Marca says Contador to get 1 yr

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
DirtyWorks said:
You are making a faulty assumption about the UCI's role. Numerous anecdotes about UCI's role in managing these positives abound. UCI and RFEC are likely working together on this to minimize Pharmador's vacation. Pat knows Schleck/Pharmador is a good, dramatic story. They want to restart it ASAP.

If Pat can get to the end of this and still pretend the UCI did what it could to enforce a WADA sanction, then it's a win. Just don't ask him for communication between the UCI, Pharmador's team, and RFEC. That would tell a different story.
Since I'm aware of how UCI manages a positive, I'm inclined to believe Pat has already chosen who's rider is more appealing to his bank account...
the problem is How Pat is going to contradict himself in public after the veredict from RFEC is announced, since he's the one calling for the 2 year ban to be enforced. WADA can say whatever they want-this is just a game played between UCI & the Spaniards
bottom line: AC is going to appeal to CAS no matter what-& Pat's powers over them isn't quite effective AFAK...
 
hfer07 said:
the problem is How Pat is going to contradict himself in public after the veredict from RFEC is announced, since he's the one calling for the 2 year ban to be enforced. WADA can say whatever they want-this is just a game played between UCI & the Spaniards
bottom line: AC is going to appeal to CAS no matter what-& Pat's powers over them isn't quite effective AFAK...
Pat got his public opportunity to play Bad Cop. "Two years for Bad Doper!" at the end of this, if the penalty comes in at less than two years, the public message is "It's out of the UCI's control.... Sigh.." As if he has no control.

Will Pharmador appeal? Only as long as the theoretical ban lasts and not one day more. Must keep up appearances.

I think we both agree that UCI is enabling the doping and managing the positives.
 
DirtyWorks said:
Will Pharmador appeal? Only as long as the theoretical ban lasts and not one day more. Must keep up appearances.
Yes because honestly he can't hope to get less than a year, especially since it's not like he's cooporated or anything and is agreeing to pay a fine like Di Lucca, BTW is AC on the hook for a fine too?

Still if he appeals for two years it's going to cost him money and make his return more difficult...
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
1
0
Moondance said:
Ridiculous... How does he not get two years like everyone else?
Because Contador has something that everyone else does not have: negative tests on previous days that prove that his positive is not the result of a regular dose declining over a period of days to the low level detected. Ironically, being tested more frequently has resulted in a somewhat reasonable defense that he is a victim of contamination.
 
Good point. Though really it was something else that he took in on that day that was contaminated.


Roland Rat said:
Apparently he's looking for it to be back-dated. So one year from the end of the TdF would mean he can ride this year's Vuelta. I wonder whether the Spanish would accede to that request... :rolleyes:
If he gets a year, it should be from when he last rode. Therefore, he should get into the Vuelta.

Pretty unbelievable that this July, Andy Schleck might have the same number of TdF wins as Contador.
 
luckyboy said:
Good point. Though really it was something else that he took in on that day that was contaminated.




If he gets a year, it should be from when he last rode. Therefore, he should get into the Vuelta.

Pretty unbelievable that this July, Andy Schleck might have the same number of TdF wins as Contador.
Schleck is a whiny punk, but he has Fat Pat in his corner. Plus, with Contador and Menchov gone, hey who's left. What a lame tour. Maybe Wigans will spice things up by wearing his Austin Powers outfit on the bike.
 
I wouldn't be bothered if AC somehow got off. I'd like to see him break a few records tbh.


About the plasticiser test & if it gets brought in - what exactly are people gonna do if they can't transfuse?

And could they not retro-test samples? That would bring lots of guys down.
 
May 21, 2010
581
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
Schleck is a whiny punk, but he has Fat Pat in his corner. Plus, with Contador and Menchov gone, hey who's left. What a lame tour. Maybe Wigans will spice things up by wearing his Austin Powers outfit on the bike.
Somebody, somewhere, has to beat the Schlockmeister! Wait a minute...Lance still has a year on his Radio Shack contract...

just throwin' it out there
 
Moose McKnuckles said:
Schleck is a whiny punk, but he has Fat Pat in his corner. Plus, with Contador and Menchov gone, hey who's left. What a lame tour. Maybe Wigans will spice things up by wearing his Austin Powers outfit on the bike.
Yes Menchov and Sastre could have given him a run for his money...however Basso will be more of a threat than last year when he was wiped out from the Giro.
 
May 11, 2009
1,301
0
0
It is ridiculus that it takes so long to determine if a rider is guilty or not. In Contador's case team SaxoBank might of screwed up their entire year by building team based on Contador - if a decision had made within two months of the sample being taken then Ruiss might have done something different in selecting a team and pleasing his sponsors.

The UCI really needs to think things through in this area
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
luckyboy said:
Yeah but still..

I really don't like Andy :p
join the club.
Andy doesn'T come close to LA in terms of charisma.
I guess Pat'll have to keep looking for that glamourboy who's gonna sell cycling all over the world.
Andy's not gonna be that guy, I'm afraid. (Nor was AC going to be that guy.)
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
sniper said:
join the club.
Andy doesn'T come close to LA in terms of charisma.
I guess Pat'll have to keep looking for that glamourboy who's gonna sell cycling all over the world.
Andy's not gonna be that guy, I'm afraid. (Nor was AC going to be that guy.)
Levi Leipheimer or Dave Zabrinskie are the guys to carry the torch.
 
sniper said:
join the club.
Andy doesn'T come close to LA in terms of charisma.
I guess Pat'll have to keep looking for that glamourboy who's gonna sell cycling all over the world.
Andy's not gonna be that guy, I'm afraid. (Nor was AC going to be that guy.)
Well, Pat has to work with what he has. Among the top GT guys, Andy is the most marketable. AC wasn't ideal as he wasn't much of a global icon, what with his limited English and his not being a total douche, but he was winning so again Pat had to make the most out of it.
 
May 11, 2009
248
0
0
This is disappointing news and sets a bad precedent for the future of cycling for two reasons:

1. This allows Contador to continue to deny that he knowingly was taking the drug. Contador's explanation is just another in a long line of implausible excuses that have been offered by riders who have tested positive, we'll likely be seeing more of the same in the future. For anti-doping methods to be truly effective it is important that not only are the riders penalized, but they also need to speak truthfully about the doping that is still going on in the peloton.

2. This gives a big green light to the riders to continue using Clenbuterol. The recent series of Clenbuterol positives lead me to believe the drug is widely in use in the peloton. This will be unlikely to change as if a rider gets caught all they have to do is use the same accidental ingestion defense that was employed by Contador and now validated by the Spanish Federation to receive a reduced ban.

I sincerely hope either WADA or the UCI will be appealing this decision to CAS to get a full two year ban imposed.
 
Mar 20, 2009
406
0
0
Blakeslee said:
This is disappointing news and sets a bad precedent for the future of cycling for two reasons:

1. This allows Contador to continue to deny that he knowingly was taking the drug. Contador's explanation is just another in a long line of implausible excuses that have been offered by riders who have tested positive, we'll likely be seeing more of the same in the future. For anti-doping methods to be truly effective it is important that not only are the riders penalized, but they also need to speak truthfully about the doping that is still going on in the peloton.

2. This gives a big green light to the riders to continue using Clenbuterol. The recent series of Clenbuterol positives lead me to believe the drug is widely in use in the peloton. This will be unlikely to change as if a rider gets caught all they have to do is use the same accidental ingestion defense that was employed by Contador and now validated by the Spanish Federation to receive a reduced ban.

I sincerely hope either WADA or the UCI will be appealing this decision to CAS to get a full two year ban imposed.
hope so. i agree totally.
 
Oct 8, 2010
451
0
0
Bicicleta said:
http://www.marca.com/2011/01/25/ciclismo/1295953557.html

Will be announced Thursday, will loose 2010 TdF title. Will have 10 days to appeal

Edit: Vidarte says its speculation.
Like I've been saying for the past 3 months, whatever the Spanish federation does is irrelevant because the losing side will appeal. If Contador gets anything less than 2 years, WADA and the UCI will appeal. If he gets 2 years, Contador will appeal.

This decision is irrelevant. In the end, Contador will end up with 2 years because his defense is pathetic and he offered no evidence of contaminated meat.
 
Oct 8, 2010
451
0
0
Izzy eviel said:
I'll be satisfied with a year ban and TdF win stripped. There's no doubting he had clen in him, but if there's doubt that it wasn't deliberate doping then a 2 year ban wouldn't be fair.
The burden of proving it was contamination lies with Contador, and his defense team failed to demonstrate any contaminated meat. In fact, just the opposite occurred: WADA showed that the meat they tested from the butcher was not contaminated.

What does it say about the credibility of Contador's defense that his own defense team failed to even test any meat from the butcher...yet WADA did????

Contador deserves 2 years.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY