 |
| Questioned beyond breaking point. |
I recently heard about Spanish rider Alberto Contador re-signing a two-year contract with Team Saxo Bank. The three time Tour de France winner was stripped of all of his race titles and given a ban as of May 2010 after being proven guilty of doping. The question I raise is: Is signing riders with such bad reputations a good thing? Or simply insane? I mean for the Team’s rep, for the sponsors etc. One could say that the rider’s rep could bring the team down. Or we can use the approach “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” In simpler terms this means that Team Saxo Bank is bigger than its individual members like Alberto Contador. I think organizations are starting to realise that if success is desired we need to risk it, look past the negatives to recognise the positives like Contador’s talent. Clearly the sport is becoming business orientated with a lot of money being invested into it, so taking risks is essential when keeping up with the mix. Is this the correct way to look at the situation? Acknowledging the positives before fussing over the negatives. For more info check out http://www.bicycling.com/
You can't punish the rest of ther riders or company because generally the teams pull out of the sport completely look at Barloworld. I say if you get caught doping you are banned for good.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is if an organization gets any negative image whatsoever, that they didn't cause for themself (like Barloworld) they have all the right to pull out. At this stage its not about the other riders. It is about the organization's image. It's up to them whether they want to take the risk or not.
ReplyDelete