End of McQuaid?

Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
henryg said:
As the USADA letter implicates the UCI in covering up evidence of doping will this finally bring about change at the top? Are McQuaid and company toast?

USADA case against Armstrong could damage UCI, Ashenden says
He's only got another 15 months in this term so he'll probably serve that out. But hopefully this will finally break the 20 year stranglehold him and Hein have had on the UCI. I won't believe it until it happens though, Hein is a crafty bas tard.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
I don't remember reading it specifically but they do elude to it or one can only conclude based on the witnesses testimony. If it goes through some splaining to be done! Will this be UCI's last year till the new Cycling Group takes over? Maybe Johnny V is busy coming up with the new league now, hopefully he won't be at the top of it, we need a more independent group at the top of it, sure team/rider representatives but not outright leading it deciding what is done or how.
 
May 20, 2010
718
0
0
While I hope Hein and McQuaid bite the dust of even greater long term import is the complete reorganisation of the admin.

Important to:

remove crony-ism
establish transparency
ensure peak body (be that a new organisation or current UCI) is regulation only
ensure that drug testing responsibilities lie with a separate, totally independent organisation/s
ensure greater variety of stakeholders have direct input into senior administration

That's a start.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
He won't quit until the lawsuit against Floyd is adjudicated.
 
You've got Hein setting strategy and the IOC not interested in actually reigning in doping. McQuaid stays or goes, nothing changes. The IOC is filled with classy folks *just* like McQuaid and Verbruggen, so I don't think they will tell Hein to clean it up. Worst case scenario, they add some rules that are somehow optional for some blessed riders.

J.A. Tri's post is a good start. Let WADA handle the anti-doping and the UCI becomes rider advocate. There would be quite a few positives for a while though....

One of the things lost in this story is there are now at least three confirmed suppressed positives.
-Contador's failed cover up.
-Armstrong 2010 samples. I'm assuming the blood profiles tell all.
-Armstrong TdS positive.

No one is asking the question, "How many more suppressed positives are there? How can we be sure?" It's as if the UCI goes invisible when in fact they are part of the problem.
 
It will be interesting to see what the UCI will do. After chasing down Ullrich all the way to CAS and doing their thing with Contador they should follow some form of precedence. If USADA sanction Armstrong will the UCI follow through on it? The entire issue will raise some questions of the UCI but I don’t think it will amount to much. They really only answer to themselves.

The passport program may come under fire for leaving the door open on Armstrong but it’s so easy to explain why you didn’t chose to investigate someone. It’s too complex for the general public to understand a passport case.

Where McQuaid may fall down a little is when the Landis revelation came out he maintained there was no cover up on the positive in 2001 etc. He ever went so far to sue Landis (although he didn’t really). They also made claims that the federations would open investigations into allegations which never occurred. The donation may also come under fire. But like I said they really only answer to themselves so I can’t see where they will come under or have McQuaid removed. They’ll just spin their wheels for a while and all will be forgotten.
 
thehog said:
It will be interesting to see what the UCI will do. After chasing down Ullrich all the way to CAS and doing their thing with Contador they should follow some form of precedence.
If only! This has been observed and discussed repeatedly. Some riders they follow to the ends of the earth for years, other riders practically Scot free with little rhyme or reason.

thehog said:
If USADA sanction Armstrong will the UCI follow through on it? The entire issue will raise some questions of the UCI but I don’t think it will amount to much. They really only answer to themselves.
+1 This is one of the factors that can take the impact out of this round of wrangling.

Regarding Makarov, the case will likely be around long enough for it to be an issue for the next UCI leader. You still have Hein running the show, so even if Makarov is President, Hein will tell him to keep his hands off Wonderboy. At least that's what it seems like from way out here in the cheap seats.
 
McQuaid both pointed to the victory of Ryder Hesjedal at the Giro d’Italia last month as a sign of cycling’s new times. The Canadian rides for Garmin-Barracuda team, which has been vocal in its opposition to doping.

Pointing to other clues, McQuaid noted that former track racer Geraint Thomas of Britain kept up with the pack and finished the “very, very difficult Giro ... that wouldn’t have happened” if doping was widespread in the pack.

And in the not-so-distant days of more widespread doping, a team leader would have six or seven teammates beside him on a tough mountain climb, but rarely anymore, McQuaid said.

“Little signs like this: When you add them all together you see that there’s a change in the behavior of the athletes, and it’s a change for the good,” he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/as-tour-de-france-looms-cyclings-fight-against-doping-advances-bit-by-bit/2012/06/26/gJQAuYeL4V_story.html
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
DirtyWorks said:
One of the things lost in this story is there are now at least three confirmed suppressed positives.
-Contador's failed cover up.
-Armstrong 2010 samples. I'm assuming the blood profiles tell all.
-Armstrong TdS positive.

No one is asking the question, "How many more suppressed positives are there? How can we be sure?" It's as if the UCI goes invisible when in fact they are part of the problem.
Well, what ever happened to this one: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/french-agency-targets-astana-for-illegal-transfusion-kit

I have to wonder if some of the "evidence of blood manipulation" happens to be a blood bag with Big Tex' DNA? Regardless, what about the DNA of the other 6 riders? Looks like Levi gets a pass since he crashed out prior to his top-up, but what about the other guys?
 
131313 said:
Well, what ever happened to this one: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/french-agency-targets-astana-for-illegal-transfusion-kit

I have to wonder if some of the "evidence of blood manipulation" happens to be a blood bag with Big Tex' DNA? Regardless, what about the DNA of the other 6 riders? Looks like Levi gets a pass since he crashed out prior to his top-up, but what about the other guys?
Be interesting if this was handed over when USADA took their European vacation with Novi.... time will tell I assume.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
McQuaid was the equiv of UCI's Medvedev to Putin. A puppet installed by Hein V.

But Pat failed to earn his own button as a made man with the IOC, so it will be interesting to see if he can manage to install a puppet of his own to take his place (not that he needs one now).

The UCI is a rigged racket. Anyone who believes that some kind of democracy is involved in the process is foolish.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
131313 said:
Well, what ever happened to this one: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/french-agency-targets-astana-for-illegal-transfusion-kit

I have to wonder if some of the "evidence of blood manipulation" happens to be a blood bag with Big Tex' DNA? Regardless, what about the DNA of the other 6 riders? Looks like Levi gets a pass since he crashed out prior to his top-up, but what about the other guys?
thanks for reminding us of this story.
it's just baffling, amazing and disturbing to see how things get/got shoved under the carpet. Just look at this (from the CN article):

The newspaper also claims that DNA testing on the seized Astana team's material revealed the presence of seven unique DNA fingerprints, but linking the evidence to individual riders would rely upon the UCI sharing its blood profile data with the French authorities.

Such cooperation is complicated by a conflict between the UCI and the French anti-doping authority AFLD over testing at this year's Tour de France. The AFLD lodged repeated complaints this summer that the Astana team had been given preferential treatment by the UCI during the Tour de France, charging that riders were allowed to delay giving their samples by nearly an hour. The team denied holding up the proceedings, stating that the testers arrived earlier than expected and waited voluntarily.
I assume it's the complete lack of any democratic structure within UCI (or cycling as a whole) that allows/have allowed McQuaid and Bruyneel to get away with this kind of stuff.

Let's hope this gets sorted out retrospectively.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS