Alberto Contador suspended until August 2012 (loses all results July 2010 - Jan 2012)

[Steel4Ever]

Byeeee!

Oop!

Time to stop watching the circus that is pro cycling!

Maybe I'll take up gardening this summer....




p.s. -- not suspicious at all that one day pharmboy is acquitted and the very next day the last rider to snub him hard gets it up the pooch! Nah! Everything is totally on the up and up within the UCI et al.

 

[straydog]

lol At all the people saying Andy Schleck would never win the tdf

ha ha....that has really made me laugh....very funny

 

[Parrulo]

python and publicus here is your new favourite thread

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=784536#post784536

 

[Mellow Velo]

What does that mean?

It means: "The Idiot has landed".

 

[Zam_Olyas]

It means: "The Idiot has landed".

Lol
ten characters.

 

[Benotti69]

And Walsh and Kimmage did not know the score "from that start". Walsh was a big fan of LA originally, until he fell out of favour, and LA confidential wasn't published until 2004. Kimmage didn't get in on the act until then either. Only Bassons said something in 99, and the rest of the peloton and the media hardly came racing to his side in support.

More Obfuscation.

Walsh knew something was up in '99 along with a couple of other Journos. The questions about taking substances was asked of Armstrong and he was quoted as saying after cancer he would never put anything near his body ever again, then he was asked about his corticoid positive he said well apart from that and then produces a backdated TUE.

Walsh talks about it in this interview

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/?s=walsh

Kimmage was not writing about Cycling then.

 

[jackwolf]

It's time to take this to a real court instead of sport tribunals. You can't get justice with corrupted institutions.

In California, for example?

 

[Walkman]

i will but in proper place b/c it will be buried here and the discussion required feedback that will be sunk here.

Yes, that seems like a good idea! Parullo has started a thread and I am eager to read you analasys and thoughts.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

this is just sad

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Where can one find said copy of the CAS decision? I have some spare time later

 

[Carols]

Shame? Because he is your favorite rider and therefore is allowd to dope?

Pantani is my favorite, followed by LeMond and Big Mig.

It's a shame because I won't get to see the best of the current peloton ride in races that is it in a nutshell.......

He is not my favorite, simply the Most Exciting to watch in GTs, as are Gibert and Cancellara in classics.

I almost gave up the sport when Museew admitted he doped, now that was devastating...but I still consider him one of my favorites.

 

[straydog]

More Obfuscation.

Walsh knew something was up in '99 along with a couple of other Journos. The questions about taking substances was asked of Armstrong and he was quoted as saying after cancer he would never put anything near his body ever again, then he was asked about his corticoid positive he said well apart from that and then produces a backdated TUE.

Walsh talks about it in this interview

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/?s=walsh

Kimmage was not writing about Cycling then.

Benotti...much as it has always been fun to refute your "knowledge" of Kimmage, Walsh and Armstrong in particular, it is kind of off thread...so let me just take this moment to congratulate you on all those prophecies regarding the Federal Investigation and then suggest we try and keep this on track....nice to "see" you again though

Peace

 

[LaFlorecita]

Look what I've found!

To read the award, cleck here

Are spelling mistakes on the site enough to appeal?

 

[roundabout]

Where can one find said copy of the CAS decision? I have some spare time later

http://www.tas-cas.org

 

[rhubroma]

You have forgotten that the UCI was notified by German media that they had a Contador positive? The UCI was trying to keep the positive hidden. They had known of the AAF for quite some time!

If in fact the UCI was not supporting Contador, then it would have been a Li FuYu outcome. Announced positive, vanish from Pro peloton days later never to be seen in Europe again. But no.

The facts of the matter simply do not support your opinion.

Actually, I hadn't forgotten that thank you.

I don't see how the UCI taking this to CAS, even if initially it does appear to have tried to not have the case exposed, isn't supportive of my personal feelings on the matter.

Having not been able to suppress the positive, the UCI decided to pursue it to the hilt. Perhaps that LA was at the time under fire by the feds played a determining factor, I don't know, or that, once exposed, it had no choice but to try and get him sanctioned. Yet since I believe that the UCI took a bribe to cover Lance for a Tour de Swiss positive and not to have to sanction him and, in other delicate cases, probably was an umbrella to him and his team (here the market issues I brought up I think are of decisive importance) the very fact that Contador has now been sanctioned with UCI compliance is at the very least hypocritical.

So, no, the facts don't confound my position, they rather support it.

 

[Pandora]

I think the backdated sentence was the most fair under the circumstances. As I noted on the other thread, if Bert had been allowed to keep 2011 results, when he returned to racing would depend on when CAS announced the decision. All these delays would mean a correspondingly longer delay in returning to racing. By backdating and in effect extending his ban throughout 2011, this was all avoided. It also means that fans will have seen Bert riding throughout all banned period except this year till the Vuelta. Under the circumstances, this was about as good as he could get.

It is very sad day for me today. I was hoping he would eventually get off the hook because I like him both as a person and a cyclist and because such lenghty and tiresome procedure is simply senseless.

Looking from the bright side, we'll see him again at the Vuelta and I'm looking forward to it. As for the Giro, I consider him the winner and it'll never change.

I found this at the Gazzetta site (and mostly agree, although I'm glad the disqualification has been backdated):

Maurizio Fondriest:

Contador has been sentenced and I don't feel like entering into the heart of the matter because it would be really difficult. The thing that cries out is the fact that a rider who rode and won the Giro, is going to be deprived of victories achieved without ever testing positive in all controls he has had, the trophies will be taken away from him because of the disqualification and now he has to serve the last 6 months of that disqualification. Other riders, I mean Ivan Basso, Valverde etc., served their 2 years and this is an anomaly I do not understand. On one side, the federal bodies should have been quicker in making the decision, on the other side, if he is really guilty for this positive clenbuterol test during the Tour, they had to leave him the victories he got afterwards and start the disqualification from now on. Personally, I can say, looking at the results, it may be established Contador is innocent, because he has kept on winning and has always ridden strongly. I consider him a great person, accustomed to suffering, who has always endured heavy burdens. When he returns to the Vuelta, he'll be big favorite and probably will win it. Scarponi? I don't think he'll be satisfied. If Contador had been positive at the Giro, maybe he could have been content. This way he wins the Giro because the Spaniard has had a positive test at the Tour a year and a half ago. But Contador won the Giro on the road.

Source: http://www.gazzetta.it/Ciclismo/06-02-2012/di-rocco-un-atto-giustizia-81259474586.shtml

 

[webbie146]

ha ha....that has really made me laugh....very funny

Glad you liked it!

 

[LaFlorecita]

Where can one find said copy of the CAS decision? I have some spare time later

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5648/5048/0/FINAL20AWARD202012.02.06.pdf

 

[Benotti69]

Benotti...much as it has always been fun to refute your "knowledge" of Kimmage, Walsh and Armstrong in particular, it is kind of off thread...so let me just take this moment to congratulate you on all those prophecies regarding the Federal Investigation and then suggest we try and keep this on track....nice to "see" you again though

Peace

Yeah refute me again since you failed previously.

Trying to work more Armstrong propaganda in here where you think it will work.

Plugged got pulled on the feds not for lack of eveidence, but money talks. look at your signature cute little doggy

 

[pmcg76]

it's likely...but not the case? huh?...Do you even follow yourself?

Blood doping was exactly what WADA and the UCI were accusing him of, and was what CAS could not entirely rule out, only stating it was not the likeliest reason for his fail. What is it with some people thinking that EPO or blood doping is worse than other doping? Doping is doping.

As to the second bolded part....your memory of cycling history has I fear been slightly swayed by subsequent events and not reality. 98, when half the race threatened to quit because of what had happened, did not in anyones eyes usher in a new dawn, it merely confirmed what most already knew, that most riders tacitly endorsed "medical" preparation and did not want that changing.

What made 2006 different was that it was the first time a TDF winner had been busted. It had sent out a message....it doesn't matter any more who you are.

See this is the problem with "reading back through the old stories"...or to the rest of us "wikipedia"....some people's "memories" of events is very much tarnished by their opinions and beliefs from the present.

And Walsh and Kimmage did not know the score "from that start". Walsh was a big fan of LA originally, until he fell out of favour, and LA confidential wasn't published until 2004. Kimmage didn't get in on the act until then either. Only Bassons said something in 99, and the rest of the peloton and the media hardly came racing to his side in support.

Contador has had plenty to say about why he "would never dope", whether they are related to his Brain Hemmorage are kind of irrelevant, though frankly, I am sure they would have been just as risible as Steakgate.

As to his narcissism generally, maybe his foundation might give us some better clues....http://www.albertocontador.com/prensa.detalle.php?id=397

You really, really dont have a clue, do you?

They did not bust him for a blood transfusion though, did they?

Your only evidence is that Contador has a foundation, wow earth shattering stuff. My problem is not with with people having foundations but using said foundation to cover their tracks.

If Contador has had plenty to say on why he would never dope, then bring it. Should be easy to find.

As for 1999, I dont need wikipedia to look back through events. I have all the phsyical copies of magazines, newspaper articles etc at home. I also have my memory which works very well.

In 1999 Kimmage said he refused to believe in miracles and was not going to applaud the performances of Armstrong because he didnt believe in them.

Likewise Walsh who wasnt even reporting on cycling at the time, however he knew Armstrong was a fraud from 1999 onward and that is why he got back on his case. The first book published by Walsh & Ballester was way before 2004. It was Walsh who was gonna reveal the Ferrari connection in 01 so yes, he also knew.

The reason nobody sided with Bassons was because as one magazine put it "Armstrong was exactly what the Tour needed and was the perfect winner". The Cnacer card trumped all.

The start was not 1993 but 99.

 

[straydog]

Actually, I hadn't forgotten that thank you.

I don't see how the UCI taking this to CAS, even if initially it does appear to have tried to not have the case exposed, isn't supportive of my personal feelings on the matter.

Having not been able to suppress the positive, the UCI decided to pursue it to the hilt. Perhaps that LA was at the time under fire by the feds played a determining factor, I don't know, or that, once exposed, it had no choice but to try and get him sanctioned Yet since I believe that the UCI took a bribe to cover Lance for a Tour de Swiss positive and not to sanction him (and, in other delicate cases, probably was an umbrella to him and his team), the very fact that Contador has now been sanctioned with UCI compliance is at the very least hypocritical.

So, no, the facts don't confound my position, they rather support it.

But they didn't. They agreed to CAS putting back the hearings twice. Were I a conspiracy theorist I might surmise that they talked with Contador, suggested that it was game up now the media had it, that sorry they had to be seen to doing something, but if the delays were long enough he would only actually serve a short suspension if found guilty...you know IF I was a conspiracy theorist.

Hence Pat's " It's a sad day for cycling quote"...which should have been, "It's a sad day for cycling 'cos we didnt get him a full two year suspension.

But apparently according to Benoitt I am Darach Mcquaid...so what would I know?

ph...p.s congrats on that one too Benoitt you "knowledge" is astounding!

 

[JimPanzen]

I'm really surprised by the amount of support Contador receives from other/former riders.

 

[Big Doopie]

ban was correct.

unfortunately having the money to lawyer up and delay things for a year and a half utterly changed the face of any race he competed in -- once more ridiculing pro cycling.

i also think both scarponi and schlecklet are just as dirty.

floyd is no longer alone.

 

[Walkman]

I'm really surprised by the amount of support Contador receives from other/former riders.

Me too. ( 10

 

[Fidolix]

Honestly, I think this decision sets a very dangerous precedent for cycling:

In essence if a rider fails a dope test, all he has to do is ignore it, carry on riding (and earning), keep appealing, keep getting his CAS date put back (with UCI agreement it seems) until nearing the end of the two year sanction, then bam....a poxy six month ban....great....well done CAS!

There are other riders who have failed for Clen, and/ or claimed contaminated supplements who haven't had the financial clout that Contdador has, or the unqualified support of their federation, and guess what....they got their full 2 year bans. Suspended from date of fail, and no riding until appeal process was over.

This result makes a mockery of clean cycling. An absolute mockery. It stuck in my throat watching him last year at the tour and honestly I cheered when he got stuck behind that crash on day one, not because I hate him as a rider, he is clearly an exceptional talent, but because he is also clearly a cheat in every sense of the word.

Florecita....wow....you really do need to get out more....your myopia is truly amazing to watch. I don't know if I have ever seen someone so comprehensibly lose their entire self respect in public before. This thread seems to have rapidly become about your impending mental breakdown due to a cheat getting banned. Honestly, one day I hope you look back at this thread and ask a mod to delete all of your posts, otherwise I genuinely fear for you in your future life. Get some perspective, your boy got away easy. Any self respecting federation would have asked for four years as a minimum, instead he has one off season not racing (the initial "suspension") and misses one tour before his mighty comeback/ homecoming at the Vuelta.

Well it is what it is, whining isn't going to change it, so that's it for me, but I will personally be glad he isn't at the tour, and if I catch a Vuelta stage I'll be sure to pack my doctor's costume again, 'cos he seemed to enjoy that one last time.

Hope and pray he gets booed every time he throws his leg over a bike, to be honest.

Peace

You sounds like a very angry old man, maybe you should get out more.