Contador acquitted

[RobbieCanuck]

Good Decision

The Spanish Fed's decision is a good one. Clearly they accepted as credible AC's explanation that he did not knowingly ingest a PED.

The real issue in PED cases is whether the athlete knowingly ingested a PED to gain a competitive advantage.

Where there is a valid positive test there should be a prima facie case against a rider. However that rider should be able to rebut the finding where the rider can prove he did not knowingly ingest the PED to gain a competitive advantage. The standard of proof should be that the rider's explanation is reasonably certain to be true.

In addition the amount of clen in this case was so negligible that clearly it could not have given AC a competitive advantage. There is a maxim in law that should have applied here: - "Diminumus non curat lex" (The law does not concern itself with trifles)

 

[craig1985]

No you're not alone!

And either way it shows injustice in the system, imo.

The nobody gets done for two years when it really was unavoidable contamination but didn't have the resources to escape sanction.

Or the big name gets off because he builds a very good case.

The only hope is that they learn from the Contador case, and maybe the little guys have a better chance.

I personally think a one year ban would of been sufficient. But it begs the question, why would you eat a steak during the Tour?

 

[Escarabajo]

I personally think a one year ban would of been sufficient. But it begs the question, why would you eat a steak during the Tour?

Three times.

http://www.sport.es/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=44&idioma=CAS&idnoticia_PK=722519&idseccio_PK=1268

He ate after the Tourmalet stage.

The test was on the rest day when he tested positive. he said he ate meat the day before and some leftovers the following day.

That makes it three times in a row. He basically was doing atkins. LOL.

 

[BroDeal]

I personally think a one year ban would of been sufficient. But it begs the question, why would you eat a steak during the Tour?

Contador was kicking it old school. He shows up all season prepared to win, just like the riders from the 70's. He eats like them, too.

 

[pedaling squares]

In addition the amount of clen in this case was so negligible that clearly it could not have given AC a competitive advantage. There is a maxim in law that should have applied here: - "Diminumus non curat lex" (The law does not concern itself with trifles)

You forgot the following clause: Diminumus non curat lex exceptus fastus Spannicus wanta cuttus livres preparus Tour de Francum which states that residual clen from a June blood transfusion contributes to a competitive edge in July and is therefore not trifling in nature.

 

[Merckx index]

Maybe there is some sort of masking agent used.

As has been discussed here previously, there is no masking agent for drugs like CB.

Where there is a valid positive test there should be a prima facie case against a rider. However that rider should be able to rebut the finding where the rider can prove he did not knowingly ingest the PED to gain a competitive advantage. The standard of proof should be that the rider's explanation is reasonably certain to be true.

So in this case, where Bert’s contaminated meat scenario was very reasonably certain not to be true, what is the justification for clearing him?

In addition the amount of clen in this case was so negligible that clearly it could not have given AC a competitive advantage. There is a maxim in law that should have applied here: - "Diminumus non curat lex" (The law does not concern itself with trifles)

Indeed, the law does and must concern itself with trifles. Are you aware of how tiny an amount of DNA can lead to a murder conviction or a paternity suit?

 

[python]

3 days past the acquittal and after reading everything i found, i’m still not clear what exactly were the 2 additional arguments contador presented to the disciplinary board that changed things around?

anyone saw anything factual in the spanish media to shed some light ?

 

[webvan]

I don't think anyone has, it looks more and more like this was rigged from the get-go, one year "preliminary" sentence to show they're tough, then one week of speculation with everyone and their sister showing their support, including the friggin' Prime Minister of Spain, and phew, it's gone...oh and the Giro organizer says Contador is welcome on the Giro...sure.

Reactions of note over the past two days :
- Spanish meat producers, Asoprovac : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/spanish-meat-production-association-denies-contadors-allegations
"all of this without showing even one piece of proof that that the Clenbuterol found in his urine effectively came from eating bovine meat"

- Tom Zirbel : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/zirbel-reacts-to-contadors-dropped-case
“If Contador's defense team was unable to provide any direct proof of their claim of contaminated meat, then it was completely inconsistent with my case and every other case that I know of"

I'm disgusted, this is even worse than the LA scandal because they had a cheater nailed and they just turned him loose.

 

[python]

3 days past the acquittal and after reading everything i found, i’m still not clear what exactly were the 2 additional arguments contador presented to the disciplinary board that changed things around?

anyone saw anything factual in the spanish media to shed some light ?

im gonna sin a bit and quote myself in an attempt to continue thinking aloud...

the only important and relevant thing that happened during the 10d appeal period was wada's desicion not to appeal the table tennis player's case.

so i could only think of some legal arguments (as opposed to technical) that contador's team have put forward in those 10 days. like perhaps changes to the strict liability interpretation (and the relevant uci/wada rules)...

no significant fault clause was replaced by 'no fault or negligence'.

but why ? what new tests or other evidence allowed the switch ?

 

[Benotti69]

I don't think anyone has, it looks more and more like this was rigged from the get-go, one year "preliminary" sentence to show they're tough, then one week of speculation with everyone and their sister showing their support, including the friggin' Prime Minister of Spain, and phew, it's gone...oh and the Giro organizer says Contador is welcome on the Giro...sure.

Reactions of note over the past two days :
- Spanish meat producers, Asoprovac : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/spanish-meat-production-association-denies-contadors-allegations
"all of this without showing even one piece of proof that that the Clenbuterol found in his urine effectively came from eating bovine meat"

- Tom Zirbel : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/zirbel-reacts-to-contadors-dropped-case
“If Contador's defense team was unable to provide any direct proof of their claim of contaminated meat, then it was completely inconsistent with my case and every other case that I know of"

I'm disgusted, this is even worse than the LA scandal because they had a cheater nailed and they just turned him loose.

This is not new for TdF winners

they had LA nailed in the 99 TdF for corticosteroids and let him off with a back dated TUE. Then they had apparently had him nailed in TdF 2001 for EPO and let him off.

 

[Benotti69]

im gonna sin a bit and quote myself in an attempt to continue thinking aloud...

the only important and relevant thing that happened during the 10d appeal period was wada's desicion not to appeal the table tennis player's case.

so i could only think of some legal arguments (as opposed to technical) that contador's team have put forward in those 10 days. like perhaps changes to the strict liability interpretation (and the relevant uci/wada rules)...

no significant fault clause was replaced by 'no fault or negligence'.

but why ? what new tests or other evidence allowed the switch ?

Is there a WADA connection with Spain?

thinking outside of the box of cycling; a lot of cases in the UK are being taken to the court of human rights because laws are apparently denying people their so called 'human rights', i wonder if this was put to wada/uci and it would open the flood gates for riders to take them to the cleaners(human rights court). an example is prisoners in the UK want the right to vote in general elections. it has gotten so bad in the UK that the British wants to removed themselves from the European Human Rights Act.

Contador could claim that the UCI would be restricting his right to earn a living???? sounds 'out there' but if you have some read of the recent rulings not so far fetched. but as i say outside the box!

 

[sniper]

I don't think anyone has, it looks more and more like this was rigged from the get-go, one year "preliminary" sentence to show they're tough, then one week of speculation with everyone and their sister showing their support, including the friggin' Prime Minister of Spain, and phew, it's gone...oh and the Giro organizer says Contador is welcome on the Giro...sure.

Reactions of note over the past two days :
- Spanish meat producers, Asoprovac : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/spanish-meat-production-association-denies-contadors-allegations
"all of this without showing even one piece of proof that that the Clenbuterol found in his urine effectively came from eating bovine meat"

- Tom Zirbel : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/zirbel-reacts-to-contadors-dropped-case
“If Contador's defense team was unable to provide any direct proof of their claim of contaminated meat, then it was completely inconsistent with my case and every other case that I know of"

I'm disgusted, this is even worse than the LA scandal because they had a cheater nailed and they just turned him loose.

+1

Another beauty of a column by Blazin' Saddles:
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blog/blazin-saddles/article/1543/

slapping Contador

"Contador described the decision to let him completely off the hook for having a banned substance in his bloodstream as "a great step forwards for our sport" - which is kind of true, if your idea of a step forward is a giant leap back into a Valverdian era of appeals and counter appeals."

 

[GJB123]

Is there a WADA connection with Spain?

thinking outside of the box of cycling; a lot of cases in the UK are being taken to the court of human rights because laws are apparently denying people their so called 'human rights', i wonder if this was put to wada/uci and it would open the flood gates for riders to take them to the cleaners(human rights court). an example is prisoners in the UK want the right to vote in general elections. it has gotten so bad in the UK that the British wants to removed themselves from the European Human Rights Act.

Contador could claim that the UCI would be restricting his right to earn a living???? sounds 'out there' but if you have some read of the recent rulings not so far fetched. but as i say outside the box!

I don't think it is far fetched at all. I have been saying all along that from a legal point of view just about everything is amiss with anti-dping regulations, for starters with the strict liability nature of most rules. I therefore wouldn't be surprised at all if that helped sway the RFEC to mitigate the strictness of those rules.

Regards
GJ

 

[GJB123]

Indeed, the law does and must concern itself with trifles. Are you aware of how tiny an amount of DNA can lead to a murder conviction or a paternity suit?

I see you haven't entirely grasped the idea of the application of that maxim for this particular case, or perhaps you haven't understood the maxim at all.

Regards
GJ

 

[sniper]

sorry to contribute little to the discussion. But just wanted to share this hilarious observation by Blazin Saddles (yes, I like him):

"It seems like there was also some mishap over mailing which may have provided some kind of legal loophole for Alberto too. Gosh, if all it takes to get off a doping charge is the late delivery of a letter then why isn't the UK an EPO Eldorado? Maybe that's why the US Postal team had such an immaculate record."

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blog/blazin-saddles/article/1543/

Interestingly, instead of citing the examples of other professional cyclists (such as Alessandro Colo and Li Fuyu) banned for using Clenbuterol - as you might logically expect - the RFEC underlined the example of a Russian-sounding German table tennis player, who was let off the hook after eating contaminated food during a tournament in China.

How ironic - for it looks like Contador and the UCI will be playing ping pong all the way to the Court of Arbitration for Sport; a game that will no doubt go on for an eternity.
As one commentator concluded, between them the UCI and RFEC have taken four and a half months to arrive at pretty much nothing. It's like the doping equivalent of the interminable final set of that match between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut in last year's Wimbledon.

 

[hrotha]

im gonna sin a bit and quote myself in an attempt to continue thinking aloud...

the only important and relevant thing that happened during the 10d appeal period was wada's desicion not to appeal the table tennis player's case.

so i could only think of some legal arguments (as opposed to technical) that contador's team have put forward in those 10 days. like perhaps changes to the strict liability interpretation (and the relevant uci/wada rules)...

no significant fault clause was replaced by 'no fault or negligence'.

but why ? what new tests or other evidence allowed the switch ?

The definitive ruling does bring up Ovtcharov's case. It says he was acquitted because WADA thought his contamination by eating tainted Chinese meat suggested no negligence of his own, hence he didn't even get a one-year ban. Now, it argues, if Chinese meat is known to have a problem with clen and Ovtcharov still showed no negligence by eating Chinese meat, it doesn't make sense to ban Contador for one year through "no significant negligence of his own" for eating meat from the EU, where clen is banned and there's supposed to be strict controls to ensure meat isn't contaminated. Hence, no suspension.

If you ask me, that argument is completely sound and logical. Anyone who accepted the ruling proposal (and hence that meat contamination was the only plausible explanation, no matter how statistically improbable) should accept the reasoning. It's as you and others have said - either an acquittal or a 2-year ban.

Of course, personally I think there's little reason to accept the ruling proposal and their suggestion that the damning theories about the clen in Contador's system are impossible, but we'll only know when (if) we see the scientific reports.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Well, at least this case has given Blazing Saddles some material from which to generate some moderately funny sound bites. Not that really these have anything to do with the case itself.

Really, the issue is one of strict liability. That standard really is stupid. It exists only to give WADA and others an easy out, as Zirbel so succinctly put it. They don't want to bother with the details, until those details happen to ensnare a fish big enough to rock their boat.

 

[thehog]

Well, at least this case has given Blazing Saddles some material from which to generate some moderately funny sound bites. Not that really these have anything to do with the case itself.

Really, the issue is one of strict liability. That standard really is stupid. It exists only to give WADA and others an easy out, as Zirbel so succinctly put it. They don't want to bother with the details, until those details happen to ensnare a fish big enough to rock their boat.

Although you look at the fallout from the Landis story and the UCI is much better off letting Contador ride. Soon forgotten after 3-4 months.*

My biggest concern now is one of precedence. Each and every "accidental" ingestion with evidence or no evidence can cite the Contador case in appeal.

This is what frustrates cyclists so much. There no consistency in the way the rules are applied.

Alberto as much as I respect his riding and handling of the Armstrong saga has dodged a bullet. He owes us (his fans) some respect and pay back. I'd like to see him build some form of anti-doping platform or publish some of his results. But I know that won't happen. Sadly just like Armstrong the truth will leak our years later and cycling will have pick up the mess from previous years.

 

[Publicus]

The definitive ruling does bring up Ovtcharov's case. It says he was acquitted because WADA thought his contamination by eating tainted Chinese meat suggested no negligence of his own, hence he didn't even get a one-year ban. Now, it argues, if Chinese meat is known to have a problem with clen and Ovtcharov still showed no negligence by eating Chinese meat, it doesn't make sense to ban Contador for one year through "no significant negligence of his own" for eating meat from the EU, where clen is banned and there's supposed to be strict controls to ensure meat isn't contaminated. Hence, no suspension.

If you ask me, that argument is completely sound and logical. Anyone who accepted the ruling proposal (and hence that meat contamination was the only plausible explanation, no matter how statistically improbable) should accept the reasoning. It's as you and others have said - either an acquittal or a 2-year ban.

Of course, personally I think there's little reason to accept the ruling proposal and their suggestion that the damning theories about the clen in Contador's system are impossible, but we'll only know when (if) we see the scientific reports.

+1 for the most part. I'm reserving opinion on AC's argument until I have a better understand of how they eliminated the other possibilities. If the science is sound, then barring a plasticizers test materializing in the next 51 days, I'd say AC dodges a very big bullet.

 

[Berzin]

If the science is sound, then barring a plasticizers test materializing in the next 51 days, I'd say AC dodges a very big bullet.

How could they re-re-test Contador's samples for plasticizers when all of the other Tour samples have already been destroyed?

These guys are going to spend the next year doing nothing but going after Contador any way they can. It's getting monotonous already.

 

[Frosty]

How could they re-re-test Contador's samples for plasticizers when all of the other Tour samples have already been destroyed?

These guys are going to spend the next year doing nothing but going after Contador any way they can. It's getting monotonous already.

Have they really all been destroyed? I thought that some were normally kept?

 

[hrotha]

Whoa, irony blast from the combination of Berzin's post and his sig.

 

[pedaling squares]

Whoa, irony blast from the combination of Berzin's post and his sig.

No kidding.

 

[Hugh Januss]

No kidding.

I think he is channeling the Swordsman.

 

[webvan]

It looks like the French will be left doing the dirty work again : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/fre...t-suggests-new-analysis-for-contadors-samples

Dine, a haematologist who is also Managing Director of the Institut Biotechnologique de Troyes, says that Contador could have used “Clenbuterol in a period when he was not tested, in order to do power training” and then that people “extracted his blood in order to transfuse him later.”

Now were that witness found by Humo go? Can't believe that story was just swept under the carpet by EVERYONE !