Antonio Rigozzi

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
sniper said:
yah, thanks for the reminder.
had forgotten about this.
See, I'm very fair really ;-)

I'll be honest - in my own entirely uneducated view, and despite being Pat's countryman, I think Cookson is a vast improvement. Perfect, hardly. But my gut feelings, for what little they are worth, is he's one of the straight ones. But time will tell.

I have less excitement, if you will, about Reedie. But then, Reedie wasn't taking over from Hein/Pat. WADA didn't need quite the level of saving UCI did.

And for the record, and hang me if you like - but Pat, as bad and all as he was, was still a f***ing improvement on Verbruggen.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
King Boonen said:
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.
You are correct, I just don't like it when the lawyers damage the sport

I just realized I made a mistake. I mixed up Antonio Rigozzi with Rocco Taminelli, my bad.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
I'd say you'd go along way to find a more influential lawyer in sport than Jean Louis Dupont. I was reading a few days back he is now taking UEFA to court now over Financial Fair Play. He played a big part in the Bosman ruling.

You might remember him representing Contador and Boonen. He's also been involved in doping cases in other sports.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
gooner said:
I'd say you'd go along way to find a more influential lawyer in sport than Jean Louis Dupont. I was reading a few days back he is now taking UEFA to court now over Financial Fair Play. He played a big part in the Bosman ruling.

You might remember him representing Contador and Boonen. He's also been involved in doping cases in other sports.
Dupont is the equivalent of an ambulance chaser. A very skilled one, but one none the less.

The problem with the UCI lawyer was simple. They stopped representing UCI, and started representing McQuaid himself, regardless of UCI interests. Never more obviously than the nonsense/ambush at Congress. That made the position untenable. It was also, IMHO, unethical. And it wasn't Pat's job to know that, it was the lawyer's.
 
sniper said:
With that English IOC guy Reedie in charge I'm not sure about WADA's future reliability.
Reedie **IS** IOC friendly. He's a longtime IOC Vice President, running a Selection Comittee now. (cha-ching!)
http://www.olympic.org/news/2020-olympic-games-bid-process-evaluation-commission-to-be-chaired-by-sir-craig-reedie/175442
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Reedie

WADA/NADOs publicly sniping at the UCI was too much for the IOC. No more noisy people suggesting transparency in sport. Reedie will close a very weak area in the anti-doping theater.

Not sure about Cookson's claims of anti-doping independence. As it is, the APMU is run by the UCI's better pals, Saugy. His hires for passport experts have to sign a 7-year NDA.
 
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.
Or it could be a master stroke from Cookson. "Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer". Denial of a good lawyer to dopers whereas helping UCI to know how the defence is going to work and anticipate their moves to ensure success of prosecution of doping cases.
 
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.
Actually this might make it a shrewd move. A case of poacher turned gamekeeper
 
King Boonen said:
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.
Indeed, probably all the experienced sports lawyers have a similar background.
 
Avoriaz said:
Actually this might make it a shrewd move. A case of poacher turned gamekeeper
It's not even that. He's just a lawyer and a lawyer's job is to present his client's case to the best of his ability.
Just because someone is a defence lawyer it does not follow that they are complicit in the crimes themselves or even condone them.
I think some people's idea of the law comes mostly from TV shows.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts