[WRC] News & Rumours (part V) 2017

[macebig]

It really is not. A banned substance (that is used without federation permission) is a banned substance.
If anti-doping is going to work, they need to be harsh.

They need to be harsh but not stupid.Provided Matton had the appropriate doctor's papers banning someone for 2 years is incredibly harsh.Plus he is not a professional rally driver so there is no real benefit for him to dope.TLR Matton gets absolutely no benefit from doping so punish him for that isn't really setting an example or hurting anyone other than himself.

[AL14]

Is that a banned susbstance? Was that kind of ban already expected for those who use that substance?

If yes, what's wrong with the decision of ban?

Of course I'm sure Matton is not trying to improve his performances but rules are rules and not taking a very important issue like doping seriously will lead you to very big problems with it in the future.

[BleAivano]

They need to be harsh but not stupid.Provided Matton had the appropriate doctor's papers
banning someone for 2 years is incredibly harsh.Plus he is not a professional rally driver so there is no real benefit for
him to dope.TLR Matton gets absolutely no benefit from doping so punish him for that isn't really setting an example
or hurting anyone other than himself.

What his doctor's papers say is irrelevant. If he wants to compete while taking his medicine then he can apply for
a TUE which is a Therapeutic Use Exempt. TUE are granted by the sport's governing federation not by the family doctor.

The problem with your reasoning is that you use different rules for different people.
IMO the rules have to be the same for everyone and you cannot allow yourself to biased judgement such as
"he is not a professional rally driver so there is no real benefit for him to dope".
Where do draw the line for when it is a benefit and where do you draw the line for when it is not a benefit to use it?
Where do you draw the line for whom it is ok to use it and for whom it is not ok to use?

ALL rules have to be the same for everyone, professional or amateur otherwise there is no point in having rules at all.

[Franky]

What kind of an advantage does that medicine give exactly?

[Rallyper]

It really is not. A banned substance (that is used without federation permission) is a banned substance.
If anti-doping is going to work, they need to be harsh.

Now, if Matton needs those pills, it´s because he has an heart decease, which demands him taking those pills every day. I know, bcs I´m there myself. Should he be banned from doing amateur rallying because of that? NOO!!!

[SubaruNorway]

For those of you not on FB

Yves Matton:
You may have seen on the web a news saying that I am suspended from all licenses for two years. It turns out that it is incorrect and incomplete. At the end of the last Condroz Rally, I had a doping test which proved positive because of a drug declared during the test. The doctor prescribing this medication had failed to notify me that I had to apply for a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) and I confess that I did not verify its composition. Recognizing my good faith and the fact that this drug did not improve performance, the sanction was reduced to a suspended sentence. I fully accept that decision. Drivers and codrivers, be careful if you have any punctual or regular prescriptions! Good weekend to all of you...
PS: You can consult the RACB document at http://bit.ly/2niiYDs

[Nelly]

Everyone of the citroen team will be them blood pressure tablets after Mexico.

[janvanvurpa]

What his doctor's papers say is irrelevant. If he wants to compete while taking his medicine then he can apply for
a TUE which is a Therapeutic Use Exempt. TUE are granted by the sport's governing federation not by the family doctor.

The problem with your reasoning is that you use different rules for different people.
IMO the rules have to be the same for everyone and you cannot allow yourself to biased judgement such as
"he is not a professional rally driver so there is no real benefit for him to dope".
Where do draw the line for when it is a benefit and where do you draw the line for when it is not a benefit to use it?
Where do you draw the line for whom it is ok to use it and for whom it is not ok to use?

ALL rules have to be the same for everyone, professional or amateur otherwise there is no point in having rules at all.

All rules are made by people...We just make them up out of the blue sky..The INTENT is that the rules should make sense and BE JUST.
All men are fallible..we sometimes make mistakes in HOW we state rules..
That is when another measure MUST take place..Justice..

Not that everything is exactly the same, but that we achieve the highest possible justice in EACH case..

That is why we have not just juries, but judges too..

What you suggest is all we need in the world are clerks..

In the end reality must be considered...

[janvanvurpa]

It really is not. A banned substance (that is used without federation permission) is a banned substance.
If anti-doping is going to work, they need to be harsh.

THERE is the problem.."doping" the word..The INTENT is that some substances which can increase performance in some way....

Pharmacological action[edit]

Using a fixed combination of an ACE inhibitor and a chlorosulfamoyl diuretic leads to additive synergy of the antihypertensive effects of the two constituents. Its pharmacological properties are derived from those of each of the components taken separately, in addition to those due to the additive synergistic action of the two constituents, when combined, on vascular endothelium, arteriolocapillary microcirculation, and the target organs of hypertension.

That drug just helps his hypertension... It doesn't artificially INCREASE his performance.

By the logic of the hard ass interpretation, A good, hot cup of my favorite tea could EASILY be considered a performance enhancing drug..

No dogma

[itix]

It really is not. A banned substance (that is used without federation permission) is a banned substance.
If anti-doping is going to work, they need to be harsh.

You can also think of it like this...

Here is a slightly fat and very stressed team manager of a global Motorsport team who does one round of the Belgian championship for fun every year (and usually stuff it into a tree).

Did he
A) take blood pressure lowering pills to perform like a rally super human in order to steal the Belgian championship crown by winning one round

Or
B) take pills to lower his blood pressure from his weight and very particular stress inducing job and did the event to forget for a while that he has 100 000+ pairs of eyes judging his performance every day.

In my opinion the sensible thing to do would be to give him a friendly reminder that those pills are not allowed in the championship... but the actual measure was very very harsh in my opinion.