Contador acquitted

[joe_papp]

Why would the riders need to be extra vigilant?
Seems you will not face a ban for eating clen meat.

Unless you're any one of the other riders sanctioned during the past year for clenbuterol...

...

"The Cologne study appears to offer the strongest proof yet that athletes can test positive inadvertently from food. It challenges WADA's principle of strict liability, which holds that athletes are responsible for all substances found in their body.
The German table tennis federation recently decided not to ban Dimitrij Ovtcharov after he blamed his positive clenbuterol test on contaminated meat. Dozens of Chinese athletes have tested positive for clenbuterol in the past three years and received bans despite claims of contamination."

 

[veganrob]

Since when did what the rules say become an impediment to achieving a desired-outcome?

Did anyone here seriously think that Contador was going to draw a ban and lose a TdF for a micro-micro-dose of clenbuterol? The same day that Contador is cleared, the Cologne lab warns that it's absolutely a plausible risk to return a positive for clenbuterol from food contamination (using Far East cattle industry as example of threat) and urges athletes to be extra-vigilant.

Thank you Joe. Someone finally making sense. While everybody is arguing about rues and burden of proof, it doesn't matter one bit. RFEC, UCI, WADA, are all complicit in decision. How could anyone really believe AC was going to get time? No way. They had no intention of banning him. OR they had no case.
I believe first arguement

 

[Scansorial]

It's not really an issue of what is more likely, or what's equally likely. The onus was on Contador to prove he accidentally ingested it, he failed to do so. Period. End of story, he's guilty. Two-year ban. That's what the rules clearly say.

I agree 100%. I think what I was trying to say is that if a blood transfusion is equally as likely as tainted meat, then he clearly didn't prove anything and he deserves the ban.

The real question to me is how they think a blood transfusion is so out of the question.

 

[uspostal]

I guess my question now is, do riders put micro announts of EPO in the meat they eat and then claim its contaniated beef ??? Maybe I should go see my butcher now. 1. Get reciept for meat.2. Make sure that I'm the only one to eat said meat.3. Hope the USADA/USA Cycling is as easy on me ??? 2011 here I come.

 

[Polish]

I guess my question now is, do riders put micro announts of EPO in the meat they eat and then claim its contaniated beef ??? Maybe I should go see my butcher now. 1. Get reciept for meat.2. Make sure that I'm the only one to eat said meat.3. Hope the USADA/USA Cycling is as easy on me ??? 2011 here I come.

Cows are not known for having EPO in their systems.

I think you would be better off using the "Hannibal Lecter" Defense and claim you ate a cancer patient

 

[The Hitch]

[tinfoil hat on]

Interestingly, Veo7 and their first AC interview have been credited with being key in shifting the perception of this case. Veo7 has the rights to the Giro. Contador is now riding the Giro.

[tinfoil hat off]

To further this point, the picture in the DAOTEC link which you quote, of Contador being hugged by the 2 guys doing funny faces looks like some sort of sitcom.

"Coming soon to Veo 7, Contador in Italy "

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I agree 100%. I think what I was trying to say is that if a blood transfusion is equally as likely as tainted meat, then he clearly didn't prove anything and he deserves the ban.

The real question to me is how they think a blood transfusion is so out of the question.

"Out of the question" is not the standard. You can't ban people for theories that aren't "out of the question". I realize some panties have been wadded up right now and some self righteous folks are up in arms over what they perceive to be a grave injustice. Maybe it is an injustice that Contador is acquitted. Maybe not. However, you can't treat and EPO positive in the same fashion as a clenbuterol or DHEA positive. I understand a zero threshold for synthetic EPO or testosterone. But if clenbuterol has been found in the food supply, that's a different story, IMO.

 

[Cobblestones]

Cows are not known for having EPO in their systems.

I think you would be better off using the "Hannibal Lecter" Defense and claim you ate a cancer patient

Now I understand what made 'the cannibal' the greatest cyclist ever.

Anywhoo, continue ...

 

[Colm.Murphy]

"Out of the question" is not the standard. You can't ban people for theories that aren't "out of the question". I realize some panties have been wadded up right now and some self righteous folks are up in arms over what they perceive to be a grave injustice. Maybe it is an injustice that Contador is acquitted. Maybe not. However, you can't treat and EPO positive in the same fashion as a clenbuterol or DHEA positive. I understand a zero threshold for synthetic EPO or testosterone. But if clenbuterol has been found in the food supply, that's a different story, IMO.

I agree with this.

I do think that Contador is correct, as was Landis before him, that WADA and the UCI are noodling along and not staying on top of their rules, thus not protecting athletes from these types of scenarios, where a micro-level of a questionable substance is found or where a lab's work is borderline criminally negligent.

I am of the belief that the Clen presence WAS from a blood transfusion and the longer Bertie drags this out, the closer the Plasticizer test is to being operational. Once that happens, the "where's the beef" issue will have zero play.

When it comes to the system, strict liability should be a two-way street. Rather ten guilty men go free....

Edit to add: Had Landis been acquitted or ultimately prevailed, the subsequent overahul to the system that is currently a glaring issue would have already occurred.

 

[Escarabajo]

Since when did what the rules say become an impediment to achieving a desired-outcome?

Did anyone here seriously think that Contador was going to draw a ban and lose a TdF for a micro-micro-dose of clenbuterol? ....

I did. And still think so.

Basically WADA is going to check all the other contamination cases and say, why is this one different from the others?

I don't agree with your perception that because is minute quantity it should be treated different. If it is so, why have it on the banned list?

Lessons learned: When you (1) eat meat (2) 3 times in consecutive days (3) during a queen stage of a GT (4) from a friend of yours (5) brought from Spain (6) and nobody else that is tested eats it, I'll suggest you to cut a piece for later testing for Clen just in case.

 

[LongSprint]

Sanction the federation

If the Spanish Cycling Federation is shown to have not come to its decision according to the relevant statutes, it should be banned for 2 years and all pros it has licensed would need to get a license from another federation.

 

[Altitude]

"Out of the question" is not the standard. You can't ban people for theories that aren't "out of the question". I realize some panties have been wadded up right now and some self righteous folks are up in arms over what they perceive to be a grave injustice. Maybe it is an injustice that Contador is acquitted. Maybe not. However, you can't treat and EPO positive in the same fashion as a clenbuterol or DHEA positive. I understand a zero threshold for synthetic EPO or testosterone. But if clenbuterol has been found in the food supply, that's a different story, IMO.

But you can and should ban someone who returns a positive for a banned substance, no? Regardless of whether you think there should be a threshold for Clen or not, the fact is there isn't. Therefore according to the rules he should be banned.

 

[joe_papp]

I don't agree with your perception that because is minute quantity it should be treated different. If it is so, why have it on the banned list?

No offense by nowhere do I imply or state that Contador SHOULD be treated differently. But yes of course I thought he WOULD be treated differently.

And I think your question about having it on the banned list will be asked in a different form, that of determining a limit for clen b/c of the reality that it can occur via contamination of the food source in certain regions.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I agree w/ you. This case was a no-win from the start and I stick by my feeling that it would be extremely unsatisfying to see Contador banned for any length of time for clenbuterol, which, while subject to no-threshold/zero-tolerance and therefore inexcusable to have in the body, can be argued to have appeared as a result of contamination.

At least the discovery of exogenous EPO/CERA or some purely-doping related product or practice would have removed the doubt that the normal (non-Clinic reading) public would have about sanctioning for that minute trace of clenbuterol.

I keep thinking about poor Tom Zirbel, who also argued contamination but drew a full two-year ban. Maybe it was USADA/USA Cycling who did the wrong thing and the RCF did the right thing by not banning Contador. Problem is everyone can argue it every which way because it's so not an airtight case.

I was offended though by the person on Twitter who claimed that I didn't support a robust anti-doping movement just because I wasn't braying about the injustice of Contador being cleared.

I keep thinking about Tom Zirbel also....is it completely wrong to think that maybe after the outcome of this case, that a good attorney could successfully argue Tom's suspension be shortened? I suppose that is fruitless, but I just see injustice....

 

[Escarabajo]

No offense by nowhere do I imply or state that Contador SHOULD be treated differently. But yes of course I thought he WOULD be treated differently.

And I think your question about having it on the banned list will be asked in a different form, that of determining a limit for clen b/c of the reality that it can occur via contamination of the food source in certain regions.

I did not mean Contador. I knew he would be treated differently. I am talking about the small amounts of Clen.

I am still waiting for all the scientists and other authorities to tell us what the new threshold should be. There was a big noise about it when Contador positive came to light. Still no news. Do you think we are going to have a threshold before the Tour 2011 starts? Have you heard any news?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

But you can and should ban someone who returns a positive for a banned substance, no? Regardless of whether you think there should be a threshold for Clen or not, the fact is there isn't. Therefore according to the rules he should be banned.

So you're going to ban a guy from his livelihood because somebody screwed up the rules and didn't bother to realize that, hey, maybe there's non-negligible chance of having trace amounts in your body due to contamination of the food supply?

That's a stupid standard and it doesn't do anyone any good. Sometimes the letter of the law does not convey the spirit of the law.

 

[flicker]

Why would the riders need to be extra vigilant?
Seems you will not face a ban for eating clen meat.

Many riders choose not to take the chance of Clen poisoning(Zabrinskie, Levi) by going vegan.
They are:
#1 Protecting our precious environmental resources.

#2 Protecting the needless and heartless slaughter of innocent civilian bovines.

#3 Living a more aestetic and healthful lifestyle.

[color="black"

#4 I myself am a breatherian although I substitute my diet by eating naturlly dead vegetative matter. Don't worry its organic.

 

[patricknd]

Many riders choose not to take the chance of Clen poisoning(Zabrinskie, Levi) by going vegan.
They are:
#1 Protecting our precious environmental resources.

#2 Protecting the needless and heartless slaughter of innocent civilian bovines.

#3 Living a more aestetic and healthful lifestyle.

[color="black"

#4 I myself am a breatherian although I substitute my diet by eating naturlly dead vegetative matter. Don't worry its organic.

you're an inspiration to us all. thank you

 

[La Vie Claire]

I keep thinking about Tom Zirbel also....is it completely wrong to think that maybe after the outcome of this case, that a good attorney could successfully argue Tom's suspension be shortened? I suppose that is fruitless, but I just see injustice....

I don't think Tom Zirbel had trace amounts of DHEA in his urine.

 

[Escarabajo]

So you're going to ban a guy from his livelihood because somebody screwed up the rules and didn't bother to realize that, hey, maybe there's non-negligible chance of having trace amounts in your body due to contamination of the food supply?

That's a stupid standard and it doesn't do anyone any good. Sometimes the letter of the law does not convey the spirit of the law.

Of course it can come from contaminated meat.

Do you believe it did?

 

[flicker]

To be fair shouldn't the Chinese guy from the SHack have his full salary paid by the spAnish federation, an apology to joHann(he really needs cheering up just about now) and a PLace on SAXO for Fi Liu for 2011, including a Tour ride.

I mean this whole thing here with the Spanish federation and Alberto Contador is about fairness, correct?

 

[131313]

I don't think Tom Zirbel had trace amounts of DHEA in his urine.

do you know what he had in his urine? If so, you know more than he does.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

****ing goddamn *** and **** **** **** damn *** **** **** **** ****.

this.
terrible news.
sick of the Italians and Spanish attempting to bend rules for their riders.

 

[Altitude]

So you're going to ban a guy from his livelihood because somebody screwed up the rules and didn't bother to realize that, hey, maybe there's non-negligible chance of having trace amounts in your body due to contamination of the food supply?

That's a stupid standard and it doesn't do anyone any good. Sometimes the letter of the law does not convey the spirit of the law.

It has happened to a number of other athletes. Why bend the rules for Aldirto? Until that rule is changed, you can't just pick and choose who gets sanctioned and who doesn't.

Unlike most other athletes, he could easily take a 2 year holiday doing nothing but training, then have teams lining up for him when he got back. It'll be hard to feel sympathy when he eventually gets his ban.

 

[Ferminal]

It has happened to a number of other athletes. Why bend the rules for Aldirto? Until that rule is changed, you can't just pick and choose who gets sanctioned and who doesn't.

Unlike most other athletes, he could easily take a 2 year holiday doing nothing but training, then have teams lining up for him when he got back. It'll be hard to feel sympathy when he eventually gets his ban.

It's hardly black and white. Each case is different, if the defense can build a case which the tribunals can accept then fair enough.