McQuaid: No Contador verdict until 2011

Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
"McQuaid says there will be no Contador verdict until 2011"

Interesting that he can have such insight into a situation that is supposedly "100% out of his hands".

We might think we're watching the Spaniards here, but in reality this is a Pat McQuaid production, beginning to end.

 
BotanyBay said:
"McQuaid says there will be no Contador verdict until 2011"

Interesting that he can have such insight into a situation that is supposedly "100% out of his hands".

We might think we're watching the Spaniards here, but in reality this is a Pat McQuaid production, beginning to end.

*Source & Link????
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
BotanyBay said:
"McQuaid says there will be no Contador verdict until 2011"

Interesting that he can have such insight into a situation that is supposedly "100% out of his hands".

We might think we're watching the Spaniards here, but in reality this is a Pat McQuaid production, beginning to end.

The only thing that McNugget forgets to say is....."I'm Loving It".
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
The whole interview is an eye opener on how McQuaid works.

The UCI has been criticised because it hasn’t communicated on this matter, but it’s not a classic case of doping,”
Not a classic case of doping? What part of Adverse Analytical Finding did McQuaids 5 lawyers not explain to him?
It didn't stop the UCI going public with Fuyu Li's positive the day he was notified of his A sample for the same substance.

“At the end of August, along with WADA, we gave Contador the chance to explain himself. Twenty-four hours later, he told us this story of the contaminated meat. We asked some experts to conduct a study to see if his version is credible. There won’t be a decision before the end of the year.”
Not only does this story not tie in with what AC said, why do you need to find an explaination when it is not up to the UCI (or WADA) to adjudicate - that is the responsibility of the RFEC.

I’m in favour of increasing the length of the suspension,” he said. “There should be a four-year ban for those who take EPO. We’re going to propose that soon to the national federations and they will need to be on the same page as us because if we had to keep asking for CAS arbitration, it wouldn’t go ahead.”
Pat sounds tough on dopers - pity he sounded equally as tough when he said the exact same thing 3 years ago. Less talk more action.

I’ll just say that the management of that team have been naïve,” McQuaid said. “If were a director sportif, [Riccardo] Riccò would never come to my team.”
No you're not a DS - but you are Presiding over the ProTour - you can blacklist people you don't like from ProTour teams ;) which is what Rasmussen said.

Cycling’s history was forged in Europe,” McQuaid said. “But it’s equally our duty to look at the world market. It’s not so much looking to make money as remembering that the Olympic Games are essential to our development in the world.
.... so just why are "the IOC essential to our development"? Because they give out money and put you up in nice hotels?

“I think we could reduce the length of the Giro and the Vuelta by a few days,” he said. “The Tour will always last three weeks. We can’t touch the Tour. It’s the biggest race in the world, it’s our shop window."
I am all for globalization but ASO has a major stake in the Vuelta and RCS are quite close to ASO, so unless you offer them the incentive (the TV rights that the UCI crave) to start races in new markets it is a fight you will lose, again.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
“At the end of August, along with WADA, we gave Contador the chance to explain himself. Twenty-four hours later, he told us this story of the contaminated meat. We asked some experts to conduct a study to see if his version is credible. There won’t be a decision before the end of the year.”
Funny. I remember AC's quote from day-one. He directly quotes McQuaid as having said I (to the effect of) "It must have been something you ate. This is not possible". The whole bogus steak story was inspired by McQuaid.

I’m in favour of increasing the length of the suspension,” he said. “There should be a four-year ban for those who take EPO. We’re going to propose that soon to the national federations and they will need to be on the same page as us because if we had to keep asking for CAS arbitration, it wouldn’t go ahead.”
This is a brilliant piece of wording. As he knows darn well that the racers have moved-on to different drugs. Any new UCI rule will be conveniently outdated with a huge loophole.
 
Mar 9, 2010
551
0
0
(start rant)

gah!

i can't believe this guy is the head of ANY organization. how can he talk like this?! virtually every quote contradicts the previous. this guy is seriously messed up in the head.

"ooh. i love ivan and want to have his babies. but vacansoleil is like, totally brilliant for hiring that ricco kid. i mean, like, how many giros has HE won? besides, basso only 'intended' to dope."

he wants a lifetime ban for doping. but he also wants lighter sentences for less effective products?

basso can come back. contador deserves a lighter sentence. ricco deserves to be ejected from the sport for eternity. what is the obvious difference between these two classes of riders? the first two have won multiple gts. the latter has not. even someone not involved in the sport could figure this out. everyone here knows it's how the system works. but to hear the head of the organization coming so close to saying it outright....well, that's more than a little disturbing. it shows the uci feels it has no checks on their authority to do whatever they want. and they are probably right.

wtf? i would say run him out of office, but it seems the uci has a tendency to hire total d-bags. so they'd probably replace him with someone just as bad.

but how can cycling's situation improve under leadership like this?

(end rant)
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
spanky wanderlust said:
(start rant)

gah!

i can't believe this guy is the head of ANY organization. how can he talk like this?! virtually every quote contradicts the previous. this guy is seriously messed up in the head.

"ooh. i love ivan and want to have his babies. but vacansoleil is like, totally brilliant for hiring that ricco kid. i mean, like, how many giros has HE won? besides, basso only 'intended' to dope."

he wants a lifetime ban for doping. but he also wants lighter sentences for less effective products?

basso can come back. contador deserves a lighter sentence. ricco deserves to be ejected from the sport for eternity. what is the obvious difference between these two classes of riders? the first two have won multiple gts. the latter has not. even someone not involved in the sport could figure this out. everyone here knows it's how the system works. but to hear the head of the organization coming so close to saying it outright....well, that's more than a little disturbing. it shows the uci feels it has no checks on their authority to do whatever they want. and they are probably right.

wtf? i would say run him out of office, but it seems the uci has a tendency to hire total d-bags. so they'd probably replace him with someone just as bad.

but how can cycling's situation improve under leadership like this?

(end rant)
with a bit of luck the federal investigation into Armstrong will shed some light on how the saddest sad-assed d-bag of them all, Verbruggen, has gone about filling his pockets and allowing dope to florish in the peloton.
A nice scenario would be: Verbruggen goes down, and takes McQuack down in his slipstream..
I mean, wishful thinkink is allowed when Santa Claus is coming to town, right?
 
spanky wanderlust said:
(start rant)

gah!

i can't believe this guy is the head of ANY organization. how can he talk like this?! virtually every quote contradicts the previous. this guy is seriously messed up in the head.

"ooh. i love ivan and want to have his babies. but vacansoleil is like, totally brilliant for hiring that ricco kid. i mean, like, how many giros has HE won? besides, basso only 'intended' to dope."

he wants a lifetime ban for doping. but he also wants lighter sentences for less effective products?

basso can come back. contador deserves a lighter sentence. ricco deserves to be ejected from the sport for eternity. what is the obvious difference between these two classes of riders? the first two have won multiple gts. the latter has not. even someone not involved in the sport could figure this out. everyone here knows it's how the system works. but to hear the head of the organization coming so close to saying it outright....well, that's more than a little disturbing. it shows the uci feels it has no checks on their authority to do whatever they want. and they are probably right.

wtf? i would say run him out of office, but it seems the uci has a tendency to hire total d-bags. so they'd probably replace him with someone just as bad.

but how can cycling's situation improve under leadership like this?

(end rant)
Vino is Satan. Oh you have Kazakh money? Yes you can come back.

Chicken I love you. ASO are treating you unfairly. Rabo is what? Going to pull sponsorship? Rasmussen you're sin. You will never ride again. Fook off!

Virenque? He's the only French rider doing well without threatening Lance. Keep him.

Tyler and Floyd? Lance said only one American hero. Cut them.

Ullrich? Don't you dare come to this sport with so much talent you barely need to dope. Out with you. We only like those who want the full program.
 
I see everyone is waking up to how business is done at the UCI.

Fat Pat is only the figurehead-he was appointed to his post for exactly the qualities he is exhibiting.

And yes, it is easy to demonize a rider like Ricardo Ricco, not only because he's never won a grand tour but because he is a chap not many people like.

So McQuaid protects riders he deems worthy, and hangs the others out to dry.

Contador is a grand tour cash cow (pardon the pun) and he as well as everyone else knows the Tour will not be as competitive without him. He is the biggest name in international cycling, and the prestige of the Tour hangs in the balance with this decision, like it or not.

It is not so much Contador they are trying to protect-it's the shame of having yet another Tour rider stripped of his yellow jersey.

There is something else going on-if anyone caught the ESPN 30 For 30 documentary "Pony Exce$$", the SMU football program received the death penalty because it was brought down by a disgruntled player who was asked to not return after doing a stint in drug rehab.

During their previous round of NCAA sanctions, the boosters felt it was better to continue payments they promised to players because they feared repercussions. The one time they left a player out to dry was when they were finally brought down for good.

In light of this, maybe McQuaid has good reason for trying to protect Contador.

Does anyone really believe Alberto is going to take a two-year sanction and just la down and die? He's the one with the leverage here, if indeed he does know something the UCI would like to keep quiet.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
When I read that, I wondered if he meant the Competition Committee had communicated that, or if he meant their decision about an appeal? Heck, Pellizotti has been waiting to sign with a team until the UCI decides whether to appeal his Bio Passport case, and Italy found him innocent in October.

It's interesting that he thinks he can defend his choices about keeping things secret, including a gag order on Contador and lying to the German journalist, because if they tale it to CAS, he and WADA should get their chances. I've said why in other threads.

If I was a team owner, manager or sponsor, I wouldn't appreciate having the UCI President get political with my dealings. If they broke some rule in hiring Ricco, then do something about it, but if the guy served his time, forget the sour grapes. Vacansoleil wasn't welcome at a single grand tour last year, so his words really don't mean much. When he starts doing an examination of conscience for other people, that's so hypocritical as to be a joke.

I'm not going to track down their original quotes, but I believe McQuaid suggested to Alberto at first that it was some kind of contamination, and Contador tried to figure it out from there.

The guy needs to talk tough because otherwise people might notice that they're losing battles against anyone with enough money to hire decent lawyers. Vino. Pellizotti.
 

ttrider

BANNED
Apr 23, 2010
386
0
0
Its all so inconsistent and amateur, mcquaid saying he was pleased to see basso but not ricco. to me that is massively wrong the uci president must be impartial surely.
To then even talk about a situation that is out of his hands, as president of the uci, he should be ensuring proper conduct with consistency and transparency

Its not just riders but races as well.....

He fails at every single objective a leader of sports authorities should have
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Berzin said:
So McQuaid protects riders he deems worthy, and hangs the others out to dry.
McQuaid is doing the makeup for the UCI. He's carefully crafting its public image. He doesn't realize that he's FAILING miserably, but I see what he's trying to do.

He's trying to build the UCI and put it on-par with Golf, F-1, NASCAR, FIFA, etc. But he needs heroes and champions to do that. He needs legends. And if he thinks he has one, he'll protect it. If one comes along that doesn't meet the measure, and they get in trouble, forget it. Meanwhile, he needs to protect champions/potential champions from testing positive.

Right now, Pat's in a difficult spot. He could care less if his champions "got that way" because of EPO. But he also has to "play ball" on dope testing. He's willing to help the potential long-term champions avoid testing positive by protecting them. My guess is that AC is NOT one of his "ideal" poster-boys. He wants an anglo. AC was "OK", but was never a particular protectee of McQuaid.

Landis was never going to be his poster boy. The moment Floyd tested positive, he was tossed under the bus. He did not have any tenure as a champion, so it was easy to toss him. He hopped-up on the throne and bounced-off the seat. Not sure what he's up to with AC. My guess is that he just doesn't want to lose another tour winner to scandal.

The kid to look out for is Schleck. McQuaid is probably really liking this kid, but wanted to get him away from Riis and into a more protected situation so that he can better look after him. Pat has a champion to groom. My guess is that he's treating AC with kids gloves so that other potential champions will know that Pat will have their backs... But AC is soon going to have a tire tread on his back as the bus pulls away.

McQuaid has to be two different guys at the same time. On one hand, he has to run the current version of the UCI, toughen-up on drugs, etc. On the other, he needs to assist the dirtiest guys to give him a ticket to the big-time.
 
Jun 12, 2010
1,234
0
0
Berzin said:
Does anyone really believe Alberto is going to take a two-year sanction and just la down and die? He's the one with the leverage here, if indeed he does know something the UCI would like to keep quiet.
Id hazard a guess he knows a lot more about the Texan than is comfortable.
Look whats happened due to squeezing Landis out.:D
 
Contador can't talk freely and say what he knows about the UCI, Astana, Discovery or doping in general. To do that, he would most likely have to admit he's guilty. He can't do that without destroying his own image. He's toured all major TV channels in Spain shouting that he's innocent.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
BotanyBay said:
McQuaid is doing the makeup for the UCI. He's carefully crafting its public image. He doesn't realize that he's FAILING miserably, but I see what he's trying to do.

He's trying to build the UCI and put it on-par with Golf, F-1, NASCAR, FIFA, etc. But he needs heroes and champions to do that. He needs legends. And if he thinks he has one, he'll protect it. If one comes along that doesn't meet the measure, and they get in trouble, forget it. Meanwhile, he needs to protect champions/potential champions from testing positive.

Right now, Pat's in a difficult spot. He could care less if his champions "got that way" because of EPO. But he also has to "play ball" on dope testing. He's willing to help the potential long-term champions avoid testing positive by protecting them. My guess is that AC is NOT one of his "ideal" poster-boys. He wants an anglo. AC was "OK", but was never a particular protectee of McQuaid.

Landis was never going to be his poster boy. The moment Floyd tested positive, he was tossed under the bus. He did not have any tenure as a champion, so it was easy to toss him. He hopped-up on the throne and bounced-off the seat. Not sure what he's up to with AC. My guess is that he just doesn't want to lose another tour winner to scandal.

The kid to look out for is Schleck. McQuaid is probably really liking this kid, but wanted to get him away from Riis and into a more protected situation so that he can better look after him. Pat has a champion to groom. My guess is that he's treating AC with kids gloves so that other potential champions will know that Pat will have their backs... But AC is soon going to have a tire tread on his back as the bus pulls away.

McQuaid has to be two different guys at the same time. On one hand, he has to run the current version of the UCI, toughen-up on drugs, etc. On the other, he needs to assist the dirtiest guys to give him a ticket to the big-time.
I like the hypothesis and you may be right. But aren't you slightly overestimating McQuack's authority and decisive power? Could he have that much influence on the transfermarket?
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
The whole interview is an eye opener on how McQuaid works.


Not a classic case of doping? What part of Adverse Analytical Finding did McQuaids 5 lawyers not explain to him?
It didn't stop the UCI going public with Fuyu Li's positive the day he was notified of his A sample for the same substance.


Not only does this story not tie in with what AC said, why do you need to find an explaination when it is not up to the UCI (or WADA) to adjudicate - that is the responsibility of the RFEC.


Pat sounds tough on dopers - pity he sounded equally as tough when he said the exact same thing 3 years ago. Less talk more action.


No you're not a DS - but you are Presiding over the ProTour - you can blacklist people you don't like from ProTour teams ;) which is what Rasmussen said.

.... so just why are "the IOC essential to our development"? Because they give out money and put you up in nice hotels?


I am all for globalization but ASO has a major stake in the Vuelta and RCS are quite close to ASO, so unless you offer them the incentive (the TV rights that the UCI crave) to start races in new markets it is a fight you will lose, again.
according to berzin, fuyu li's case doesn't matter.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
sniper said:
I like the hypothesis and you may be right. But aren't you slightly overestimating McQuack's authority and decisive power? Could he have that much influence on the transfermarket?
Why not? Look at JV's recently "veiled" criticism of Pat's actions in regards to ProTeam licenses. Team CEOs are obviously very concerned with how Pat is wielding his power over licenses. If Pat were to "drop a hint" to a few riders (and perhaps a friendly financial backer), you could see the development of a new team happen very quickly, and a liability to the sport go away very quickly. What makes you think that Pat wasn't giving AS's new backers a "sneak peek" at things to come?

I'd say that for Riis to end up with a dope-guilty Contador and the loss of the rest of his team smells of a political tom-foolery. Riis was just shown the door (in a polite way).
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
Berzin said:
I see everyone is waking up to how business is done at the UCI.

Fat Pat is only the figurehead-he was appointed to his post for exactly the qualities he is exhibiting.

And yes, it is easy to demonize a rider like Ricardo Ricco, not only because he's never won a grand tour but because he is a chap not many people like.

So McQuaid protects riders he deems worthy, and hangs the others out to dry.

Contador is a grand tour cash cow (pardon the pun) and he as well as everyone else knows the Tour will not be as competitive without him. He is the biggest name in international cycling, and the prestige of the Tour hangs in the balance with this decision, like it or not.

It is not so much Contador they are trying to protect-it's the shame of having yet another Tour rider stripped of his yellow jersey.

There is something else going on-if anyone caught the ESPN 30 For 30 documentary "Pony Exce$$", the SMU football program received the death penalty because it was brought down by a disgruntled player who was asked to not return after doing a stint in drug rehab.

During their previous round of NCAA sanctions, the boosters felt it was better to continue payments they promised to players because they feared repercussions. The one time they left a player out to dry was when they were finally brought down for good.

In light of this, maybe McQuaid has good reason for trying to protect Contador.

Does anyone really believe Alberto is going to take a two-year sanction and just la down and die? He's the one with the leverage here, if indeed he does know something the UCI would like to keep quiet.
I watched the same show 30 for 30 last night. I was in college about the time this really came to the head. I remember many of the details while it was going on / playing out in the media. You caught something in the story that I caught as well. I would not be surprised if that is what is playing out with this. Maybe the “got to make payroll” goes on in such a way with the UCI that if they cut it off someone will be disgruntled and unload the entire pay to ride deals that must be happening.
 
BotanyBay said:
Why not? Look at JV's recently "veiled" criticism of Pat's actions in regards to ProTeam licenses. Team CEOs are obviously very concerned with how Pat is wielding his power over licenses. If Pat were to "drop a hint" to a few riders (and perhaps a friendly financial backer), you could see the development of a new team happen very quickly, and a liability to the sport go away very quickly. What makes you think that Pat wasn't giving AS's new backers a "sneak peek" at things to come?

I'd say that for Riis to end up with a dope-guilty Contador and the loss of the rest of his team smells of a political tom-foolery. Riis was just shown the door (in a polite way).
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EpilepticTrees
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Berzin said:
It is not so much Contador they are trying to protect-it's the shame of having yet another Tour rider stripped of his yellow jersey.
Let's put this in perspective. If AC's blood had been the blood that L'Equipe had discovered to be positive for EPO, it would have been the "greatest fraud" and that statement would have come from McQuaid, not Lemond. Contador is a Tour winner, not a UCI legend.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
I watched the same show 30 for 30 last night. I was in college about the time this really came to the head. I remember many of the details while it was going on / playing out in the media. You caught something in the story that I caught as well. I would not be surprised if that is what is playing out with this. Maybe the “got to make payroll” goes on in such a way with the UCI that if they cut it off someone will be disgruntled and unload the entire pay to ride deals that must be happening.
I think there's a "We're all in this together" fraud happening, and perhaps this is why JV is often so elusive and careful about what he's saying. The more years that tick-by, the harder it is for people to come clean.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
spanky wanderlust said:
..."ooh. i love ivan and want to have his babies. but vacansoleil is like, totally brilliant for hiring that ricco kid. i mean, like, how many giros has HE won? besides, basso only 'intended' to dope."....
The other difference between basso and Ricco is that Ricco gave some information to get a shorter sanction. Perhaps it's omerta breakers that Pat is allergic to.

He really needs to cut the BS with this 4 year thing too. Riders can get out of it by accepting liability in a timely manner and Pat knows it. So he needs to stop pretending it is something he can make happen, when the UCI is actually bound by the WADA code. It is so transparently a sound-bite to fool the lumpen proletariat.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,296
0
0
2011 is in 3 weeks

Hardly a major prediction. No Spanish hearing date is set and the court of arbitration could take months if the UCI wanted to appeal a decision made by Spain.
Saying this won't end before next year is in my mind obvious. Even if cleared I doubt Alberto will race before Paris Nice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS