Di Luca Ban Suspended 9 Months Early by CONI

[JPM London]

I really like that Di Luca's making such an effort of declaring that he certainly didn't mentione names and definitely not Petacchi's name.

Oh yeah, and that he's doing for a clean sport...

Can I have a tissue, please?

 

[Benotti69]

I really like that Di Luca's making such an effort of declaring that he certainly didn't mentione names and definitely not Petacchi's name.

Oh yeah, and that he's doing for a clean sport...

Can I have a tissue, please?

are you sure it is not a bucket you want like me!

I thought the quote about Petacchi was really pointing the finger at Petacchi as a doper

 

[Beech Mtn]

Di Luca schools Lance in "brazening it out"

“My collaboration was not against athletes, but in favour of cycling,”

he nonetheless claimed that his collaboration with the anti-doping enquiries was a selfless act, undertaken with future generations of cyclists in mind.

I hope that my collaboration can help bring young people into this sport, which is beautiful and above all, a great school of life.”

It's all about the children! St. Danilo will save cycling for the children!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/di-luca-says-he-did-not-name-riders-during-anti-doping-collaboration

 

[JPM London]

are you sure it is not a bucket you want like me!

I thought the quote about Petacchi was really pointing the finger at Petacchi as a doper

Maybe a bucket...

Yeah, I couldn't quite figure the Petacchi bit out either. Theoretically it could mean there were rumours he named P and just wants to clarify he didn't.

Could he just lie the way other dopers do and say "I know nothing"?

The worst thing in general is that he makes sure to mention he gave no names. So basically making sure that the friends know they're safe so that he won't feel their wraith when back in the peloton is more important than reassuring fans all around the world that he's being honest.

Why on earth even bother declaring he wants to clean up the sport?

Who on earth would for a second believe he intends to return racing clean after those comments?

The most unbelievable part remains he's even allowed back. I had finally started to get some respect for CONI, but this is really, really - Shizzle; I have no words!

 

[michaeld]

I really like that Di Luca's making such an effort of declaring that he certainly didn't mentione names and definitely not Petacchi's name.

Oh yeah, and that he's doing for a clean sport...

Can I have a tissue, please?

We'll see what the peloton things of this in the spring. If he gets flicked into a ravine, or off the side of a mountain...they didn't buy it.

 

[Escarabajo]

are you sure it is not a bucket you want like me!

I thought the quote about Petacchi was really pointing the finger at Petacchi as a doper

+1. LOL. I thought the same thing.

Talking about being scare of the OMERTA.

 

[JPM London]

+1. LOL. I thought the same thing.

Talking about being scare of the OMERTA.

Well, he is Italian - not from Sicily, is he?

 

[Benotti69]

Well, he is Italian - not from Sicily, is he?

he's from Abruzzo a region on the Adriatic coast opposite the region of Lazio where Rome is.

Abruzzo was Ruled by the Spanish when they ruled Sicily about 300 years ago

 

[Altitude]

Maybe a bucket...

Yeah, I couldn't quite figure the Petacchi bit out either. Theoretically it could mean there were rumours he named P and just wants to clarify he didn't.

Could he just lie the way other dopers do and say "I know nothing"?

The worst thing in general is that he makes sure to mention he gave no names. So basically making sure that the friends know they're safe so that he won't feel their wraith when back in the peloton is more important than reassuring fans all around the world that he's being honest.
Why on earth even bother declaring he wants to clean up the sport?

Who on earth would for a second believe he intends to return racing clean after those comments?

The most unbelievable part remains he's even allowed back. I had finally started to get some respect for CONI, but this is really, really - Shizzle; I have no words!

Can you blame him? He wants to come back and compete in the most important races, where he belongs. I can understand your frustration w/ CONI but Di Luca is just doing his job.

 

[Benotti69]

Can you blame him? He wants to come back and compete in the most important races, where he belongs. I can understand your frustration w/ CONI but Di Luca is just doing his job.

His Job is to cheat and rub the name of his sponsors in the dirt? don't think so!

His Job is to ride his bike as well as he can? I dont think team sponsors sign on for bans....

Does the UCI have a code of behaviour that dopers break?

 

[hrotha]

If Di Luca truly had to either deny giving names or face being ostracized by the rest of the peloton, then I'd say the problem is not Di Luca, but the rest of the peloton. Sure, it would be ideal if he had publicly admitted he broke the omerta, but if conditions are bad enough it takes nothing short of a hero to do so. I just hope we can trust the CONI not to lift the ban after negligible cooperation. I'm trying very hard to believe, really.

 

[HoustonHammer]

Did Kohl really get a lifetime ban? I saw CN wrote this recently in connection with the Metchner verdict, but I thought he got the usual two years ban, but retired cause 'it is impossible to race clean and win'?

I noticed that too, and it didn't fit with what I remembered. According to what I could find on UCI's website, Kohl got a two year ban. And yeah, he says he is 'retired'.

It's crazy how sloppy cycling journalism is sometimes. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of fact-checking. On the other hand, I guess it's the same as any other kind of journalism these days.

 

[roundabout]

Kohl would have been eligible to race from the 6th of July 2014. NADA reduced his lifetime ban to 4 years for cooperating.

 

[HoustonHammer]

Kohl would have been eligible to race from the 6th of July 2014. NADA reduced his lifetime ban to 4 years for cooperating.

OK - thanks. I just checked and saw the rest of the story, and I humbly take back what I said about sloppy reporting.

It's a pretty interesting story, and shows a big gap in interpretation of the rules between CONI and the Austrian NADA.

Obviously, we don't know what di Luca told CONI, but they figured it was good enough to reduce his ban. Kohl, on the other hand, came clean about (all of?) his doping going back to 2001, including names and methods; NADA took a totally different route, reasoning that since he had violated the rules so many times he deserved a life ban, but that because he cooperated, they could cut it to six years. It seems Kohl took the whole 'tell the truth' thing a bit too literally and was severely punished for it.

It's hard to see how they're ever going to get anywhere without one set of rules that are interpreted the same no matter what country you're in.

 

[craig1985]

According to the article on the front page, Di Luca is of the opinion that the majority of the peloton is clean:

The Italian also said that he could understand CONI anti-doping prosecutor Ettore Torri’s recent pronouncement on the widespread nature of doping. “He has always had athletes before him who had doping problems, but I’m in professional cycling since 1999 and I can say that things have changed,” claimed Di Luca. “The majority of riders are clean.”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/di-luca-says-he-did-not-name-riders-during-anti-doping-collaboration

And as far as I'm aware, it's not April 1.

 

[JPM London]

Can you blame him? He wants to come back and compete in the most important races, where he belongs. I can understand your frustration w/ CONI but Di Luca is just doing his job.

I actually don't know specifically what my frustration is about

If there's been a lot of whispers in cycling and in the Italian press that he tried to get a good deal by giving names without knowing whether they actually doped, then I perfectly understand his need to publicly say he didn't - however I'd expect a different kind of statement, like "I don't know about other riders doping, so obviously I couldn't and didn't name other riders".

Even if he does know about other riders dope and chose not to say anything, I could live with that - I understand the dilemma of the riders in that they are not the ones who's responsibility it is to police each other and are under a union that seems more concerned about media damage control than actually fighting doping. I'm not sure I'd rat in that environment even if I had been the most squeaky clean rider ever.

What I don't get is that he's able to put so conflicting sentences together in one paragraph that it makes no sense whatever: Basically stating that while he wants a clean sport and believes the sport is much cleaner than 10 years ago, he's also going to great pains to make sure the world understands that any dopers he knows about are completely safe. It's like a paedophile saying the kids are safe because he's keeping an eye on them! - makes no sense...