Confidentiality/cover-up confirmed?

[Tubeless]

It'd be useful to go through the doping positive notification process - so we can conclude who's colluded with UCI on this case, and where the leak to the German reporter may have originated. My memory may be a bit rusty here, so please jump in to correct if any of this is wrong:

1. WADA lab finds a positive sample containing clenbuterol.

2. Lab only knows the secret rider #, reports the positive to UCI who has the info to link the rider # to rider name.

3. Lab is also required to notify WADA of the positive sample (no name passed to WADA).

4. UCI notifies the rider of positive A sample and simultaneously notifies his national cycling federation. Rider can request B sample to be tested.

5. Lab tests the B sample, with rider's representative present. If positive, the rider is deemed to have delivered a positive doping test and his name can be announced by UCI (or the national federation).

The lab would have known the rider's identity not after the A sample, but when the rider (or his representative) accompanies the testing of the B sample. So it's plausible that the lab was the source of the leak to the German journalist. UCI would know this and be pretty ****ed off at the lab if their plan was to keep this quiet all the way...

When would WADA learn of the rider's identity? From UCI simultaneously with notification to the rider / national federation?

 

[roundabout]

Paddy is innocent, meat producers made him cover up the positives.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I think it´s obvious that the lab leaked it. Soon, no more testing in France and Germany. No more positives, everything perfect.

 

[Anonymous]

From the article - Both teams could have a legal right to sue him, not pay him, suspend him, or Cancel his 7 figure contract? They probably won't but, they could and should. Not doing so shows complicity and continuing omerta.

It seems that it would come down to the strength and content of the contracts.

If UCI exonerates him, WADA doesn't and the media continues to cover the evidence against he and the UCI...

The whitewash, double standard and preferential treatment could be the worst thing for Contador's career.

The Rules are quite clear that despite the vector and quantity, Clenbuterol is a banned substance in any quantity and results in a 2 year suspension and loss of the Tour result, with a rule allowed 1 year reduction if found to be inadvertent.

Granted it seems that the split between believers and critics is about 50/50 but, this reeks of cover-up/corruption despite either view.

It has all of the hallmarks of another Armstrong debacle, this is Contador's cortisone, and will taint his past successes and the rest of his career.

Chapeau CN for detailing the ongoing evidence of a cover up and spin.

Is there really any question now regarding the Armstrong "contributions" and what Landis alleges regarding payoffs?

In a normal scenario I could see Riis/Saxo Bank suing the UCI into oblivion. They can absolutely show huge damages (if AC is ultimately suspended).

But the relationship between the team bosses and the UCI is totally corrupt and as such, there willl never be a suit as both sides would bury each other.

It would be fun to watch though.

 

[Der_Gestreifte]

When would WADA learn of the rider's identity? From UCI simultaneously with notification to the rider / national federation?

14.1 Information Concerning Adverse Analytical Findings,
Atypical Findings, and Other Potential Anti-Doping
Rule Violations

14.1.1 Notice to Athletes and Other Persons
An Athlete whose Sample is brought forward
as an Adverse Analytical Finding after the
initial review under Articles 7.1 or 7.3, or an
Athlete or other Person who is asserted to
have committed an anti-doping rule violation
after the initial review under Article 7.4, shall
be notified by the Anti-Doping Organization
with results management responsibility as
provided in Article 7 (Results Management).

14.1.2 Notice to National Anti-Doping Organizations,
International Federations and WADA
The same Anti-Doping Organization shall
also notify the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping
Organization, International Federation and
WADA not later than the completion of the
process described in Articles 7.1 through 7.4.

14.1.3 Content of Notification
Notification shall include: the Athlete's name,
country, sport and discipline within the sport,
the Athlete’s competitive level, whether the
test was In-Competition or Out-of-Competition,
the date of Sample collection and the
analytical result reported by the laboratory.

14.1.4 Status Reports
The same Persons and Anti-Doping
Organizations shall be regularly updated on the
status and findings of any review or proceedings
conducted pursuant to Articles 7 (Results
Management), 8 (Right to a Fair Hearing) or 13
(Appeals) and shall be provided with a prompt
written reasoned explanation or decision
explaining the resolution of the matter.

14.1.5 Confidentiality
The recipient organizations shall not disclose
this information beyond those Persons with a
need to know (which would include the
appropriate personnel at the applicable
National Olympic Committee, National
Federation, and team in a Team Sport) until
the Anti-Doping Organization with results
management responsibility has made public
disclosure or has failed to make public
disclosure as required in Article 14.2 below.

So far so good.
Later there is:

14.2.2 No later than twenty (20) days after it has been
determined in a hearing in accordance with
Article 8 that an anti-doping rule violation has
occurred, or such hearing has been waived, or
the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation
has not been timely challenged, the Anti-
Doping Organization responsible for results
management must publicly report the
disposition of the anti-doping matter including
the sport, the anti-doping rule violated, the
name of the Athlete or other Person
committing the violation, the Prohibited
Substance or Prohibited Method involved and
the Consequences imposed. The same Anti-
Doping Organization must also publicly report
within twenty (20) days appeal decisions
concerning anti-doping rule violations. The
Anti-Doping Organization shall also, within the
time period for publication, send all hearing
and appeal decisions to WADA.

Yes, pure speculation, but it might as well have been someone whithin WADA who was fed up with the modus operandi of that "Anti-Doping Organization".

I´d say ARD had multiple sources from which they put the pieces together.

 

[icefire]

I think it´s obvious that the lab leaked it. Soon, no more testing in France and Germany. No more positives, everything perfect.

Incidentally, one of the two accredited labs in Spain is next to the Prime Minister Office

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Incidentally, one of the two accredited labs in Spain is next to the Prime Minister Office

Nice to see the US model has found fertile ground in portions of Europe.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I don't think the issue here so much is the leak - though I can understand why Pat wants leaks to stop, but the timing of when Pat told AC this. If he would have told AC to keep quiet until after the B samples came back, and all authorities had been notified as such, that makes perfect sense.

But if I'm reading this correctly, and I believe I am, Pat did all he could after the B samples were released to keep it all quiet. Wow, just...wow.

Informative, if sad post there Foxxy. I would not be surprised at all if cycling is dumped from German TV entirely. The sport now appears more doped and corrupt than the DDR and Stasi.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

The idea that the UCI told Contador to keep his mouth shut and that they would handle this in-house effectively draws open the curtains and exposes the depth of corruption in this sport.

Sponsors are now forced to make business decisions on incomplete information. As a result, they're not able to fully assess the risk associated with the decision to engage in sponsorship of a cycling team. Why would they continue to sponsor cycling?

It's truly disgraceful. The sponsors pay the bills. They deserve to know if potential issues come up. They shouldn't find out from the media. The UCI is doing a major disservice to the sport.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Informative, if sad post there Foxxy. I would not be surprised at all if cycling is dumped from German TV entirely. The sport now appears more doped and corrupt than the DDR and Stasi.

Even i consider to give it up completly (as written in other posts). What i really hate is the cover up, not so much that many dopers are caught. Btw, Cycling coverage is complete off. Only the TdF is shown until next year. Then it´s "Feierabend".

Only Eurosport brings cycling, b/c it´s a european wide TV-Chanel. I think cycling will end up in Internet-livestreams only and maybe spain. McQuaid wants it, he´ll get it.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

One thing being overlooked is the fact that Contador is the one now exposing this behavior of the UCI.

Contador has been a protected individual, in Spain and within the UCI under Buyneel's header, for some time. That he now shrugs this news and explains the UCI told him to keep it quiet, is big news.

The comment about the editing of the UCI press release removing the 400x lower comment goes to the point of credibility and transparency. Not only was it factually wrong, it was a red herring served to distract from the issue of the positive itself, somehow arguing away the clenbuterol due to "low levels".

There is nowhere for the UCI to backpedal on this. They are on the precipice.

...and people thought Landis would be a distraction in Geelong. Pfffttt.

 

[131313]

There is no 'speculation' Pat - Contador has failed a test. That's it, end of.
There is nothing to investigate - he has been caught. If Contador wishes to show that there was "no fault or negligence" then he can bring evidence to his hearing.

That is the way the system works and has been applied up to now.
There is no need to change it - yet that is what McQuaid wants to do.

Even as someone who believes strongly that Contador wasn't doping (with this substance), I agree with this completely. I think the rules allow for him to keep the tour title and receive a brief, token suspension. I'm also certain that these rules will end up being re-written (as the Colgne lab directer suggested over a year ago). That said, the UCI's (attempted) handling of this is unconscionable.

Talk about a credibility gap? The glaring discrepancy between this case and Li's case show that they're not interested in fairness but appearance. It also makes me wonder a lot more about the plasticizer angle much more, and what else the UCI is willing to sweep under the rug.

For those who keep saying that DEHP or other plasticizers aren't "banned", that's really not correct. It would fall under the "blood boosting methods or practices" part of the UCI code. So my guess is that they're faced with the potential of sanctioning 13 of the top 15 or something like that, and they just don't want to go down that road. Pure speculation on my part, but given how they attempted to hide the due process of Contador's case, it seems like legitimate speculation.

 

[hiero2]

I shoulda posted this here, but I won't cross-post.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=353089&posted=1#post353089

Basically, I've been holding my opinions until further information turned up. Now it is, and I'm wondering when the other 14 will show up.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I shoulda posted this here, but I won't cross-post.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=353089&posted=1#post353089

Basically, I've been holding my opinions until further information turned up. Now it is, and I'm wondering when the other 14 will show up.

The other 14 what?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Good point Moose. I think that really says a lot. I mean, if I ran a business I have to seriously question if I'd sponsor even a team with a successful track record. I'd be looking elsewhere. It's almost as if you'd approach team sponsorship and attaining a PT license with your wallet open and cash showing.

I honestly can't see Berti just getting a token suspension. That would reek of absolute favoritism no matter how he and the UCI want to spin it. They'd have to let Li back, and they may as well start listening to every other excuse in the book the riders come up with.

They may have to go down the road of looking at the top riders when it comes to it. Their failure to seriously address the issue has lead us down this same path we're on now over and over and over and over, and until something is seriously done about it, the sport is going to just be the laughing stock of the sporting world.

 

[Mich78BEL]

This is running on Dutch TV as we speack: http://nos.nl/video/188818-mart-smeets-over-contador.html


Alberto Contador BioPass exposed by 6 experts already in July with this Glen thing now on top ... It seems that bloodbooster AC his BloodPass looks like this:

Mart Smeets talks about cycling-politics, a war between UCI & Wada, basically Wada wants to catch a big fish, a big name rider.

Wada had found irregularities in Contador's blood-pasport earlier in the year, this coupled with the clenbuterol-case and they saw a chance of 'getting' Contador.

He also talks that UCI wants to get Contador off the hook, Wada off course disagrees.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Thanks for the description of the Dutch link. If there's an English translation anywhere, it would be great if someone could post it.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I'd like to read that as well. I have yet to see or hear of WADA (under John Fahey that is) taking such an isolated approach to a singular athlete, or focus on top athletes. Fahey has seemed quite impartial and thorough, especially as he's had to deal with the UCI. So this is interesting and there must be more more to it.

And if it is accurate and WADA has found past discrepancies in AC's tests, this completely shoots a hole in JW's assertion that he'd seen AC's biopassport and it was "impeccable".

 

[Race Radio]

Mart Smeets talks about cycling-politics, a war between UCI & Wada, basically Wada wants to catch a big fish, a big name rider.

Wada had found irregularities in Contador's blood-pasport earlier in the year, this coupled with the clenbuterol-case and they saw a chance of 'getting' Contador.

He also talks that UCI wants to get Contador off the hook, Wada off course disagrees.

WADA does not have access to the BioPassport information

 

[Anonymous]

your comments about the teams reminded me of what I have been thinking the last few days. Assuming the rumors are not true that Contador will get a 3 month slap on the wrist and retain his tour crown. I have heard that a 2 year suspension for AC could lead to Saxo bank folding. Combine this with the fact german TV is basically saying they may stop carrying the tour (and maybe all cycling?). Spain is going to be up in arms with AC and mosquera, valverde, et al.

Then add in the US investigation against lance and now the obvious outright corruption by the UCI.

Where does this leave cycling? I'm fearful for the future of the sport. Whether it be lack of sponsors, lack of coverage, whatever. We were finally getting to a point where online streams, and HD coverage, etc were allowing us to watch amazing coverage of some really great racing.

People will still race bikes competitively. Fans of cycling will still watch that even if it isn't on TV. So we should just quit testing for PED's so you can watch drugged out pros on TV. You will have to excuse me if I don't find your argument compelling.

 

[Berzin]

This is a case of the Armstrong chickens coming home to roost.

The governing bodies are corrupt, yes. But what about last year's scandal of the discarded hypodermic needles at the Tour that supposedly belonged to the Astana team?

Who swept that one under the rug?

That information should be out already, but something happened to it. It doesn't or at the very least shouldn't take an investigation this long to be carried out.

But we heard about it, and then it was gone.

Contador is benefiting from the modus operandi that Armstrong and Bruyneel put in place years ago.

There isn't one fanboy who could get up and yell righteous indignation at this latest turn of events involving Contador because he is just a beneficiary of the corrupt system Armstrong had dedicated himself to building and preserving ever sine the "Tour of Redemption" of 1999.

As long as bureaucratic hacks like Fat Pat McQuaid run the system, expect even more corruption going forward.

 

[python]

WADA does not have access to the BioPassport information

not entirely true. there are several levels of access. riders for example can see half of the two dozens of their parameters, wada does not have the results management records and thus normally, you are correct, not able to identify riders. recall, recently the issue came up when there were rumours of wada getting involved into 'missing' passport sanction that originally numbered 8 and eventuated in 3 to 5.

 

[Protein]

This is a case of the Armstrong chickens coming home to roost.

The governing bodies are corrupt, yes. But what about last year's scandal of the discarded hypodermic needles at the Tour that supposedly belonged to the Astana team?

Who swept that one under the rug?

That information should be out already, but something happened to it. It doesn't or at the very least shouldn't take an investigation this long to be carried out.

But we heard about it, and then it was gone.

Contador is benefiting from the modus operandi that Armstrong and Bruyneel put in place years ago.

There isn't one fanboy who could get up and yell righteous indignation at this latest turn of events involving Contador because he is just a beneficiary of the corrupt system Armstrong had dedicated himself to building and preserving ever sine the "Tour of Redemption" of 1999.

As long as bureaucratic hacks like Fat Pat McQuaid run the system, expect even more corruption going forward.

It wasn't corrupt before 1999?

 

[goggalor]

your comments about the teams reminded me of what I have been thinking the last few days. Assuming the rumors are not true that Contador will get a 3 month slap on the wrist and retain his tour crown. I have heard that a 2 year suspension for AC could lead to Saxo bank folding. Combine this with the fact german TV is basically saying they may stop carrying the tour (and maybe all cycling?). Spain is going to be up in arms with AC and mosquera, valverde, et al.

Then add in the US investigation against lance and now the obvious outright corruption by the UCI.

Where does this leave cycling? I'm fearful for the future of the sport. Whether it be lack of sponsors, lack of coverage, whatever. We were finally getting to a point where online streams, and HD coverage, etc were allowing us to watch amazing coverage of some really great racing.

Meh. Who cares about Saxo Bank? Cycling doesn't need Bjarne Riis. If pro cycling burning to the ground meant getting rid of the UCI and corrupt liars like McQuaid, then it would be a good thing. As TFF said, people will still race bikes. And fast too. And the fastest will still get paid, somehow, because bike companies want to sell bikes, and clothing companies want to sell clothes. And fans will still follow the sport, somehow, even if not in HD.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

And if it is accurate and WADA has found past discrepancies in AC's tests, this completely shoots a hole in JW's assertion that he'd seen AC's biopassport and it was "impeccable".

Indeed, and frankly, the implications are disturbing. What are our choices there? Is JV just incapable of reading a biopassport or is he willing to overlook obvious anomalies in order to sign specific big-name riders? In any case, it will be interesting to see if this WADA story is confirmed.