Francesco Redas ban reduced by CIRC?

May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
In the previous update (11.08.2014 update) of UCI's sanction list Francesco Reda was listed with a two year ban ending 20.06.2015, for having refused to submit to sample collection. On the current list (10.09.2014 update) the length of the sanction is listed as 14 months and 10 days, and he is already free to ride again as the ban ended 1 September 2014. Under sanction is listed "14 months & 10 days (UCI AdHoc Reg CIRC)"

Does this mean he has been talking to the Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) and gotten his sanction cut by 9 months and 20 days?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
good spot,
if correct, wouldn't the publication of this fact on the website constitute a violation of CIRC's confidentiality regulations?
From p. 13 of the CIRC's ADHOC regulations (and I'm having trouble deciphering it):
If the CIRC applies a Further Reduced Sanction and decides that the ADRV shall not be publicly disclosed, the CIRC’s Decision will be notified only to the LH (Articles 277 and 351-355 of the UCI ADR shall not be applicable).
p.16:
The CIRC will conduct its investigation on a strictly confidential basis and will take all procedural measures it deems necessary to guarantee such confidentiality.
The CIRC shall make it clear at the outset that the name of the LH will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with the LH’s agreement (by accepting a Reduced Sanction or a Further Reduced Sanction that does not include confidentiality).
http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/CleanSport/16/53/44/AdHocregulationCIRC2014ENG_English.PDF

edit:
ADRV = Anti-Doping Rule Violation
LH = UCI License Holder

I can't see Redas being pleased about the rest of the peloton knowing he snitched.
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
sniper said:
good spot,
if correct, wouldn't the publication of this fact on the website constitute a violation of CIRC's confidentiality regulations?
From p. 13 of the CIRC's ADHOC regulations (and I'm having trouble deciphering it):

p.16:

http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/CleanSport/16/53/44/AdHocregulationCIRC2014ENG_English.PDF

edit:
ADRV = Anti-Doping Rule Violation
LH = UCI License Holder

I can't see Redas being pleased about the rest of the peloton knowing he snitched.
Thank you for the link to the regulations. Section D on page 14 seems to be the relevant one in Reda's case.
67. The CIRC’s authority to propose Reduced Sanctions and Further Reduced Sanctions with in the meaning of the CIRC Regulations is limited to LHs who are not currently : (i) serving a period of ineligibility ; or (ii) already facing disciplinary proceedings (i.e. who have been informed of a potential ADRV) at the time of the adoption of the present CIRC Regulations.

68. On a case by case basis, the CIRC can recommend an ad hoc reduction in sanction for a LH who is: (i) currently serving a period of ineligibility; or (ii) currently facing disciplinary proceedings, along the lines of the Reduced Sanctions defined in Section IV.B if said LH provides the CIRC with particularly valuable anti-doping relevant information:

i) The reduction proposed by the CIRC is subject to the agreement of: (i) the UCI; (ii) the ADO which investigated and prosecuted the case which resulted in the period of ineligibility currently being served ; and (iii) WADA.
(ii) The identity of a LH currently serving a period of ineligibility shall be disclosed. However the CIRC will have discretion to decide whether and to what extent the identity of a LH who is currently facing disciplinary proceedings can be kept confidential. Such decision shall be accepted by: (i) the UCI; (ii) the governing body that imposed the period of ineligibility currently being served or is conducting the pending disciplinary procedure; and (iii) WADA.
CIRC isn't supposed to give reduced santions in cases like Reda's, but they can still do it, if the rider provides particularly valuable anti-doping relevant information.

Reda claims CIRC reduced the sanction because it was unjust. Ergo a complaint about the unjustice of getting a doping sanction for a missed urine test is regarded as "particularly valuable anti-doping relevant information" or Reda must have been talking to CIRC about something else.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
DirtyWorks said:
Thank you for tracking that.

I'm putting the probability on Armstrong's ban being reduced as 90%. That is, unless the IOC says "no."
Armstrong has stated he is 'talking' to the CIRC........it doesn't give me much confidence that CIRC is credible.
 
sniper said:
If the CIRC applies a Further Reduced Sanction and decides that the ADRV shall not be publicly disclosed, the CIRC’s Decision will be notified only to the LH (Articles 277 and 351-355 of the UCI ADR shall not be applicable).
The word and is kind of important in that sentence. They can give secret sanctions, they don't have to.
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
Did the journalists get hold of Savio on the rest day to ask him about that stuff in the CIRC report?

"It also appears that team organised doping is more likely still to take place at lower levels of competition, where anti-doping efforts are less concentrated. The Commission was told of a team below the UCI WorldTour recently involved in doping. It was claimed that the team manager and sports director brought a nutritionist into the team who advised a selected group of riders within the team on a doping programme. The instructions were to administer 1000 ml of EPO Zeta every second day after 11pm at night, and alternate in the winter with HGH and Lutrelef, a hormone. Their haematocrit levels were to be tested every third day, and amounts of EPO Zeta reduced to 500 ml as the season approached. The nutritionist owned a gym, through which substances were procured from Eastern Europe. Other riders were said to have procured substances via a hospital and a pharmacy more locally. It was further explained that the team manager was also a senior person in a prominent anti-doping movement, and had later on introduced strong antidoping clauses in the team contracts, including the imposition of significant fines for anyone caught doping."
 
Re:

neineinei said:
Did the journalists get hold of Savio on the rest day to ask him about that stuff in the CIRC report?

"It also appears that team organised doping is more likely still to take place at lower levels of competition, where anti-doping efforts are less concentrated. The Commission was told of a team below the UCI WorldTour recently involved in doping. It was claimed that the team manager and sports director brought a nutritionist into the team who advised a selected group of riders within the team on a doping programme. The instructions were to administer 1000 ml of EPO Zeta every second day after 11pm at night, and alternate in the winter with HGH and Lutrelef, a hormone. Their haematocrit levels were to be tested every third day, and amounts of EPO Zeta reduced to 500 ml as the season approached. The nutritionist owned a gym, through which substances were procured from Eastern Europe. Other riders were said to have procured substances via a hospital and a pharmacy more locally. It was further explained that the team manager was also a senior person in a prominent anti-doping movement, and had later on introduced strong antidoping clauses in the team contracts, including the imposition of significant fines for anyone caught doping."
Based on those facts it can only be Savio or Sanquer
 
Sep 13, 2010
297
0
9,030
Reda statement:

https://www.facebook.com/teamidea2010/posts/854906844583025

A special post from Francesco Reda on his experience at the ‪#‎anpostras‬ ‪#‎ras‬ and other.

Dear friends,
I do not want to dwell a lot and I will try with these lines to be lucid and putting on fire as the second leg of the tour of Ireland, and not only.
I loved this sport since little because it was a sport true and made by people who looked at each other in the face and they wanted from loyally to face open.
That world of cycling today I hesitate to find him again in a context where anyone can afford to insult me publicly, to give me the liar, the doped, of the scammer attached to the car, in fact using the affair of the failure to control to create the monster between baro of doping and baro Of the trawl.
I do not want to go back to defend myself from the charge on the failure to control, failure to control only of urine (because the blood that I took me instead), As the controllers showed up late to a few minutes from the departure of GP Camaiore, for a check out competition, after that I had already carried it out.
I have provided all the documentation to the authorities judgmental sports and my arguments have not been discarded, so much so that my suspension was adjourned.
I know what I have done really wrong in my work, as well as all the men in them, but I certainly cannot accept for my personal dignity to be considered a "cheater", A Baro, like the pillory on social is judging me.
For what has happened to the tour of Ireland:
I suffered a blowout to little more than 10 miles from the finish line as other comrades and other members of the group. Fortunately, there has been a place immediately at my side a generous teammate like David Viganò That I spent the wheel, wheel that we unfortunately mounted too much of a hurry. I took a left and right away I have warned you problems because the wheel was braking. At that point I assisted the flagship from where the mechanic has tried to widen the Grip of the brakes.
I had to do the next hill with a relationship impossible.
None of the jury has intervened in the race as of Norma to discern a my eventual infringement, that was supposed to be noticed by people along the way and by many colleagues and employees who were present at that stage.
With the blowout, and the accident mechanic I would have lost the shirt if anything, but I would have stayed second in the charts.
Get a tow was insane and, let me also, illogical, saw the advantage on the third in the charts.
I managed to get back on the head of the race, as well as viganó that has arrived even third, while I crossed the finish line in sixth position.
Just at the time of the awards ceremony, I discovered that the jury, on the basis of the testimony of a subject better not specified, I had ousted from the order of arrival and the race.
The witness would have declared that I would have stayed hooked the flagship for a mile.
It is absolutely not true and I are backed up for about 200 meters to fix the wheel and the brakes to the better.
You can understand the anger that he caught me for this decision absolutely absurd. I have toiled atrattenere the rash. I am a cyclist professional, but I am a man too. Many if I have forgotten what it means to this. I am sick of humiliation.
I apologise to the passionate Irish for a tweet wrote in an English unlikely, that then I was told to have a different meaning from what I wanted to express. I fell the world on me for the second time, and once again I am found to butt heads with a wall of gum where the burden of proof was reversed.
My only disappointment in that tweet merch was for the jury and for this witness mysterious stayed anonymous, to which I wish only to suffer in the course of his life a decision unjust as the one he did suffer today to me.
As always in the past, I respect the decisions of the jury, but now it is for me, we must ask ourselves if we can be driven on the basis of a testimony of a third not pointed out, I have not been able to compare. I wonder why all of this, as I wondered at his time because I was accused of a lack of control and a willingness to jump a test, when I gave every availability for the blood test, while for that of urine was unable to have already carried it out A few minutes away from a race, with the controller that showed up late.
The word of us cyclists now does not count anything. We have our responsibilities as category, There is no doubt, but so our profession is at the mercy of the imponderable and the indiscretions of a stranger.
None of my colleagues with whom I have shared a thousand battles never believe that Francesco Reda needs a trawl to win a race. All those who know me know that it is one thing that does not belong to me. I can try to exploit a trail, as we all do in particular after a blowout, but make me tow no, just no.
I put a question to the jury: because none of them he followed me after the blowout? Is it normal that a leader holes and that the jury does not pay attention to an event so important? If I had followed them and checked they could not have therefore reject me, simply because I have done what they do all my colleagues when forano or have an accident mechanic.
Thanks to the affirmation of a mysterious witness they instead could therefore reject me.
A single message I finally to all those who on the various social, strong of the courage of the anonymity or from heroes of integrity of the keyboard, they are attacking me with insults or crackpot allegations of doping and sports disloyalty: I hope not to live never what you're Doing pass to me.
Now I want to stay calm and look in the eyes of the people who know me and they want me well, primarily my son that I want to grow up proud and knowing that dad is not a "cheater". I fell so many times on the bike and I have always gotten back up. They made me fall so many times and I am always spread.
I'll do it this time too, and with your head held high.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS