide by the strictest of anti-doping programs.
Perhaps many of these older riders never wanted to dope in the first place, and will be more than happy to leave it behind. The big problem with this approach will come when their results are not as good as before, and they begin to feel pressured to get back to the level they are used to riding at. The addictive aspect of doping cannot be underestimated. A rider who is used to riding at certain level and having a certain place in the peloton will likely find it a very hard adjustment to discover themselves unable to ride at that level anymore (Sinkewitz is the most obvious recent example). Yet the fact that any rider freely chooses to join a clean team has to suggest that they are willing to face this prospect head-on. Perhaps they believe that enough of the other riders will also be clean next season that they will not be at such a sudden stark disadvantage?
If you have read Walsh's From Lance to Landis, then you may well have a negative opinion on the Hincapie issue. Yet remember that years ago Hincapie was among the young vulnerable members of the unfortunate US junior team that was horribly mistreated at the hands of their despicable syringe-wielding coaches. Who knows what actually happened to him on that team, but whatever it was, it was not good. Whatever happened after that in the years of indentured servitude to Armstrong, I don't even want to think about. But we have to decide, does everyone deserve a second chance or not? Should we have pity and show forgiveness, or only anger and hatred? Is there a point past which we will never forgive? Certainly there are some riders I will never ever forgive. Which side of this line is Hincapie on? I haven't decided. My total disgust for the Discovery/Tailwind mafia makes it very very hard for me to want to see him in a High Road jersey. Maybe the real question is whether he was active participant in this mafia or a victim of it?
It seems with Hincapie's hiring that Stapleton has made a very risky direct statement to the fans. Either let the old guard join the new, or find another team to support. I am not sure how many fans will choose the later. The poison of the Lance years lingers painfully, and few well-informed fans will ever be willing to let it go quietly. Such is the conflicted and messy path of change. I go back and forth between hating the dopers and feeling sorry for them. One rider I spoke to recently told me emphatically that I show too much pity and understanding toward the dopers. As a clean rider, he is very understandably bitter and angry at the dopers, and I have a great deal of respect for his point of view. I don't know the right answers to any of this, only that we have to try to look at these issues with an open mind and even perhaps an open heart.
Can we really relegate the entire older generation of riders to the trash heap of fans' rejection? Maybe they deserve it after the way they have lied and deceived and twisted the sport into a ghoulish pharmaceutical circus. Yet they are also to some extent cogs stuck in a rotten machine, subject to the morally bankrupt mis-leadership of a corrupt UCI and the exploitative and dictatorial demands of unethical team managers. In the long run, will permanent condemnation of any and all actual or suspected dopers heal the sport or further destroy it? Is Stapleton challenging us to turn the other cheek and learn to forgive and forget? Should we?
9 comments:
Thanks. I think it is important to go forward---draw a line in the sand and impose strict consequences for any infractions that follow---a lifetime ban. Maybe there needs to be an amnesty of some sort. Money, energy and time need to be spent on the future in order to save this sport. Compassion and forgiveness for the truly repentent is humane and right. Disgust for the insensitive and arrogant abusers is also right. And, those who introduce, aid and abet dopers are the worst of all. They deserve jail time.
Thanks for the brutally honest assessment of the sport.
Too many people are like the fans who post on podiumcafe.com. They're obsessed with hero worship - oblivious to the very dopers they are rooting on.
Its pretty simple, bob was a huge fan of Hincapie. For a fan to own team and have his star in that team is a dream come true. I think thats all it is. He is for sure not stupid and maybe he doesnt want to believe that his star has doped in the past.
But according to that article T-Mobile were also keen to show forgiveness, to Jaksche at least, and to reward his candour by giving him a job. I infer from that that they were willing to stay around for the long slog if they could present themselves as the good guys trying to rebuild German cycling. Hincapie on the other hand is a poster boy for Omerta. And even if he wanted to come clean he is too old to come back after any sort of ban.
Even worse for T-Mobile he comes from a team that is, to put it mildly, the one that arouses the most suspicions when talk turns to doping, the one that took most advantage when cycling last tried to ditch the dope. If any scandals from Discovery or USPS were to come into the open then why would they want to see "now riding for T-Mobile" in the report too. They have enough doping scandals of their own. Big George is just a risk too far.
I'd combine "forgive and forget" with "trust but verify". I don't think it's appropriate to simply ban all the old guard because they raced in a "wink wink nudge nudge" era where the pressures to dope were very strong and the controls against it nearly negligible. I'm not saying that excuses them, but I do tend toward giving people second chances. If they're willing to race with more stringent controls, I'd let them. I'd be even more strongly inclined toward this route, however, where riders acknowledged past wrongdoings and, essentially, gave testimony as to the details to how, when, and where they doped in the past.
What puzzles me about this is that Stapleton rejected Jacksche. Here was a man who admitted his mistakes and publically committed himself to clean cycling. Hincapie did not. How then can you say that Stapleton's decision was based on the premise of "pity and forgiveness" and "letting the old guard join the new"??
If you're going to sign old pin-up boys of the doping era to join your team, then at least get the one whose bad news has already come out, rather than the ticking time bomb with the square jaw.
I can't fathom this from Stapleton. That he would risk his team's future funding over a... a Hincapie? It would be madness if the rider were a proven winner - a Boonen or a McEwen or yes - a Basso. But to risk it all over someone with the palmares, potential, baggage and age of Hincapie truly boggles the mind.
Somethings's missing from this picture.
If Stapleton had changed his mind on hiring Hincapie perhaps he thought he'd be seen as weak? Or perhaps he's just astonishingly arrogant and can't stand to admit he was wrong?
Or George "knows" something about Stapletons team and his silence is being bought?
IMO, Bob isn't quite as clever as people think. An intelligent person would learn from his mistakes.
I dont like the idea of giving riders that confessed a second change. They only confess to get back in the game. Patrik had a chance to ride clean and he did not. Now he says he will ride clean, why should he? He had the chance before.
Hincappie is for pure market. A lot of people love him and he will be worth the advertising for the team.
anyone smart here?
anyone?
Come on, Stapleton knew ALL about the sport, he knew about Freiburg, about the transfusions.
Anyone think he orchestrated the Hincapie recruitment for his own purpose, if it pissed off the folks in ivory towers in Bonn, all the better, he had a pretty good contract, water tight.
Stapleton has done well. He has what, 15 million Euros or something to play with.
He can rebrand the team, if he can sell the jersey, and make a mint.
I do not think he will do that, as it will create a rod for his back, if he is seen to profit from this episode, but he has his own team, and someone else financing it, but no one calling the shots but him.
Pretty good thing dont ya think?
Post a Comment