French doping agency forwards report on Armstrong...what's this about?

Mar 10, 2009
182
0
0
News out of no news? Are the French "authorities" still dealing with their false pride?



PARIS (AP)?France?s anti-doping agency has sent a report on Lance Armstrong?s recent test to international sports authorities.

The report from March 17 was forwarded to cycling?s governing body and the World Anti-Doping Agency.

The French agency said it will decide to investigate once it hears from the cycling body. The international cycling group, however, told The Associated Press on Monday it doesn?t have jurisdiction in this matter.

Armstrong was tested in southern France, where he was training as part of his comeback in a bid to win an eighth Tour de France.

He was was asked to provide a hair sample. Testing of hair is allowed under French law but is not recognized by WADA or by the world cycling group.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
so basically they have now tested the hair they took on the 16th or 17th of march and have now forwarded the results...

why are they bothering to publicise they are posting some results unless its just another opportunity for the french to show there muscles..
it all makes no sense.. hair tests are inadmissable, can be too easily contaminated and are used purely as guidance for future target testing.. if there was something amiss and lance was going to be target tested as a result surely it would be common sense to keep the fact they had forwarded the results secret...

whatever your whys and wherefores over lance, whatever your opinion on doping, the french do like making a good old mountain out of a 4th catagory climb when the opportunity presents itself..

when there is actually some news can someone wake me up.. :D

edit: one of the reasons for hair testing is to look for DHEA.. apparantly in tests done recently on french sportsman something like 20% of then where using it, it boosts testosterone levels, is banned, but undetectable in blood or urine tests.... so if its undetecable in tests, except hair, but hair tests are unenforcable due to possibility of external contamination the only way the french authorities can do anything is to create rumour and suspicion..

i dont agree with doping, and am all for bans for those that dope, but the french do seem to have a completely cack handed way of approaching things..
 
Apr 7, 2009
176
0
0
I find it hard to believe that Lance would have acted like an idiot during a drug test. I could see him being a little upset though. I doubt that any other riders have been 'randomly' tested 24 times since October.

Lance also had to know that he was going to be targeted if he came back so I'd find it hard to believe that even he'd have the guts to try to beat the system.

What isn't surprising is that the 'revealed' test was a test done by AFLD and 'leaked' by LeQuipe...imagine that. Here we go again!

Although, no updates on Twitter today...hmm....
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
So is transparency being viewed through a iron window?

I don't dope so they could take hair, urine, blood, fingernail samples, poop, heck anything if needed, that is transparency. Just nothing invasive.

Anything else is non-transparent.
 
It shows how muzzled the press have become, not to mention the forums.
There would be a lot more info in the open on this, were it not for the fact that all the posters who mention the "D" word, in association with Lance, in a negative manner, have been banned.

How y'all's French?
http://autres-sports.le10sport.com/une-affaire-armstrong-_201865_a

Seems Mr A allegedly signed the consent form, then shut the door in on the testers......only to re-open it, some 30 minutes later.

Here's their alternative view of things:-
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=4047481

Now, I wonder why he need half an hour to himself? Why would he suddenly need to dive in the shower, because some French people had arrived? :rolleyes:
Must have been to twitter the world the news, as it seems to be the main source of all things Lance these days.
Even this site is using it as it's basis for reporting, which is worrying, to say the least.

Now play the last post....
 
Totally agree with byrd.

Regardless of how much of a j******, one might have thought LA was/is, he must have completed the "doping for dummies" book to be that stupid as to do anything irregular after his return to pro cycling.

I thought The States was the "Capital of conspiracy theories", but I guess France is a close second...

I acknowledge that there's a need to be caution towards potential dopers, but this is like my famous countryman stated: "One Little Feather Can Easily Grow Into Five Hens"...... Let's all calm down if nothing else shows up.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
Kazistuta said:
Totally agree with byrd.

Regardless of how much of a j******, one might have thought LA was/is, he must have completed the "doping for dummies" book to be that stupid as to do anything irregular after his return to pro cycling.

I thought The States was the "Capital of conspiracy theories", but I guess France is a close second...

I acknowledge that there's a need to be caution towards potential dopers, but this is like my famous countryman stated: "One Little Feather Can Easily Grow Into Five Hens"...... Let's all calm down if nothing else shows up.
Actually I think the report is not about anything found in Armstrong's hair. It is about Armstrong avoiding a test for a half an hour by shutting the door on the testers. That half hour can be used for masking dope, and the athlete should be chaperoned after being informed of a test. It sounds like Armstrong had something to hide.
 
Mar 11, 2009
165
0
0
Yes, the question is not the hair sample, it's the potential duck and weave move.

The latest is that Bruyneel says some people were seen hanging around outside the house in recent days and so when the tester arrived, Bruyneel called the UCI to find out if the tester was for real.

Odd, since the tester is from the AFLD, not UCI and is required to present identity and credentials, which he did. Both Armstrong and Bruyneel must know you can't leave the sight of the tester once they've arrived and that if this happens, it's a potential infringement.

Still, until the AFLD reviews the report and issues its conclusions, I suppose everyone else will have to wait.
 
Mar 10, 2009
11
0
0
What's in the hair can't be masked..AFAIK

What ever is in the hair can not be masked like a urine or blood sample. Maybe LA went to "dye" his hair YELLOW! ;-)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BroDeal said:
Yeah, they try to catch people. It's crazy.
well trying to catch people with tests they know are inadmissible to the uci etc.. so pointless

from that article

"Bruyneel said he called UCI chief Pat McQuaid to make sure the AFLD had the authority to test Armstrong out of competition. He said McQuaid transferred him to UCI anti-doping policy manager Anne Gripper, who confirmed the request was valid. (Gripper could not be immediately reached for comment by ESPN.com.) "I was on the phone for maybe 10, 12, 15 minutes," Bruyneel said. "Lance took a shower and put on shorts and a T-shirt, and then he gave the samples, which took about an hour and a half."


Under AFLD rules, and those of the World Anti-Doping Agency, testers must keep athletes in sight from the time they are notified of a test until the time samples are collected. Bruyneel said that the tester, who was waiting outside, could not see Armstrong the entire time, but also did not ask to come in or at any time tell Bruyneel that he had to stay with Armstrong. "There was never any feeling of tension, of 'I have to get in,'" Bruyneel said. "It was always a very friendly conversation."


so.. bruyneel should not have let lance shower and change while he was on the phone, but by the same token the tester should not have stood outside chatting i wonder if the testers animated phone call to his boss was more "shouldnt i be with him when he showers" and his boss says "no.. leave him to it, cos then we can announce he deliberately tried to avoid the test.."

if youre going to test people, great, but if your going to do it do it properly and dont leave any room for suspicion or interpretation.. i want the cheats out, and want them caught, but how are we to have faith in a system where a tester willingly allows someone to take a ruddy shower.. obviously that gives lance the option to try and mask something, but if the system is that crap obviously it also gives opportunity at the other end for tampering etc...

test.. yes! chuck cheats out of cycling yes! but with something like this all it does it make lance look like a cheat, and the testers look like something out of a peter sellers movie.. ive got pictures of a bumbling clouseau style tester who drops vials of urine on the train and gets them all muddled up putting them back in his breifcase...
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
If you believe Bruyneel's version. Obviously it was a big enough deal for the AFLD to make a report on it. Even if the UCI can't do anything the AFLD can keep him out of the Tour De France if he is positive.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mellow Velo said:
There would be a lot more info in the open on
this, were it not for the fact that all the posters who mention the "D" word, in association with Lance, in a negative manner, have been banned.
have they been banned... opinion on this, im a lance fan, but i am open to intelligent conversation on doping, testing procedures etc, and if its proved hes cheated then im all in favour of banning him.. im guessing the ones who where banned where the ones who derailed with for instance in a thread like this just saying "there.. hes a cheat.. a fraud.. drugged up junkie" and considering that that is an intelligent, rational argument..

as far as the recent test goes, i dont know if there is a rule to cover having a shower while i non uci tester waits to cut your hair.. :? if so, he could be in hot water so to speak.. :D
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Epicycle said:
If you believe Bruyneel's version. Obviously it was a big enough deal for the AFLD to make a report on it. Even if the UCI can't do anything the AFLD can keep him out of the Tour De France if he is positive.
well they havnt banned anyone from this years tour yet, so it makes sense.. :D damn.. weve booked our hotel, so the wife can have her first chance to see lance up close n personal so to speak.... wonder if its covered on our travel insurance if hes banned...

personally im finding most of the federations and the uci completely unfathomable.. the french seem fairly bungling unless its lance, or someone they think may have doped in the giro so they can make the italians look stupid.. the italian authorities seem happy to turn a blind eye, unless they can catch a spaniard, and the spanish dont seem to know there arses from there elbows.. the uci's biological passport program seems to just be mentioned every other week when they announce they are "investigating irrelularities" but nothing seems to come of it..

how difficult can in be to just test people, find drugs, and ban em.. :D
 
Mar 13, 2009
66
0
0
I'm sure if we give Johan the ol' look 'em in the eyes test then we'll know they've got nothing to hide.












Yeah right.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
as i say, if the testers where more competant and could do there job properly, and the teams and riders showed a bit more common sense when the testers where around, we wouldnt need to have speculation and these conversations, it would all be cut and dried..
 
Mar 13, 2009
683
0
0
The only person I trust less than LA is JB. I'll take his version of the story with 5kg of salt. A call to his friends at the UCI can't get him out of every black spot.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
dimspace said:
have they been banned... opinion on this, im a lance fan, but i am open to intelligent conversation on doping, testing procedures etc, and if its proved hes cheated then im all in favour of banning him.. im guessing the ones who where banned where the ones who derailed with for instance in a thread like this just saying "there.. hes a cheat.. a fraud.. drugged up junkie" and considering that that is an intelligent, rational argument..
Nope. A bunch of people have disappeared. I have been IP banned from my usual IP address. I know of another person who suffered the same fate. I tried using the "contact us" that is on the ban page three times but only managed to get one response. They said the woud look into the problem, but so far nothing. I think there may be a whole bunch of people who have suffered the same fate.

I honestly cannot think of anything I posted here to get me banned.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
oh..... :?

im all in favour of banning trolls, but people who are making sensible intelligent posts, thats just daft...

maybe you failed to agree with a troll and you where singled out as a troublemaker.. :D

ive found it.. you said in a post you rode without a helmet.. :eek: thats silly, dangerous and a very bad example to be setting.. you SHOULD be banned.. :p
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
dimspace said:
personally im finding most of the federations and the uci completely unfathomable.. the french seem fairly bungling unless its lance, or someone they think may have doped in the giro so they can make the italians look stupid.. the italian authorities seem happy to turn a blind eye, unless they can catch a spaniard, and the spanish dont seem to know there arses from there elbows.. the uci's biological passport program seems to just be mentioned every other week when they announce they are "investigating irrelularities" but nothing seems to come of it..

Say what? The French have done the best job of anybody. They caught people last year not because of their Giro performance but because their blood profiles were suspicious. The Italians have sanctioned a bunch of their biggest stars like Petacchi, DiLuca, Basso, Ricco, etc.
 

whiteboytrash

BANNED
Mar 17, 2009
525
0
0
BroDeal said:
Nope. A bunch of people have disappeared. I have been IP banned from my usual IP address. I know of another person who suffered the same fate. I tried using the "contact us" that is on the ban page three times but only managed to get one response. They said the woud look into the problem, but so far nothing. I think there may be a whole bunch of people who have suffered the same fate.

I honestly cannot think of anything I posted here to get me banned.
I got banned as well. As I mentioned Ashley Olsen and Lance Armstrong in the same sentence.
 
Apr 7, 2009
176
0
0
Epicycle said:
If you believe Bruyneel's version. Obviously it was a big enough deal for the AFLD to make a report on it. Even if the UCI can't do anything the AFLD can keep him out of the Tour De France if he is positive.
To me, the bigger problem is that the story was 'leaked' by Lequipe and the tests were carried out by AFLD, both French. And Lequipe (if that's how you spell it) always seems to get a 'scoop' on doping. And if the tester allowed Lance to leave his sight, shame on him.

This whole thing stinks of journalistic marketing. Everyone knows that LA is targeted right now. He knows it. We know it. Whether we like it or not. I'm just surprised it took this long for something to come out.

And i wonder if McQuaid or Gripper will back up Bruynel? If they do, AFLD looks sloppy. If they don't, Bruynel and LA look like lyers. Looks like Lequipe has done another fine job of mucking up cycling.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
True. AFLD/UCI have a credibility problem because of leaks to L'Equipe. However, in regards to Armstrong's 1999 EPO samples, this was independent research involving an L'Equipe journalist (and hence why the results were never legal) and done with Armstrong's permission. No leak or dodgy journalism for that story.
 
mwbyrd said:
To me, the bigger problem is that the story was 'leaked' by Lequipe and the tests were carried out by AFLD, both French. And Lequipe (if that's how you spell it) always seems to get a 'scoop' on doping. And if the tester allowed Lance to leave his sight, shame on him.
This whole thing stinks of journalistic marketing. Everyone knows that LA is targeted right now. He knows it. We know it. Whether we like it or not. I'm just surprised it took this long for something to come out.
And i wonder if McQuaid or Gripper will back up Bruynel? If they do, AFLD looks sloppy. If they don't, Bruynel and LA look like lyers. Looks like Lequipe has done another fine job of mucking up cycling.
As opposed to Lance "leaking" the news, on twitter, every times there's a knock on the door?
Pretty obvious you hate the Fench.
As for the UCI backing up Bruyneel. You can count on it.
You equate L'Equipe to "mucking up" cycling, while others prefer the term "cleaning up."
 
BroDeal said:
Say what? The French have done the best job of anybody. They caught people last year not because of their Giro performance but because their blood profiles were suspicious. The Italians have sanctioned a bunch of their biggest stars like Petacchi, DiLuca, Basso, Ricco, etc.

Full agreement here. The French are the only ones doing anything. The Italians will only going after foriegners and the Spaniards...well...

And as for Armstrong being unfairly targeted by the press: I'd say a good 40-50% of coverage on Cyclingnews and Velonews right now is Lance. How he's recovering, what his plans are, etc. So this is no surprise to me.

And plus there's the stupid twitter obsession. Armstrong's media popularity makes the negative news more ubiquitous, too.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY