Any sanctions imposed on Armstrong would only be valid in France
The head of world cycling says France's anti-doping agency (AFLD) acted unprofessionally in a drugs test conducted on Lance Armstrong in March.
The American could face punishment from the AFLD over claims he violated strict dope-testing rules, although no traces of drugs were found in his samples.
But International Cycling Union (UCI) chief Pat McQuaid questioned why the news had been leaked to the press.
"The French are not acting very professionally in this case," he said.
Although French doctors declared Armstrong's hair, urine and blood samples were all drug-free, the AFLD said the seven-time Tour de France champion behaved strangely when a tester asked him to provide the samples following a training ride in the French Riviera town of Beaulieu-sur-Mer on 17 March.
The Texan said he was unsure of the identity of the AFLD drug tester who had turned up at his French base for an unscheduled visit, leading to a 20-minute delay.
In this case it was leaked to the press and I do find that disturbing
Armstrong claimed he was given permission to shower during that period while his manager verified the tester's credentials, a fact confirmed by McQuaid.
"The tester has to have a specific instruction that the athlete must remain under his supervision from the moment he is notified until the test is concluded," he told the BBC.
"From my understanding, this was not the case. Lance Armstrong had every right to take a shower while his manager (Astana team head Johan Bruyneel) checked with the UCI that these people had the authority to take these samples.
"During that time his manager rang me and I put him on to our anti-doping manager, who confirmed that it (the AFLD) has the authority to take samples."
Further confusion arose when the AFLD tester asked for a sample of Armstrong's hair, a demand which McQuaid admitted was "unusual".
"That only happens in France, which is for research purposes," he said. "Armstrong was concerned whether he (the tester) had the authority to do this."
But because the test was conducted under French law, rather than under UCI or World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) regulations, McQuaid said the AFLD is solely responsible for investigating any irregularities in the testing procedure.
AFLD president Pierre Bordry said the body will only consider sanctions after its nine-member ruling committee has considered the tester's report.
Any actions imposed on Armstrong would only be valid on French territory, which could affect his chances of an eighth Tour de France title in July.
However, McQuaid criticised the AFLD's handling of the Armstrong case.
"The French authorities decided to make up a report on the testing procedure, forward it to the UCI, knowing the UCI have no jurisdiction on the case and at the same time that report has leaked to the press," said the former Irish cyclist.
"I would have to question why that is the case.
"Normal proceedings between institutions such as national anti-doping agencies, the international federation and Wada are normally done in a professional and confidential way until a decision or sanction has been taken.
"In this case it was leaked to the press and I do find that disturbing."
The head of world cycling says France's anti-doping agency (AFLD) acted unprofessionally in a drugs test conducted on Lance Armstrong in March.
The American could face punishment from the AFLD over claims he violated strict dope-testing rules, although no traces of drugs were found in his samples.
But International Cycling Union (UCI) chief Pat McQuaid questioned why the news had been leaked to the press.
"The French are not acting very professionally in this case," he said.
Although French doctors declared Armstrong's hair, urine and blood samples were all drug-free, the AFLD said the seven-time Tour de France champion behaved strangely when a tester asked him to provide the samples following a training ride in the French Riviera town of Beaulieu-sur-Mer on 17 March.
The Texan said he was unsure of the identity of the AFLD drug tester who had turned up at his French base for an unscheduled visit, leading to a 20-minute delay.
In this case it was leaked to the press and I do find that disturbing
Armstrong claimed he was given permission to shower during that period while his manager verified the tester's credentials, a fact confirmed by McQuaid.
"The tester has to have a specific instruction that the athlete must remain under his supervision from the moment he is notified until the test is concluded," he told the BBC.
"From my understanding, this was not the case. Lance Armstrong had every right to take a shower while his manager (Astana team head Johan Bruyneel) checked with the UCI that these people had the authority to take these samples.
"During that time his manager rang me and I put him on to our anti-doping manager, who confirmed that it (the AFLD) has the authority to take samples."
Further confusion arose when the AFLD tester asked for a sample of Armstrong's hair, a demand which McQuaid admitted was "unusual".
"That only happens in France, which is for research purposes," he said. "Armstrong was concerned whether he (the tester) had the authority to do this."
But because the test was conducted under French law, rather than under UCI or World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) regulations, McQuaid said the AFLD is solely responsible for investigating any irregularities in the testing procedure.
AFLD president Pierre Bordry said the body will only consider sanctions after its nine-member ruling committee has considered the tester's report.
Any actions imposed on Armstrong would only be valid on French territory, which could affect his chances of an eighth Tour de France title in July.
However, McQuaid criticised the AFLD's handling of the Armstrong case.
"The French authorities decided to make up a report on the testing procedure, forward it to the UCI, knowing the UCI have no jurisdiction on the case and at the same time that report has leaked to the press," said the former Irish cyclist.
"I would have to question why that is the case.
"Normal proceedings between institutions such as national anti-doping agencies, the international federation and Wada are normally done in a professional and confidential way until a decision or sanction has been taken.
"In this case it was leaked to the press and I do find that disturbing."
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram