BrandSoul: An ethical dilemma

A dilemma is supposed to be a problem that offers no obvious solution. When it comes to ethics it is quite common to support one ethical judgment or the contrary. You can always be or not to be in favour of abortion. You could even have mixed feelings on the issue. But a dilemma defies common reasoning. You cannot even figure out what the most correct answer to the problem could be.

As unusual as it seems, there's an ethical dilemma happening in the last few months. I refer to the case of Floyd Landis and his supposedly doped victory at the Tour de France 06. Well, it is quite clear that Landis behaviour regarding the use of some kind of doping substance if proved, should be condemned. But from that point on, things start to be more and more obscure.

What should authorities do?

1. Should they declare the Tour 06's winner was Oscar Pereiro? It seems like he deserves it.

2. Should they ask Landis to return the money he earned for being considered the winner of the race?

3. What about the collateral earnings he enjoyed? What about the collateral money people like Pereiro couldn't earn?

The problem with cycling is just getting more puzzling. Bjarne Rijs the 1996 Tour de France Champion declared last week he used EPO to improve his performance. What should we do now? We should consider he did not win the race? Should we change the whole Tour de France history? And how can we be sure the one who made second did not use some substance too?

The problem is even more difficult to resolve if we compare Rijs' case and Landis'. Landis is being judged severely in public. Rijs has admitted having done the same and nobody asks him to submit from his position. Should Rijs too return the money he earned for winning the Tour 96? And the subsequent earnings derived from that? And why should Landis, then? Rijs has built his prestige on the sole basis of his results at the french race. Should he be removed from his current job, too? Should someone else deserve his position?

Comments

Floyd Landis was never accused of using EPO which stimulates red blood cell production thus allowing greater oxygenation of the blood and an increase in stamina. Floyd Landis has been accused of using some form of testosterone, a patch or gel, that caused his Testosterone to epitestosterone level to be abnormal which would indicate some use of the drug. This is very dissimilar to EPO usage.

str

Posted by: strbuk | May 30, 2007 at 12:47 AM

Also, Landis' prize money for the Tour has been held in escrow, unpaid to him until the current anti-doping case is complete. He will only receive that money if he is exonerated, and not before.

And regardless of the outcome of this first hearing, there will be two more: one in France and the other, a likely appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

In addition, he received no bonuses or any other substantial earnings from his Tour victory, in large part due to the fact that his alleged positive test results were leaked to the media so quickly.

Should Landis lose when all is said and done, the winner's purse will be paid to Oscar Pereiro, or Andreas Kloden, if Pereiro is disqualified due to an alleged link to Operacion Puerto.

No one, not even Landis, will reap the normal financial benefits from winning the 2006 Tour, as the ultimate decision is not likely to happen before the 2007 Tour takes place.

- Rant

Posted by: Rant | May 30, 2007 at 02:02 AM