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

[Cimber]

Okay, it's highly unlikely he doped. Happy now?

Actully they stated that it was just as unlikely as the beef explanation, whcih by many in here was deemed totally impossible so

 

[LaFlorecita]

Actully they stated that it was just as unlikely as the beef explanation, whcih by many in here was deemed totally impossible so

Lol. That's so funny and too true.

 

[El Pistolero]

Please spare us the tears.

Two of the stories of athletes being cleared for clenbuterol are from cases where the athletes were in Mexico and China. Both countries are regarded as having unsafe meat supplies such that clenbuterol contamination is very likely. This is not controversial.

The EU's very safe meat supply is well known and highly regarded. There are lots of odd things about the decision and few controversies. The haphazard use of the word discrimination, is equally bad.

May I remind you and LaFlorecita the AAF - 1 day athlete sample was tested by WADA as a result of this appeal and surprise surprise, another clenbuterol positive. Let it go already.

Read the verdict, you're responsible for what's in your body. Ban them all.

 

[LaFlorecita]

May I remind you and LaFlorecita the AAF - 1 day athlete sample was tested by WADA as a result of this appeal and surprise surprise, another clenbuterol positive. Let it go already.

Ah... What do I have to do with this?

 

[Christian]

My condolences to his fans.

Overall I think it's not that bad though. He loses some titles but no one else wants them anyways and no one cares. He'll miss the Tour but he'll win the Vuelta and Saxo Bank won't lose their license or anything. Basically it's just as if he'd broken a leg in the early season, except he can still train the whole year so he'll be nice and ready in August. If you compare it to guys like Valverde and Basso who were gone two full years it's not bad at all.

 

[LaFlorecita]

First Saxo boy after Jesus to express feelings is Morkov:

http://sporten.tv2.dk/cykling/article.php/id-48002952:trist-mørkøv-kaptajnen-er-væk.html

 

[therealtimshady]

Firstly Saxo may not be at the vuelta if they lose their license and
Contadors points would not count under the UCI new rules on doping

 

[Winternet_]

Firstly Saxo may not be at the vuelta if they lose their license and
Contadors points would not count under the UCI new rules on doping

If Alberto stays with Saxo, then a wildcard is in place for them for the Vuelta.

 

[rhubroma]

Excellent that they kept their nerve and finally made the correct decision. A banned substance in his system, end of (although obviously there is a more detailed debate lying behind that).

Congratulations to Andy Schleck. I do wish such punishments stripped the offender of all previous titles too to be honest.

Individuals like Merx and McQuaid are out of line and such remarks irritate me. The punishment is "excessive" or this is a "dark day" for the sport? Idiots.

The evidence suggests that the black day for the sport was when Alberto elected to undergo a treatment that led to having a banned substance in his system. The day when the scientists found the traces of that and the day when the courts apply a punishment in relation to it were good days for the sport.

The punishment is no where near harsh enough for my liking, for Pete's sake he can race this year's Vuelta! He is essentially being rewarded for dragging the case through the courts with delay after delay. The longer he delays it, the more feeble his back dated punishment is. It should have been from the date he was sentenced (i.e. today). Expect other rumbled riders to continue to follow suit and tedious court cases with muppets in the media and peloton bemoaning the judicial process while ignoring what all evidence suggests is the real villain of the piece.

We can speculate if the clenbuterol is consistent with him having had plasticisers from blood transfusions. We can speculate why his performance that year, despite this process, was markedly inferior to his performances in previous Grand Tours (and what this might suggest about what he was up to earlier in his career). Only Alberto and his closest associates will ever know the answer and there is zero incentive for them to ever tell anyone. In such a system you only catch the bona-fide cheats a tiny percentage of the time they actually cheat.

It still comes back to having a banned substance in your system and you have to come up with something more concrete than a phantom cow carcass to overturn the routine punishment for such a blood test. If we can't accept the results and consequences of independent blood tests to identify a list of proscribed substances, then we might as well pack up and go home.

Sure, the decision could have been made quicker. But the quickest way for decisions to be reached is if the offender admits they were wrong. This can only be done if you impose harsh sentences for those who plead not guilty, but less harsh sentences for those who hold their hands up to it. Currently we are so lenient there is no incentive for anyone to admit it's a fair cop.

The sport is still on life support though, let's not kid ourselves. Anyone who saw Froome and Cobo destroy the pretty high level competition (including their in-form and more illustrious teammates) in the last Vuelta will know what to expect this coming season from a wider array of competitors. I'll be tuning in to this year's TdF from behind the sofa I think!

Anyway, on balance I'm a happy enough camper with this. Hopefully it'll give one or two riders pause for thought about their "preparations" this spring.

In your cut and dry, ruthlessly rational manner, you have elucidated what a certain rigorous and unbiased perspective requires, what Italy is referred to, often in a pejorative sense, as giustizialismo.

In an ideal world, and in one in which everyone receives the same treatment, I have no problem with your sentiments. However, given that cycling is far from an ideal world and given the fact that many of Alberto's competitors abide by the same praxis, seeing him burn (above all in this, ehm, ehm, particular moment) is rather a shame.

Certainly I'm being hypocritical, but who arrives at the age of 41 with his ideals intact and without some falsehood, also because what I saw from Italy in his manners was a class act that matches his riding skills.

So I'm sorry I won't get to see him line up at the start with the other dopers at the Tour is all. My lack of rigor and flawed logic in this regard is a detestable quality, which nobody can't stand more than myself, but I can't get past it in this case. So while I can appreciate the lucid analysis you have provided us here, I can’t applaud its surgical precision and un-nuanced attitude.

 

[elapid]

My condolences to his fans.

Overall I think it's not that bad though. He loses some titles but no one else wants them anyways and no one cares. He'll miss the Tour but he'll win the Vuelta and Saxo Bank won't lose their license or anything. Basically it's just as if he'd broken a leg in the early season, except he can still train the whole year so he'll be nice and ready in August. If you compare it to guys like Valverde and Basso who were gone two full years it's not bad at all.

+1. Well said.

 

[roundabout]

They'll get a wildcard anyway should Contador ride.

The loss of licence for the team during this year is potentially a bigger issue. They need to not to lose the licence, have a good enough season to stay WT or they would lose Contador or WT status.

 

[richardp]

+1. Well said.

Not entirely correct. If he had merely broken his leg, he would come back and earn UCI points. Now, as I understand it, he won't for 2 years.

 

[sniper]

No, but let's hear him speak out now about how his treatment and that of his fellow riders is not standardised across the board and how it should be to be fairer. I didn't hear him complain about hearing about it (or did he) and that it was not fair on Li Fuyu.

Indeed, no complaints from the man himself.
Wonder why?

A reminder of what a great sportsman and colleague AC is:

After adding the following day that he needs time to think about the right words to use, Extebarria eventually tweets: “AC you shout about justice and when it is handed out you start shouting again that you don’t believe in it”.

He then adds: “When there were ex-team-mates who were asking for justice and weren’t given it you were silent.” A further tweet states: “You shout about the gutter press… When the majority has been easier on you that it has with anyone else in a similar case.”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/david-etxebarria-critical-of-contadors-reaction-to-one-year-ban

 

[palmerq]

are riders automatically sacked from their team when banned or are they just banned and can train with their team mates, or are they banned from that too ?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Firstly Saxo may not be at the vuelta if they lose their license and
Contadors points would not count under the UCI new rules on doping

They'd get a wild card without a doubt.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Overall I think it's not that bad though. He loses some titles but no one else wants them anyways and no one cares. He'll miss the Tour but he'll win the Vuelta and Saxo Bank won't lose their license or anything. Basically it's just as if he'd broken a leg in the early season, except he can still train the whole year so he'll be nice and ready in August. If you compare it to guys like Valverde and Basso who were gone two full years it's not bad at all.

Generally agree. Though it's not quite the same as breaking a leg. But yes, it could have been worse, as you note.

I think the decision is fairly just. I just don't think that Schleck and Scarponi (and anything else Berti won) should be handed victories. I think those races' record books should say "no winner". That's all.

 

[Woody22]

Excellent that they kept their nerve and finally made the correct decision. A banned substance in his system, end of (although obviously there is a more detailed debate lying behind that).

Congratulations to Andy Schleck. I do wish such punishments stripped the offender of all previous titles too to be honest.

Individuals like Merx and McQuaid are out of line and such remarks irritate me. The punishment is "excessive" or this is a "dark day" for the sport? Idiots.

The evidence suggests that the black day for the sport was when Alberto elected to undergo a treatment that led to having a banned substance in his system. The day when the scientists found the traces of that and the day when the courts apply a punishment in relation to it were good days for the sport.

The punishment is no where near harsh enough for my liking, for Pete's sake he can race this year's Vuelta! He is essentially being rewarded for dragging the case through the courts with delay after delay. The longer he delays it, the more feeble his back dated punishment is. It should have been from the date he was sentenced (i.e. today). Expect other rumbled riders to continue to follow suit and tedious court cases with muppets in the media and peloton bemoaning the judicial process while ignoring what all evidence suggests is the real villain of the piece.

We can speculate if the clenbuterol is consistent with him having had plasticisers from blood transfusions. We can speculate why his performance that year, despite this process, was markedly inferior to his performances in previous Grand Tours (and what this might suggest about what he was up to earlier in his career). Only Alberto and his closest associates will ever know the answer and there is zero incentive for them to ever tell anyone. In such a system you only catch the bona-fide cheats a tiny percentage of the time they actually cheat.

It still comes back to having a banned substance in your system and you have to come up with something more concrete than a phantom cow carcass to overturn the routine punishment for such a blood test. If we can't accept the results and consequences of independent blood tests to identify a list of proscribed substances, then we might as well pack up and go home.

Sure, the decision could have been made quicker. But the quickest way for decisions to be reached is if the offender admits they were wrong. This can only be done if you impose harsh sentences for those who plead not guilty, but less harsh sentences for those who hold their hands up to it. Currently we are so lenient there is no incentive for anyone to admit it's a fair cop.

The sport is still on life support though, let's not kid ourselves. Anyone who saw Froome and Cobo destroy the pretty high level competition (including their in-form and more illustrious teammates) in the last Vuelta will know what to expect this coming season from a wider array of competitors. I'll be tuning in to this year's TdF from behind the sofa I think!

Anyway, on balance I'm a happy enough camper with this. Hopefully it'll give one or two riders pause for thought about their "preparations" this spring.

Well said!!

 

[TheMight]

are riders automatically sacked from their team when banned or are they just banned and can train with their team mates, or are they banned from that too ?

Usually sacked, Valverde was the most recent case where that didn't happen. There were certain events where he wasn't to be near his team but at other times he effectively trained with them.


I don't know the exact state of the current rules but I believe it was part of the protour that required it. Supposedly teams weren't supposed to race investigated riders but that only applied to riders not protected by UCI.

 

[The Hitch]

Read the verdict, you're responsible for what's in your body. Ban them all.

Yeah i agree with that. people say that he should be banned because he's responsible for what goes into his body but yet they then say the footballers shouldn't be banned because contamination is more likely in Mexico.

 

[luckyboy]

Wonder what would've happened if RFEC just stuck with the original one-year ban.

 

[Andynonomous]

Good news, bad news for me.



An obvious doper gets publicly sanctioned.

He only got caught because of an unlikely set of circumstances (different lab with more sensitive equipment, a German journalist getting leaked information).

An even bigger fraud (Armstrong) gets no trial.



Overall, I don't think cycling can claim that the situation is getting significantly better or worse.




Tennis, on the other hand, is laughing all the way to the bank (unfortunately).

 

[Havetts]

Wonder what would've happened if RFEC just stuck with the original one-year ban.

All the Contador fans wouldve gone apesh*t 1 year ago, cry how it is unfair etc.. Same situation like it is now.

 

[Andynonomous]

Good news, bad news for me.



An obvious doper gets publicly sanctioned.

He only got caught because of an unlikely set of circumstances (different lab with more sensitive equipment, a German journalist getting leaked information).

An even bigger fraud (Armstrong) gets no trial.



Overall, I don't think cycling can claim that the situation is getting significantly better or worse.




Tennis, on the other hand, is laughing all the way to the bank (unfortunately).

 

[roundabout]

All the Contador fans wouldve gone apesh*t 1 year ago, cry how it is unfair etc.. Same situation like it is now.

I think the question is would WADA and or UCI have appealed such a ban.

 

[The Hitch]

are riders automatically sacked from their team when banned or are they just banned and can train with their team mates, or are they banned from that too ?

Valverde trained with movistar last year. he was waiting for xavi and benat for a training ride, when Tondo died.