ContadorÂ’s legal team hit back at WADA report

[on3m@n@rmy]

Dave, here's a valid reason why Contador threatens to quit: Because he knows that the jig is up. Doping is harder now, and if they're going to pick you up for trace amounts in the contemporary testing era and it's not possible to sweep it under the rug, then he's done for.

A message to all dopers: Just leave. The sooner the better.

I think Contador has come up with a new legal defense position. It's really been around since creation. I call it the CRY-BABY DEFENSE (you know... "I'll quit if punished")... absolutely disgusting. Let him quit then.

 

[ozerulz]

Dave, here's a valid reason why Contador threatens to quit: Because he knows that the jig is up. Doping is harder now, and if they're going to pick you up for trace amounts in the contemporary testing era and it's not possible to sweep it under the rug, then he's done for.

A message to all dopers: Just leave. The sooner the better.

Um there won't be anyone left to race.

 

[webvan]

I think Contador has come up with a new legal defense position. It's really been around since creation. I call it the CRY-BABY DEFENSE (you know... "I'll quit if punished")... absolutely disgusting. Let him quit then.

Yes, this is getting worse by the day. That would be a pretty huge admission of guilt, giving up on tens of millions of euros (after coming back two years later)...who would do that, except as someone pointed out, someone who absolutely needs the dope to beat the competition.

It's likely that after Puerto where he "walked" he thought he was untouchable just like LA was for 10 years.

Talking about Pueto, how come the Italians didn't check his blood (he ran and won the 2008 Giro) against the "AC" bags when they did it for Valverde a few months later? I have yet to hear a good explanation for that...some kind of deal maybe?

 

[Ferminal]

The Italians still haven't re-tested the 2008 Giro samples for CERA, it's politics everywhere, not just Spain and the UCI.

 

[Dallas_]

The Italians still haven't re-tested the 2008 Giro samples for CERA, it's politics everywhere, not just Spain and the UCI.

I think it is possibly more to do with the financial side. I dont know what the breakdown of costs are for each test, but maybe more money than we realize. Maybe a topic for another thread. I am definitely interested. We may have some forum members with some inside knowledge

cheers dallas

 

[webvan]

Why would they have gone after Valverde and not Contador though? Because he won the 2008 Giro giving some needed cred to their race? Possibly...but that's probably another reason Contador thought he was untouchable.

 

[theswordsman]

Here's text from his TV interview, and for Spanish speakers, the 15 minute video. The news is that he's meeting with the Competition Committee Friday to turn everything over, and Sunday he'll go to the team camp for two weeks of normalcy.

http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/noticias-ficha.asp?id=33003

http://www.rtve.es/deportes/20101125/contador-espero-resolucion-favorable/375747.shtml

I don't think the excerpt got his reply right about if he'd retire if banned. He wasn't making a threat to try to influence a decision.

If you are suspended for two years, are raised withdrawal?

Sólo me planteo que todo se solucione de forma favorable. I only argue that everything is resolved favorably. No puedo pensar otra cosa. I can not think otherwise. Así vamos a asumir el caso. So let's take the case. Es pronto para decirlo en este momento, pero no te podría asegurar que fuera a continuar si la sanción es de dos años. It is early to say at this time, but you could ensure that would continue if the penalty is two years.

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/sancionan-anos-seguire/20101126dasdaicic_1/Tes

As to the why he would retire, I've answered before, but here goes. A two year ban would have him miss all of 2011, and he could only be back for the Vuelta in 2012. If they take away his 2010 Tour win, why should he train for a couple of years with no salary just to try to win a third Tour AGAIN in 2013?

He's already won the races that matter to him. He's got millions of dollars, but he still lives a quiet life (with nice cars). If he walks away from the sport, he can go on with a life with no reports, or people knocking on the door every couple of days asking for blood or urine.

Look at some of the posts and threads against him here. Look back at the way the UCI treated him, with a gag order for more than a month so he couldn't seek support. Look at the hundreds of articles about plasticizers, and the Humo article, and "experts" not privy to the lab reports condemning him as a blood doper.

Why on Earth would he want to come back to that - to be described as "the disgraced" for the rest of his life? He doesn't need the money. He doesn't seem to be into fame and self-promotion. After losing two years in his prime, what race would make him want to come back? His legacy would already be ruined.

Other guys came back because they had unfinished business, or needed the money, or the acclaim. After all the trash that was repeated against him for a couple of months, with cycling media pretty much trying to push him out the door, why would he beg those people to let him come back as a second class citizen a couple of years down the road?

Basically, if you bash him, don't expect him to come back so you can bash him some more. He doesn't owe you anything.

 

[Ferminal]

Here's text from his TV interview, and for Spanish speakers, the 15 minute video. The news is that he's meeting with the Competition Committee Friday to turn everything over, and Sunday he'll go to the team camp for two weeks of normalcy.

http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/noticias-ficha.asp?id=33003

http://www.rtve.es/deportes/20101125/contador-espero-resolucion-favorable/375747.shtml

I don't think the excerpt got his reply right about if he'd retire if banned. He wasn't making a threat to try to influence a decision.


http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/sancionan-anos-seguire/20101126dasdaicic_1/Tes

As to the why he would retire, I've answered before, but here goes. A two year ban would have him miss all of 2011, and he could only be back for the Vuelta in 2012. If they take away his 2010 Tour win, why should he train for a couple of years with no salary just to try to win a third Tour AGAIN in 2013?

He's already won the races that matter to him. He's got millions of dollars, but he still lives a quiet life (with nice cars). If he walks away from the sport, he can go on with a life with no reports, or people knocking on the door every couple of days asking for blood or urine.

Look at some of the posts and threads against him here. Look back at the way the UCI treated him, with a gag order for more than a month so he couldn't seek support. Look at the hundreds of articles about plasticizers, and the Humo article, and "experts" not privy to the lab reports condemning him as a blood doper.

Why on Earth would he want to come back to that - to be described as "the disgraced" for the rest of his life? He doesn't need the money. He doesn't seem to be into fame and self-promotion. After losing two years in his prime, what race would make him want to come back? His legacy would already be ruined.

Other guys came back because they had unfinished business, or needed the money, or the acclaim. After all the trash that was repeated against him for a couple of months, with cycling media pretty much trying to push him out the door, why would he beg those people to let him come back as a second class citizen a couple of years down the road?

Basically, if you bash him, don't expect him to come back so you can bash him some more. He doesn't owe you anything.

Because after watching Andy Schleck win the TdF twice without testing positive for two years, he will feel some injustice!

The interesting thing when (if) Contador returns in 2011 or 2012, how will the "hate every sanctioned rider except..." (hello Harmon) crowd view him? Will he get the same treatment as Ricco and Vino? Will he be "tolerable" like Basso or will he become like Millar, one of the good guys?

I can imagine someone calling Contador winning the TdF in 2012 and 2013 and describing the scene as was done in L-B-L 2010, completely missing the truth which has seen almost every TdF for 20 years won by an enhanced performer.

Of course it's unlikely Contador will ever go back on the meat story, so in a way he's only digging his own hole and is more likely to end up being viewed in the same way as Vino and Landis.

 

[RdBiker]

Why on Earth would he want to come back to that - to be described as "the disgraced" for the rest of his life? He doesn't need the money. He doesn't seem to be into fame and self-promotion. After losing two years in his prime, what race would make him want to come back? His legacy would already be ruined.

Does he have an education, a job? Two million a year sounds quite tempting to me at least. He's probably earned 5-8 million from cycling (just a guess) minus the money he has used (cars did you say?) That's a lot of money but when you divide it for 50 years it isn't that much. So it depends what kind of life he wants to live.

I just don't get how the UCI listens to these threats about "retiring if I get a two year ban". Have you heard any other rider ever make these kinds of threats? It's like telling the police "I'll never work in the financial sector if you punish me for tax evasion"

 

[Finbouy]

I've read the thread, from what I've picked up most (here) think the lads guilty and that the threat is just him crying "sour grapes"
You are an interesting lot, speculation and inferance seems to be the way you live your lives or through those of others.
Interesting.

If I was Bert, in his shoes right now, I'd quit. I'd not want to be in a sport that treats competitors as Gulty until proven Innocent, where naysayers get angst and greavance vented frustration out into the open even before the case has been heard. Where Internet bashing is the new media Sport without any comeback or moderation. It's a very sad sad situation. The comments in this thread pretty much revert back to medeaval "hang him" rants in the Main Square complete with rotting vegetables at the ready to be thrown at the accused. How sad.

Like most Spanish, I'd live a life in the Sun, eat, drink exceptional food, get invited to the nicest of famly gatherings and pootle along on my Aprillia Scooter wearing shades and kicking back, I'd have a family, bring kids up, watch them grow and mature into pillars of society and eventually die a quite humble death.

Far far better than having a public flogging every time you pop to the shops for Bread and Wine.

 

[python]

in the interview contador sounded as he expected more support from astana..

im not clear what he meant.. moral support or he had in mind some specific instances he chose not to elaborated on ?

astana found the meat receipt. beyond that, i don't know what else they could do.

 

[Dewulf]

I've read the thread, from what I've picked up most (here) think the lads guilty and that the threat is just him crying "sour grapes"
You are an interesting lot, speculation and inferance seems to be the way you live your lives or through those of others.
Interesting.

If I was Bert, in his shoes right now, I'd quit.

Agreed being presumed guilty is a bitter pill to swallow...but then that's our hyper-aware media-based society of today, not to mention the backlash to years and years of drug abuse in cycling.

That said, I think he doth protesteth a bit much with all this talk of quitting, if it's meant to be some sort of threat. Others with much more plausible explanations of accidental contamination have been banned. Li Fuyu springs to mind.

So it really doesn't matter HOW it got in his system, the point is each rider is responsible for what they eat and if he f*cked up by not being careful enough about that, then he needs to be sanctioned, for the sake of the sport. If he's not man enough to accept that, or the sport of cycling is just too much of a minefield for him to navigate, then tough bikkies, bye bye.

 

[Benotti69]

I've read the thread, from what I've picked up most (here) think the lads guilty and that the threat is just him crying "sour grapes"
You are an interesting lot, speculation and inferance seems to be the way you live your lives or through those of others.
Interesting.

If I was Bert, in his shoes right now, I'd quit. I'd not want to be in a sport that treats competitors as Gulty until proven Innocent, where naysayers get angst and greavance vented frustration out into the open even before the case has been heard. Where Internet bashing is the new media Sport without any comeback or moderation. It's a very sad sad situation. The comments in this thread pretty much revert back to medeaval "hang him" rants in the Main Square complete with rotting vegetables at the ready to be thrown at the accused. How sad.

Like most Spanish, I'd live a life in the Sun, eat, drink exceptional food, get invited to the nicest of famly gatherings and pootle along on my Aprillia Scooter wearing shades and kicking back, I'd have a family, bring kids up, watch them grow and mature into pillars of society and eventually die a quite humble death.

Far far better than having a public flogging every time you pop to the shops for Bread and Wine.

if i was passionate about a sport that behaved in this manner, and i dont believe cycling does, i would be doing everything in my power as a rider to prove i was clean. But sadly how many riders offer to be tested as much as the sport wants or needs? how many speak out about the positive riders? How many riders in the peloton speak about teams that dope? How many? name them?

Contador's explanation for testing positive for a banned non natural substance is ridiculous. He tested positive for a banned substance, hence guilty! he is upset because he shouldn't have tested positive because the level is so minute and previous testing procedures wouldn't find it and that it what really makes him angry and this is part of the problem like what Landis felt, everyone else won while doping and got away with it so why him? why now? it is not fair?

i hope he retires, why? Because 1 less unrepentant proven doper in the peloton is a good thing.

 

[sniper]

if i was passionate about a sport that behaved in this manner, and i dont believe cycling does, i would be doing everything in my power as a rider to prove i was clean. But sadly how many riders offer to be tested as much as the sport wants or needs? how many speak out about the positive riders? How many riders in the peloton speak about teams that dope? How many? name them?

Contador's explanation for testing positive for a banned non natural substance is ridiculous. He tested positive for a banned substance, hence guilty! he is upset because he shouldn't have tested positive because the level is so minute and previous testing procedures wouldn't find it and that it what really makes him angry and this is part of the problem like what Landis felt, everyone else won while doping and got away with it so why him? why now? it is not fair?

i hope he retires, why? Because 1 less unrepentant proven doper in the peloton is a good thing.

That is the whole point indeed. In his defence, AC can only say things like: "I have not doubted even for a single second because at no time did I do anything irregular," (http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/25112010/58/tour-de-france-contador-repeats-quit-threat.html)
And surely he's not lying there. The blooddoping is completely regular.
On the other hand, I've never heard AC say: "I didn't do blooddoping". Lying is tougher than one thinks.

 

[GJB123]

Agreed being presumed guilty is a bitter pill to swallow...but then that's our hyper-aware media-based society of today, not to mention the backlash to years and years of drug abuse in cycling.

That said, I think he doth protesteth a bit much with all this talk of quitting, if it's meant to be some sort of threat. Others with much more plausible explanations of accidental contamination have been banned. Li Fuyu springs to mind.

So it really doesn't matter HOW it got in his system, the point is each rider is responsible for what they eat and if he f*cked up by not being careful enough about that, then he needs to be sanctioned, for the sake of the sport. If he's not man enough to accept that, or the sport of cycling is just too much of a minefield for him to navigate, then tough bikkies, bye bye.

Can anyone show me a link that clearly states that Li Fuyu has actually been handed a ban? All I can find seems to say that he is is still provisionally suspended pending a disciplinary hearing.

Regards
GJ

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Can anyone show me a link that celarly states that Li Fuyu ahs actually been obviously handed a ban? All I can find seems to say that he is is still provisionally suspended pending a disciplinary hearing.

The last news I see is that the B-sample was also confirmed positive the beginning of August. I see no indication anywhere that any action has been taken in his case.

Susan

Edit: This story indicates that he was suspended for two years, but doesn't give a source. Also it seems to say that the UCI suspended him, when it would have to be the Chinese Cycling Federation. http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/tag/fuyu-li/

 

[GJB123]

The last news I see is that the B-sample was also confirmed positive the beginning of August. I see no indication anywhere that any action has been taken in his case.

Susan

Edit: This story indicates that he was suspended for two years, but doesn't give a source. Also it seems to say that the UCI suspended him, when it would have to be the Chinese Cycling Federation. http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/tag/fuyu-li/

Thanks, Susan. It is more or less what I expected, namely that it's not clear what happened to the guy.

Interesting bit of reading, mind you, that blog. Perhaps some of the strict liability proponents here should also read it.

Regards
GJ

 

[lean mean &green]

Thanks, Susan. It is more or less what I expected, namely that it's not clear what happened to the guy.

Interesting bit of reading, mind you, that blog. Perhaps some of the strict liability proponents here should also read it.

Regards
GJ

it is an interesting read. what else is interesting is how it only discusses the small likelihood of contamination and never mentions other incriminating evidence very discriminating observers here are using to form an opinion. how about presenting both sides by explaining autologous transfusions, the common practice of rest day refills, and the timing of contador's positive? is the timing an illusory correlation? maybe, but i least i acknowledge it. nope let's leave that out, this is a case of strict liability.

strict liability, or what are commonly referred to as zero tolerance policies, are a concern. my best advice if you want to make that point is to start a new thread and leave contador out of the discussion. somewhat ironically, the contador situation is good justification for having no threshold substances, not evidence the policy needs rewriting. in other words, it caught out an obvious doper who eluded other forms of detection instead of wrongly identifying the abstinent. bringing it up here just comes off as special pleading.

back to the drawing board for you

 

[Aguirre]

There are right now more possibilities of clearing Contador than judging him guilty. Even UCI thinks that, then major problem is WADA, but I'm comvinced that in this case, so irregular since the beginning, Contador will be cleared.

Scientifically speaking, science cannot prove maybe the meat contamination, but neither the other way round, I mean, science cannot prove the blog transfussion, this is a ridiculous speculation and the plasticers added to that are just specualtions created in forum threads, but is not science and the famous danish guy was simply speculating. Speculation are not facts!

 

[lean mean &green]

Scientifically speaking, science cannot prove maybe the meat contamination, but neither the other way round, I mean, science cannot prove the blog transfussion, this is a ridiculous speculation and the plasticers added to that are just specualtions created in forum threads, but is not science and the famous danish guy was simply speculating. Speculation are not facts!

science proved the presence of clenbuterol and it is a no threshold substance. that's a two year suspension. next question?

 

[Señor_Contador]

If you were "informing me" then you would offer information - I have asked you to say who is assasinating Contador, again you cannot say who.

I've already answered that: Those within WADA or the UCI who leaked the story to the German journalist.

Just because you ask the same question three times does not mean you haven't been given an answer. You may just not accept the answer, but that is an entirely different story.

Now you can add to the above exactly how much WADA (who have nothing to do with sanctions) get paid per positive?

I don't know. You ought to pose that question to the German journalist who got the story leaked from the WADA/UCI employee(s). I certainly was not involved, so I can't give you an exact number. You see, leaking a story is like jumping from a 10-story building: All I need to know is what happens at the beginning. Anything in the middle and the end I can pretty much figure out how it went on my own.

And yes, it would be extremely foolhardy to think that the leaking of the story did not involve $$.

Where have I lied?

When you insinuated that I objected (or not) to Fuyu Li's sanction? Like I said, I did not know who Fuyu Li was until a couple week ago.

So the UCI were just about to make public Contadors poitive - even though McQuaid said that very week that Contador was not subject to an investigation?

No, the German media were going to make it public and Alberto did it first to save some face. But you already knew this, so I really ignore as to why you must be reminded of things that you already know...

 

[sniper]

I've already answered that: Those within WADA or the UCI who leaked the story to the German journalist.

Just because you ask the same question three times does not mean you haven't been given an answer. You may just not accept the answer, but that is an entirely different story.

I don't know. You ought to pose that question to the German journalist who got the story leaked from the WADA/UCI employee(s). I certainly was not involved, so I can't give you an exact number. You see, leaking a story is like jumping from a 10-story building: All I need to know is what happens at the beginning. Anything in the middle and the end I can pretty much figure out how it went on my own.

And yes, it would be extremely foolhardy to think that the leaking of the story did not involve $$.

When you insinuated that I objected (or not) to Fuyu Li's sanction? Like I said, I did not know who Fuyu Li was until a couple week ago.

No, the German media were going to make it public and Alberto did it first to save some face. But you already knew this, so I really ignore as to why you must be reminded of things that you already know...

Your answers connect well with Contador's steakstory. Complete speculation.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Your answers connect well with Contador's steakstory. Complete speculation.

Like I said, some people at WADA/UCI get paid "by the positive".

Leak$ are a very profitable business you know... And licks too.

 

[Benotti69]

Like I said, some people at WADA/UCI get paid "by the positive".

Leak$ are a very profitable business you know... And licks too.

i suppose you have a steak to present us as evidence for wada getting paid per positive

 

[roundabout]

I heard that keeping positives in house is also very profitable.