Contador acquitted

[pedaling squares]

thank you, best thing said in this thread yet. contador being the scapegoat from a failing wada is unfair

Hold on Ryo, who do you think he meant by "the guilty in countries without contamination problems?"

 

[Sanjūrō]

The beef defense is as ridiculous as it is epic lawyerism. Reminds me of OJ Simpson's glove.

 

[red_flanders]

I honestly can't believe there are still people here who believe Contador's riduculous beef defense.

It's one thing to say you don't care if he's doped and you want him acquitted because you like to see him ride (and win I suppose), but please don't pretend to be that gullible and think everybody else is stupid enough to buy it.

I think you're quite right, no one actually believes the beef defense. No one can be that delusional, right?

They just don't want to see him sanctioned and are willing to support an argument that allows them to feel they are justified in feeling he should be allowed to ride.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

thank you, best thing said in this thread yet. contador being the scapegoat from a failing wada is unfair

Yeah WADA set this thing up a year before it went down.

Hontō

 

[roadiemtl]

Its all disgusting. A cheater has gotten away with cheating and the system of his country (which I will not name) helps him be declaring him innocent.

I never did see the receipt for the meat, did anyone??

I am finished with cycling. A particular country which I will not name is responsible the destruction of a once magnificent sport.

I hope the people of this country are proud of their heritage, the future will remember this european union member as a bastion of cheating and lying.

Too bad I can't tell you which country it is, you'll have to figure it out for yourself.

 

[Descender]

"Ein Freispruch Contadors wäre ein weiteres Beispiel für den laxen Umgang mit Doping in Spanien."
an acquittal for AC would be another example of the negligent way of dealing with doping in Spain.

http://www.spiegel.de/sport/sonst/0,1518,745509,00.html

Fair enough, but why do they include Marta Dominguez and Blanco in their accusations? They have been suspended and arrested and are under investigation.

 

[Stuart]

I honestly can't believe there are still people here who believe Contador's riduculous beef defense.

It's one thing to say you don't care if he's doped and you want him acquitted because you like to see him ride (and win I suppose), but please don't pretend to be that gullible and think everybody else is stupid enough to buy it.

+2 - It's totally unbelievable to me that cyclists would believe this BS .. he's got a track record with Operation Porto - they guy needs to be banned for 2+ years to show that cycling is really serious about banning the cheats or our sport slides ever further down the toilet

 

[Publicus]

I think you're quite right, no one actually believes the beef defense. No one can be that delusional, right?

They just don't want to see him sanctioned and are willing to support an argument that allows them to feel they are justified in feeling he should be allowed to ride.

Not sure why it is delusional. If you accept the notion that folks CAN ingest clen through food sources, then it's not delusional to believe that it was possible in this case. Just because the EU has tested somewhere around 1% of the cattled slaughtered in any given year with only one positive, is not concrete evidence that clen is not found in the food supply (in fact, just extrapolating one could presume that something around ~100 cases of clen could occur each year in the EU). It does make the argument less credible than if it had occurred in a country that does not attempt to prohibit the introduction of clen into the food supply, but that doesn't mean it is impossible.

Just to be clear, I'm not arguing the plausibility of AC's argument in the instant case, but rebutting the notion that it is delusional for one to find his argument plausible.

 

[patricknd]

beg your pardon? I said your warm and that I liked the brainstorm. In other words: I agree.

EDIt: give what back?

he was confused. try smaller words next time

 

[pedaling squares]

Just to be clear, I'm not arguing the plausibility of AC's argument in the instant case, but rebutting the notion that it is delusional for one to find his argument plausible.

I understand your viewpoint. Probability does not eliminate possibility. I think the judicial bodies need to adopt a standard of "beyond reasonable doubt, notwithstanding the exceptionally rare and outrageous circumstances that seem only to occur in professional cyclists."

 

[MarkvW]

It is a dark comedy.

So Contador walks . . ..

I give up! Pro cycling has always been a dope festival, and it will remain a dope festival far into the foreseeable future. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a fool.

Clean pro racers enable the doping festival. They provide meat for the doped racers, and provide a meaningless veneer of respectability. They support an institution that is full of liars and cheats. Nobody wants to kill the doped goose that lays the golden eggs.

The dopers lie and cheat because they adapt to the world of Doped Pro Cycling. I used to think that caring about their welfare was worthwhile, but now I realize that they WANT to risk their lives in a doped racing environment. Why should I care about such fools? Better to leave them to their folly.

The Contador message has been sent: Doping is necessary to be a champion. Every kid racing a bike will receive that message loud and clear (like the Ullrich, Pantani, Riis, Petacchi, etc., etc. messages). Those kids are future fodder for the Manolo Saiz's of pro cycling.

It is a joke. People like Joe EPO Papp make the joke even more laughable--a dope DEALER testifying at a doping arbitration?! You can't make this stuff up!

Botany Bay self-righteously proclaimed that there is nothing funny about the most recent Ricco doping episode. I disagree. It's all a big joke. Pro cycling is what it is: a corrupt doped up circus. Pretending that it is at all elevated above the gutter is naive foolishness.

From now on, it is ALL entertainment for me. From racing, to cheating, to testing, to kidney failure, to EPO sludge, to plasticizers in the blood, it is all entertainment.

Now, where do I get that Dopestrong jersey? And what's the latest gossip on genetic doping--I wanna see a man with antelope legs!

 

[Winterfold]

This whole thing is due to WADA's incompetence. Having no minimum threshold on a substance with known food contamination issues is stupid. It ensares the innocent who travel to places like Mexico, and it allows the guilty in countries without contamination problems to claim that they too are victims. The Cologne lab warned that the ever more sensitive limits of detection could causes problems. WADA did nothing. Now the anti-doping framework looks foolish and unfair.

+1

You could also hypthesise this is due to the UCI's incompetence in allowing a protected rider to a) fail a test then b) failing to keep that test quiet while an appropriate excuse/exemption and ahem donation to the clenbuterol minimum research programme were cooked up. If you were prone to conspiracy theories...

It's clear Contador never expected this kind of thing to happen.

Now, where is my tin-foil hat

 

[moi123]

If the rumours are true, the RFEC did the right thing. I can only applaud them.
But I don't think this story is over yet..

 

[Barrus]

I am really amazed that people use this case as the breaking point. To be quite honest in this case there can be made a reasonable argument as to why he should not be punished. Am I of that conviction? No, but I can understand why people view it that way. The amount of CLen Contador had in his system was far too little to have any effect, a case can be made for contamination. And although I am in favour of strict liability, a case can be made against it. Really, this case was far from a slamdunk from the beginning and Contie getting of, although not something I would've tought probable, certainly was a possibility since the start of the case.

 

[131313]

I am really amazed that people use this case as the breaking point. To be quite honest in this case there can be made a reasonable argument as to why he should not be punished. Am I of that conviction? No, but I can understand why people view it that way. The amount of CLen Contador had in his system was far too little to have any effect, a case can be made for contamination. And although I am in favour of strict liability, a case can be made against it. Really, this case was far from a slamdunk from the beginning and Contie getting of, although not something I would've tought probable, certainly was a possibility since the start of the case.

In my opinion, strict liability simply shouldn't exist for substances which can be contained in the general food or water supply. This just simply isn't fair.

I'll be glad if he walks, and like you I don't understand how people can really be enraged about this. A couple of posts up someone commented that 'it's obvious he's been doping all the way back to Puerto'... well, bust him for that! Bust him for evidence of a blood transfusion (and no, the plasticizer test isn't a 'red herring' as someone put it earlier. That shows a complete lack of understanding of the test itself and doping tests in general). But busting him for a trace amount of something which isn't even performance-enhancing, "just because he's done other stuff" doesn't hold much water with me. He should be sanctioned for something he's actually done.

At this point, my bigger concern is for the other riders serving bans for the same thing? What about them??

 

[pedaling squares]

It is a joke. People like Joe EPO Papp make the joke even more laughable--a dope DEALER testifying at a doping arbitration?! You can't make this stuff up!

While off topic somewhat, it's things like that which give me some hope. The sport needs to accept that the riders have an expertise in the effects of the drugs, how and when they are taken/administered/stored etc. I wish the governing bodies would consider any dopers willing to talk as witnesses instead of scapegoats.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yes, CAS will only rule when there has been an appeal, and they have never indicated that there is anything wrong with the current system where the national federation judges his own athletes. I doubt the CAS even has the jurisdiction to completely change the current system. I don't think WADA has ever said they think anything is wrong with the current system.

Sure, there are some signs that this case was drawn out, so what? That's hardly in Contador's best interest, and certainly no reason to expect that someone will completely overhaul the current system of doping law.

Agree re CAS/WADA which is why I wrote;
"Not quite - CAS will only rule on the case (if there is an appeal).
It is WADA who sets the rules and criteria...."

It is has nothing to do with CAS -

As for the case being 'drawn out', nothing to do with Contador - but the UCI did not make public that Contador had been positive for a full month after the B sample (and only because it was about to be leaked by the media).

I never said "completely overhaul" - but anti-doping evolves as WADA introduces new rules and practises - expect this case to have an significant impact on the application of rules in the future.

 

[happychappy]

Hahaha. Poor little Baby Shlock will be regretting all that big talk I now.

 

[spalco]

Does anybody have any halfway reasonable estimate how long the CAS would take for a decision, assuming it gets appealed - specifically what's the chance of a decision before July 2nd?

At this point, my bigger concern is for the other riders serving bans for the same thing? What about them??

Right. The real problem with doping testing is too much testing.

 

[pedaling squares]

Spalco... FYI I don't think Bro wrote that. You are attributing a 131313 quote to BroDeal.

 

[flicker]

So Contador walks . . ..

I give up! Pro cycling has always been a dope festival, and it will remain a dope festival far into the foreseeable future. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a fool.

Clean pro racers enable the doping festival. They provide meat for the doped racers, and provide a meaningless veneer of respectability. They support an institution that is full of liars and cheats. Nobody wants to kill the doped goose that lays the golden eggs.

The dopers lie and cheat because they adapt to the world of Doped Pro Cycling. I used to think that caring about their welfare was worthwhile, but now I realize that they WANT to risk their lives in a doped racing environment. Why should I care about such fools? Better to leave them to their folly.

The Contador message has been sent: Doping is necessary to be a champion. Every kid racing a bike will receive that message loud and clear (like the Ullrich, Pantani, Riis, Petacchi, etc., etc. messages). Those kids are future fodder for the Manolo Saiz's of pro cycling.

It is a joke. People like Joe EPO Papp make the joke even more laughable--a dope DEALER testifying at a doping arbitration?! You can't make this stuff up!

Botany Bay self-righteously proclaimed that there is nothing funny about the most recent Ricco doping episode. I disagree. It's all a big joke. Pro cycling is what it is: a corrupt doped up circus. Pretending that it is at all elevated above the gutter is naive foolishness.

From now on, it is ALL entertainment for me. From racing, to cheating, to testing, to kidney failure, to EPO sludge, to plasticizers in the blood, it is all entertainment.

Now, where do I get that Dopestrong jersey? And what's the latest gossip on genetic doping--I wanna see a man with antelope legs!

Right on brother, it is time for people to take off the blinders about cycling.
It really is and always has been on level with horse racing and boxing.
I just want to add, it really is a gladiator sport in some ways. I just ignore the doping and enjoy the spectacle. As far as credible performances I just like my favorites, purely subjective. As a cyclist it is pretty obvious who is juiced.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

This is likely to be a disaster for the season.

If Contador rides the Tour and the inevitable appeal hasn't been dealt with by then we'll have a situation of total uncertainty, where the hot favourite has a possible ban hanging over him. Even if the ASO decides to stop him from riding, it will still cause the same uncertainty and controversy in a whole bunch of other races. The coverage of every race he rides, particularly in the non-specialist mainstream media, will be first and foremost about whether or not his results will stand.

 

[spalco]

Spalco... FYI I don't think Bro wrote that. You are attributing a 131313 quote to BroDeal.

Weird. Did the post disappear? I thought I just cropped the quote, I didn't change the name or anything.

 

[roundabout]

Does anybody have any halfway reasonable estimate how long the CAS would take for a decision, assuming it gets appealed - specifically what's the chance of a decision before July 2nd?



Right. The real problem with doping testing is too much testing.

Watch RFEC take their time sending the documents to UCI and WADA.

As for a decision before July 2nd it is rather unlikely, as a reference it was 9 months between the USADA and CAS rulings in case of Landis and about a year for Valverde.

 

[Barrus]

This is likely to be a disaster for the season.

If Contador rides the Tour and the inevitable appeal hasn't been dealt with by then we'll have a situation of total uncertainty, where the hot favourite has a possible ban hanging over him. Even if the ASO decides to stop him from riding, it will still cause the same uncertainty and controversy in a whole bunch of other races. The coverage of every race he rides, particularly in the non-specialist mainstream media, will be first and foremost about whether or not his results will stand.

Probably not, it was not the case with all the races Valverde rode, with most media this will just be a backdrop