Boonen caught for cocaine use again - out of competition. Foolish, yes, but does it really matter?

This is really annoying, both because it's a distraction as the first Grand Tour of 2009 gets underway and because Tom Boonen has so much to lose, for so little reason. We can presume it's been taken for recreational reasons, but he's not the only one (in the wider community) to do so is he? He is however a huge role model for kids in Belgium, as well as for much of the cycling world. So it matters, but not so much that it should get this much attention, surely? Does he need counselling? A cocaine habit is one thing, but the guy gets caught - twice - out of competition. Which indicates he has some self-control, but not enough to pull free. (So why risk everything, Tom?) It's not for performance-enhancement, it's just a guy with fame and money being tempted by an illicit drug... and giving in. He's young but adult enough to cop the consequences; he's also famous beyond belief in Belgium, cashed-up and probably a target for all sorts of people with trash to peddle. Let's hope some perspective is kept here.

Tom Boonen has been suspended by team Quick Step following his second positive control for cocaine, taken on April 27, in Belgium following the Spring Classics. The 2005 World Champion could face criminal charges for violating the conditions of his suspended sentence for cocaine use.

Setting Boonen aside for a moment, this is a community issue, not just an athletic one. Athletes are in the spotlight and performance enhancement is arguably viewed as 'cheating' by many, and certainly so by the established, traditional media as well by many of the 'clean' athletes themselves. And there are good arguments to control such substances, not just for sporting fairness but for the athlete's health. But does recreational cocaine use - illegal though it may be - really constitute such a threat to our wider society, one that justifies the resultant media frenzy? Unfortunately the media have a stake in both creating and destroying these role models, a conflict of interest that just won't go away.

Boonen stays out of sight... briefly

Nasty recreational cocaine-taker one day, winner the next. You'd imagine he'd like to stay out of sight for a while, but no... Tom Boonen recovered from his rather tough few weeks with a trademark Boonen sprint victory, crossing the line just ahead of his lead-out man Wouter Weylandt while notable speedsters Mark Cavendish, Matthi Breschel and Graeme Brown were left in his wake. The Belgian, who tested positive for cocaine and had his invitations to the Tour de France as well as the Tour de Suisse revoked, had a quiet first three stages, but was back to his old form on stage four of the Ster Elektrotoer. He and Weylandt crossed the line a full bike length ahead of third placed Nikolai Trusov (Tinkoff). Enrico Gasparotto of Team Barloworld retained the leader's jersey.

No-one's perfect after all

The biggest problem with the idea of dope controls is 'who decides'. In other words, who actually has the moral and ethical right to decide what is "good" or "bad" dope? Whilst drugs that are clearly shown to offer performance enhancement, like EPO, are 'probably' something we can all agree on, in fact not everyone will agree that we should set up costly programs of detection, control and punishment in the first place. The alternative may be 'legalising' dope but monitoring the health of riders and asking them to stay within limits; or perhaps simply 'outing' them so we know who the 'cheats' are, but not withdrawing their right to participate.

And then we have recreational drugs and 'out of competition' testing. Again it's a moral and ethical question. Do we have the right to say for example that cocaine is wrong, but alcohol is fine? What of an athlete's right to live a 'normal' life? And then again, should we consider them role models and expect the highest standards?

And then there's Tom Boonen. Obviously and clearly an outstanding athlete, a top road sprinter and dominating one-day classics rider. He's had some run-ins with the law lately, and we 'kind of' expect better from him. But should we? Do the standards we apply to athletes apply to journalists, to lawyers, or to popular music and movie stars? Should they?

What has Boonen done? Apparently he has lost his driving licence twice and been implicated - and now has been caught in an out-of-competition test for cocaine: from CN - "This is not the first time that Boonen has been linked to the drug (cocaine). Last December, his good friend and cyclo-cross star, Tom Vanoppen was caught by the Flemish doping controllers with cocaine. During questioning Vanoppen allegedly named Boonen as his dealer, a claim Boonen later denied. Following the claim, Boonen's parent's house was searched. Boonen's brush with the law does not stop there however. Just last week, he lost his drivers license for the second time in six weeks. On Tuesday night he was pulled over by the police travelling at 180 km/h in a 90km/h zone on the Mol ring road. He had a blood alcohol reading of 1.0. Six weeks earlier he lost his license for 14 days for travelling 120km/h in a 70km/h zone. In 2006 Boonen was the face of the Belgian roads and traffic authority, promoting safe driving."

Obviously not a good look for Boonen and his team, irrespective. But what penalty should apply to recreational drug use, especially outside of competition? And who can truly decide right from wrong without exposing themselves to charges of hypocrisy, when the 'norm' in most Western societies is clearly and certainly to indulge in recreational drug taking?