Can someome explain why Valverde is still allowed to race?

[Walshworld]

Clearly I don't understand the cycling justice system. CAS ruled again Valverde at least a month ago that in fact CONI has legitimate evidence that Valverde was involved in blood doping. They upheld the Italian two year ban. So what is the UCI waiting for? I know there's still another (dragging as always) CAS ruling up coming but that is on whether the Spanish Federation should have pressed charges against Valverde. At this point, with the first CAS ruling upheld and a clear ruling that Valverde doped, the second ruling would seem to me to have very little bearing on the UCI immediately slapping a global ban on Valverde. So please, can somebody smarter than me explain this?

 

[jaylew]

I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the situation but the way I understand it, the CAS case that is actually pending is the UCI's appeal to extend the ban worldwide.

I figure he's going to be banned at some point but I can't say I'm really happy about it.

 

[peloton]

See clinic, threads up there.

 

[Mambo95]

You know how in America people, in some states, get sentenced to death for murder or whatever. After the sentence, they don't get taken out the back of the courthouse and shot - they're put on Death Row. Then their lawyers go through every appeal procedure and legal loophole to keep them alive. Usually, they're there for about 20 years. Occasionally, they get let off.

This is what Valverde and his lawyers are doing. But unlike the the mentally subnormal black guy from Texas, Mr Piti is winning the Vuelta and making 2 million Euros a year.

 

[Notso Swift]

It is a disgrace, but people (like everything in life) with powerful allies get away with murder.
Semi-related some one like Kopp cops it, with an extension to his ban, yet there was no real difference to what Boonan did, TWICE without penalty.
(BTW not saying Kopp should have got off, but neither is he, it is just that the UCI have different standards for high profile/connected/stars)

 

[luckyboy]

You know how in America people, in some states, get sentenced to death for murder or whatever. After the sentence, they don't get taken out the back of the courthouse and shot - they're put on Death Row. Then their lawyers go through every appeal procedure and legal loophole to keep them alive.

Yeah, but the prisoners are incarcerated during all of that. Piti rides free.

 

[Publicus]

You know how in America people, in some states, get sentenced to death for murder or whatever. After the sentence, they don't get taken out the back of the courthouse and shot - they're put on Death Row. Then their lawyers go through every appeal procedure and legal loophole to keep them alive. Usually, they're there for about 20 years. Occasionally, they get let off.

This is what Valverde and his lawyers are doing. But unlike the the mentally subnormal black guy from Texas, Mr Piti is winning the Vuelta and making 2 million Euros a year.

Any reason why the guy in your example had to be from Texas, mentally subnormal or black? I'm sure it would have worked the same if you just said "unlike some guy on death row, Mr. Piti..."

 

[luckyboy]

Any reason why the guy in your example had to be from Texas, mentally subnormal or black? I'm sure it would have worked the same if you just said "unlike some guy on death row, Mr. Piti..."

Was he talking about the guy from The Green Mile? I know he was black and had some mental problem, not sure about the Texas thing though..

 

[Mambo95]

Any reason why the guy in your example had to be from Texas, mentally subnormal or black? I'm sure it would have worked the same if you just said "unlike some guy on death row, Mr. Piti..."

Statistics. I believe Texas executes more people than any other state. Black people are vastly over-represented on Death Row, compared to the general population of the US (or Texas), and an awful lot of them are mentally subnormal. Just the established facts really. That's all I'm going to say on the matter as it's not about cycling. If you disagree so be it.

(In case you were wondering, I do find it amazing that a so-called civilized nation as the US still has the death penalty - but that's just me).

 

[jaylew]

and an awful lot of them are mentally subnormal.

Please tell me you are referring to inmates and not black people

Btw, any reason you couldn't have just said, "unlike an inmate"

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

You know how in America people, in some states, get sentenced to death for murder or whatever. After the sentence, they don't get taken out the back of the courthouse and shot - they're put on Death Row. Then their lawyers go through every appeal procedure and legal loophole to keep them alive. Usually, they're there for about 20 years. Occasionally, they get let off.

This is what Valverde and his lawyers are doing. But unlike the the mentally subnormal black guy from Texas, Mr Piti is winning the Vuelta and making 2 million Euros a year.

Interesting analogy.

Don't think I've ever said this before, but it sickens me that Valverde won the Vuelta. Basically, a smack in the face.

 

[BroDeal]

Any reason why the guy in your example had to be from Texas, mentally subnormal or black? I'm sure it would have worked the same if you just said "unlike some guy on death row, Mr. Piti..."

The "mentally subnormal" probably is an allusion to a few notorious cases in the U.S. For example, to prove he was tough on crime Clinton executed a man who left the dessert of his last meal in his cell so he could eat it after the execution.

 

[luckyboy]

Maybe if Clinton was running the UCI/CAS, Piti would be banned by now.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Moving this to the CLinic.

Stay on topic please.

Susan

 

[Downunderpro]

My understanding is he doesn't have sufficient evidence against him. He was just involved in Operación Puerto along with many other riders including Alan Davis who is now clear of all charges.

 

[Galic Ho]

Clearly I don't understand the cycling justice system. CAS ruled again Valverde at least a month ago that in fact CONI has legitimate evidence that Valverde was involved in blood doping. They upheld the Italian two year ban. So what is the UCI waiting for? I know there's still another (dragging as always) CAS ruling up coming but that is on whether the Spanish Federation should have pressed charges against Valverde. At this point, with the first CAS ruling upheld and a clear ruling that Valverde doped, the second ruling would seem to me to have very little bearing on the UCI immediately slapping a global ban on Valverde. So please, can somebody smarter than me explain this?

It is because Valverde is the man. When you are the man, people don't want to mess with you. You know, "Fear my wrath" and "I will rain fire and brimestone down upon you." That kind of attitiude. On a serious note, if he is going to be banned, then he will be. Give it time and get over it. He is racing. He is not the only drug user still racing, so deal with it and go back to blogging about whatever it is that is tickling your fancy.

 

[Kerbdog]

I hate even seeing the guy on a bike these days at all. Problem is if it keeps up & say for example he gets to the TDF & does well in it then cycling will be dragged through the muck again when its in its prime part of the season & media attention is through the roof. All the journalists will want then is something to sacrifice & through his stubborness & belief that he didnt do anything wrong he is gift wrapping the headlines for these guys come mid July.

Make the guy fall badly in LBL on Sunday.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I hate even seeing the guy on a bike these days at all. Problem is if it keeps up & say for example he gets to the TDF & does well in it then cycling will be dragged through the muck again when its in its prime part of the season & media attention is through the roof. All the journalists will want then is something to sacrifice & through his stubborness & belief that he didnt do anything wrong he is gift wrapping the headlines for these guys come mid July.

Make the guy fall badly in LBL on Sunday.

But yet nobody cares about seeing Fränk Schleck on a bike, or Andreas Klöden, et cetera et cetera. Should Valverde have been banned? Yes. Should he be riding now? Yes, because he should have been banned and returned from his suspension by now.

I'm not saying it's wrong to be disgusted by the sight of him racing, but why is Valverde any more morally outrageous to see still racing than Schleck or Klöden? What makes Valverde so downright offensive when other people with strong ties to doping scandals are getting away with it too?

And no matter what happens, wish poor performance or mechanical maladies and a suspension on him by all means, but wanting a guy to crash out after some of the accidents we've seen recently, that just isn't cool.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I'm not saying it's wrong to be disgusted by the sight of him racing, but why is Valverde any more morally outrageous to see still racing than Schleck or Klöden? What makes Valverde so downright offensive when other people with strong ties to doping scandals are getting away with it too?

Perhaps because there is DNA evidence directly linking Valverde to Operacion Puerto, and there is no such direct evidence for the others?

Susan

 

[auscyclefan94]

Perhaps because there is DNA evidence directly linking Valverde to Operacion Puerto, and there is no such direct evidence for the others?

Susan

The Voice of Reason = Susan Westemeyer

 

[Tim Costello]

Perhaps because there is DNA evidence directly linking Valverde to Operacion Puerto, and there is no such direct evidence for the others?

Susan

I don't understand how CONi obtained this alleged evidence. How did they get hold of the original Puerto blood? Surely the Spanish authorities didn't hand it over to them? If it was not obtained as part of the proper legal process then it cannot be legal to ban him.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Perhaps because there is DNA evidence directly linking Valverde to Operacion Puerto, and there is no such direct evidence for the others?

Susan

There was clear evidence that Schleck had wired 7,000 euro to a blood doping ring for "interval training" - from a gyneacologist who knows little about cycle training and a lot about doping.

It's a bit like getting caught with a kilo and claiming its strictly for personal use.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I don't understand how CONi obtained this alleged evidence. How did they get hold of the original Puerto blood? Surely the Spanish authorities didn't hand it over to them? If it was not obtained as part of the proper legal process then it cannot be legal to ban him.

The Court of Arbitation for Sport has ruled that Italy legally had the blood evidence.

See for example: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cas-confirms-valverdes-italian-ban

Susan

 

[theyoungest]

Perhaps because there is DNA evidence directly linking Valverde to Operacion Puerto, and there is no such direct evidence for the others?

Susan

There's a bank transaction linking Schleck to Fuentes. What more direct evidence do you need?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yea, the evidence may be more irrefutable in Valverde's case but it doesn't stop there being evidence in the others. How's about some more outrage at João Cabreira or David Bernabéu still riding? Any? Or since they're small fry does it not matter that they're as bad if not worse than Valverde?

I guess the point is, Valverde is guilty as sin, and his continued presence in the péloton is aggravating. But there are lots of known dopers in the péloton, some of whom have been caught, and some of whom who continue to ride on, but Valverde attracts many, many times more abuse than them. If it's about doping, then there should be a similar level of distaste for other known dopers still riding. If it's a purely personal matter of distaste for Valverde, then the doping is extraneous to it and needn't be brought up as justification if you're not willing to apply the same criteria when judging other riders.