Bye, bye Alejandro

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
biker jk said:
Let me get this straight. The Spanish refuse to investigate Operacion Puerto and now complain that the Italians have busted Valverde, who you agree is a doper. It appears that it is the Spanish authorities who are displaying an absence of morals and ethics.
Actually, the Spanish authorities are the only ones yet in this case to display and ethical and moral standard. They followed the letter of their own law when I am sure that hey would have preferred to do otherwise. CONI has no authority for their actions, and the UCI is hesitating because while they now know that Valverde's blood was part of the OP seizure, they also know that they cannot legally prove it under the rule of law.

It's is also worth noting that there is still no evidence legal or otherwise that Valverde blood doped, only that his blood was identified. Like Basso he is only implicated in the intention to blood dope. While that is against UCI rules, it does not violate Spanish law.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
Great discussion all! (except the 3yr old comment :rolleyes:)

The Spanish legal system letting the blood bags go was their worse mistake. The day they nullified the case they should of dumped the blood bags and it would of all been closed that day with the lack of evidence. Instead the blood bags were shipped to Germany and then Italy (if I remember right) or at least samples were, what was that all about? If the case was closed or dismissed how did its evidence of the list get destroyed (the non-cyclist on the list) but not the cyclist and blood bags of the cyclists? The whole thing was run by keystone cops and continues to be executed much like a keystone court system.

If all was fair and done the same way we'd of given up on it, but instead the whole OP story continues like a soap opera where one day a dumped blood bag will re-appear and bring down another rider, if he's having good results :rolleyes:
 
ElChingon said:
Great discussion all! (except the 3yr old comment :rolleyes:)

The Spanish legal system letting the blood bags go was their worse mistake. The day they nullified the case they should of dumped the blood bags and it would of all been closed that day with the lack of evidence. Instead the blood bags were shipped to Germany and then Italy (if I remember right) or at least samples were, what was that all about? If the case was closed or dismissed how did its evidence of the list get destroyed (the non-cyclist on the list) but not the cyclist and blood bags of the cyclists? The whole thing was run by keystone cops and continues to be executed much like a keystone court system.

If all was fair and done the same way we'd of given up on it, but instead the whole OP story continues like a soap opera where one day a dumped blood bag will re-appear and bring down another rider, if he's having good results :rolleyes:
I am not sure, but I think they kept the bags just in case there was new evidence in the future that required using or testing the blood for DNA.
maybe evidence related to the case against "Public Health"
Thanks.
 
Mar 12, 2009
434
0
0
Interesting thread ;)

Just one quick question, is Operation Puerto currently open or closed? Or is it just an ongoing "soap opera" as someone else put it with dribs and drabs evidence (and rumor) just bringing it back to everyone's attention.
 
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
lookkg386 said:
Interesting thread ;)

Just one quick question, is Operation Puerto currently open or closed? Or is it just an ongoing "soap opera" as someone else put it with dribs and drabs evidence (and rumor) just bringing it back to everyone's attention.
The "Public health" case under which this all began is officially a closed case. New evidence could potentially reinvigorate it, but there were no Spanish laws prohibiting blood doping at the time of the investigation.

The open question is around the evidence gathered under the investigation, and in particular the athlete's bags of blood seized in this case. The UCI would like to know whose blood was found there, but since the criminal case is closed the blood technically belongs to the donors and they would have to give permission for it to be tested or examined legally.

Since that is not going to happen all parties concerned are lock up in a classic Mexican Stand Off.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
lookkg386 said:
Interesting thread ;)

Just one quick question, is Operation Puerto currently open or closed? Or is it just an ongoing "soap opera" as someone else put it with dribs and drabs evidence (and rumor) just bringing it back to everyone's attention.
The initial Spanish inquisition is closed due to who knows what reason, I think there were some procedural issues but really the only plausible reason it was initial closed is bribery.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
It seems to me that what Valverde should do is recognize that he will get banned and mitigate the length. Fuentes is already persona non grata in the cycling community. There is no reason not to burn him further. Valverde should make a deal with the Spanish fed to give info about Fuentes but not any riders. As part of the deal the federation should coopt the Italian judgement by saying that Valverde has provided enough information to warrant only a one year ban. Valverde can then come out with some self-serving B.S. about how the time he worked with Fuentes was a different era and now he has seen the light.
 
Mar 12, 2009
434
0
0
ElChingon said:
The initial Spanish inquisition is closed due to who knows what reason, I think there were some procedural issues but really the only plausible reason it was initial closed is bribery.
I take it that it was many of the other sports and some huge worldwide names in other sports that would have had an interest in this going away too, could it be that cycling missed out on a proper investigation because of others maybe closing this down?
 
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
lookkg386 said:
I take it that it was many of the other sports and some huge worldwide names in other sports that would have had an interest in this going away too, could it be that cycling missed out on a proper investigation because of others maybe closing this down?
I'd say your assumption is basically sound. But I would think less a conspiracy, and more just serious influence from business interests which were mas formidable'
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
lookkg386 said:
I take it that it was many of the other sports and some huge worldwide names in other sports that would have had an interest in this going away too, could it be that cycling missed out on a proper investigation because of others maybe closing this down?
Real Madrid and Barcelona sued French newspaper Le Monde for publishing that Feuntes and Operacion Puerto were linked to Barcelona, Real Madrid, Valencia and Real Betis. They all vehemently denied the allegations. You bet they wanted it to go away.
 
elapid said:
I do think Valverde doped, but IMO it should be an all-or-nothing affair. The relevant authorities should start proceedings against everyone involved. If they cannot do that, then they should put Operacion Puerto to bed and write it off as a bad experience and a lesson learned.
I would agree with this 100%. I have asked on this, and other forums, why are the cases pick and choose? No one knows why. When CONI opened the case again, Torri said he would go after everyone as they had all the DNA. So far, only one person has been gone after: Valverde. No other investigation has been opened up to any other rider. Why not? The only excuses I've heard is that many of the riders on the list are already retired, or not racing. Which is a nonsense excuse. Either go after everyone, or don't at all. Wait until only a few are left, then try to only fry the biggest name left?

RFEC has shown contradictory actions. Sometimes saying they'd like to go after everyone, other times remaining silent. But they're hands are mostly tied, at least on a legal level.

One of the huge problems with OP is that it's in a sporting gray area. In theory the governing bodies (here, RFEC) could have said that because of suspicion of doping, everyone on the list is suspended. But it was such a big, messy list, that didn't last. Names got added, then dropped, then added.

I too don't understand why Valverde hasn't gone to RFEC and cooperated to some extent, and gotten a lesser suspension as a result. CONI had no problem giving Di Luca, Petacchi and even Basso lighter suspensions after they cooperated (to what degree, not much if you ask me). In theory Valverde could go to RFEC and confess to "intending to dope", and be given an off-season suspension, like Di Luca was. And at this late date, it would probably make the most sense to me.

As I have said before, I think they should declare amnesty for all riders involved. Saying that if you come forward and cooperate, you pay a fine and get a light suspension. If you don't, and we later find out, we'll do all we can to throw the book at you. Actually, they should have done this two years ago. :mad:
 
Mar 18, 2009
981
0
0
I agree with elapid...this should have been canned and lessons learned.
It's a constant disappointment, if they are that keen to catch people out, you would think that they would have got their act together so it can happen in a matter of days or at the outset weeks not bloody years.:mad:
 
Jun 13, 2009
99
0
0
Round one to CONI.

Round two will be whether UCI backs the ban.

Round three will be CAS throwing out any previous decisions and saying Valverde is not guilty due to the evidence being inadmissible.

Do I think he doped ... yes.
 
subzro said:
Round three will be CAS throwing out any previous decisions...
Pretty similar to 2006 (remember back then?) when the UCI singled him out and ruled he couldn't race in the World's, the case was fast tracked to CAS, who ruled in his favor on those exact same grounds.

The not very funny thing is that since this all started, Floyd Landis has won the Tour, been stripped, had his USADA hearing (which took forever), then his CAS ruling (which took forever), AND served his entire suspension, plus he's been racing now for six months.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
subzro said:
Round three will be CAS throwing out any previous decisions and saying Valverde is not guilty due to the evidence being inadmissible.
Well, that is going to be a joke. It is one thing for Landaluze to get off on a technicality, but Valverde has a tendency to win a lot of big events.
 
Apr 16, 2009
394
0
0
Seems like little has changed.

UCI chief says Spain is by far cycling's major doping problem News
STUTTGART, Germany (AP) _ Spain's government and the national federation are not doing enough to contain cycling's drug culture, the leader of the sport's world governing body said Monday.
``The biggest problem we have in doping and cycling comes from Spain,'' UCI president Pat McQuaid said in an interview with The Associated Press. ``There seems to be a reluctance to completely clean the problem out in Spain.''
Speaking two days before the start of the world championships in Stuttgart, McQuaid accused the Spanish cycling federation of being soft on doping and criticized the government for not following up new laws with tough action.
On Wednesday, the International Cycling Union and the Spanish federation will argue before the Court of Arbitration for Sport over whether Spanish cyclist Alejando Valverde can compete in Sunday's road race.
The UCI had asked the Spanish federation to open disciplinary proceedings against Valverde after discovering new evidence in a 6,000-page Operation Puerto file linking him to the Spanish doping scandal. The Spanish federation said it also reviewed the document but found no new evidence.
McQuaid was especially upset that Spanish Sports Minister Jaime Lissavetsky sided with the Spanish cycling federation, which wants Valverde on the team. The UCI wants to keep him out.
McQuaid said the minister's position was ``indicative'' of Spain's position on doping, despite a new anti-doping law.
``It is all very well bringing in laws, but you need to bring action after that,'' he said.
The Sports Ministry said it wouldn't respond to McQuaid's comments until it sees them.
The UCI monitors riders' blood values, and McQuaid said those from Spanish riders stood out.
``The evidence we have from blood values from riders that we take indicates to us that there is manipulation of blood going on in Spain,'' he said. ``And it is more so than in any other country.
``That shows to me that the authorities are not coming down strong enough. The culture change which is being effected throughout the rest of Europe is not being effected in Spain.''
Asked what Spain could do, McQuaid said there should be more controls on riders and a major crackdown on suppliers.
He also derided the slow pace of Operation Puerto, which broke in May 2006 when Spanish authorities seized about 100 bags of frozen blood in the Madrid offices of doctor Eufemiano Fuentes.
On the eve of the 2006 Tour de France, nine riders _ including 1997 champion Jan Ullrich and 2005 runner-up Ivan Basso _ were excluded after being implicated in the scandal. The investigation implicated 58 cyclists, but a judge threw out the case.
The UCI, however, has continued to pursue the matter.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Why do they bother to "go after" them? The riders ALL continue to dope. Its like punishing somebody for that parking ticket from 4 years ago when they have 150 unpaid ones int he glove compartment and their whole F-ing family, relatives, co-workers and classmates all have 100+ parking tickets too and continue to run school crosswalks, park in front of fire hydrants and flick off meter maids.

Alejandro is blood doping with his own blood right now just like he did before with Fuentes but maybe now with a different doctor and management. Contador is doing the same thing, along with Lance, pelizotti and ALL the top riders.

Cycling is full of rabid doping controls that favor the big money teams and riders who can afford to still dope heavily. If everybody was allowed and supplied with epo to a 54% crit ( all cat 2s and above) this would solve the problem. Create a supply for the top 10,000 riders in each country to pay tp dope freely (like handing out condoms.) It would be part of your license fee (a few hundred bucks for say 40,000 iu of EPO.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
BigBoat said:
Why do they bother to "go after" them? The riders ALL continue to dope. Its like punishing somebody for that parking ticket from 4 years ago when they have 150 unpaid ones int he glove compartment and their whole F-ing family, relatives, co-workers and classmates all have 100+ parking tickets too and continue to run school crosswalks, park in front of fire hydrants and flick off meter maids.
Well if they had already made you pay for the 150 tickets and then the next day let everyone else go scott free I think you'd have an issue with it. If they gave amnesty to the current riders the generation that got fired and not rehired could sue for their lost wages or I would. Yet another Pandora's box to be opened.

Then again, if there was a true riders union it could be worked out, but till then we'll see things in an even worse situation if they do that.

I laughed when Rasmussen won his legal case against Rabobank, he got paid none the less and any rider with a smart attorney will get paid as well, racing or not racing. The rules are as strong as butter.

I did leave out, if the UCI gets ousted then they could do as you state as the governing body would be gone and a new one in its place would not be under the same rules.
 
Mar 18, 2009
981
0
0
This is the point where I am at with all this mess, for Valverde, either punish him or let him off...but do it this week don't drag it out for months more.
 
Jun 13, 2009
99
0
0
subzro said:
Round three will be CAS throwing out any previous decisions and saying Valverde is not guilty due to the evidence being inadmissible.
BroDeal said:
Well, that is going to be a joke. It is one thing for Landaluze to get off on a technicality, but Valverde has a tendency to win a lot of big events.
I don’t really care how many events he has won or will win, justice has to be seen to be the same for any rider. If he walks free the joke here will be clearly on CONI, as much as I don’t like the effect doping has on the sport, the effect of dodgy prosecutions is just as bad.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
subzro said:
I don’t really care how many events he has won or will win, justice has to be seen to be the same for any rider...as much as I don’t like the effect doping has on the sport, the effect of dodgy prosecutions is just as bad.
Tell that to Sevilla or Basso or Ullrich.
 
Jun 9, 2009
320
0
0
so if they all rule in favour of coni will this allow them to go after alberto, pellozotti and other riders yet to pick up their "lost property"
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Professional Road Racing 66

ASK THE COMMUNITY