Michael Rasmussen "Chicken" missed contract with Ceramica Flaminia

[issoisso]

Does anyone have a definite source for saying that the UCI pressured the team not to sign him, like a statement from the team to that effect? Or even a statement that the team was interested in signing him at all? Why would they want to sign him when they will have Ricco on the team?

Susan

I'm pretty sure it has to be on feltet.dk. That's basically the only place that reports news on danish riders/teams that are only later repeated by other sources.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I found it on feltet. As I understand it, Ceramica asked the UCI about signing Rasmussen and the UCI pointed out that Austria is investigating him in the Human Plasma/Kohl/blood centrifuge business. As a result of his being involved in an ongoing doping investigation, the team decided not to sign him.

I am certainly not an apologist for the UCI, but I fail to see how that is "blacklisting" him.

Susan

 

[M Sport]

As far as I know, the charter only applies to convicted dopers, and since Rasmussen hasn't been found guilty of the actual use of doping, he should not be forced to repay his salary...

The charter covers anti-doping violations so that covers positive tests, test violations including missed tests, etc.

If I were to suggest a defence for chicken on the salary issue I would go in on the signed under duress angle. All the riders had to sign or they weren't allowed to start the 2007 TDF.

 

[barrlley]

I'm not sure why everyone gives him such a hard time. He lied about where he was, still never got caught for any drugs, and had to take a suspension. Now
I'm sure he was on some magic sauce, but who isn't?

As far as I am concerned he should be allowed back, as he did his time, for something that was rather uncontroversial. Basso is back, Scarponi is back, Virenque cam back and everyone loved him. I don't think you can pick and choose who you want to return and who you don't. Its not a popularity contest.

 

[Bala Verde]

As best I remember, those "technicalities" are considered to be equal to a doping violation, so they carry the same sanctions.

Susan

But that's what Rasmussen, as far as I read, was (trying) to put in doubt.

If some action is defined as being equal to the use of doping, and therefore, by the existence of this very definition, the action itself was indeed not the same as the use of doping, how should the 'use of doping' in the charter he signed be interpreted. Does it suit a narrow (only use of actual doping) or wide (anything that amounts to a doping sanction) interpretation

I don't know if he has a case, but I guess that's for his lawyers to figure out.

Technicalities, the cyclist's redemption.... as well as the precondition for the existence of a wide range of lawyers i guess...

 

[Bala Verde]

The charter covers anti-doping violations so that covers positive tests, test violations including missed tests, etc.

If I were to suggest a defence for chicken on the salary issue I would go in on the signed under duress angle. All the riders had to sign or they weren't allowed to start the 2007 TDF.

Wasn't that issue already brought before CAS, and aren't they working on it now?

 

[Bala Verde]

As best I remember, those "technicalities" are considered to be equal to a doping violation, so they carry the same sanctions.

Susan

The charter covers anti-doping violations so that covers positive tests, test violations including missed tests, etc.

I stand corrected. Apparently this is the full text of what the riders had to sign (?):

“I do solemnly declare, to my team, my colleagues, the UCI, the cycling movement and the public that I am not involved in the [Operacion] Puerto [blood doping] affair nor in any other doping case and that I will not commit any infringement to the UCI anti-doping rules. As proof of my commitment, I accept, if it should happen that I violate the rules and am granted a standard sanction of a two-year suspension or more, in the Puerto affair or in any other anti-doping proceedings, to pay the UCI, in addition to the standard sanctions, an amount equal to my annual salary for 2007 as a contribution to the fight against doping.

“At the same time, I declare to the Spanish Law, that my DNA is at its disposal, so that it can be compared with the blood samples seized in the Puerto affair. I appeal to the Spanish Law to organise this test as soon as possible or allow the UCI to organise it. Finally, I accept the UCI’s wish to make my statement public.”

 

[LugHugger]

First of all he didn't dope. No evidence has been found to that end. If you claim he has doped, please procure some solid facts, or STFU. I'm annoyed that some people in their armchairs can possibly know who doped and who didnt - if he didnt test positive he didnt dope, end of line.

Second, why shouldnt he be let back? Basso, Valverde and a whole other bunch who indeed has been found guilty of doping are racing - but you think Rasmussen shouldn't be allowed back in?

Blimey What is it with you Danes? I work for a Danish company and 75% of you seem to think that he's whiter than white and holier than thou. Imo, the weight of circumstantial evidence and his behavior would lead any sane person to draw the same conclusions as the UCI and ASO. Oh, and neither Basso or Valverde have been found guilty of doping. Please do your homework before posting.

 

[elapid]

Blimey What is it with you Danes? I work for a Danish company and 75% of you seem to think that he's whiter than white and holier than thou. Imo, the weight of circumstantial evidence and his behavior would lead any sane person to draw the same conclusions as the UCI and ASO. Oh, and neither Basso or Valverde have been found guilty of doping. Please do your homework before posting.

Basso admitted to "attempted [or intended] doping". This makes him equally as guilty as Rasmussen of doping infringements according to the UCI regulations, which is also the same as having actually doped.

CONI has found Valverde guilty of doping. Splitting hairs, but still he has been found guilty.

 

[LugHugger]

Basso admitted to "attempted [or intended] doping". This makes him equally as guilty as Rasmussen of doping infringements according to the UCI regulations, which is also the same as having actually doped.

CONI has found Valverde guilty of doping. Splitting hairs, but still he has been found guilty.

True, I'm being a pedant but technically correct After all, Valverde is still riding (outside of Italy)....

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

True, I'm being a pedant but technically correct After all, Valverde is still riding (outside of Italy)....

And the UCI is reviewing the matter, to consider extending the ban to all racing.

Susan

 

[LugHugger]

Thank you, Susan. I think that raises interesting questions about where Contador goes next season if the ban is extended. Time to switch threads

 

[mr. tibbs]

There IS a history of blacklisting and double standards by the UCI, unoffical or otherwise. I would point out guys like Mancebo and Sevilla who, as far as I am aware, have never been officially sanctioned but have no chance of riding for a ProTour team. Why is that? Ditto with the majority of guys who get popped. I doubt we'll see Jaksche or Sinkewitz (sp?) back in the ProTour ranks any time soon.

But then Basso and Millar, et al, get, essentially, a free ride back. Is this owing to their retrospective contrition and half-*ssed confessions? If so, then that's lame. If a rider serves the prescribed ban, he should be allowed back whether he throws a bone to the AD crusaders or not.

Sorry to re-post something that has been expressed already (and, in most cases, better) by other posters in this thread, but grr !

 

[psychlist]

I found it on feltet. As I understand it, Ceramica asked the UCI about signing Rasmussen and the UCI pointed out that Austria is investigating him in the Human Plasma/Kohl/blood centrifuge business. As a result of his being involved in an ongoing doping investigation, the team decided not to sign him.

I am certainly not an apologist for the UCI, but I fail to see how that is "blacklisting" him.

Susan

Thank you for this Susan.

 

[LugHugger]

There IS a history of blacklisting and double standards by the UCI, unoffical or otherwise. I would point out guys like Mancebo and Sevilla who, as far as I am aware, have never been officially sanctioned but have no chance of riding for a ProTour team. Why is that? Ditto with the majority of guys who get popped. I doubt we'll see Jaksche or Sinkewitz (sp?) back in the ProTour ranks any time soon.

But then Basso and Millar, et al, get, essentially, a free ride back. Is this owing to their retrospective contrition and half-*ssed confessions? If so, then that's lame. If a rider serves the prescribed ban, he should be allowed back whether he throws a bone to the AD crusaders or not.

Sorry to re-post something that has been expressed already (and, in most cases, better) by other posters in this thread, but grr !

Yep, I agree. Although I think that people's general attitude to those riders who have at least expressed some contrition for their actions is better than those who continue to deny and drag their cases through the courts.

 

[analo69]

Could you send me those links, please?

Susan

Here are a more comprehensive article:

http://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/cykling/article1200729.ece

The quotes on feltet.dk are only the most important quotes from this article from a Danish tabloid newspaper.

here is another article on the same subject.

http://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/cykling/article1200733.ece

Michael Rasmussen is qouted for saying that one more reason for flaminia not signing him was that the organizers of Tour of Denmark were relectant accepting him in the race.

Actually there has always been a lot of controversy between the DCU (Danish Cycling Union who also organize Tour of Denmark) and Michael Rasmussen. The DCU is a small organisation with only a few employees and the press management is not at all proffesional. The director of DCU Jesper Worre (former pro) is known for disliking Michael Rasmussen, and in Denmark among some cycling fans he is also known as the man who slughtered the chicken(Michael Rasmussen).

It started during the TDF 2007 when Jesper Worre out of the blue contacted a newspaper and told them that Michael Rasmussen was no longer welcome on the Danish national team because he had 2 whereabouts violation. There is no problem in having 2 whereabouts violations. You are allowed as far as i recall to have 3 violations within a couple of years. Michaels third violation being the one he was convicted for after the tour - the infamous "mexico lie" brought public by the Italian tour commentator who sid he saw Michael in the Dolomites before the tour, where he was supposed to be in Mexico. Remember here that Rabobank was aware of Michael beeing in Italy instead og Mexico. He even had meetings with Rabobank staff i Italy, and Rabobank was later on found guilty of sacking him unrightfully. The Dutch court even found that Rasmussen should be paid a lot of money for unrightfully sacking and some money should even cover the prize money he would have received if he had stayed in teh TDF and won.

Nevertheless the director Jesper Worre saw it fit to publicly announce that he had 2 violations,allthoug this was no problem with the UCI or Rabobank. After this there was a lot of focus on his whereabouts and it became eventually known that he had 3 whereabouts violations. Jesper Worre didn't know this when he went public.

Rasmussen has always been a loner and no friend of the established Danish cycling community, and I guess Worre just disliked him.

Worre is also the race director of Tour of Denmark and a couple of weeks ago Rasmussen asked the DCU if he could participate in Tour Of Denmark, but he never received an answer from DCU. Because there was some more controversy. DCU requested to know what team he would race for, and Rasmussen said he could only find a team if he was allowed to race But after the race started a couple of days ago Worre publicly announced that Rasmussen was welcome. Too late of course.

My opinion is that Worre dislikes Rasmussen who dislikes Worre and this is the prime reason Rasmussen is not racing in the Tour of Denmark. This controversy has been going on for a number of years because Rasmussen was so succesfull, but didn't want to have anything to do with DCU.

I know from sources within DCU that this crusade against Rasmussen is in fact spearheaded by Jesper Worre. The problem is that a very few people are in charge of everything within DCU and the Tour of Denmark, and some journalist in Denmark favour DCU and some favour Rasmussen. The result is an unpretty mess with no end in sight.

Hoped the post helped you to understand at least some of the inner workings of the Rasmussen case. My hope is that he will succeed finding a team and will ride a couple of grand tour before it is too late. A talent of this magnitude shouldn't be forced to stop because of some stupid cycling politics.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Thank you.

Susan

 

[Irish2009]

Just to clear up one point. Miller was allowed sign to a Pro Tour as his suspension was pre-pro tour.

Now to add fuel to the fire, Rasmussen signed chararter and is now in a legal battle over it while Bettini didn't sign charter before the world champs and went on to win(Stuttgart)!

 

[TrapperJohn]

It is disconcerting to see this arbitrary application of anti doping. If Chicken was known by the UCI to be doping, and that's why they made their non recommendation, then the reasons for this should be public. If they don't know for sure, then they should keep their mouthes shut.

The process itself should be at least as transparent as the riders are expected to be. If Chicken gets banned because he can't account for his whereabouts, perhaps the UCI should serve a suspension for not saying why they blackballed him. Fighting doping isn't easy, but be sure that the cure isn't worse than the disease. If the UCI, or ASO, or whomever, is going to pick and choose who they don't like, and keep the process for those selections under wraps, then cycling is no longer a test of the fittest. It becomes a political game.

Or should I say, it's political nature becomes blatantly obvious. Don't know about the rest of you, but I can't see myself cheering on a rider for their insider connections. "Contador's smooching of McQuaids **** has really paid off on this stage" "Boonen swept to the front of this sprint, having slept with Ms Amaury last night"

I have to deal with enough of that at work as it is. Ride bikes and follow pro racing to get away from that, not to support it.

 

[SarahDane]

I'm not sure why everyone gives him such a hard time. He lied about where he was, still never got caught for any drugs, and had to take a suspension. Now
I'm sure he was on some magic sauce, but who isn't?

As far as I am concerned he should be allowed back, as he did his time, for something that was rather uncontroversial. Basso is back, Scarponi is back, Virenque cam back and everyone loved him. I don't think you can pick and choose who you want to return and who you don't. Its not a popularity contest.

Ditto that!

 

[ThisFrenchGuy]

Did somebody say inconsistenUCI?

If it is true the UCI is "advising" behind the scenes, one wonders what are their reasons to apply such double standards.

 

[ingsve]

Rasmussen had a contract ready with Ceramica Flaminia, but UCI adviced them not to sign him = UCI has blacklisted Rasmussen.

Rasmussen says they had big plans with him, they were going to try to helt him win the Giro next year. He still has hopes though, that SOME team out there will sign him. (I really have A LOT of respect for him now, it's very impressive how he can still keep his head high.) I believe Ceramica Flaminia are cowards. And the UCI guys a HYPOCRITS! But it's no suprise AT ALL. And what's even worse, the DCU, (danish cycle union) has played a big part of the blacklisting of Michael.

What are your thoughts on this? Personally, I'm FURIOUS! He needs to COME BACK!

Sorry for my not-so-perfect english.

If there actaully is a blacklist then I'm all for it 100%. Blacklist everyone that gets caught with no exceptions. I don't care if everyone is cheating and only the stupid people get caught. As soon as there is proof that somone cheated then get rid of them.

Now the only thing to demand is some consistency...

 

[scribe]

.... Although The Chicken versus Il Pistolero would be worth watching again....

That would be as awesome as watching McGuire and Bonds go at it in a home run derby.

 

[SarahDane]

If there actaully is a blacklist then I'm all for it 100%. Blacklist everyone that gets caught with no exceptions. I don't care if everyone is cheating and only the stupid people get caught. As soon as there is proof that somone cheated then get rid of them.

Now the only thing to demand is some consistency...

Exactly, you can't let guys like Ricco and Basso ride again just because they are Italian, and likeable (the last only applies to Basso. ;-)) and not let Michael race again, just because he's not. (more likeable now though, I think. )

 

[Bagster]

Look at you statement. Do you see a problem here?

At the end of the day, the guy has served his suspension just the same as Basso, Millar, Landis and others and there should now be no barriers put in place by the UCI or anyone else to stop him returning to the sport. Otherwise what the point of having a two year ban, they may as well just ban him for life. The reason they will give of course is his possible involvement in ongoing doping investigations, but any involvement he may have had would have been prior to his ban so its all just crap really.