• 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!

Ballan and the destructive power of suspicion

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
I haven't insulted you - I just highlighted your posts. If you're insulted by that then you shouldn't have wrote them.

I also checked your posts to see if you had named the people in the Hospital room, I couln't find it - could you point me to the post where you named them.

I am not going back more than a year to look up information that has already been provided you. I can tell you that Lance's doctor was in the room, an dthat any illegal drug use would have been in his medical record and would have been relevant to cancer treatment. Too my knowledge no such entries exist (and if you are really interested in the names, please go back to the posts about this very same subject a year ago and find the names).

As I have stated earlier, I do not think rehashing year old posts about the same subject is terribly relevant to proving someone doped.

As for insults, Dr. please take a look at this thread and bear in mind that reply was not addressed to you.
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
The interwebs are great! You can be a ranger Iraqi war killer conspiracy breaker french police helper lawyer. Dang. That gree, he oozes credibility...:rolleyes:

Yes, I am a Ranger and a combat veteran.

I have worked with many different police agencies (I am not a police man and have never claimed to be one - only that having worked with them, they are not as corrupt as our tin foil **** floss wearing freinds wish them to be.)

I am not a lawyer either, nor have I ever claimed to be one.

The conspiracy theory is yours, and yes it is broken. Tough.

Now that we have proven you are prone to irrational exaggeration and superfluous speculation devoid of proof .... well, I guess that says loads about your credibility doesn't it.

And you do what for a living again? Oh that's right, to jealoous of others who have achived success - and can only insult from the safe side of a computer. Such bravery, such honor - while I am sure your heroism for insulting from safe anonimity will one day be lionized in the .... no where actually.

So, thanks for the inability to make a case and having to rely oin deliberate inaccuries in order to insult those who disagree with you. I am sure WADA and the UCI will be acting on your statement shortly - I wouldn't hold my breath though :D

Do you have any actual items or concerns to discuss?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
gree0232 said:
I am not going back more than a year to look up information that has already been provided you. I can tell you that Lance's doctor was in the room, an dthat any illegal drug use would have been in his medical record and would have been relevant to cancer treatment. Too my knowledge no such entries exist (and if you are really interested in the names, please go back to the posts about this very same subject a year ago and find the names).

As I have stated earlier, I do not think rehashing year old posts about the same subject is terribly relevant to proving someone doped.

As for insults, Dr. please take a look at this thread and bear in mind that reply was not addressed to you.

Doctor Nichols was not in the room and Armstrong complete medical records were never introduced.... because many of them are magically missing.
 
OK, lets look at this source who supposedly is the cause of Ballan's premature suspension.
Why call the source anonymous? Does away with the required back up links to establish this fact.

In fact, it is UNTRUE.

The source were the Italian prosecutors. Not exactly anonymous or ill informed.

BMC acted on the very limited information they receive from Italy.
Was it the right response? That is an issue for debate. A fictional scenario is not.

http://www.universalsports.com/news/article/newsid=468270.html

This is an article that backs up the idea that the suspension was hasty and therefore, wrong.

However, the blame, it appears, has been placed at the feet of the BMC team.

"There is still no specific accusation. All we know is that there is an investigation that will take six more months before it's finished," ACCPI Secretary Federico Maria Scaglia told Reuters.

"The prosecutor, himself, said that those under investigation will not necessarily be accused of anything. So suspending the riders now seems an imprudent and unfair act to us
."

So, the Italian prosecutor cautioned against the action BMC took.

Examine BMC's unilateral action, sure, but don't try and dress it up as some sort of Italian conspiracy. It clearly is not.
 
Mellow Velo said:
OK, lets look at this source who supposedly is the cause of Ballan's premature suspension.
Why call the source anonymous? Does away with the required back up links to establish this fact.

In fact, it is UNTRUE.

The source were the Italian prosecutors. Not exactly anonymous or ill informed.

BMC acted on the very limited information they receive from Italy.
Was it the right response? That is an issue for debate. A fictional scenario is not.

http://www.universalsports.com/news/article/newsid=468270.html

This is an article that backs up the idea that the suspension was hasty and therefore, wrong.

However, the blame, it appears, has been placed at the feet of the BMC team.

"There is still no specific accusation. All we know is that there is an investigation that will take six more months before it's finished," ACCPI Secretary Federico Maria Scaglia told Reuters.

"The prosecutor, himself, said that those under investigation will not necessarily be accused of anything. So suspending the riders now seems an imprudent and unfair act to us
."

So, the Italian prosecutor cautioned against the action BMC took.

Examine BMC's unilateral action, sure, but don't try and dress it up as some sort of Italian conspiracy. It clearly is not.
Thank you.

I think we can all agree that doping in cycling is a very difficult if not impossible problem to solve.

If someone has a beef with suspending riders simply because they are under investigation, I can understand and appreciate that, but that's an issue with teams going too far. The alternative is to wait until the outcome of any investigation, if the result is substantiated accusations, then suspension is probably appropriate.

But, really, in the big scheme of things is the premature suspension of certain riders a huge problem in the sport?

I will say this, if Floyd Landis can say he personally transfused Levi and Lance told him he bribed the UCI and Bruyneel taught him how to microdose, apparently without fear of being sued, I'm not sure that counts as unsubstantiated accusations.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
Much of the issue with the Italian riders under "investigation" is that Italian law predicates that anyone under investigation, no matter how early the stage or what their exposure is, must be informed.

So, while Ballan could be pure as driven snow, if he was placed under investigation, even in an effort to rule him out of wrongdoing, he would be informed. To the extent his NGB would also be informed is unclear to me, or his employer (Swiss?).
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Visit site
Mellow Velo said:
OK, lets look at this source who supposedly is the cause of Ballan's premature suspension.
Why call the source anonymous? Does away with the required back up links to establish this fact.

In fact, it is UNTRUE.

The source were the Italian prosecutors. Not exactly anonymous or ill informed.

BMC acted on the very limited information they receive from Italy.
Was it the right response? That is an issue for debate. A fictional scenario is not.

http://www.universalsports.com/news/article/newsid=468270.html

This is an article that backs up the idea that the suspension was hasty and therefore, wrong.

However, the blame, it appears, has been placed at the feet of the BMC team.

"There is still no specific accusation. All we know is that there is an investigation that will take six more months before it's finished," ACCPI Secretary Federico Maria Scaglia told Reuters.

"The prosecutor, himself, said that those under investigation will not necessarily be accused of anything. So suspending the riders now seems an imprudent and unfair act to us
."

So, the Italian prosecutor cautioned against the action BMC took.

Examine BMC's unilateral action, sure, but don't try and dress it up as some sort of Italian conspiracy. It clearly is not.

Do you really think Italian prosecutors are checking out every single pharamacy in Italy? Someone had to bring claim to the prosecutor that was strong enough for him or her to open an investigation.

Who are these people or persons?

Why is it some people feel it is necessary to re-write how the system works?

Quite frankly there are ways to clean up doping. However, pointing a finger of suspicion at everyone, allowing innuendo and false accussation to become tools of the 'anti-doping' effort is fundamentally counter productive.

If your favorite rider loses is it because everyone else doped? We can certainy see that in the fact that the winners of the last three grand tours all had suspisions of doping dumped on them at some point after their victory.

The other extreme, doping is too difficult to solve is just throwing your hands up and quitting. There will always be people that attempt to cheat any system, and any system that wants to remain viable in the long run will have to be adaptive. The anti-doping system in cycling has taken huge strides in recent years, and it is actively seeking out tests for likely doping.

What never gets mentioned in the discussions about what can still be happening in the peloton is that the UCI/WADA/IOC are also aware of these and developing tests to combat them. We see this with EPO variant tests and the nailing of Ricco and Piepoli. It was not suspicion that nailed them! It was the biological passport that raised suspicions, and it was the new EPO test that nailed Ricco and Schumacher. It was retroactive testing that got Piepoli. These guys were caught and sanctioned based onproveable evidence, not suspicion.

The system that is in place appears to be doing a fair job of catching the cheats using transparant and accountable procedures. We know when a guy tests positive. We know when I rider's values on the bio passport are out of whack. We know that suspicious riders can have their samples retested as new tests become available. The system is clearly looking forward and is clearly actively looking to eliminate doping and catch those who dabble in dope.

The question: Why then do we need to let the finger of anonymous accussation be the determiner of who rides and who doesn't?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
gree0232 said:
Do you really think Italian prosecutors are checking out every single pharamacy in Italy? Someone had to bring claim to the prosecutor that was strong enough for him or her to open an investigation.

<snipped for brevity
>
The question: Why then do we need to let the finger of anonymous accussation be the determiner of who rides and who doesn't?

Answer: It is part of the 'Code of Conduct' set down by the UCI for the teams, that I pointed out to earlier.

If you don't like it take it up with them.
 
May 11, 2009
547
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
Answer: It is part of the 'Code of Conduct' set down by the UCI for the teams, that I pointed out to earlier.

If you don't like it take it up with them.

No, there is nothing in the code of conduct that state any accussation must be treated in a certain way.

An open investigation .... well, that is open to interpretation. At the point where it reaches indictment, that is pretty clear and a rider should be side lined.

However, fantastical claims issued in the press and that have not reached the indictment phase? That are subsequently unable to produce anything?

Astana should be sidelined. There is an open investigation into 'medical waste' found during the Tour.

There is another doping case in Austria that should be sidelining several riders.

Floyd's accussations have opened several investigations, none of the riders have been sidelined.

Valverde's case is before CAS, still riding.

I understand the teams decision, but I disagree with it. We cannot allow the Press to be the determiner of guilt or innocence through anonymous accussation.

I definitely think this is a rule that needs to be clarified, and in the wake of the Floyd accussations, probably will be.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
gree0232 said:
No, there is nothing in the code of conduct that state any accussation must be treated in a certain way.

An open investigation .... well, that is open to interpretation. At the point where it reaches indictment, that is pretty clear and a rider should be side lined.

However, fantastical claims issued in the press and that have not reached the indictment phase? That are subsequently unable to produce anything?


Astana should be sidelined. There is an open investigation into 'medical waste' found during the Tour.

There is another doping case in Austria that should be sidelining several riders.

Floyd's accussations have opened several investigations, none of the riders have been sidelined.

Valverde's case is before CAS, still riding.

I understand the teams decision, but I disagree with it. We cannot allow the Press to be the determiner of guilt or innocence through anonymous accussation.

I definitely think this is a rule that needs to be clarified, and in the wake of the Floyd accussations, probably will be.

The Press reported the investigation - the investigation is being done by the Italian police. The Press did not sideline Ballan, his team did as a result of the UCI's 'Code of Conduct'.

Again, you need to read the 'Code of Conduct':
IX. Without prejudice to the right to terminate the contract for serious misconduct, not to enter any licence-holder for events who is subject to judicial proceedings or investigation for facts relating to sporting activity......