• 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!

Mosquera: Finally the UCI Demand Action

Jan 14, 2011
504
0
0
Visit site
another joke - the UCI need to make the decision themselves and stop passing the buck, and then inevitably appeal when they dont like the verdict to claim credibility - IF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION MAKES A DECISION STICK WITH IT, IF YOUR NOT HAPPY MAKE IT YOURSELF IN THE FIRST PLACE.

rant over
 
Cloxxki said:
What about sacrifycing him to let Contador walk? It will seem less biased when one is hung and one let go.
Except that the one let go tested positive for something that can be sanctioned and the one that gets hung tested positive for something that can't?

The question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why is he being hung out to dry in limbo?

The next question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why not?

And following from that:

if he CAN be sanctioned, why hasn't he been?
 
Dec 30, 2010
850
0
0
Visit site
The modus operandi

Cloxxki said:
What about sacrifycing him to let Contador walk? It will seem less biased when one is hung and one let go.


I believe that Spain's modus operandi is to sacrifice the lesser athletes to protect the elite "heroes". Still need sufficient evidence though.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
Except that the one let go tested positive for something that can be sanctioned and the one that gets hung tested positive for something that can't?

The question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why is he being hung out to dry in limbo?

The next question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why not?

And following from that:

if he CAN be sanctioned, why hasn't he been?

How is testing positive for something that can't get into the body by any legal means can not be sanctioned?
 
roundabout said:
How is testing positive for something that can't get into the body by any legal means can not be sanctioned?

If he can be sanctioned, why hasn't he been?

It's on WADA's list but not the UCI's, or on the UCI's but not WADA's. There's some problem regarding sanctioning HES. That's why Óscar Sevilla is still riding too. They nailed David García because he took enough EPO for it still to be detectable on retest. Mosquera didn't, so the HES is all they have to sanction him on.

It's a stupid loophole, but it's a loophole nonetheless.

I got the feeling that they felt like they couldn't ban him but wanted rid of him anyway so tried to put it off indefinitely while leaning heavily on his team not to use him.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Lanark said:
It looks like the Spanish Anti-doping Agency and UCI have discovered that it can't be proven if HES is taken intravenously:

http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/noticias-ficha.asp?id=41517

Looks like we'll be seeing Mosquera back on the road really soon.

If i read it correctly,
the research was done, and the claims made, by the Spanish Anti Doping Agency.
The article doesn'T say whether the UCI agrees or will agree with their conclusions.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
Except that the one let go tested positive for something that can be sanctioned and the one that gets hung tested positive for something that can't?

The question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why is he being hung out to dry in limbo?

The next question is:

if he can't be sanctioned, why not?

And following from that:

if he CAN be sanctioned, why hasn't he been?

To be honest, the main reason why he isn't racing is because Vacansoleil doesn't let him.
Contador is under investigation, and he is riding. Not because the uci allows him and doesn't allow mosquera, but because his teammanagement decided to race him and vacansoleil decided not to race mosquera. Which made sense after the ricco fiasco, but now it is taking very very long.
 
Dec 21, 2010
513
0
0
Visit site
Roninho said:
Contador is under investigation, and he is riding.

Wrong - Contador has been investigated and cleared (correctly or otherwise), and that clearance is undergoing an appeal.

Whilst this situation remains, he must be considered as "INNOCENT". Once the appeal has been heard, a decision given and any/all other avenues of appeal by either party have been exhausted, then the situation will be resolved, but at present, Contador is allowed to race.

Mosquera is in a peculiar limbo situation, and one which his lawyers and his employer may be in dispute over - we simply do not know.
 
sniper said:
If i read it correctly,
the research was done, and the claims made, by the Spanish Anti Doping Agency.
The article doesn'T say whether the UCI agrees or will agree with their conclusions.
I wouldn't think it suspect just because a Spanish agency did it. After all, they concluded this starch can't be ingested via contaminated food, which means Mosquera must have taken it at some point either by willing taking the stuff (for whatever reason - and he never argued he took it orally) or via a contaminated supplement (which he hasn't produced, and which as far as I know has never been part of his defense). As things stand, this should be enough at least for a one-year no-significant-neglicence-of-his-own suspension, shouldn't it?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
I wouldn't think it suspect just because a Spanish agency did it. After all, they concluded this starch can't be ingested via contaminated food, which means Mosquera must have taken it at some point either by willing taking the stuff (for whatever reason - and he never argued he took it orally) or via a contaminated supplement (which he hasn't produced, and which as far as I know has never been part of his defense). As things stand, this should be enough at least for a one-year no-significant-neglicence-of-his-own suspension, shouldn't it?

you'Re right of course.
and to be sure, my intention was not to raise suspicion, but to point out that the UCI is still to express their stance.
In fact, I think, reading the article, that this investigation must have been relatively impartial / unbiased.
The RFEC wasn't involved, correct?
 
Andynonomous said:
I believe that Spain's modus operandi is to sacrifice the lesser athletes to protect the elite "heroes". Still need sufficient evidence though.

Its the same everywhere in that regard. Most countries like to say that cycling is the doping sport and all the ones which make them real money are clean. Cyclists (who cares about them) are evil, unlike footballers or tennis players who would never touch drugs if only because they realize they represent their country and their sport. They are true heroes.

At least Spain freed a lesser athlete like Contador and tried to with an even lesser one like Valverde.

I dont think that could happen in a country like Germany which would use any positive to try to finish the sport.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
The Hitch said:
Its the same everywhere in that regard. Most countries like to say that cycling is the doping sport and all the ones which make them real money are clean. Cyclists (who cares about them) are evil, unlike footballers or tennis players who would never touch drugs if only because they realize they represent their country and their sport. They are true heroes.

At least Spain freed a lesser athlete like Contador and tried to with an even lesser one like Valverde.

I dont think that could happen in a country like Germany which would use any positive to try to finish the sport.

By letting AC off the hook, Spanish sports has done themselves a hughe disfavor.
Basically all spanish accomplishments in sports are highly suspicious now in the eyes of the world.
Which is why I don't really understand why they didn't sacrifice AC, if only to clean up Spain's image in sports.

And all this regardless of whether it's also happening in other countries, which it obviously is. The point is, AC was such an obvious cheater, that letting him off the hook raised a lot of eyebrows, especially after Puerto.
 
May 8, 2009
837
0
0
Visit site
I found it funny in the CN article "hyroxyethyl starch may be used as a masking agent for EPO, for which he did not test positive." Wouldn't be a very good masking agent if he did test positive would it?
 
Bumeington said:
I found it funny in the CN article "hyroxyethyl starch may be used as a masking agent for EPO, for which he did not test positive." Wouldn't be a very good masking agent if he did test positive would it?
His teammate García Dapena tested positive for hydroxyethyl starch and EPO. Hydroxyethyl starch is just a plasma expander. It's not magic, you still have to do it right.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
Visit site
Bumeington said:
I found it funny in the CN article "hyroxyethyl starch may be used as a masking agent for EPO, for which he did not test positive." Wouldn't be a very good masking agent if he did test positive would it?

HES only masks an increase in Hct and Hb.
 

TRENDING THREADS