Jonathan Tiernan-Locke written to by UCI, asked to explain blood values

[Race Radio]

We can hardly believe JTL now can we?

Good point....but he is more believable then the guy who invented the "Sky paid for JTL's defense" nonsense

 

[sniper]

We can hardly believe JTL now can we?

true story.
i'm inclined to believe him though when he says the BP is pathetic.

 

[hrotha]

true story.
i'm inclined to believe him though when he says the BP is pathetic.

The BP might be pathetic, but certainly not for the reasons he brings up.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Perhaps he did ask, perhaps Tiernan-Locke responded and perhaps Benson couldn't confirm the claims made by Tiernan-Locke, so he decided not to publish the claims.

Ah, the pitfalls of being a journalist compared to the noble surroundings of a libellous doping forum.

Why does he have to confirm or verify.

As a direct quote from JTL surely it would be JTL than would be the target of any action.

 

[Arnout]

Pity that the interviewer didn't ask about the testing with Garmin and Sky in early 2012. Other than that, he sounds very unconvincing.

 

[waraplay]

thanks for the great suggestions and help.




Best Video Sharing Site In ****stan

 

[LeakyLens]

Why does he have to confirm or verify.

As a direct quote from JTL surely it would be JTL than would be the target of any action.

No I don't think so. If you repeat something libelous you're as culpable as the original source.

 

[Netserk]

No I don't think so. If you repeat something libelous you're as culpable as the original source.

There's a difference between repeating and quoting.

 

[Nick C.]

So JTL is non-credible but we want his quotes on who the UCI gave a free pass to? Um er OK sure.

 

[DirtyWorks]

So much for the invented claim that Sky was paying for, and directing, his legal team

This was his former DS at the pro-conti level suggesting this might be the case, which turned into an assumption it was happening. That poor guy went to bat for JTL a couple of different times.

 

[DirtyWorks]

"there are various theories", JTL says, and Daniel Benson doesn't ask.

then JTL says and again Daniel Benson doesn't ask.

Daniel, perhaps it's time to start being a journalist?

And get the ASO press credentials revoked? No way!

More evidence the UCI has stacks of positives. Theoretically, the leak had to be from the UCI. In theory, they are the only ones that can associate an athlete code with a name. And Pat McQuaid is just the guy to do it.

And Andrew McQuaid knew when the information would be published.... Hmm. Something leaky going on there...

No one really spoke but Dave, and it was suggested, I felt, that they wanted me to disappear. Hmm... Something leaky going on there...
So instead of having 30 days I have about 24 hours. Hmm. Sooo fired by the UCI. Again, Saint David Brailsford knew much more far ahead of the athlete.

..but if you also bring in the sample taken 48 hours later it seems like they were very closed to the possibility of an alternative scenario. You mean that epo detection window closes by day 3? Sorry.

...the Tour of Britain tests weren’t screening for EPO. Well in my mind that’s pathetic. The only things they should be screening for are things like EPO. What are they testing for? Amphetamines? We’re not in the 1960s or 1970s. We don't really know what tests are run, but now we know lower-ranked events can opt out of testing for EPO.

 

[gillan1969]

surely the question sadly missing was eh, why didn't you drink anything at all on the Friday?

 

[peloton]

surely the question sadly missing was eh, why didn't you drink anything at all on the Friday?

Too hungover?

 

[neineinei]

I guess the team wanted to find a way to navigate around the situation but they wanted me to be transparent, so they told me to keep it vague.

The Sky definition of transparent: keep it vauge.

 

[Granville57]

Nothing in that interview sways me one bit closer to JTL's side of the fence.

So JTL is non-credible but we want his quotes on who the UCI gave a free pass to? Um er OK sure.

Yes. JTL is the one who threw that out there. He should back it up, or shut it up.

Was he referring to Froome or Wiggins? If he dropped either of those names then that would be quite interesting. No matter who he might've mentioned though, the UCI would then be forced to either confirm or deny.

What's JTL got to lose at this point?

Or was he showing a hand that he might be willing to play in the future?

 

[Granville57]

I'd still be curious to get JTL's reaction to this:

The CEO of the [Garmin], Jonathan Vaughters, was interested in Tiernan-Locke and saw him as a possible addition to his WorldTour squad for 2013. However, as per team policy, he required that any riders without biological passports do a series of blood tests in order to build up a profile and show they are clean.

“If we are in contact with a rider and they want to come to the team, we will send them a plane ticket and basically say, ‘come down to Girona tomorrow,’ or even that afternoon, or whatever it is,” he told CyclingTips.

Under the protocol, the rider is then collected at the airport, brought straight to a lab in Girona and asked to provide blood and urine samples. After food, he is then asked to do an intensive hour and a half physiological test; an additional blood test may follow later.

According to Vaughters, testing riders around high performance periods should both illustrate their physiological capacity and also give an idea of their haematological [blood] profile at those points in time. Three different tests are done at short notice over different periods in the season.

If the team is satisfied with the figures and believes they look credible, it can then decide to offer the rider a contract.

“The thing with Tiernan-Locke was that we tried to do that in February or early March of that year, when he was in a real high performance period, but he wouldn’t come down to Girona,” Vaughters said. “We kept saying, ‘okay, you need to be here tomorrow for the test,’ but he would say, ‘oh no, I’m busy, I have got this or I have got that.’ He would always put it off, put it off, put it off.

“Finally he agreed to come down. We did the test on March 28. At that point in time all I can say is that the haematology was normal but his power test was average at best. It certainly wasn’t the guy who was ripping Philippe Gilbert and Dan Martin off his wheel at the Tour of Med. It was a power test of a very average professional rider.

“That to me that was sort of inconclusive. We were going to try to do a second and third test, but at that point in time he didn’t show a whole lot of motivation for doing any more testing because he had pretty much decided to ride for Team Sky anyway.”

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/biological-passport-what-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The Sky definition of transparent: keep it vauge.

Yeah that was a bowl of custard in terms of transparency protocol.

 

[RownhamHill]

There's a difference between repeating and quoting.

Not when it comes to the UK libel laws.

If JTL says 'Netserk is doping' he is slandering you (or at least he might be!). If someone writes it down and publishes it, it becomes libel, and its the publisher who is liable for it, not JTL.

 

[zigmeister]

Although the burden oddly lands on the side of the accussed, ***-backwards from the rest of the world and courts of law, JTL certainly didn't have much in the way of an explanation.

Furthermore, Vaughters, and knowing their system, when they say jump, and you need to be on a flight, and you don't do it, to them either says, hey, he already has a contract he signed, if so, then why not just say so...or he will light up the lab equipment when his samples hit it throwing positives all over the place.

Hence, he no-showed, which creates suspicion.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Furthermore, Vaughters, and knowing their system, when they say jump, and you need to be on a flight, and you don't do it, to them either says, hey, he already has a contract he signed, if so, then why not just say so...or he will light up the lab equipment when his samples hit it throwing positives all over the place.

Hence, he no-showed, which creates suspicion.

Or, he had a life and a girlfriend and wasn't a yes-man who does whatever JV demands. Imagine the relationship that sets up from the get go... Plus he probably had enough contact in the BC world to know he had a chance with a good team like Sky.

 

[thehog]

Or, he had a life and a girlfriend and wasn't a yes-man who does whatever JV demands. Imagine the relationship that sets up from the get go... Plus he probably had enough contact in the BC world to know he had a chance with a good team like Sky.

Correct. He had a letter of intent from Sky in April/May of that year. He was always signing with Sky.

Vaughters posturing on the matter is more an attempt to push "garmin, clean team" propaganda than JTL avoiding internal team dope testing. Not that a one off internal team test would show much anyway.

 

[Avoriaz]

So why not go visit Garmin anyway and play the teams off against each other in order to negotiate the biggest deal?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

So why not go visit Garmin anyway and play the teams off against each other in order to negotiate the biggest deal?

I think the McQuaid network played a role here.

Phats family must have made a solid bundle when JTL signed a big contract with Sky.

I think these type of deals happens frequently in our sport.

Pump up a rider, sign a big contact and a select group makes money.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I think the McQuaid network played a role here.

Phats family must have made a solid bundle when JTL signed a big contract with Sky.

I think these type of deals happens frequently in our sport.

Pump up a rider, sign a big contact and a select group makes money.

The only people making reliable money during a gold rush are the people selling tools.

 

[RownhamHill]

Although the burden oddly lands on the side of the accussed, ***-backwards from the rest of the world and courts of law, JTL certainly didn't have much in the way of an explanation.

It is opposite to the rest of the world, but it's the other way round. If JTL says Netserk is doping, and I publish that in a newspaper (let's imagine I own one), and Netserk sues me for libel, it's up to me (the publisher making the accusation) to prove what JTL is saying is true (to use a fair comment defence). In the absence of any evidence otherwise the courts will automatically assume JTL's words are false, that Netserk has been defamed, and I (as publisher) am liable for libel.