• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Miguel Ángel Lopez Discussion Thread

Page 59 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I understand the difference, but sponsors doesn't neccessarily about the difference between 🐈 [cat image] and 💉🧪[injection and lab images]?

it's a non-story. the cat story was forgotten by the public and it's just some people on here and twitter still going on and on every time Tiberi is on screen or named in any thread. what he did is terrible and surely very bad. but ask any team if they prefer an UCI investigation or some wrong doing by one of their riders outside the sport.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: noob
it's a non-story. the cat story was forgotten by the public and it's just some people on here and twitter still going on and on every time Tiberi is on screen or named in any thread. what he did is terrible and surely very bad. but ask any team if they prefer an UCI investigation or some wrong doing by one of their riders outside the sport.
Too bad. The side effect of cancel culture is no one getting cancelled so I was hoping that would include the madman. I want the madman back!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick2413
UCI statement concerning Miguel Ángel López

The Tribunal found Miguel Ángel López guilty of an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) for use and possession of a prohibited substance (Menotropin)*, concomitantly with the 2022 Giro d’Italia, and has imposed a four-year suspension on the rider.

In accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code and the UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the period of suspension started on 25 July 2023 and will remain in force until 24 July 2027.
 
UCI statement concerning Miguel Ángel López

The Tribunal found Miguel Ángel López guilty of an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) for use and possession of a prohibited substance (Menotropin)*, concomitantly with the 2022 Giro d’Italia, and has imposed a four-year suspension on the rider.

In accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code and the UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the period of suspension started on 25 July 2023 and will remain in force until 24 July 2027.

Should this be moved to the clinic?
 
UCI statement concerning Miguel Ángel López

The Tribunal found Miguel Ángel López guilty of an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) for use and possession of a prohibited substance (Menotropin)*, concomitantly with the 2022 Giro d’Italia, and has imposed a four-year suspension on the rider.

In accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code and the UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the period of suspension started on 25 July 2023 and will remain in force until 24 July 2027.
Tough way to end a career. Honestly not sure when he went off the track but I enjoyed him as a pure climber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Should this be moved to the clinic?

Let the mods decide. imo, if it's official from the UCI it should stay, but who am I to say what belongs where.
I'm not sure quite how this has been handled in the past (@Red Rick ? @Eshnar?)
The prohibition of clinic talk in main space is, as I understand it, to avoid innuendo, rumour and accusation from diverting every discussion. Once a case has been proven (leaving aside whether anyone is convinced by such a hearing), that is no longer really an issue. It would seem churlish to prevent his article having the announcement of such a key factor in his career path.

But there is a Clinic thread for him now, so perhaps further discussion should be there, and this thread will probably wither on the vine a bit now, with only occsional posts relating to happier days of the past.

I'll watch the thread for a while, and move more obviously clinic stuff to the new thread over there.

Let me know if you strongly feel otherwise or this is out of keeping with precedent.
 
@Armchair cyclist There's always been double PRR/Clinic threads.

I wouldn't move a PRR thread to the Clinic unless it was explicitly Clinic talk. Now this thread can be for any rider updates unrelated to doping, and while sometimes the line is blurry, you don't wanna have to clean up the entire thread once/if the rider becomes active again
No, I certainly didn't mean moving the thread: just some posts hereafter if they are obviously more apposite there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noob
I think the question is whether clinic talk about official and confirmed clinic news, should be allowed here or deleted, modded, banned or moved. The rules as such are ridiculous, since they do not allow "clinic talk" in the PRR forum and it is "a doping free forum". I think the rules should be updated to make a clear distinction between discussing official/confirmed/objective reports be it from anti-doping authorities, police representatives, UCI, court etc. on one hand, and subjective mongering, accusations, insinuations etc on the other.

This is the MAL thread, his ban is an official UCI sanction and as such part of the professional road racing discussion. That means discussing his ban, what he took, how he got caught, whether he will ever return etc, should all be free of moderation. Talk about "he probably has been using his entire career" or "he must have been doping when he won TDS and podiumed the Giro" should not be allowed and be posted in the clinic forum. But that is not what current forum rules tell us.
 
The way I've always looked at it, talking about an official sanction is not "doping talk". That is, as long as the conversation does not devolve into more discussions about what exactly was done and how. For that kind of talk, you all know there is the Clinic.
Hopefully this makes sense. This is the place to talk about the effect, and not about the cause.
Being able to discuss official sanctions and objective facts, that would make sense. But the forum description reads: "A doping discussion free forum."

However, in the forum rules, i can no longer find anything on doping or clinic discussions, though i was banned last year for merely talking about other people making doping accusations, lol. So as long as it is not in the forum rules, and only in the forum description, it should be seen more as a "guideline" and not a bannable/modable offense? Maybe it should be cleared out in the forum rules, make a distinction between facts and official reports, as opposed to insinuations and accusations.
 
The clinic is a depressing place, an echo chamber for conspiraty theorists.

It makes perfect sense to not have to go there for a news item such as this.
Which is why it's also posted here. But if you want to discuss his case in itself (and not the consequences of his case which can often be discussed here just fine), it belongs in the other place.
 
Rigaberto Uran, Froome, Wout, all are trying to give a boost to events and federation in Colombia and surrounding countries.
UCI needs to send a stern warning about the number of people getting popped per capita, real opportunity to expand the calendar, lots more people ride bikes in Colombia more than UAE, or Saudi Arabia!! Just saying!! What is the UCI doing since 2022 Giro!!?
 
Rigaberto Uran, Froome, Wout, all are trying to give a boost to events and federation in Colombia and surrounding countries.
UCI needs to send a stern warning about the number of people getting popped per capita, real opportunity to expand the calendar, lots more people ride bikes in Colombia more than UAE, or Saudi Arabia!! Just saying!! What is the UCI doing since 2022 Giro!!?
Same thing as before the 2022 Giro. Looking for the money. And they don't find it where the riders and fans use to be.