- Oct 25, 2010
"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
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.MarkvW said:What is the convincing proof that McQuaid covered up the Contador results?
That is on purpose. REFEC is the bad guy. He knows it. They know it. It's theater.Captain_Cavman said: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.
Fixed that for you.thehog said: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.
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.thehog said: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.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7458/Contador-case-questions-being-asked-about-change-in-direction-of-RFEC-decision.aspx#ixzz1E9qLPfmKDespite 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.
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.BotanyBay said:"The show must go on"
The whole of Pat's comments boiled down to three, short words - thanks Postman...Francois the Postman said:Pot, meet kettle.
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 said: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...
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.hrotha said:When do you think it would have been appropriate to disclose the information without prompting the cynics to make that connection?
RobbieCanuck said: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.