Michael Rogers positive for clenbuterol

[Dear Wiggo]

t I think I read last year that Froome was tested 3 times on the rest day. Good - proves they were doing something right.

You think you read something, therefore it proves UCI (or whoever) are doing something right?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Teflon guy slipping out of this positive test:

Wow.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Good. Would have been absurd to ban him as explained when the positive came out.
OK, my POV again is against the majority of the clinic. But OTOH, if this was a UCI or WADA panel, nobody would be riding, no matter if postive, positive because of special circumstances, or negative...

 

[BYOP88]

Wow, what did Kreuziger do wrong apart from that he rides for Contador? So did Porte-target-test him too. Target-test BMC because of Rihs and Ochowicz. Kwiatkowski because of Ibarguren. Do you see how unfair your argument is?

I'd hardly class what Porte did for Contador in 2011, as riding for him. Porte was too busy dreaming about the big contract he 'deserved' in the autobus

 

[melkemugg]

The decision seems right for me. No matter how drug grazed the clinic believe the peloton is, I dont think anyone at this level is dumb enough to dope on clenbuterol,

 

[doperhopper]

what else can be found in the chinese food? time will tell

 

[Catwhoorg]

Dont athletres/cyclists only have to declare where they will be for only an hour a day?

No.

Whereabouts has two elements.
1) a general description of a days activities, plus where you will be spending the night. (Staying at home, general training ride around such and such)
2) a specific location for an hour per day (usually early morning, where they spend the night) (at home 6am to 7am)

Testers can try to to find an athlete anytime.

Failure to be at the location specified at 2) counts as a 'strike' if someone comes knocking.
Failure of a tester to find someone outside the window doesn't count as a strike, but they do at times go looking.

Failure to keep 1) reasonably upto date, also counts as a 'strike'.

(obviously some leeway is given, say if the rider was in an accident and hospitalised, they aren't going to be penalized for a failure to amend theyr whereabouts until they have had a chance to recover a bit)

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

The decision seems right for me. No matter how drug grazed the clinic believe the peloton is, I dont think anyone at this level is dumb enough to dope on clenbuterol,

not to mention at the back end of october for the japan cup.

 

[Benotti69]

The decision seems right for me. No matter how drug grazed the clinic believe the peloton is, I dont think anyone at this level is dumb enough to dope on clenbuterol,

not to mention at the back end of october for the japan cup.

You both have a full and comprehensive understanding of how doping works and specifically clenbuterol?

Good, please explain the PED use of Clen for a cyclist.

 

[darwin553]

I think it is a reasonable decision - I also think the majority of doubters (which is also the majority in this thread ) owe Franklin an apology.

 

[GJB123]

There is really very little we can say on the likelihood it was food contamination or something else without having any facts or numbers to go on. Who knows perhaps the amount found can be fully constant with food contamination, perhaps not.

I was really hoping there would have been some clarity on the facts and numbers so that people an actually understand if it was or wasn't food contamination. As it stands we actually have no certainty either way.

 

[hrotha]

Having the figures of his clen levels wouldn't have proven anything, except in some very specific scenarios. You can get ridiculous amounts of clen by eating highly contaminated meat, and it'll take a while for your body to clear it. Bear in mind people have been hospitalized for clen poisoning in the past, so there's plenty of room for a rider with no symptoms to display values that are seemingly off the roof but still caused by contamination.

This is why a clen threshold doesn't make sense.

 

[RownhamHill]

Having the figures of his clen levels wouldn't have proven anything, except in some very specific scenarios. You can get ridiculous amounts of clen by eating highly contaminated meat, and it'll take a while for your body to clear it. Bear in mind people have been hospitalized for clen poisoning in the past, so there's plenty of room for a rider with no symptoms to display values that are seemingly off the roof but still caused by contamination.

This is why a clen threshold doesn't make sense.

And likewise, you could pick up trace amounts of Clen in a test of someone who had been doping, just because you happened to test on the last day that the final bits of the dose cleared the system. So unless you've got something to compare to (like Contador's negative test for Clen the day before the positive test for trace amounts) the level found doesn't really tell you much about the likelihood of contamination.

 

[Master50]

I think CONTADOR must be upset a bit with the news, well knowing of his punishment for the same offense was 2 years, titles stripped & millions of Euros on Lawyers, while MR just "walks away clean" ....

Ironic, isn't it?

I wonder if the idea that Contador was targeted ever sinks in here? could it be no one believes the anti doping crowd actually wants to catch anyone? The change in Labs, the attempt at the plasticizer test validation, the very minute quantity, They were trying to make a blood doping case against AC and the Clen was the ticket. That the testers were bumbling along might be consistent with their perceived competence but AC was popped for doping because he was. I am thinking AC dodged the real bullet which was aimed to prove blood manipulation. That he served a suspension for Clen can always be spun as overzealous enforcement.
The number of clem positives arising from contaminated Meat in China and Mexico certainly gives that excuse traction when MR was in China. The other thing is the Clen at this point in his season does not make sense either as the use of clem is usually during training periods rather than competition where it is easily detectable.
AC tried to deflect his positive with a lame claim his food was contaminated in a part of Europe where there is no supporting evidence including random checks of butcher shops. In China there are all kinds of contamination sources in the food chain. In this context I think the correct penalties were applied as the decisions from several other sports support.
If anything the popular notion that MR is doping probably reflect the greater disappointment of this crowd that he did not get popped too.

 

[Benotti69]

Contador may have been target tested at the behest of Hein's friend But that McQuaid tried hard to keep it under wraps till a German TV journalist uncovered it kind of makes it hard to know whether UCI were pro or anti Contador.

 

[BYOP88]

I'm glad that Dirty Bertie got busted. More cheats need to be caught and thrown out, but that won't happen whilst the UCI are in charge of anti-doping or whilst they're wasting $$$$ on testing samples from the past.

Now conspiracy mode for a minute:

I wouldn't be that shocked or surprised if Lance did make a call to some high up friends and tip them off. I'm sure in 2010 Armstrong was aware he wasn't going to win anymore TdF's and also thought that he'd never lose the 7 he 'won'. So at the time Dirty Bertie was the guy closest to beating 7 TdF wins.

Anyway back to the real world.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I'm glad that Dirty Bertie got busted. More cheats need to be caught and thrown out, but that won't happen whilst the UCI are in charge of anti-doping or whilst they're wasting $$$$ on testing samples from the past.

Now conspiracy mode for a minute:

I wouldn't be that shocked or surprised if Lance did make a call to some high up friends and tip them off. I'm sure in 2010 Armstrong was aware he wasn't going to win anymore TdF's and also thought that he'd never lose the 7 he 'won'. So at the time Dirty Bertie was the guy closest to beating 7 TdF wins.

Anyway back to the real world.

Hmmm I think it was Lance and Hein.... Grrr

 

[Justico]

Hmmm I think it was Lance and Hein.... Grrr

seems they did only half of the job

pistol salute on champs elysee 2014 will be the final nail in the coffin. Just needs Valverde and Frank Schlek on the podium with Bertie to stamp it final.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I wonder if the idea that Contador was targeted ever sinks in here?...

AC tried to deflect his positive with a lame claim his food was contaminated in a part of Europe where there is no supporting evidence including random checks of butcher shops. In China there are all kinds of contamination sources in the food chain. In this context I think the correct penalties were applied as the decisions from several other sports support.
If anything the popular notion that MR is doping probably reflect the greater disappointment of this crowd that he did not get popped too.

People tend to forget that the Contador and Rogers case are driven by the anti-doping rules of the UCI. Contador was popped (and it may be he was being targeted) but he could not prove his excuse. Rogers was popped and could prove his excuse. The operable sections of the rules are 295 and 296 as follows,

Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substances under Specific Circumstances

295. Where a Rider or Rider Support Personnel can establish how a Specified Substance entered his body or came into his possession and that such Specified Substance was not intended to enhance the Rider’s sporting performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance, the period of Ineligibility for a first violation found in article 293 shall be replaced with the following: at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility from future Events, and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility.

To justify any elimination or reduction, the License-Holder must produce corroborating evidence in addition to his word which establishes to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel the absence of an intent to enhance sport performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance. The License-Holder’s degree of fault shall be the criterion considered in assessing any reduction of the period of Ineligibility.


Elimination or Reduction of Period of Ineligibility based on Exceptional Circumstances

No Fault or Negligence

296. If the Rider establishes in an individual case that he bears No Fault or Negligence, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated. When a Prohibited Substance or its Markers or Metabolites is detected in a Rider’s Sample as referred to in article 21.1 (presence of a Prohibited Substance), the Rider must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his system in order to have the period of Ineligibility eliminated. In the event this article is applied and the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable is eliminated, the anti-doping rule violation shall not be considered a violation for the limited purpose of determining the period of Ineligibility for multiple violations under Articles 306 to 312

 

[Benotti69]

People tend to forget that the Contador and Rogers case are driven by the anti-doping rules of the UCI. Contador was popped (and it may be he was being targeted) but he could not prove his excuse. Rogers was popped and could prove his excuse. The operable sections of the rules are 295 and 296 as follows,

Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substances under Specific Circumstances

295. Where a Rider or Rider Support Personnel can establish how a Specified Substance entered his body or came into his possession and that such Specified Substance was not intended to enhance the Rider’s sporting performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance, the period of Ineligibility for a first violation found in article 293 shall be replaced with the following: at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility from future Events, and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility.

To justify any elimination or reduction, the License-Holder must produce corroborating evidence in addition to his word which establishes to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel the absence of an intent to enhance sport performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance. The License-Holder’s degree of fault shall be the criterion considered in assessing any reduction of the period of Ineligibility.


Elimination or Reduction of Period of Ineligibility based on Exceptional Circumstances

No Fault or Negligence

296. If the Rider establishes in an individual case that he bears No Fault or Negligence, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated. When a Prohibited Substance or its Markers or Metabolites is detected in a Rider’s Sample as referred to in article 21.1 (presence of a Prohibited Substance), the Rider must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his system in order to have the period of Ineligibility eliminated. In the event this article is applied and the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable is eliminated, the anti-doping rule violation shall not be considered a violation for the limited purpose of determining the period of Ineligibility for multiple violations under Articles 306 to 312

Why do you believe Rogers could prove his case and UCI didn't want another doping story?

Contador's Clen positive was not meant to come out remember.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Benotti69

Why do you believe Rogers could prove his case and UCI didn't want another doping story?

Part of the problem continues to be lack of transparency by the UCI. They issue a press release in effect saying they accepted Rogers explanation but then they don't tell us what that explanation was. So it leaves the UCI open to the very suggestion/criticism you are implying. I cannot understand why the UCI doesn't get this.

Contador's Clen positive was not meant to come out remember

I am not so sure about this. IMO he was being targeted by the UCI for reasons we will probably never know only suspect.

 

[Night Rider]

Part of the problem continues to be lack of transparency by the UCI. They issue a press release in effect saying they accepted Rogers explanation but then they don't tell us what that explanation was. So it leaves the UCI open to the very suggestion/criticism you are implying. I cannot understand why the UCI doesn't get this.

It's almost like McQuaid never left. They just don't get it.

If you're going to circumvent the normal anti-doping process then they should be absolutely transparent about it. This is just smoke and mirrors from all concerned.

 

[Master50]

It's almost like McQuaid never left. They just don't get it.

If you're going to circumvent the normal anti-doping process then they should be absolutely transparent about it. This is just smoke and mirrors from all concerned.

Whether they get it or not they are operating under their rules which is what most people supporting Cookson seemed to think would change with the president. Pat was not intransigent he was compelled. Cookson will soon learn his boundaries and we will ***** about it.

 

[Master50]

Didn't want to repost the details as B69 already has and offered his glib thoughtless reply.
Nice to see you bothered to look it up.

Too many think anti doping is clairvoyant or should be. I guess there are a few here that understand the process.
Thanks for the post.

 

[ebandit]

?

was it necesary for UCI to allow leniency in support of world tour event

where many teams would prefer to send their b team

Mark L