Log in:  

Register

Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

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

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re: Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

01 Jun 2018 00:58

King Boonen wrote:
JosephK wrote:I think M. Lappy is not worse for cycling than Cookson based solely on the revelation of Froome's AAF at the Vuelta. If Uncle Brian had been re-elected, I expect no one on the outside would ever have known about Dawg's Sal doping. I don't think the item would have been accessible to the papers that blew the whistle -- too locked down from inside the UCI. No leak would have occurred.

Just to be clear, you think the leak came from, or was at least authorised by, the President and that is a good thing?


I have no idea, of course. This is pure speculation, and not worth much one way or the other. I don't think Lappartient was aware of the AAF when it happened, and I don't think he was the leaker. But if Cookson were in charge, I would not expect the AAF to have gotten out. Not saying the leak was good, just saying that it feels like Froome and Sky are not good for cycling -- just a fan's take -- and if the AAF case can help clean up the sport, just a little, then it's a good thing. And if Lappartient's being there facilitated this, even indirectly, I think it is awesome sauce, with gravy. :lol:
User avatar JosephK
Junior Member
 
Posts: 256
Joined: 24 Jul 2016 15:49

Re: Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

01 Jun 2018 08:35

JosephK wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
JosephK wrote:I think M. Lappy is not worse for cycling than Cookson based solely on the revelation of Froome's AAF at the Vuelta. If Uncle Brian had been re-elected, I expect no one on the outside would ever have known about Dawg's Sal doping. I don't think the item would have been accessible to the papers that blew the whistle -- too locked down from inside the UCI. No leak would have occurred.

Just to be clear, you think the leak came from, or was at least authorised by, the President and that is a good thing?


I have no idea, of course. This is pure speculation, and not worth much one way or the other. I don't think Lappartient was aware of the AAF when it happened, and I don't think he was the leaker. But if Cookson were in charge, I would not expect the AAF to have gotten out. Not saying the leak was good, just saying that it feels like Froome and Sky are not good for cycling -- just a fan's take -- and if the AAF case can help clean up the sport, just a little, then it's a good thing. And if Lappartient's being there facilitated this, even indirectly, I think it is awesome sauce, with gravy. :lol:


ahhaha, nice one
did you see Lappartient taking a pic with Vino in Rome?
:p
clean up the sport :D
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,349
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

Re: Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

01 Jun 2018 14:56

pastronef wrote:
JosephK wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
JosephK wrote:I think M. Lappy is not worse for cycling than Cookson based solely on the revelation of Froome's AAF at the Vuelta. If Uncle Brian had been re-elected, I expect no one on the outside would ever have known about Dawg's Sal doping. I don't think the item would have been accessible to the papers that blew the whistle -- too locked down from inside the UCI. No leak would have occurred.

Just to be clear, you think the leak came from, or was at least authorised by, the President and that is a good thing?


I have no idea, of course. This is pure speculation, and not worth much one way or the other. I don't think Lappartient was aware of the AAF when it happened, and I don't think he was the leaker. But if Cookson were in charge, I would not expect the AAF to have gotten out. Not saying the leak was good, just saying that it feels like Froome and Sky are not good for cycling -- just a fan's take -- and if the AAF case can help clean up the sport, just a little, then it's a good thing. And if Lappartient's being there facilitated this, even indirectly, I think it is awesome sauce, with gravy. :lol:


ahhaha, nice one
did you see Lappartient taking a pic with Vino in Rome?
:p
clean up the sport :D


Lappy does appear to be going down the selfie route of Cookson, he needs to leaks Dawgs passport, it’s his only hope :cool:
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

03 Jun 2018 07:07

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,019
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

Re:

03 Jun 2018 16:27

Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and annouce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Re:

04 Jun 2018 08:48

thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and announce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.


Weren't they x-raying bikes at the Giro? I don't see what else he could possibly announce. I picked up there was a general feeling from those who believe motors are being used that the UCI don't want to catch anyone.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,449
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Re:

04 Jun 2018 12:13

King Boonen wrote:
thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and announce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.


Weren't they x-raying bikes at the Giro? I don't see what else he could possibly announce. I picked up there was a general feeling from those who believe motors are being used that the UCI don't want to catch anyone.


Do you think the UCI will try and catch motors and kill the sport?

That is not going to happen. They may make it look like they are looking for motors but they are most definitely not going to tell the public they found motors.

Motors in bikes becoming public will kill the sport forever.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,525
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Re:

04 Jun 2018 13:09

Benotti69 wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and announce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.


Weren't they x-raying bikes at the Giro? I don't see what else he could possibly announce. I picked up there was a general feeling from those who believe motors are being used that the UCI don't want to catch anyone.


Do you think the UCI will try and catch motors and kill the sport?

That is not going to happen. They may make it look like they are looking for motors but they are most definitely not going to tell the public they found motors.

Motors in bikes becoming public will kill the sport forever.


That's pretty much what I was driving at. To think the UCI might bring in new technology/checks is to say you think the current technology and checking system is flawed. I honestly don't see how it could be without the UCI being complicit. If that's the case then Lappartient isn't hoping for anything, he's part of it.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,449
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Re:

04 Jun 2018 16:54

King Boonen wrote:
thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and announce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.


Weren't they x-raying bikes at the Giro? I don't see what else he could possibly announce. I picked up there was a general feeling from those who believe motors are being used that the UCI don't want to catch anyone.


What I meant was, once a team knows the testing method they can build around it. Lappartient has hinted at a new technology which might get used. I believe this is the only way to combat motor fraud.

I would add whereas doping still requires a physical effort, motor doping if detected by a top rider would destroy cycling for years. No UCI president wants that during his reign.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Re:

04 Jun 2018 16:59

King Boonen wrote:That's pretty much what I was driving at. To think the UCI might bring in new technology/checks is to say you think the current technology and checking system is flawed. I honestly don't see how it could be without the UCI being complicit. If that's the case then Lappartient isn't hoping for anything, he's part of it.


They are all part of it.

Lappartient is running UCI while trying desperately to get a bigger part in IOC. It is sport politics to these suits. They dont give a fig about morals, integrity, fans, riders, teams, or anyone but themselves and forwarding their own interests.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,525
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

06 Jun 2018 10:20

More handwringing from Le Président,
http://www.velonews.com/2018/06/news/uci-wants-froome-sidelined-anti-doping-case-drags_468438
“You know, when I was elected president of the UCI, an hour later I was informed of Froome’s test. Everyone has trouble understanding how after nine months it still has not advanced,” Lappartient told Le Parisien. “But this issue is incredibly complex, more so than any one we’ve ever had in cycling.

“My point of view has always been that the best thing would be if he does not take part in competitions. It would calm things down and he could focus on his defense. He decides to race. We respect his right.”
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,019
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

10 Jun 2018 14:18

Handwringing - perfect choice of word.

Sky are controlling the process. Sky are dictating when the the process moves along and when it doesn't. Sky are determining outcomes.

It is possible Lappartient is so out of his depth he doesn't even realise this.

Expect more handwringing.
User avatar wirral
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,553
Joined: 28 Mar 2011 06:05

Re:

10 Jun 2018 14:53

wirral wrote:Handwringing - perfect choice of word.

Sky are controlling the process. Sky are dictating when the the process moves along and when it doesn't. Sky are determining outcomes.

It is possible Lappartient is so out of his depth he doesn't even realise this.

Expect more handwringing.


I was much hopeful for Lappy but Sky are in full control here, there is really nothing he can do, nothing. If I were Lappy, I’d take Movistar out of the testing pool and let Landa and co. go the fullest of full retard.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re:

10 Jun 2018 22:33

Robert5091 wrote:More handwringing from Le Président,
http://www.velonews.com/2018/06/news/uci-wants-froome-sidelined-anti-doping-case-drags_468438
“You know, when I was elected president of the UCI, an hour later I was informed of Froome’s test. Everyone has trouble understanding how after nine months it still has not advanced,” Lappartient told Le Parisien. “But this issue is incredibly complex, more so than any one we’ve ever had in cycling.

“My point of view has always been that the best thing would be if he does not take part in competitions. It would calm things down and he could focus on his defense. He decides to race. We respect his right.”


"You know, when my mandate as president of the UCI expired, an hour later I was informed Froome's case was still not solved.

It still is an incredibly complex issue more so than any one we’ve ever had in cycling. I leave this office hoping that someday, somebody will get to the bottom of this"
User avatar Rollthedice
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,568
Joined: 11 May 2013 10:59

Re: Re:

10 Jun 2018 22:51

thehog wrote:
wirral wrote:Handwringing - perfect choice of word.

Sky are controlling the process. Sky are dictating when the the process moves along and when it doesn't. Sky are determining outcomes.

It is possible Lappartient is so out of his depth he doesn't even realise this.

Expect more handwringing.


I was much hopeful for Lappy but Sky are in full control here, there is really nothing he can do, nothing. If I were Lappy, I’d take Movistar out of the testing pool and let Landa and co. go the fullest of full retard.



Now there is an interesting thought.
User avatar Koronin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,808
Joined: 14 Oct 2017 01:42
Location: North Carolina, USA

11 Jun 2018 06:40

The UCI must change this dumb{bleep!} system - otherwise the ASO, RCS, MPCC will force it to.

The ASO must be soilng themselves about Froome and his safety at the TdF. If anything happens, Sky's lawyers will drag ASO through the courts tout suite!
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,019
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

Re: Re:

11 Jun 2018 18:40

thehog wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-says-chris-froome-decision-unlikely-to-come-during-tour-de-france/
UCI president David Lappartient has said that should Chris Froome’s salbutamol case extend past the start of the Tour de France next month a decision is unlikely to happen during the race itself. Though Lappartient has no say as to when and how a decision is reached, he says that it could deprive Froome of his rights to defend himself if a hearing was to be held while the race is happening.


So he knows about as much as we do, or he knows that even a decision mid-TdF would result in an appeal by Sky and Froome would carry on riding. Non-news news!


Well 1500 pages is a lot to formally respond to and present counter analysis. So, yes it will take a long time which sounds like Sky’s strategy.

Lappy also has to be careful what he says publicly to not prejudice the case. He’s only hope is to amp up the testing on Froome and announce some form of secret yet to be used motor checking device for the Tour.


Weren't they x-raying bikes at the Giro? I don't see what else he could possibly announce. I picked up there was a general feeling from those who believe motors are being used that the UCI don't want to catch anyone.


What I meant was, once a team knows the testing method they can build around it. Lappartient has hinted at a new technology which might get used. I believe this is the only way to combat motor fraud.

I would add whereas doping still requires a physical effort, motor doping if detected by a top rider would destroy cycling for years. No UCI president wants that during his reign.


Not sure he would want it to come out accidentally either. Only takes one rider or team grudge to say something or a Labrador to run out in front of Marcus Burghardt folding open his wheel or frame like a taco to spill the motorized beans inside live on TV and it's all over. There's nothing he can do to control that no matter how fake the testing method pretending to not find motors is.
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 1,950
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

13 Jun 2018 11:06

Lappy talking tough on TUEs, motors etc. to MPCC :sad:

Image

Image



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1qa0qvZAUg
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Lappartient is worse for cycling than Cookson?

13 Jun 2018 11:56

thehog wrote:Lappy talking tough on TUEs, motors etc. to MPCC :sad:

Image

Image



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1qa0qvZAUg


He admits motor use. It is WHENEVER a motor is used, not IF a motor is used.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,525
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re:

14 Jun 2018 20:47

wirral wrote:Handwringing - perfect choice of word.

Sky are controlling the process. Sky are dictating when the the process moves along and when it doesn't. Sky are determining outcomes.

It is possible Lappartient is so out of his depth he doesn't even realise this.

Expect more handwringing.


Disagree. He's replaying the Contador case timing. Contador got his appearance fees, Contador fans watched while the UCI slowed arbitration. Any "ban" was served mostly in the off-season. While other athletes simply vanish from the pro peloton, case swiftly arbitrated.

The UCI as a federation clearly favors riders and teams based on viewership and how much money they bring. Right now, it's Sky.
User avatar DirtyWorks
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,089
Joined: 10 Feb 2010 17:01

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests

Back to top