devashish_paul wrote:
I've met Nina personally several times, and been in the same races shortly after her ban was lifted. She returned much slower than her former "Nina the Machina" self. I am inclined to believe that she is truly sorry for her time doping, is racing clean, racing much slower and frankly not competitive on the global scale. If Mirinda Carfrae showed up at Louisville, and Nina did this exact same performance we would have zero discussion because she would be way off the back. Just because no one fast showed up, now we're having "the doper won" discussion. Last year, Nina was 7 minutes slower, was 4th, and essentially had the same performance on much less current. No one said anything. The hate is on right now because no one faster than her showed up.
I feel there is more overall hate for her here than Natasha Badmann probably has today.
I'm surprised you try to polarize this discussion into camps of love and hate. I don't see any hate at all here--I read discussions about when someone should be allowed to race again after doping, and whether or not their doping is fair game for discussion after they're reinstated. No one is calling her a bad person.
Surely we haven't devolved to a point where we label someone a hater simply for disagreeing with an opinion?
Regardless, here's the nuance in the issue: the fans and sponsors aren't bound by the governing body's or RD's rules about reinstatement. A doper can be reinstated after 2-4 years, but it doesn't mean the fans need to follow suit and accept them back into the sport. We can bring up their past doping, and remind folks there are hundreds of outstanding pro's who have never been caught doping.
And we can remind sponsors of that.
In other words: a convicted doper may be able to start racing again, and collect prize money. But if the fans are upset enough about it, sponsors will continue to shy away from her. And that seems like a perfectly legitimate fair-market system.
