I transcribed that NOS video fragment that was linked earlier on, for those interested.
I don't quite subscribe to DAOTEC's characterisation of it. Whilst he does clearly state that WASA wants a big fish, he doesn't exactly state that the UCI "wants to get Contador off the hook".
Mart indicates that he understands that, to UCI's eyes, this reading does not clearly prove to a European rules standard that is significant to them, that Contador is actually on that hook in the first place. And that is why they won't/can't make a case out of it.
Nor does Mart state that the 6 experts "exposed Contador in July". He explains how 6 experts "exposed 6 different readings of the same case". They can't all be true, if any. A subtle but important distinction.
I'm no fan of the UCI, but, if all this is accurate, then it does suggest, for this particular case, that smelling a cover-up might - might - be jumping one fence too many.
Judge for yourselves though.
It's all Mart Smeets from here:
====================
... since then more information has become available, and if you quietly assess it, then it leads to the conclusion that it, in reality, has become a tug of war between the rule makers, between the UCI and WADA.
The cycling organisation, it is fair to say, hasn't been totally adequate, as it has waited too long with releasing the news about Contador into the public domain. It was, of course, a known issue for a while now within the inner sanctum of the UCI.
But, the UCI took the position that the pictogramme that was found - and one has to realize that that is zero point and then 10 more zeros and then a five - that this was a negligible amount.
Because there is a European rule that states that it has to be much, much higher before someone can be declared positive.
But, and this is key, because there still is a battle between the UCI and WADA [snipped explanation of who these bodies are], a battle that can be traced back to the days of D
ick Pound, the Canadian ex-president of WADA and Hein Verbruggen, the ex-President of the UCI, because that battle still rages... because this battle still exists, it is now pretty much fought out over the head of Contador.
That may sound strange, but I think that this is the case, I have indications in that direction.
And why does this take place? Because -and that has to be acknowledged- the Blood Passport of Contador showed irregularities. No big ones, but still significant enough to invite closer inspection.
And this was done by experts. Three people appointed by WADA and three people appointed by the UCI took a closer look at Contador's Blood Passport...
Could it be said that it was irregular? Yes, that could be said. Irregularities.
And then they asked the six experts, who were qualified and knew what they were looking for: "what was it exactly that you found out?" That question was answered in six different ways. No two answers the same, or three. No,
six different replies. So there was totally no consensus on what was actually happening here.
And that makes this whole case so incredibly weak.
Then suddenly this Dane shows up, and this Dane declares, "yes, but hang on, I know what happened here: the urine also showed a plastic residue trace, and that indicates that Contador used a plastic bag that stored blood....".
In the past few hours it has become clear that even this explanation can be countered. It is likely that if you, for instance, get a meal at McDonalds, and the burger you eat had been kept in plastic wrapping, that you would find traces of plastic wrapping in your urine too.
That's how complicated this all is.
But the crux is, that, for the WADA people, Contador
has to be nailed.
They are totally determined to nail a high-ranking cyclist. And they estimated that the Blood Passport would be sufficient for this. And that incredibly small amount of clenbuterol that now has been found, that is now seized on, so they can crucify him.
And there is a precedent for it. And one that doesn't favour Contador. And that precedent concerns a case of a Chinese athlete, Li, who
has been suspended for two years, also because of clenbuterol. But the amount that was found in him was higher than that which was found in Contador.
Sources within the UCI have told me that it is for -say- 98% certain that he will survive this trip. It's all a bit too vague, the percentages are too small, and thus he will, most likely, "escape having suffered nothing more than a bit of a fright".
But it is a fact that the cycling world looks bad again, and must start all over again.
I ask myself, when will it finally end? When are the people behind the green table finally willing to create a set of very good rules that are adhered to by all? When will that happen, when will the war between WASA and the UCI finally stop, and when will they start to fight the same, single, battle: namely for an honest sport. But
also for an honest rules system, honest rules and honest values [hinting at thresholds, numbers, not morality]. That is what is at the heart of the matter here.
I don't absolve anyone, I don't take anyone's irons out of the fire for him. But this is something that may also be said, in fairness, for once.
And one more thing: do you know the total cost to the UCI to follow through on the doping control of one single rider, and the aftermath of it, and the aftermath of that? Half a million Euros. The UCI spends an unbelievable amount in its efforts to expose the guilty.
The conclusion of it all: a frightened Contador will probably escape.
http://nos.nl/video/188818-mart-smeets-over-contador.html
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram