|
News in May
|
| doddy13 |
Posted on 11-05-2009 16:58
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7891
Joined: 04-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
schleck93 wrote:
issoisso wrote:
Want to bet ASO will make it so the next tour route has a slight detour through Italy, just barely enough so that Valverde can't ride? 
Why would they need that if UCI gives him a ban aswell?
which is very likely
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
|
| |
|
|
| Xavier |
Posted on 11-05-2009 18:44
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 933
Joined: 21-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
it has a detour trough italy  |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-05-2009 22:07
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
The guy on cyclingnews forum saying CONI falsified evidence against Valverde is funny
It's a bit
Landis fans 2: Valverde fans |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-05-2009 22:29
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
WADA have announced they support CONI's decision.
That's it, nail in the coffin, case closed, there's no way the UCI will disagree now. Bye Piti.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| doddy13 |
Posted on 11-05-2009 22:33
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7891
Joined: 04-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
You know what, i actually love wada.
Now who's next on the UCI's hit list.
Edited by doddy13 on 11-05-2009 22:33
|
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 11-05-2009 22:57
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4386
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
WADA have announced they support CONI's decision.
That's it, nail in the coffin, case closed, there's no way the UCI will disagree now. Bye Piti. Link? |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 13:03
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-05-2009 22:59
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Roman wrote:
issoisso wrote:
WADA have announced they support CONI's decision.
That's it, nail in the coffin, case closed, there's no way the UCI will disagree now. Bye Piti. Link?
https://www.lequip...verde.html
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| rjc_43 |
Posted on 11-05-2009 23:22
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6716
Joined: 13-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
doddy13 wrote:
You know what, i actually love wada.
Now who's next on the UCI's hit list.
Cuntador.
[url=cleavercycling.co.uk]  [/url] |
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 11-05-2009 23:30
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4386
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ok. Great news. Now Contador.. B) |
| |
|
|
| t-baum |
Posted on 12-05-2009 03:44
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2153
Joined: 07-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
rjc_43 wrote:
doddy13 wrote:
You know what, i actually love wada.
Now who's next on the UCI's hit list.
Cuntador.
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race." |
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 12-05-2009 07:44
|
World Champion
Posts: 10018
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
A) Illegally: The Spanish judge sealed the samples and paper-work and only he or a set court has the the right to re-open the case and samples. The judge did not authorize the re-opening so these samples are either stolen or fraudulant.
If stolen, then the person who gave the samples to Etorri would face criminal charges and therefore is unlikely to be a testimaonial witness to the authenticity of the given samples.
Nope - it was done illegally - the judge who had been blocking anybody getting access to the blood bags was on vacation, the judge who took over gave them legal access to them.
|
| |
|
|
| boork |
Posted on 12-05-2009 07:44
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 336
Joined: 10-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Food for thought
Valverde is guilty and wil hopefully get punished. Most important is that he get shown to be a cheater and is stopped from ever racing again. Looks like that will be accomplished even with your hypothetical defenses that would take a very long time for him to accomplish.
Food for thought
Removing all the cheaters from the sport means clean riders got a chance to make it. That is the future of the sport and therefor it is good to catch all the cyclists that have gotten to where they are cause of it. The sport is already so tainted that we have moved past the point where positive tests hurt the sport but rather the opposite since sponsors and fans can see the progress towards a clean sport now.
I find it sad that some people, like you KenL, are trying to protect the cheaters and even help them. Shame on you |
| |
|
|
| jacknic |
Posted on 12-05-2009 07:54
|
Domestique
Posts: 613
Joined: 19-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
KenL wrote:
Opening up the OP cases and others such as Armstrong 98 may become the nail-in-the-coffin of this sport one day.
Sooner or later they are going to have to stop with retroactive punishments...As McQuade said last year, "Cycling has to move forward, or risk the consequences of changing results to hundreds of races as well as the legal ramifications of sueing to get unwarrented prize-money back to be distrubited anew".
Now I applaud CONI and its efforts (the only effort) to squash the OP guilty but the consequenses for the sport is turning it into a fiascal. Every race is becoming....such-n-such wins *. The astericks being that a note follows at the bottom of the page saying "Rider may have been involved in OP or Oil for Money and these results may be altered at a future date" or such.
Is Valverde guilty, Yes...of course!, Contador? probably! and so on down the list. The Spanish Government realized how far reaching and wrongly chose to bury it three years ago and now digging it up is crazy.
I think Valverde has a case with CAS, not out of innocence, but because you have one country (Italy) bringing to trial riders of another country for an offence in an other country (Spain). Don't know where this kind of action would be deemed legal in any country.
Having said that, the UCI makes it clear that they opperate outside the Law with their "Guilty till proven innocent policy"
Just food for thought....
I'm inclined to say, so be it. I think that knowing is far better than the eternal doubt thant clings to every single rider of the peloton. I do agree, that it may not make sense to punish and withdraw prize money in older cases, but I would stil want to know if the winner cheated.
It sends the message, that "you might be able to cheat us now with some new drug, but when we find a test you're going down!" Regardles of how much time has past. Riders need to understand, that their legacies are in danger if they dope.
Oh and by the way: UCI doesn't apply guilty until proven innocent. Otherwise Valverde wouldn't have ridden at all this season. Cyclingfans are another story. Especially on these boards.
Edited by jacknic on 12-05-2009 07:56
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 12-05-2009 08:09
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
KenL wrote:
Opening up the OP cases and others such as Armstrong 98 may become the nail-in-the-coffin of this sport one day.
Sooner or later they are going to have to stop with retroactive punishments...As McQuade said last year, "Cycling has to move forward, or risk the consequences of changing results to hundreds of races as well as the legal ramifications of sueing to get unwarrented prize-money back to be distrubited anew".
Now I applaud CONI and its efforts (the only effort) to squash the OP guilty but the consequenses for the sport is turning it into a fiascal. Every race is becoming....such-n-such wins *. The astericks being that a note follows at the bottom of the page saying "Rider may have been involved in OP or Oil for Money and these results may be altered at a future date" or such.
Is Valverde guilty, Yes...of course!, Contador? probably! and so on down the list. The Spanish Government realized how far reaching and wrongly chose to bury it three years ago and now digging it up is crazy.
I think Valverde has a case with CAS, not out of innocence, but because you have one country (Italy) bringing to trial riders of another country for an offence in an other country (Spain). Don't know where this kind of action would be deemed legal in any country.
Having said that, the UCI makes it clear that they opperate outside the Law with their "Guilty till proven innocent policy"
Just food for thought....
You're missing the point:
The vast majority of drugs are undetectable. If there is no chance of retroactive testing, there's no deterrent. Riders will know the samples will never be retested, sol they are free to dope as they want and they'll never be caught.
That's the whole intention behind the retesting.
That said, the Valverde thing isn't retroactive. It's been continuous since 2006, quite simply it's taken a long time.
The spanish have been very successful at slowing it down. Finally after three years the italians have obtained the evidence they asked for.
KenL wrote:
Food for thought.....Valverde possible defence (Hypothetical)
CONI obtained the evidence legally from Serrano's replacement at the Madrid court.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 12-05-2009 15:14
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
KenL wrote:
The broken system starts with drug companies: They must be held accountable to provide WADA with the signature of the drug prior to Patent approval and sales.
"The signature" doesn't mean much. The chemical formula? Sure, they do that for all substances, out of good will. But that doesn't help much in developing a test for the substance.
KenL wrote:
Teams held accountable to provide roster lists with alternates 1 month prior to race, to allow time for all riders to be pre-tested and then retested prior to the 1st race day and subsuquently every rider participating be tested at least every 3 days. (Team argument: Time...Resources...Money)
There's no money for all those tests. But all riders are tested prior to races now.
KenL wrote:
WADA needs to increase Ban to 4,5 or life (2nd offence) when caught.
That's already the case. The ban is 4 years for the first offence and lifetime bans are in order for the second offence.
KenL wrote:
UCI needs to establish a firm time-line of say 5 years for retro-testing.
I see no reason why they should do that. Not to mention that the UCI are against retroactive testing.
Which is no surprise when you consider that there are many insiders and former riders who have testified that a few top teams have "moles" on the inside of the UCI that notify them prior to being tested so they can mask their doping.
QuickStep is a prime example.
KenL wrote:
They also need to allow Race organizers to have the power to say that if a rider is caught at the TDF then the Organizer has the right to Ban-for-Life the positve rider from said event, as well as let teams know that they will not get automatic selection to the next event (Astana 08)
They already have that power.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 12-05-2009 15:30
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
KenL wrote:
Chemical Formula: at least the makers of CERA did this, albeit late.
No, that was a rumour that idiotic websites published, despite both WADA and the makers of CERA denying it over and over again.
KenL wrote:
The 2 year ban is still the norm...enforce the 4 and life.
The 2 year ban is the norm in cases where the doping violation happened when the maximum was 2 years. You can't punish someone for 4 years if they broke the law when the punishment was 2.
Those that have broken the rules this year and got caught will be punished with 4 year suspensions, or a lifetime ban in Pfannberger's case.
The UCI wants lifetime bans for every offence, no matter first or second, but WADA isn't letting them.......yet.
KenL wrote:
The race organisers get handicapped by CAS, who enforce teams rights to participate....FUJI at the GIRO
CAS enforced that at Paris-Nice and the Tirreno, god knows why.
RCS invited Fuji, no court forced them.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Ildabaoth |
Posted on 12-05-2009 15:32
|
Domestique
Posts: 695
Joined: 22-03-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
KenL wrote:
The Giro is pleased to say they will do some 400 tests throughout the Giro. That is only 2 times each rider at best or 400 tests of 4158 possibles (21 stages x 198 riders: less than 10% tested)
That's not very positive...(Time...Money...Resources)
You aren't very good at statistics, my friend. 10% is already a huge value. The problem is that there are a lot of indetectable drugs. So even if we had 100% testing, that wouldn't work.
Disclaimer: The above post reflects just the personal opinion of the author and not a fact. But if you read it, you must accept it as the ultimate truth.
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 12-05-2009 21:19
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Petacchi's dreaming of a Tour invite, while Di Luca's dreaming of a Vuelta invite.
When are the Vuelta invites announced? IT's more than time...
Edited by issoisso on 12-05-2009 21:24
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 13-05-2009 08:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
ASO: "Tom, stay away from the Tour please."
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 13-05-2009 08:37
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
after winning green..Tom will pass second TdF..this guy must be idiot. |
| |
|
