McQuaid Criticises Spain

[BotanyBay]

"Psst, RFEC, I have to issue a press statement criticizing the Spanish (so it won't look so obvious). But Lord knows, I love the Spanish today" -Pat McQuaid

 

[MarkvW]

McQuaid Cover-Up?

What is the convincing proof that McQuaid covered up the Contador results?

 

[sniper]

What is the convincing proof that McQuaid covered up the Contador results?

the whole idea of a cover up is you don't find proof of it.

b.t.w. convincing proof is like white snow. you mean just proof, i guess?

 

[BotanyBay]

What is the convincing proof that McQuaid covered up the Contador results?

The report outlining the positive sample was delivered to McQuaid and he literally sat on it for 2 months. He only admitted to it once the German media exposed its existence.

In contrast, when Landis tested positive, McQuaid released the result to the media BEFORE even bothering to inform Landis.

BTW, McQuaid has never stated that either approach was improper.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I know it's fashionable amongst folks here to knock Mr McQuaid but I agree with absolutely everything he said in that article.

There's a first time for everything.

That is on purpose. REFEC is the bad guy. He knows it. They know it. It's theater.

McQuaid wanted Pharmador to ride in 2011 so as not to harm the TdF production. So Pharmador gets off.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Difference being Pat can actually make the changes needed. We can't. McQuaid blasts out at Spain each and every time there's a positive. But he does THE VERY LEAST AMOUNT POSSIBLE to combat the problem of doping or foreign cyclists choosing to live in Spain. Wipe out the drug use regardless of nationality and you'll fix the Spanish problem. They get away with it just like every other country.

Fixed that for you.

 

[BotanyBay]

That is on purpose. REFEC is the bad guy. He knows it. They know it. It's theater.

McQuaid wanted Pharmador to ride in 2011 so as not to harm the TdF production. So Pharmador gets off.

"The show must go on"

 

[hfer07]

Once again Pat making no sense at all....
a corrupt President of a rotten sporting institution talking about corruption by another rotten cycling federation..........

go on Patty- you never let us down

 

[blackcat]

Difference being Pat can actually make the changes needed. We can't. McQuaid blasts out at Spain and Monaco each and every time there's a positive. But he does little to combat the problem of doping or foreign cyclists choosing to live in Spain. Wipe out the drug use regardless of nationality and you'll fix the Spanish problem. They get away with it just like every other country.

need to add that. Does not the Ozzie ex-pats live in Monaco and all their wives girlfriends do PR and spray-tans. No $hit, not making that up.

 

[roundabout]

Could be a rumor, but anyway

Despite that, it is understood that due to behind-the-scenes pressure from individuals in positions of influence, a last-minute change of mind occurred and the disciplinary committee of the RFEC decided that it would clear the rider of all charges.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...direction-of-RFEC-decision.aspx#ixzz1E9qLPfmK

 

[Oldman]

"The show must go on"

McQuaid's going to have to "manly-up" his lead cast for next year. Alberto and Andy sounds like a comedy act involving puppets. The only drama is which one is the ventriloquist and which one has a hand up his a*s.

 

[movingtarget]

I agree with the Irishman on this one. A voice in the wilderness ? Lot's of people doubted the ban would stick.

 

[JPM London]

Pot, meet kettle.

The whole of Pat's comments boiled down to three, short words - thanks Postman...

Most of what Pat says in that interview is probably perfectly correct, the only problem is that you can substitute whatever entity or group he's having a go at with "UCI" or "Pat McQ". It's actually quite fun when you do that - all of a sudden you're listening to Pat berate himself and his own organisation

 

[Mestre]

Maybe McQuaid's criticism hit a nerve

Today's El País has published a story headlined "Cyclist uncovers doping network" (see here), in which it reports that a "professional cyclist" resident in Olot (Girona) reported the reception of an email -via which he was offered PEDs- to the Catalonia regional police. The investigation, which elsewhere is mentioned as having been launched in December, has led to the arrest of 7 people. Only a cynic would relate the timing of the disclosure to the international criticism received by Spain for its handling of the Contador case...

 

[hrotha]

Today's El País has published a story headlined "Cyclist uncovers doping network" (see here), in which it reports that a "professional cyclist" resident in Olot (Girona) reported the reception of an email -via which he was offered PEDs- to the Catalonia regional police. The investigation, which elsewhere is mentioned as having been launched in December, has led to the arrest of 7 people. Only a cynic would relate the timing of the disclosure to the international criticism received by Spain for its handling of the Contador case...

When do you think it would have been appropriate to disclose the information without prompting the cynics to make that connection? Talk about Spain and doping has been constant for a year or so.

 

[Mestre]

When do you think it would have been appropriate to disclose the information without prompting the cynics to make that connection?

Every day of the week, to be honest. And I don't say that as a way of taking pot shots at Spain. I say it in the context of McQuaid's criticism of Spain's handling of the Contador case, loathe as I am to agree with him. For the record, I fully agree with the pot/kettle analogy drawn earlier in the thread, and from a merely PR perspective I've never understood why the UCI would choose to go about pursuing its aims, whatever they might be, by being represented by such a conflictive person. However, rejecting his claims on the grounds that he's an all-round t*t, which would seem to be comon consensus, is letting the trees obscure the wood.

It is relatively easy to obtain PEDs in Spain, just as it is relatively easy to build a house without permission, to open a bar without a licence, to carry out work for regional authorities without authorization, to get a subsidy for cultivating crops you don't actually have, to defraud one million euros and have a judge accept that you won the national lottery on four occasions, whatever. You just need a friend/brother in law/interested party in a suitable position of authority to turn a blind eye and give the go ahead. Common, everyday, run-of-the-mill practice. The important thing is to be SEEN to be observing the law, not observing the law in itself. And, after many, many years of living and working with Spaniards, yes, I am unfortunately somewhat cynical of the timing of a disclosure that could be made precisely any day of any week of any month. But isn't. It comes after Spain received heavy international criticism, to which it is extremely sensitive. I would consider this highly coincidental, to say the least. Not as coincidental as Alvaro Pino retiring 10 minutes before Mosquera returned a positive, but close.

 

[hrotha]

Jordi Riera arrested. Belda taught him well.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

McQuaid Comments

UCI Article 296 states inter alia,

"If the Rider establishes in an individual case that he bears No Fault or Negligence the otherwise period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated. ... the Rider must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his system in order to have the period of Ineligibility otherwise eliminated...."

This article establishes that if a National Cycling Federation believes a rider's explanation then this article can be invoked. The issue is clearly one of credibility. In AC's case, the Spanish Federation obviously accepted AC's explanation.

A person's credibility inevitably involves that person's reputation in the community for telling the truth. As far as I know, until this incident, AC had a stellar reputation for truthfulness (all the CN speculation skeptics aside).

If the President of Spain or any other credible person can attest to that good reputation why should the Spanish Federation not take that into account in assessing AC's credibility, just because he is President of Spain? If I was in $h!? and the Prime Minsiter of my country could vouch for my truthfulness I would be stupid not to use his endorsement.

McQuaid admits he has not even studied the Spanish Federation' file. He should keep his mouth shut until all the legal proceedings have ended and quit being msichievous.

In this case the UCI and WADA should not appeal to the CAS because the Spanish Federation finding is based on AC's credibility. What are they going to argue - that the Spanish Federation should not have believed AC?

If WADA and the UCI appeal and lose, AC should sue them for all it is worth.

 

[Andynonomous]

If you say so.

UCI Article 296 states inter alia,

"If the Rider establishes in an individual case that he bears No Fault or Negligence the otherwise period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated. ... the Rider must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his system in order to have the period of Ineligibility otherwise eliminated...."

This article establishes that if a National Cycling Federation believes a rider's explanation then this article can be invoked. The issue is clearly one of credibility. In AC's case, the Spanish Federation obviously accepted AC's explanation.

A person's credibility inevitably involves that person's reputation in the community for telling the truth. As far as I know, until this incident, AC had a stellar reputation for truthfulness (all the CN speculation skeptics aside).

If the President of Spain or any other credible person can attest to that good reputation why should the Spanish Federation not take that into account in assessing AC's credibility, just because he is President of Spain? If I was in $h!? and the Prime Minsiter of my country could vouch for my truthfulness I would be stupid not to use his endorsement.

McQuaid admits he has not even studied the Spanish Federation' file. He should keep his mouth shut until all the legal proceedings have ended and quit being msichievous.

In this case the UCI and WADA should not appeal to the CAS because the Spanish Federation finding is based on AC's credibility. What are they going to argue - that the Spanish Federation should not have believed AC?

If WADA and the UCI appeal and lose, AC should sue them for all it is worth.

Yep, if the accused says he is innocent, then we should rule that he is innocent . That should be our new burden of proof (no fanboyism to see here).

 

[veganrob]

Actually Robbie that is a well thought out response. Bravo. I totally agree the decision to acquit will not be appealed by anybody and have been saying that. That is exactly how it is probably going to be explained. It may not be the absolute truth, but it will not be able to be argued.

 

[roundabout]

UCI Article 296 states inter alia,
<snip>

I've read a lot of stupid things in my life, but this one really takes the cake.

Well done.