the latter, at least, falls to them. And if the IOC and WADA weren't able to catch cycling dopers at the Olympics, what does that say about the sophistication of the people involved? My impression is that cycling has tried harder than most sports to address doping issues; that so many cyclists have been caught is not necessarily because the sport is dirtier but because they are tested. Baseball players, after all, were for the most part not caught during the height of the steroid era - and it was still an Olympic sport even when what was happening was becoming obvious and even after the Mitchell Report. What was going on in baseball was no less egregious.
I am absolutely against what is essentially a form of collective punishment - and this is based on stuff that's probably happened in the past, not necessarily now. If you want to demand that the people involved are kicked out of the UCI, that's one thing. But to ban an entire sport - to keep people like Bradley Wiggins and Chris Hoy out of the Olympics - is going too far. And IMO, it's more damaging than anything dopers can do.
But then, I am probably in the minority as I believe that anti-doping is in many ways an important goal, but it isn't an end that justifies all means - obviously it's a view Dick Pound doesn't share.