• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Armstrong in the mire again. LeMonde reports

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
guilder, that was comedy gold - my dog died today so I needed cheering up.

Uru, the UCI are open to charges of gross incompetence here - throwing samples in a car boot in the height of summer? Ooooh so many issues there about chain of custody and improper storage of samples. Sorry, I forgot, it's only the French labs who are incompetent :rolleyes:

Fact is their dirty little badly kept secret is out in the open and all but the diehard fanboys will sit up and take notice.
It's worse than that.

The bad storage was certainly done to voluntary affect the testing and dismiss positive test!

We have seen in the past some organisers collecting but not testing them, here that is a new method.
 
Jul 7, 2009
209
0
0
Visit site
British Pro Cycling said:
Guys, you know very well by now that RaceRadio is first and foremost a troll. He wants to turn this into a slanging match. Try not to rise to his bait.

This is more than a bit ironic.
 
Jul 7, 2009
209
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
Actually - it is the OP 'TheHog' who has earned that title, by putting in a reference to LA in the the thread name.

Hook - line - sinker.

Very true, TheHog has demontrated this time and time again. As an aside, I am very interested in what the retests of 2008 show. Has there been any news on the retests of the 2008 Giro?
 
Jul 7, 2009
209
0
0
Visit site
dolophonic said:
Man there are some really funny posters on here.. quality.
09 was the "greatest"... yeah, sure thing buddy!

Perhaps guilder thinks it's great when one knows the end result before the first week is done.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
"Guys, you know very well by now that RaceRadio is first and foremost a troll. He wants to turn this into a slanging match. Try not to rise to his bait. "

Another remarkedly on topic comment.:mad:


The UCI is showing a real tendency towards short term thinking. LA will only be around another year or so and, yes, he brought a new mulit-million dollar sponsor to the table but how long does the UCI think this facade is going to last? Once the corruption is exposed how many sponsors will simply walk away? I realize there are still many, many millions of people watching pro cycling but will they still when they realize the product they are watching has about as much legitimacy as US pro wrestling? Or is that the TV market the UCI is after?
 
There are two issues here:

1. Does the UCI treat all of its samples from the 2009 Tour in the same way?If so then there is a problem.

2. Did the UCI only treat the Astana samples and collection in the manner described? If so very big problem.

A few questions need to be responded to. Not that we shall receive a response along with WADA being powerless to do anything.

I suspect at next years Tour the AFLD will take over testing similar to 2008 on its own.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
thehog said:
There are two issues here:

1. Does the UCI treat all of its samples from the 2009 Tour in the same way?If so then there is a problem.

2. Did the UCI only treat the Astana samples and collection in the manner described? If so very big problem.

A few questions need to be responded to. Not that we shall receive a response along with WADA being powerless to do anything.

I suspect at next years Tour the AFLD will take over testing similar to 2008 on its own.

I don't think the AFLD will take over the tests - now that ASO/EPA and the UCI have kissed and made up they are back.

Also this is a piece from CN today-"(Anne) Gripper envisages that the UCI will be involved again with the AFLD in 2010. "There’s a very good chance we’ll work together, regardless of the results from this set of testing,” she said. "The management would be the same as the process in 2009,"
 
bianchigirl said:
Not old news in the sense that the AFLD have just released their damning report which asks many an awkward question about the apparent collusion of the UCI in potentially allowing doping practices to go on.

It's only old news when it involves uncomplimentary reports regarding anything involving Armstrong and his cohorts. Some would prefer that everyone get in lockstep and genuflect to the greatness of one rider in particular regardless of what soiled laundry comes with him. How dare we question anything in his regards? Don't we know who he is?:rolleyes:
 
Scott SoCal said:
The UCI is showing a real tendency towards short term thinking. LA will only be around another year or so and, yes, he brought a new mulit-million dollar sponsor to the table but how long does the UCI think this facade is going to last?

Not only the UCI, but by everyone that has gone to Radio Shack. I'm saying this purely on the sporting level. Aging domestiques signing two-year contracts to ride for an aging Armstrong, who does not have the zip in his legs to either attack in the mountains or time-trial anymore?

I don't understand how people think they can pull this off like it was 1999.

Scott SoCal said:
Once the corruption is exposed how many sponsors will simply walk away? I realize there are still many, many millions of people watching pro cycling but will they still when they realize the product they are watching has about as much legitimacy as US pro wrestling? Or is that the TV market the UCI is after?

I have a feeling that Armstrong is going to walk away with his millions in appearance fees and his reputation in the world at large relatively intact.

That's what happens with bureaucracies-they exist not only to regulate but to perpetuate the cynical cycle of hypocrisy that it takes for Armstrong, Bruyneel and their gang of thugs to keep this fraud going because it's what brings in the cash.
 
Mountain Goat said:
I think the only rational response is SSDD...

(can't remember where I last heard that;) )

Or, SSDY, where the Y stands for Year... :rolleyes:

Let the Lance conspiracy theorists assume this report is all "fact" and certainly not fudged media hype...

I'm not sure how this can fall under SSDY or SSDD if they report on 2 new drugs that are found to be in use as a result of the findings of their testing.
 
For the record, I am not a groupie or fanboy or whatever strawman label some may choose. Near as I can tell, this is a complaint or collection of complaints from AFLD about UCI. Seems it only circumstancially refers to Astana. In my reading of the current story (or past stories during the Tour), I do not recall any specific complaint about any particular riders.

My reading of the issue is that this represents a turf war between AFLD and UCI. Granted, it sounds like they interpret responsibilities differently. But still, they were on French soil at the time so shouldn't AFLD have a right to test? If so, can't they themselves choose the timing of the tests? In any case, it sounds like a political battle between AFLD and UCI.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
**Uru** said:
For the record, I am not a groupie or fanboy or whatever strawman label some may choose. Near as I can tell, this is a complaint or collection of complaints from AFLD about UCI. Seems it only circumstancially refers to Astana. In my reading of the current story (or past stories during the Tour), I do not recall any specific complaint about any particular riders.

My reading of the issue is that this represents a turf war between AFLD and UCI. Granted, it sounds like they interpret responsibilities differently. But still, they were on French soil at the time so shouldn't AFLD have a right to test? If so, can't they themselves choose the timing of the tests? In any case, it sounds like a political battle between AFLD and UCI.

uru, it’s not a political battle. you’re terribly mistaken thinking that way.
if aso was behind it you’d have a point. but afld is merely a national antidoping agency minding its business in its home country. there was a cooperative formally signed agreement between the uci and afld regarding 2009 tour testing. both were supposed to test when they felt was right and afld was granted the status of a full partner. Afld is saying aloud that the uci did not uphold its end when astana was given a more lenient treatment. they did not complain about other teams. that’s huge enough in their view to file a formal complaint with wada.

it goes beyond involuntary mistakes and occasional oversights.

afld believes this was favouritism and is prepared to back up its position with facts if wada cares to get to the bottom of it.
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,978
0
0
Visit site
Mmmm... good to see lots of people taking about LA being favored. Spanish headlines read today 'Contador's team favored in antidoping controls during the TdF'

It will be interesting to watch next year if only one of them gets more lenient treatment.
 
Sep 27, 2009
117
0
0
Visit site
Speaking of favoritism wasn't Lance the only rider who received a hack job hair cut from the AFLD?

Didn't the AFLD go out of their way to cast blame on Armstrong for a lapse in protocol in the infamous shower scene?

When it comes to LA, he is definitely the AFLD's favorite. Everyone wants a piece of Lance.
 
guilder said:
Speaking of favoritism wasn't Lance the only rider who received a hack job hair cut from the AFLD?

Didn't the AFLD go out of their way to cast blame on Armstrong for a lapse in protocol in the infamous shower scene?

Yeah, I guess...if you can call an athlete hiding in the shower from the testers for thirty minutes a lapse in protocol.

And the AFLD has been taking hair samples for a while.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
guilder said:
Speaking of favoritism wasn't Lance the only rider who received a hack job hair cut from the AFLD?

Didn't the AFLD go out of their way to cast blame on Armstrong for a lapse in protocol in the infamous shower scene?

When it comes to LA, he is definitely the AFLD's favorite. Everyone wants a piece of Lance.


Wrong on all counts.

AFLD has been running hair tests since 2008, Armstrong is the only one who has wined about it.

It was Armstrong again who started the whole showergate issue by whining on Twitter. It was Armstrong who locked the tester out of his house for 30 minutes, a clear protocol violation. He eventually wised up and wrote a nice letter to the AFLD apologizing for being a douchbag and escaped a sanction.

Lance likes to pretend that everyone is out to get him and his groupies eat this up. It is always a big French conspiracy.
 

TRENDING THREADS