Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral, Dr. Michele Ferrari and Jose “Pepe” Martí life bans

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
ManInFull said:
I *believe* that cyclists were previously recommended to not work with Ferrari, but Lance and others did it even though Ferrari had a reputation for incorporating drugs into a cyclist's training regimen.
This was an Italian only mandate by CONI not WADA/UCI.
 
ManInFull said:
I *believe* that cyclists were previously recommended to not work with Ferrari, but Lance and others did it even though Ferrari had a reputation for incorporating drugs into a cyclist's training regimen.
The bolded section should read 'because'
 
Mar 10, 2009
341
0
0
what we need to know now is did Ferrari , Marti etc confess and admit it all or just say they can't be bothered charge me.

Have they actually given any info over to USADA, this is stuff we still don't know yet
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
LaFlorecita said:
I hope that doesn't happen.
I understand why. But... clearly you have to be very concerned with AC's connection to Marti?

I feel your pain, but it does not look like AC is pure as the driven snow.
 
May 12, 2010
1,998
0
0
sherer said:
what we need to know now is did Ferrari , Marti etc confess and admit it all or just say they can't be bothered charge me.

Have they actually given any info over to USADA, this is stuff we still don't know yet
Why would they? It looks like they knew they were going to get a lifetime ban, and didn't bother to fight it. They aren't going to help the USADA is some never before seen desire for a clean sport.
 
Cimacoppi49 said:
Banking records showing that Armstrong used Ferrari's services while the doc was banned will be introduced at an arbitration hearing.
The Ferrari ban may be especially significant for the case against LA, because it could be an argument for extending the SOL. If it can indeed be established that LA was working with Ferrari within as well as beyond the eight years limitation, then as I understand it, the limitation would no longer apply. Then questions about whether the Hellebuyck decision could apply would be moot, as well as using the SCA testimony. USADA might not even need testimony of ex-teammates, most of which probably falls outside the eight year period.

If the SOL extension were still iffy, then I can see LA making a deal. If he and his lawyers really believe he has no chance to win at arbitration, they would have nothing to lose by trying to make a deal that would save some of his palmares and maybe limit his current ban from Tris. The only downside of a deal for him in those circumstances that I can see is that it would force him to accept USADA’s verdict, not simply legally but psychologically, so to speak. IOW, he could not call them a kangaroo court whose decisions are a joke. To do that, you really have to ignore them completely, or as they are doing now, try to attack them through the federal courts.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
LaFlorecita said:
I'm not very concerned.
IMO the big concern for AC would be if Marti or Bruyneel start talking to protect their own skin, a deal of some kind for eg. Or if Armstrong decides that if he's going down he's going to take others down with him, ie he may just pull a Landis of his own, either out of spite or to try to show that everyone was doping and not just him, and AC I would assume would be a prime target. Now I don't think it'll actually come to all that, but in a worst-case scenario I could potentially see this getting very messy for a whole lot of people, including AC.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
VeloCity said:
IMO the big concern for AC would be if Marti or Bruyneel start talking to protect their own skin, a deal of some kind for eg. Or if Armstrong decides that if he's going down he's going to take others down with him, ie he may just pull a Landis of his own, either out of spite or to try to show that everyone was doping and not just him, and AC I would assume would be a prime target. Now I don't think it'll actually come to all that, but in a worst-case scenario I could potentially see this getting very messy for a whole lot of people, including AC.
But what LA does (/did), AC can do just as good or even better.
This includes not only riding up a mountain, but also lying like a sack of **** for years and years and keeping the fans for fools.
 

snackattack

BANNED
Mar 20, 2012
581
0
0
Merckx index said:
To do that, you really have to ignore them completely, or as they are doing now, try to attack them through the federal courts.
That's axactly what's going to happen and beyond, LA holds the axe all the rest is kangeroo.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
screaming fist said:
They're banned from any olympic sport and any sport whose federations are signatory to the WADA code.
Yet no one can prevent them from "practicing medicine", and if some of their patients happen to be cyclists who live 5,000 miles away, so be it, right?
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
sniper said:
But what LA does (/did), AC can do just as good or even better.
This includes not only riding up a mountain, but also lying like a sack of **** for years and years and keeping the fans for fools.
Yes. Sadley, it seems to be working in this very forum :(
 
May 25, 2009
332
0
0
football

henryg said:
No they have banned the doctors and coaches from acting as doctors and coaches or working in any other capacity in any WADA signatory sport. It also means there would be sanctions for any athlete that uses their services.

These doctors make millions developing doping programs so if it can be effectively enforced its a big monetary loss.

They'll still have Football to make $ - There's no state andi-doping authority will b---ls that big to stop, say a Spanish Doctor from helping Spain win the World Cup**...


**hypothetical example ;)
 
Jul 3, 2012
682
0
0
BotanyBay said:
Yet no one can prevent them from "practicing medicine", and if some of their patients happen to be cyclists who live 5,000 miles away, so be it, right?
Well, yes and no. Obviously the USADA can't prohibit them from practicing medicine.

But (and someone can correct me if I'm wrong), I'm sure there are provisions which prohibit athlete contact with banned individuals. Regardless, they'd be well within the scope of their powers to promulgate a rule imposing sanctions for cyclists who are shown to be in contact with the banned individuals after the bans were handed down.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
oldschoolnik said:
They'll still have Football to make $ - There's no state andi-doping authority will b---ls that big to stop, say a Spanish Doctor from helping Spain win the World Cup**...


**hypothetical example ;)
I just looked up Pedro Celaya. In fact he's from Bilbao.
In this conference from 2004, he talked alongside an Athletic Bilbao team doctor, indeed, a certain Sabino Padilla, on the effect of steroids on athletes' sexual performance, or something of that kind:

9:00h-12:30h • ANTICONCEPCIÓN Y SEXUALIDAD EN EL DEPORTE DE ÉLITE • Sala A1
Presidente: Dr. Domingo Álvarez. Santander
Moderador: Dr. Iñaki Lete. Vitoria
9:00h Fisiología Deportiva: acción de las hormonas esteroideas
Dr. Sabino Padilla. Athletic Club. Bilbao
Dr. Pedro Celaya. U.S. Postal. Elorrio

10:00h La visión de la Administración Deportiva en el control de las hormonas esteroideas:
D. José Ramón Lete. Santiago de Compostela
10:30h Pausa-Café
11:00h • Cara a cara en mesa redonda:
¿Son compatibles sexo, anticoncepción y deporte de élite?
Con la participación de diversos deportistas de élite en ciclismo, atletismo, etc...

(from a word document that you find in google with the key words "pedro celaya" athletic bilbao, the third link that appears)
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Warhawk said:
Well, yes and no. Obviously the USADA can't prohibit them from practicing medicine.

But (and someone can correct me if I'm wrong), I'm sure there are provisions which prohibit athlete contact with banned individuals. Regardless, they'd be well within the scope of their powers to promulgate a rule imposing sanctions for cyclists who are shown to be in contact with the banned individuals after the bans were handed down.
So in Ferarri's case, Italian riders have been punished for consulting with him. What about American riders? Is that within the rules?

Lance was seeing him as recently as 2009 (probably even more recent than that).
 
Will a decision be issued that outlines the evidence and justification for a lifetime ban? If not then I think this probably helps Armstrong and Bruyneel. They do not want detailed info about these three to be made public. It makes it easier for riders like Hincapie and Leipheimer to decide not to testify.
 
VeloCity said:
IMO the big concern for AC would be if Marti or Bruyneel start talking to protect their own skin, a deal of some kind for eg. Or if Armstrong decides that if he's going down he's going to take others down with him, ie he may just pull a Landis of his own, either out of spite or to try to show that everyone was doping and not just him, and AC I would assume would be a prime target. Now I don't think it'll actually come to all that, but in a worst-case scenario I could potentially see this getting very messy for a whole lot of people, including AC.
Yeah it could happen... I hope it doesn't but it is possible.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY