Antonio Rigozzi

Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
interesting, but i'm not sure if much can be deduced from that either way, except that he has a lot of relevant field experience.

the glass is half empty (he's defending dopers), or it's half full (he's defended cyclists against inconsistent UCI politics).

like here he did say some smart things wrt uci's inconsistent blacklisting of former dopers.
This is not true, Antonio Rigozzi tells - a Swiss lawyer who has worked for several riders with doping offences - among them the Kazakh star rider Alexander Vinokourov and Michael Rasmussen. He has also authored several books and articles on the legal aspects of professional cycling. He is quite confident that there is a blacklist:

"I have followed Michael Rasmussen's case closely. It is clear that UCI presses teams not to write a contract with him. "

As a sign that there is a blacklist, Antonio Rigozzi explains that absolutely no consistency in who is allowed to return to the races after a doping ban and who is not.

"There are no rules in the sport. We live in a world where people in small offices determine the future of the riders. "
http://newcyclingpathways.blogspot.co.uk/2010_04_01_archive.html
 
Oct 26, 2012
2
0
0
True, I am not quite sure what to make of it. However, another concern is that I believe he was the one who represented the "Swiss members" (i.e. Jamie Fuller) in the case brought against swiss cycling about Pat McQuaid's Swiss nomination, it just all seems very fishy to me.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Jonesy.s said:
True, I am not quite sure what to make of it. However, another concern is that I believe he was the one who represented the "Swiss members" (i.e. Jamie Fuller) in the case brought against swiss cycling about Pat McQuaid's Swiss nomination, it just all seems very fishy to me.
Has anybody seen any vacancy for "UCI lawyer" that one could apply to? probably not.
clearly there's nepotism going on under Cookson like under Pat and like in all sports bodies.

I'll get my hopes up high not before anti-doping becomes really independent from UCI.
And then it's still a question of whether WADA stays fully independent and with enough financial ressources.
With that English IOC guy Reedie in charge I'm not sure about WADA's uture reliability.
 
sniper said:
Has anybody seen any vacancy for "UCI lawyer" that one could apply to? probably not.
clearly there's nepotism going on under Cookson like under Pat and like in all sports bodies.

I'll get my hopes up high not before anti-doping becomes really independent from UCI.
And then it's still a question of whether WADA stays fully independent and with enough financial ressources.
With that English IOC guy Reedie in charge I'm not sure about WADA's uture reliability.
This is a joke right? When you are looking for a lawyer for an international federation you don't take out a wanted ad on gumtree.

And what is your problem with Reedie? Apart from him being English?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
King Boonen said:
This is a joke right? When you are looking for a lawyer for an international federation you don't take out a wanted ad on gumtree.
Isn't gumtree where Sky got Leinders?

King Boonen said:
And what is your problem with Reedie? Apart from him being English?
What is wrong with being English?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
And what is your problem with Reedie? Apart from him being English?
no problem. i just don't know him and so i'm not sure about him. WADA's independence is not a matter of course.


Benotti69 said:
Isn't gumtree where Sky got Leinders?
What is wrong with being English?
lol
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
King Boonen said:
And what would his nationality have to do with his independence?
do the words conflict of interest not appear in your dictionary?

it's obvious why i'm not happy with an englishman in charge of anti-doping.
you don't have to be a genius to see that great britain have a lot of athletes on great programs at present.
more specifically, i think sky dopes and got institutionalized help while at it.
so to have two englishmen in charge of cycling's anti-doping, that's not reassuring.

it's not said that reedie's a sell out. perhaps he'll do great.
just that i'm not at all reassured as it stands.
 
Jonesy.s said:
Is anyone else concerned that one of the first staff changes Cookson makes was to appoint as lawyer for UCI a lawyer who has worked for pretty much every doper cyclists in the past ten years?

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/4410/5048/0/Award20145820_FINAL_20internet.pdf

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5648/5048/0/Award20FINAL202012.02.10.pdf

http://newcyclingpathways.blogspot.co.uk/2010_04_01_archive.html
Neutral for now, gotta move with a certain level of pace in getting the core new team installed. Major decisions are needed and that requires a solid operational team in place.

Waiting for the decisions now.
 
sniper said:
do the words conflict of interest not appear in your dictionary?

it's obvious why i'm not happy with an englishman in charge of anti-doping.
you don't have to be a genius to see that great britain have a lot of athletes on great programs at present.
more specifically, i think sky dopes and got institutionalized help while at it.
so to have two englishmen in charge of cycling's anti-doping, that's not reassuring.

it's not said that reedie's a sell out. perhaps he'll do great.
just that i'm not at all reassured as it stands.
If you knew the first thing about Reedie, you'd know he's not English

If you can't even get that right, I wouldn't put much stock in your assessment of him
 
sniper said:
do the words conflict of interest not appear in your dictionary?

it's obvious why i'm not happy with an englishman in charge of anti-doping.
you don't have to be a genius to see that great britain have a lot of athletes on great programs at present.
more specifically, i think sky dopes and got institutionalized help while at it.
so to have two englishmen in charge of cycling's anti-doping, that's not reassuring.

it's not said that reedie's a sell out. perhaps he'll do great.
just that i'm not at all reassured as it stands.
It gets even better, a "conflict of interest" because of his nationality? Then feel free to suggest some people who are suitably qualified from countries without any successful athletes.

You do understand that WADA is composed of more than one person don't you?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Parker said:
If you knew the first thing about Reedie, you'd know he's not English

If you can't even get that right, I wouldn't put much stock in your assessment of him
ok, that's painful for me, but slightly better already for my views on reedie.

King Boonen said:
It gets even better, a "conflict of interest" because of his nationality?
does CAS ever appoint a judge that has the same nationality as the defendant? I don't think so and the reason is obvious.
Nationalities play a role at all different levels of politics, management and decision making.
You wanna deny that?
And again, I'm not saying it will play a role, i'm saying it can/could/might.
You do understand that WADA is composed of more than one person don't you?
uci was also composed of more than one person when armstrong freewheeled his way to 7 tdf victories.:rolleyes:

if you wanna give reedie and cookson the benefit of the doubt already, be my guest.
 
sniper said:
ok, that's painful for me, but slightly better already for my views on reedie.

1. does CAS ever appoint a judge that has the same nationality as the defendant? I don't think so and the reason is obvious.

2. One of Reedie's tasks is to bring doping cases against sporters. His nationality won't help him bring down Murray.

3. Nationalities play a role at all different levels of politics and management.
You wanna deny that?

4. uci was also composed of more than one person when armstrong freewheeled his way to 7 tdf victories.:rolleyes:
1. Do you actually know that or are you just making an assumption? I can pretty much guarantee it's an assumption. Does your country bring in foreign judges to try criminals?

2. I don't believe WADA bring any cases. They can challenge rulings but I'm pretty sure it is the responsible ADO that brings cases against athletes.

3. You do realise WADA is a law foundation don't you?

4. Comparing the UCI to the WORLD anti-doping agency is utterly ridiculous.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
King Boonen said:
1. Do you actually know that or are you just making an assumption? I can pretty much guarantee it's an assumption. Does your country bring in foreign judges to try criminals?

2. I don't believe WADA bring any cases. They can challenge rulings but I'm pretty sure it is the responsible ADO that brings cases against athletes.

3. You do realise WADA is a law foundation don't you?

4. Comparing the UCI to the WORLD anti-doping agency is utterly ridiculous.
1. my country is irrelevant here, as i'm obviously talking international law here.
The hague's international court of justice won't ever see, say, a chinese judge rule over a case involving chinese defendants. An assumption that is indeed, but i guess a safe one.

2. I don't know the exact structure and processes, but hardly anybody does (see the thread "BP for dummies", or the multiple discussions on how Lance was able to by-pass the BP). And tthings often turn out to be different in reality than they are on paper.

3. no, i didn't. what would be the implications of that?

4. Perhaps it is.
I'm just saying WADA's independence for me is not a matter of course. WADA ultimately have to answer to the IOC, if not officially, then inofficially.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
uci was also composed of more than one person when armstrong freewheeled his way to 7 tdf victories.:rolleyes:

if you wanna give reedie and cookson the benefit of the doubt already, be my guest.
Tell me, was Verbruggen American, then? Was McQuaid? Or was some other American in UCI the real puppetmaster - could you point him out for us, please?

You actually undermine your own original point - Armstrong/UCI was nothing to do with 'conflict' of nationalities. This latest anti-Reedie nonsense it's inate bias against the english, even when they aren't english!

Crazy thing is, I've heard things about Reedie that do concern me. His nationality ain't one of them.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
martinvickers said:
Tell me, was Verbruggen American, then? Was McQuaid? Or was some other American in UCI the real puppetmaster - could you point him out for us, please?

You actually undermine your own original point - Armstrong/UCI was nothing to do with 'conflict' of nationalities. This latest anti-Reedie nonsense it's inate bias against the english, even when they aren't english!

Crazy thing is, I've heard things about Reedie that do concern me. His nationality ain't one of them.
So post your concerns and lets forget nationalities.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
martinvickers said:
Tell me, was Verbruggen American, then? Was McQuaid? Or was some other American in UCI the real puppetmaster - could you point him out for us, please?

You actually undermine your own original point -
Armstrong/UCI was nothing to do with 'conflict' of nationalities. This latest anti-Reedie nonsense it's inate bias against the english, even when they aren't english!

Crazy thing is, I've heard things about Reedie that do concern me. His nationality ain't one of them.
my point merely being that i wouldn't trust reedie or cookson to bring down sky, even if they'd have red hot positive samples in their fridge.
not until i see it happen.
of course, being british is not a sine qua non for being a sky apologist.
but it doesn't help either.
 
1. Please don't compare the international court for war crimes to CAS, that really is incomprehensible. In the grad scheme of things CAS is irrelevant, that comparison does your argument no favors what so ever.

2. Hardly anyone does? you mean a few people on a cycling forum don't understand it. But we get back to the point, WADA do not bring cases, they contest them. By that point everyone knows the outcome so in some ways their hands are tied but they are an independent body.

3. It means they are not involved in politics in sport to a level you are suggesting. WADA does not need to please people.

4. Link please or retract, this is a huge statement and clearly requires some proof.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Jonesy.s said:
Is anyone else concerned that one of the first staff changes Cookson makes was to appoint as lawyer for UCI a lawyer who has worked for pretty much every doper cyclists in the past ten years?

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/4410/5048/0/Award20145820_FINAL_20internet.pdf

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5648/5048/0/Award20FINAL202012.02.10.pdf

http://newcyclingpathways.blogspot.co.uk/2010_04_01_archive.html
I was very surprised to hear this a few days ago. I have heard from several people Rigozzi is a good guy but nonsense he spewed as a paid liar for dopers makes me really question this move. There has to be better people.
 
Race Radio said:
I was very surprised to hear this a few days ago. I have heard from several people Rigozzi is a good guy but nonsense he spewed as a paid liar for dopers makes me really question this move. There has to be better people.
Be fair, as far as a lawyer is concerned he is there to provide the best defence possible to his client and that is what his client is entitled to. You can't make a moral judgement about it, that doesn't come in to it.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
King Boonen said:
1. Please don't compare the international court for war crimes to CAS, that really is incomprehensible. In the grad scheme of things CAS is irrelevant, that comparison does your argument no favors what so ever.

2. Hardly anyone does? you mean a few people on a cycling forum don't understand it. But we get back to the point, WADA do not bring cases, they contest them. By that point everyone knows the outcome so in some ways their hands are tied but they are an independent body.

3. It means they are not involved in politics in sport to a level you are suggesting. WADA does not need to please people.

4. Link please or retract, this is a huge statement and clearly requires some proof.
1. the point was conflict of interest due to nationality.
I agree nationality won't matter a thing IF WADA is indeed fully independent and if Reedie doesn't have any say in which cases are opened and which aren't. On paper of course he doesn't. In reality, I hope he doesn't.

2. Again, you're right on paper, but I'm more skeptic about the reality. Reedie is an important IOC member.

3. That's indeed how it should be and how I hope it will be.

4. It doesn't seem far-fetched that IOC can exert serious pressure on WADA. E.g. in the financial department.
But that's just speculation on my part.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts