Most disappointing drug suspension?

[samhocking]

How I understand the process before June 1st, is the lab could only report their findings as an AAF for Clenbutorol. What would then happen is the athlete asks for B sample (or not) and AAF is confirmed. Then as we saw with Contador, UCI & WADA appealed Spains decision to clear him, it went to CAS and Contador couldn't establish, on a balance of probability a) how the Prohibited Substance entered his body and b) that he committed no fault or negligence, or no significant fault or negligence and was banned for the full 2 years. That was despite his 4000 page legal evidence. Assuming he couldn't convince an ADO again with the investigation an ATF allows, one assumes UCI(CADF now) would reach the same conclusion and ban Contador similarly.

 

[rick james]

Re:

Take it the Contador thread guys

 

[samhocking]

Take Froome's to the Froome thread then?

 

[rick james]

Re:

Froome NOT being given a ban he should have had.

I think someone who was given a ban the most disappointing for me is Sammy Sanchez at the end of his career.

ban for being found innocent...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

What is this, the Mueller Report? Come on. Froome isn't Rui Costa. The conclusion was not that he was innocent. It was that they couldn't prove that the salbutamol hadn't got there by within-the-regs means, so they couldn't prove he was guilty.

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Froome NOT being given a ban he should have had.

I think someone who was given a ban the most disappointing for me is Sammy Sanchez at the end of his career.

ban for being found innocent...

Except he wasn't found innocent. They literally NEVER cleared him. Also his adjusted numbers are still HIGHER than Petachi's UNADJUSTED numbers.

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Froome NOT being given a ban he should have had.

I think someone who was given a ban the most disappointing for me is Sammy Sanchez at the end of his career.

This one actually pissed me off a little bit.

I'm guessing you're talking about Sanchez? From what I've read on other pages I think a lot of people agree with you.

 

[Ripper]

Re:

What is this, the Mueller Report? Come on. Froome isn't Rui Costa. The conclusion was not that he was innocent. It was that they couldn't prove that the salbutamol hadn't got there by within-the-regs means, so they couldn't prove he was guilty.

LOL - this is awesome!

 

[SafeBet]

Santi Perez was probably the one that hurt me the most.
I mean, he was the most obvious doper ever but the way he turned from zero to (super)hero after the first rest day in that Vuelta should warrant some kind of scientific award. I will never forget it.

 

[hrotha]

This is essentially "Who's your favourite rider that has been caught", so Camenzind. He was clearly past his prime at that point so it wasn't a huge loss, I wasn't even that bummed out, but it kinda sucked. Made easier to bear by the fact that he simply admitted his guilt straightaway and retired instantly, which I found rather dignified (although he did use some BS excuses).

 

[roundabout]

Carretero - disappointing on too many levels

 

[Koronin]

Re:

This is essentially "Who's your favourite rider that has been caught", so Camenzind. He was clearly past his prime at that point so it wasn't a huge loss, I wasn't even that bummed out, but it kinda sucked. Made easier to bear by the fact that he simply admitted his guilt straightaway and retired instantly, which I found rather dignified (although he did use some BS excuses).

As my answer to this question was Sammy Sanchez and my favorite rider has severed what amounted to a year and a half ban due to Operation Puerto, it would be incorrect to say this is a "Who's your favorite rider that as been caught".

 

[Black Betsy]

Re:

This is essentially "Who's your favourite rider that has been caught", so Camenzind. He was clearly past his prime at that point so it wasn't a huge loss, I wasn't even that bummed out, but it kinda sucked. Made easier to bear by the fact that he simply admitted his guilt straightaway and retired instantly, which I found rather dignified (although he did use some BS excuses).

He still has to co-author a book sharing the tools of the trade and return a medal, like the King Of Pain.

 

[Simurgh]

Re:

when Ricco almost killed himself doing his own blood transfusion before Paris-Nice in 2011. i never got to see him race live.

Riccó was before my time too, and even though I have watched some Youtube videos, it really isn't the same It sounds asinine, but I'd like to see him make a comeback when he is eligible to ride in 2023 just to truly witness how ridiculous he was: https://road.cc/content/news/234567-i-prefer-chemical-doping-mechanical-doping-says-riccardo-ricco

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Probably Laurent Fignon. What was even more disappointing was his way of saying "I'll admit it, I have no problem with this" in his autobiography and at the same time clearly trying to make it look casual. He basically said that (I think it was the summer of 1989, between the Tour and the worlds) he needed courage to go training so he took a pill of amphetamines. My point is... in order to do that you have to a/ possess amphetamines and b/know their effects. That's not casual. If I wanted to dope i really wouldn't know where to start. Anyway, that way of amitting without really admitting was disappointing and his book is full of that.

 

[rick james]

Re: Re:

Froome NOT being given a ban he should have had.

I think someone who was given a ban the most disappointing for me is Sammy Sanchez at the end of his career.

ban for being found innocent...

Except he wasn't found innocent. They literally NEVER cleared him. Also his adjusted numbers are still HIGHER than Petachi's UNADJUSTED numbers.

I think you are struggling to understand what happened, Froome never got charged, it didn't go to a hearing, he had no case to answer.....how you can try and spin it so it seems was he was guilty because he never to went to a tribunal to fight a charge is beyond me, that is seriously deluded way of looking at things...how the hell can they find him innocent or guilty of a charge that never existed?


He got asked to explain and abnormal finding, he explained it, so no charges were brought on him

 

[F_Cance]

interesting way to interpret the things that happened.

 

[spalco]

I'm hesistant to contribute turning this into another Froome thread, but, regardless of whether any "interpretation" is correct or not, cycling fans are under no obligation to accept let alone be happy with any verdict by UCI. It's factually true that Froome right now is legally allowed to race, but Koronin or anyone else also has a right to disagree with that, ineffective as his disagreement may be.

 

[rick james]

But you can’t be found innocent without a charge, it never went that far

 

[rick james]

Re:

interesting way to interpret the things that happened.

It’s all true what I said, anyone wanting to twist things differently has an agenda to stick to

 

[macbindle]

You have an agenda too.

 

[rick james]

Yes, that of the innocent....I’ll happily admit that

 

[rick james]

Well if that’s a bad agenda well colour me embarrassed

 

[macbindle]

lol

 

[Escarabajo]

Re: Re:

What is this, the Mueller Report? Come on. Froome isn't Rui Costa. The conclusion was not that he was innocent. It was that they couldn't prove that the salbutamol hadn't got there by within-the-regs means, so they couldn't prove he was guilty.

LOL - this is awesome!

:lol: