Skins launch $2 million law suit against UCI - Page 2 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-04-12, 20:15
sniper sniper is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,818
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroDeal View Post
The UCI will say that they thought the bio passport was sufficiently robust to prevent most blood doping but do acknowledge there will be borderline cases that cannot be sanctioned. Unless someone can prove that Armstrong's profile was flagged by the passport committee but the UCI did not act on it then it remains one of many passports that are indicative of doping but not to such a degree that action can be taken other than targeted testing.

Contador testing positive mean nothing unless it can be shown the UCI tried to cover it up. It's not like McQuaid popped a Clenbuterol pill into Contador's mouth.

The best avenues to explore are the UCI facilitating the return of Armstrong by meeting with the ASO, which resulted in Patrice Clerc being replaced; delays and warnings during testing during the 2009 and 2010 TdF; the UCI refusing to woth with national anti-doping agencies, like AFLD at the Tour and USADA at the TOC; and pressuring potential witnesses to doping.

How this might have harmed Skins is unclear. If sponsorship contracts were renewed during the time in question then Skins could have mitigated any damages it claims it has suffered.
Hajo Seppelt, the German journo, is convinced UCI attempted to cover up Dirty's positive. Also, Kimmage spoke of "unleashing hell". I assume a smart/experienced guy like him wouldn't use such strong wordings if he wasn't convinced to have some sort of smoking gun evidence of corruption.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-04-12, 20:20
TheGame TheGame is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 350
Default

Who is the Lawyer representing Skins?

Who is the Lawyer representing Paul Kimmage?

Oh, and already being discussed in the Paul Kimmage thread.

Last edited by TheGame; 11-04-12 at 20:25.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-04-12, 20:32
thirteen's Avatar
thirteen thirteen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGame View Post
Who is the Lawyer representing Skins?

Who is the Lawyer representing Paul Kimmage?

Oh, and already being discussed in the Paul Kimmage thread.
yes, Cédric Aguet, lawyer for both

(which is why i posted it in that thread because, in the scheme of things, it's all intertwined)

(ignore the trolls, we've obviously hit a sore spot)
__________________
______________
sempre con noi

Last edited by thirteen; 11-04-12 at 20:34.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-04-12, 20:34
TheGame TheGame is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thirteen View Post
yes, CÚdric Aguet, lawyer for both

(which is why i posted it in that thread because, in the scheme of things, it's all intertwined)
It is 110% related to the Kimmage case. Aguet is forcing the UCI into making a legal statement of defence that they really dont want to be making. Its not check mate yet, but that surely can only be a couple of moves away.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-04-12, 20:37
Mellow Velo's Avatar
Mellow Velo Mellow Velo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,272
Default

In taking on the UCI it's: to the fore SKINS.
__________________
They use thought only to justify their injustices, and speech only to disguise their thoughts. Voltaire
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-04-12, 20:37
thirteen's Avatar
thirteen thirteen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGame View Post
It is 110% related to the Kimmage case. Aguet is forcing the UCI into making a legal statement of defence that they really dont want to be making. Its not check mate yet, but that surely can only be a couple of moves away.
waiting with bated breath
__________________
______________
sempre con noi
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-04-12, 20:52
sniper sniper is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,818
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGame View Post
It is 110% related to the Kimmage case. Aguet is forcing the UCI into making a legal statement of defence that they really dont want to be making. Its not check mate yet, but that surely can only be a couple of moves away.
could you expand? I'm not sure if I correctly understand.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-04-12, 21:00
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellow Velo View Post
In taking on the UCI it's: to the fore SKINS.
What? Are you 13 years old? s****** s******.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-04-12, 21:02
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
could you expand? I'm not sure if I correctly understand.
Its now a legal "context" by which they have to respond within the legal framework. Before they were issuing media statements which are not bound in the same manner and open for interpretation.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-04-12, 21:09
Master50's Avatar
Master50 Master50 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 893
Default

I fear this suit will do severe damage to the sport and to anti doping efforts. Try too hard to eradicate a problem and the publicity ruins you. Maybe Baseball and football have it right. Frankly they missed the mark anyway. They should be suing WADA for their unfair treatment of doping in cycling while completely ignoring the problems in the other sports. Operation Puerto has been mostly a cover up of football and tennis dopers. We don't need external criticism of the sport because we can do a better job ourselves.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.