Re: Re:
when somebody inside the 'government' leaks something...the 'government' generally aren't very pleased
yaco said:Pantani_lives said:Great piece, Libertine Seguros. In the period 2006-2008 there was a genuine fight against doping, the "New Cycling", with a lot of big names caught. AFLD played a crucial role in that. The welcoming back of Armstrong in the 2009 Tour was a return to the Old Cycling, with the UCI back in charge and AFLD out of the equation. Anti-doping should be taken out of the hands of the UCI. They were never bothered about Froome's salbutamol level, only about the truth leaking out. Today another Tour starts with the top favorite perceived as a protected doping user whose team gets a preferential treatment.Libertine Seguros said:But the most important impact of Armstrong's return was the removal of AFLD from testing at the Tour, and - allegedly pressured by Nicolas Sarkozy - the removal of Pierre Bordry from his position there. AFLD's work on the anti-doping front was the driving force behind a lot of progress from 2006-2009; they were the ones that kept the CERA test fully secret until suddenly unleashing a flurry of positives, seeing as the drug both had a long half-life and was thought by the péloton to be safe from detection. But throwing a polka dot jersey wearer out of the race during the event, and a GC podium and polka dot jersey winner being disqualified after the event, as well as having to reclassify no fewer than four stages, didn't sit well with the attempts to rejuvenate the event, and so revoking AFLD's licence for the race was of course a small price to pay for the improvement in that lucrative American audience.
Who do you think leaked Froome's test results ? The own goal was kicked by the UCI !
when somebody inside the 'government' leaks something...the 'government' generally aren't very pleased