Ferrari:There's No Evidence I Doped

Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
So no evidence vs LA, and the Italian(s) pinged get 3 months - essentially a slap on the wrist. And not for doping. Just for being associated.

What about all the image rights management - is that all dealt with now? Astana et al?

Padua is a 2 year investigation and that's it? Scarponi gets 3 months?

If Ferrari can refute all that testimony from USADA so easily, it looks to me like not much more can come of it, surely?
 

airstream

BANNED
Mar 29, 2011
5,123
0
0
it's high time to put into practice some kinda video detectors or devices of remote surveillance. i don't see any other solutions. Until it happens, these morons are entitled to say 'no positives, no evidence, what could you accuse me of ah??'
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
del1962 said:
Ferrari says he is considering taking legal action against USADA in the US.

I won't be holding my breath
He has foregone any prospective claim against USADA by passing on arbitration.

UCI/WADA rules made it clear and unambiguous that a non licensed person involved in the preparation and support of a licensed rider is subject to the rules as a licensed person (UCI Rule 18).

If Armstrong with his battery of high powered lawyers could not fault the USADA process then Ferrari is just p.ss.ng in the wind.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Well, going with the topic title, I'd have to agree that there's no evidence Ferrari ever took any of the doping products he administered to his clients--I mean, he's an intelligent guy, no way he's gonna start injecting any of that poison into his own system.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Wallace said:
Well, going with the topic title, I'd have to agree that there's no evidence Ferrari ever took any of the doping products he administered to his clients--I mean, he's an intelligent guy, no way he's gonna start injecting any of that poison into his own system.
:D

10chars
 
Wallace said:
Well, going with the topic title, I'd have to agree that there's no evidence Ferrari ever took any of the doping products he administered to his clients--I mean, he's an intelligent guy, no way he's gonna start injecting any of that poison into his own system.
He certainly never tested positive or if he did it was swept under the carpet.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Ferrari would probably pass even the polygraph test if allowed to choose carefully his claims.

1. "I've never seen any doping practice from LA" - truth - sure, it's enough that he looked elsewher when LA took something

2. "He (LA) never asked me informations or... about doping" - truth - LA did not need to ask, MF just told him what to do
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
I don't remember where LA got his EPO from - was it detailed in Tyler's book? I seem to remember another doctor mentioned for Tyler's supplier, but was it ever mentioned who supplied LA?
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
doperhopper said:
Ferrari would probably pass even the polygraph test if allowed to choose carefully his claims.

1. "I've never seen any doping practice from LA" - truth - sure, it's enough that he looked elsewher when LA took something

2. "He (LA) never asked me informations or... about doping" - truth - LA did not need to ask, MF just told him what to do
In the interview he does not appear to be trying to pick legal nits, or carefully choosing words as suggested above.

He says several times in a variety of ways "nothing to do with doping"

He also says they are considering US legal action against USADA which could prove interesting if it is happens and is more than an empty threat.

I do not know whether doctors who attach to riding teams have UCI "approval" or enter into an agreement with UCI or other federations? , I have not heard of such agreements. The "teeth" that USADA have over riders stems from their license agreements with federations and carries the obligation to use arbitration and USADA process.

If Ferrari has no cycling "license" he is free to use the US courts to attack USADA using all available legislation such as defamation, restraint of trade etc etc. which will demand normal evidential standards.

It is not the first time an athlete has gone against federations in open court - years ago Butch Reynolds took the US federation all the way to supreme court and won. In cycling Heras has done so and won in spain.

It will make for interesting times if Ferrari does it.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
0
0
mountainrman said:
In the interview he does not appear to be trying to pick legal nits, or carefully choosing words as suggested above.

He says several times in a variety of ways "nothing to do with doping"

He also says they are considering US legal action against USADA which could prove interesting if it is happens and is more than an empty threat.

I do not know whether doctors who attach to riding teams have UCI "approval" or enter into an agreement with UCI or other federations? , I have not heard of such agreements. The "teeth" that USADA have over riders stems from their license agreements with federations and carries the obligation to use arbitration and USADA process.

If Ferrari has no cycling "license" he is free to use the US courts to attack USADA using all available legislation such as defamation, restraint of trade etc etc. which will demand normal evidential standards.

It is not the first time an athlete has gone against federations in open court - years ago Butch Reynolds took the US federation all the way to supreme court and won. In cycling Heras has done so and won in spain.

It will make for interesting times if Ferrari does it.
Once again...blah,blah,blah...let's ignore the WADA code:rolleyes:
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
spetsa said:
Once again...blah,blah,blah...let's ignore the WADA code:rolleyes:
I am simply reporting what Ferrari said. Suggest you listen to the interview which includes mention of court action against USADA

Nothing to do with " WADA code"
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
0
0
mountainrman said:
I am simply reporting what Ferrari said. Suggest you listen to the interview which includes mention of court action against USADA

Nothing to do with " WADA code"
USADA is on firm ground with their decision. If he was doing anything other than talking crap, he would be talking about suing the riders that named him. Good luck with that.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
mountainrman said:
I am simply reporting what Ferrari said. Suggest you listen to the interview which includes mention of court action against USADA

Nothing to do with " WADA code"
But he has been rightfully sanctioned under the WADA Code. Suggest you refer to your oft quoted jurist, Judge Sam Sparks. It's too late for alternatives. Ferrari's only opportunity was to go to arbitration.

You attempt to show more familiarity with US law than your native UK law. Odd.
 
Oct 14, 2012
63
0
0
MRM is just reporting what Ferrari said. I agree it would be interesting if Ferrari could get a US case going. And I am not any too confident in legal opinions on matters of US law rendered on an international bicycle forum, by readers who have not actually reviewed actual case files, legal precedents, nor interviewed the potential plaintiffs.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
0
0
mountainrman said:
I do not know whether doctors who attach to riding teams have UCI "approval" or enter into an agreement with UCI or other federations? , I have not heard of such agreements. The "teeth" that USADA have over riders stems from their license agreements with federations and carries the obligation to use arbitration and USADA process.

If Ferrari has no cycling "license" he is free to use the US courts to attack USADA using all available legislation such as defamation, restraint of trade etc etc. which will demand normal evidential standards.

It is not the first time an athlete has gone against federations in open court - years ago Butch Reynolds took the US federation all the way to supreme court and won. In cycling Heras has done so and won in spain.

It will make for interesting times if Ferrari does it.
howsteepisit said:
MRM is just reporting what Ferrari said. I agree it would be interesting if Ferrari could get a US case going. And I am not any too confident in legal opinions on matters of US law rendered on an international bicycle forum, by readers who have not actually reviewed actual case files, legal precedents, nor interviewed the potential plaintiffs.
Ah yes, YOU were just repeating what the good doctor said in the interview.:rolleyes:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY