Astana Licence to be withdrawn?

[Morbius]

Where is the good news? A team loses is licence but no one gets banned? So Nibali and Aru, 2 top riders will find teams and continue. The docs will get work, they won a TdF last year. I dont really see much change. Vino will still be a part of the sport, but like those banned just less in the public eye.

No this is not a victory for anti doping.

You're proving my point about the clinic's reaction.

Progress can only be made one step at a time. Banning a dirty team and making it stick will be a step forward and create a precedent for the future. The risk-reward balance for doping or for riding alongside dopers has clearly moved.

 

[Puckfiend]

Damn! I guess this means Vino and Froome can't be best buds anymore. No more Cound pics of the two.

 

[ebandit]

?

So now you guys are telling people how they are supposed to emotionally react to news

a question asked is not telling anyone anything.....................

laughed at the member who said 'astana have done nuffin wrong..........right
...........nothing at all

so the lausanne report states.........'what was presented to the UCI is NOT
how the team are operating'................LOL

Mark L

 

[The Hitch]

Not at all. I'm commenting on how a lot of people here instinctively reacted to what many would see as good news.

Just because many people would see it as good news does not mean everyone is obliged to. People can react emotionally however they want.

 

[coinneach]

Wow, the clinic really is a place where every silver lining has a cloud.

Instead of a small celebration, we hear that this is bad for sponsors, bad for Sky and british cycling, bad for race organisers, bad for riders, just PR, that Astana can be sacrificed to protect the "big boys" and that this only happened because the UCI's hands were forced by Padua.

Totally agree!

Previously posters before this decision was announced were saying how soft the UCI is, how useless Cookson is, how corrupt the whole business is.
There is no point in taking action against Astana unless there is a good chance of winning, and it looks like they now feel they have enough.
And doing nothing would have been a terrible message.

 

[hrotha]

Just because many people would see it as good news does not mean everyone is obliged to. People can react emotionally however they want.

Yes but that doesn't mean their reactions can't be very telling.

In this particular case, however, I'm not sure what they're complaining about. I thought they might be referring to the anti-Sky bias, but now it seems it's just about people being too cynical for their tastes? Dunno.

Anyway, yes, this is good news overall and, if it goes forward, a limited victory against doping.

 

[The Hitch]

No I expect they're assuming how people with a strong anti-doping agenda would be consistent with their approach

Any people specifically?

ps: who are you to tell people how they are supposed to react to news? I and everyone else are perfectly entitled to feel happy/sad/exctatic/angry/apathetic to news without kim jong jimmy instructing as what emotion we are supposed to exhibit.

 

[Irondan]

a question asked is not telling anyone anything.....................

laughed at the member who said 'astana have done nuffin wrong..........right
...........nothing at all

so the lausanne report states.........'what was presented to the UCI is NOT
how the team are operating'................LOL

Mark L

Why do you use so many periods? Or are they dots? This is a legitimate question.

 

[nuvolablu]

This probably means the new part of Padua investigation ( Ferrari at Astana training camp in 2013 etc , new wiretapping involving Nibali's trainer... ) is actually true.
What a bunch of idiots Astana/Vino

Nibali and Aru should go to teams like Sky, BMC, OPQS or Saxo, where riders are properly protected

 

[Benotti69]

You're proving my point about the clinic's reaction.

Progress can only be made one step at a time. Banning a dirty team and making it stick will be a step forward and create a precedent for the future. The risk-reward balance for doping or for riding alongside dopers has clearly moved.

I dont speak for the clinic, therefore it proves nothing. To appoint a single voice (even ones as eloquent as mine ) to the clinic is ludicrous.

UCI has 'requested' withdrawal of licence not 'banned' Astana.

We have been here before when Festina got kicked off the Tour and when Rabobank got kicked off the Tour. That really made teams look at risk-reward....

People have pointed to Vino taking gold in London and cycling has shown how petty and vindictive it can be, so this would hardly be stretch in conspiracy theories.

 

[happychappy]

I hope Nibali somehow gets to ride the Tour. I was really looking forward to DA DAWWWWWG smashing him all over france. And hopefully a tired Contador will still have enough legs to wipe the floor with him, it will be beautiful.

 

[TailWindHome]

UCI with a British president promoting "clean cycling" is still furious about an evil doper taking away the gold medal from hard working, marginally gaining British athletes.

He didn't take it from a Brit
He bought it off a Colombian

 

[Benotti69]

He didn't take it from a Brit
He bought it off a Colombian

He bought it off a Colombian who rode for Sky, 'Sky' is the important bit.

 

[Gaul 58]

No - he bought it from a seller is the important bit.

 

[sniper]

...
Anyway, yes, this is good news overall and, if it goes forward, a limited victory against doping.

Maybe not even that.
Ben Johnson 1988 springs to mind.
Let's wait and see if Cookson and the Circ report now go on to confirm Sky, Garmin and Kittel et al. as the paragon of clean cycling.

 

[Escarabajo]

http://inrng.com/2015/02/astana-uci-world-tour-licence-withdrawal/

Thanks for the info!

 

[neineinei]

I think it's terrible for the riders, but the spate of doping positives they had last year in such a short period was ridiculous, so it's great to see the UCI taking a stand.

Hopefully they can still ride some of the bigger races this year as a PC team and then Nibali, Aru and other big name riders can find a team the next year (or even new teams this year- come OGE Nibali )

The spate of doping positives was already a sign of UCI taking a stand. At least four of them had the marks of proper targeting and a real desire to catch the cheaters. Something otherwise very rarely seen.

 

[hrotha]

Maybe not even that.
Ben Johnson 1988 springs to mind.

It's better than the alternative regardless, isn't it? That's what should matter here.

 

[Benotti69]

It's better than the alternative regardless, isn't it? That's what should matter here.

Not if it is an excuse in PR. Banning Ben Johnson changed nothing in sprinting.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Not at all. I'm commenting on how a lot of people here instinctively reacted to what many would see as good news.

Except you don't know how anyone "instinctively" reacted to anything.

Since you're reading minds, tell us what my instinctive reaction was?

 

[Escarabajo]

Yes, only Vino himself seems to be a problem for the UCI.

And other members that were probably mentioned in the Padua investigation.

 

[TailWindHome]

'Sky' is the important bit.

Isn't it always

 

[Jancouver]

Is Kreuziger counted to Astana wrongdoings?

Of course, he was with Astana at the time of his issues. Who knows, he may have talked to UCI to have his ban reduced.

I'm sure he told Crookson he was forced to dope by Vino

 

[Morbius]

Except you don't know how anyone "instinctively" reacted to anything.

Since you're reading minds, tell us what my instinctive reaction was?

I know how a number of people on here instinctively reacted by what they wrote - as summarised in my first post on this thread.

As Hitch says, everyone is free to react here as they wish. It is also reasonable to comment on that reaction.

 

[Escarabajo]

Wow, the clinic really is a place where every silver lining has a cloud.

Instead of a small celebration, we hear that this is bad for sponsors, bad for Sky and british cycling, bad for race organisers, bad for riders, just PR, that Astana can be sacrificed to protect the "big boys" and that this only happened because the UCI's hands were forced by Padua.

+1.


There are always pros and cons to every decision in life. When they were allowed into the worldtour some were unhappy and they had the good reasons as well.

Both sides have good reasons. Having said that, this is bad in the short term but good in the long term. There are rules to follow, even if you are cheating. We cannot be living in the Wild West where we can just grab a syringe and go wild in the Tour. The UCI must keep it within the lines.

Some people will have skepticism about the favoritism for Sky. Well we don't know but maybe they'll have their day in court in the future just like Armstrong and US Postal had it.