Next move = UCI

[Pazuzu]

What's the latest Clinic thinking on UCI's next moves?

Does this topic need a new thread? It's the main event now ... 19 days and ticking -- what will UCI do?

Yes!

I tend to think UCI will support the findings contained in USADAs Reasoned Decision. Trying to subvert its findings by claiming lack of jurisdiction on the USADA's part, or statute of limitations, would be a joke and would further undermine their asseration they take the fight against doping seriously. Some people contend that if UCI don't appeal this to CAS, Armstrong will try to take them out by exposing their complicity in the conspiracy. However, that would entail Armstrong admitting to having doped. Which I don't see him doing. He'll play the victim card (persecution/witch hunt) to the bitter end.

 

[Race Radio]

They will appeal to CAS based on jurisdiction

 

[Pazuzu]

They will appeal to CAS based on jurisdiction

What would they cite as precedent in their argument. Do they have a leg to stand on legally? And what would the fall out be in terms of public relations?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

They will appeal to CAS based on jurisdiction

not even uci are that idiotic, prudhomme already declared that armstrong is stripped of everything and uci need aso more than anything

 

[thehog]

not even uci are that idiotic, prudhomme already declared that armstrong is stripped of everything and uci need aso more than anything

Correct. They need to move this along as quickly as possible.

Unless Armstrong is hanging going full *** over their heads.

 

[Briant_Gumble]

Correct. They need to move this along as quickly as possible.

Unless Armstrong is hanging going full *** over their heads.

There has been a lot of speculation about what Armstrong could have over the heads of the UCI.

Now that the reasoned is out I expected it to contain more revelations about how the clever doctor Ferrari managed to circumvent the tests but I still find it unclear.

It seems they were relying on the tip offs to Bruyneel and Armstrong to get them ready for the tests, so I expect this is what he has on them, don't know if he can influence them, I guess he's trying.

 

[ebandit]

hot

fat pat will rubberstamp sanctions as quickly as possible thinking that uci have escaped lightly with little direct evidence of corruption in usada's reasoned decision

hoping just to weather the storm..........keeping his head down

 

[the asian]

They will appeal to CAS based on jurisdiction

Don't think that will happen. The media has turned against Armstrong and so has public opinion. ASO have stated clearly that the evidence against Lance is overwhelming.

I don't thin Pat and Hein will make any suicidal moves just yet. They will try their best to show that they are serious by quickly stripping Armstrong of the titles and hope they can survive until the next election.

They may try to appeal against the reduced sentences of the riders who gave evidence though.

 

[thehog]

fat pat will rubberstamp sanctions as quickly as possible thinking that uci have escaped lightly with little direct evidence of corruption in usada's reasoned decision

hoping just to weather the storm..........keeping his head down

They got off rather lightly so yes they need to endorse the sanction and "look towards the future".

However the UCI are always full of surprises. You never know what they're going to do.

 

[Benotti69]

They got off rather lightly so yes they need to endorse the sanction and "look towards the future".

However the UCI are always full of surprises. You never know what they're going to do.

They got off lightly in the 200 page document.

What about the other 800+ pages?

 

[thehog]

They got off lightly in the 200 page document.

What about the other 800+ pages?

Then there's Hog's evidence. I imagine it was him doing the deals with the UCI. So there's still more to come.

 

[Merckx index]

They will appeal to CAS based on jurisdiction

They certainly have a reasonable cause to do so. Not saying they would win, but the claim is definitely not frivolous. Not only does most of the rider testimony antedate WADA/USADA’s jurisdiction over cycling, but a great deal of it antedates the existence of the organizations themselves. And if they do appeal, they might as well also challenge the SOL argument.

But as others point out, they will be swimming against the tide if the do this. It will look as though they are trying to get LA off on a technicality.

Now that the reasoned is out I expected it to contain more revelations about how the clever doctor Ferrari managed to circumvent the tests but I still find it unclear.

Before the Reasoned Decision came out, there was a lot of speculation and predictions here that the evidence would include new positive tests that we hadn’t heard of before.

There were none.

And drugs not available to even patients, let alone the peloton, like HemAssist.

There were none.

And proof that the blood values indicated doping, or at least were correlated with specific dates of doping as indicated by rider testimony.

There was none. There was a claim of a one in a million significance, but this was made with no reference to the software actually used to evaluate these values, and USADA emphasized that the blood values were only corroborative, not standalone. This is curiously inconsistent with the claim of a high degree of significance, but since the conclusion is what counts, one has to assume that they themselves don’t have a lot of faith in their own statistical analysis.* Moreover, if the blood values really had indicated doping to a high degree of statistical significance, then USADA should have had a prima facie case of corruption vs. UCI. It would be impossible to claim the one without so strongly implying the other that one would need to state it explicitly.

Speaking of which, there were a lot of predictions here that the R.D. would contain new evidence of UCI corruption.

There was none. There was evidence that riders sometimes knew in advance of testing, but clearly not always, because there was testimony that sometimes they had to take evasive action at the last minute. So the advance notice could be taken as evidence of incompetence as much as corruption. It also makes it easier for UCI to keep the problem downstairs, i.e., claim that maybe individual testers screwed up, but that no one at the top knew about let alone directed this. This is classical bureaucratic cover your ****, but it works.

The RD was basically an expansion of what Tyler said, with many additional witnesses, plus some financial records and emails indicating LA’s ties to Ferrari. If USADA had any serious proof of UCI corruption, the kind that could stand up in court, I think they would have mentioned it to strengthen their case that “never tested positive” is basically meaningless. Since they didn't, I think that whatever factors UCI is weighing now, they don't include a lot of worry that if they appeal, new damaging testimony will emerge. It might yet, but I don't think UCI is worried that it will.

They got off lightly in the 200 page document.

What about the other 800+ pages?

We’ve seen it all. The other 800 pages are the Appendices.

*One of the stranger parts of the RD. After claiming that Gore's analysis said there was only a one in a million chance that the reticulocyte levels could be natural, they emphasized that the blood values could not be proof of doping like a positive test, but only consistent with all the rider testimony. How could a one in a million probability not be proof of doping? That is a far greater degree of significance than Floyd's testoterone data.

An appeal would be great news for LA. He and his supporters could argue that it proves that not everyone regards the USADA report as a slam dunk. And it extends the time that the idiots at Nike and other sponsors can justify continuing to stay with him. If UCI does appeal, get ready for a deluge of "I told you so's" from Fanboy Nation. Ugh.

 

[Race Radio]

The UCI may not have made it publicly clear but privately they indicate they will appeal on jurisdiction and perhaps SOL. This is driven by Verburggen, not McQuaid

I think it would be a great move as it would completely expose them. They have to announce by November 1st.

 

[snackattack]

I think it would be a great move as it would completely expose them. They have to announce by November 1st.

Before first a frenzy with > THIS

 

[70kmph]

What process do the UCI follow

Is there a commitee of members who come to a unanimous decision

How do they make a determination

 

[mtb Dad]

I was struck by how cocky Armstrong must have been to take out an insurance policy that foresaw 7 tour wins.

Unless he knew he could win through his connections. I wonder what correlation there is between him receiving cheques from SCA, and UCI officials receiving cheques?

 

[Briant_Gumble]

As far as UCI corruption goes the evidence so far is the signed affidavits from Floyd and Tyler saying that Lance told them he tested positive in the 2001 Tour of Switzerland, this third hand evidence is not strong.

Then there is the report from the AFLD that Lance was tipped off about the tests.

It seems the real people who can implicate them are Armstrong and Bruyneel, I'm sure Armstrong would appreciate the PR move of a token appeal to CAS.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

The UCI may not have made it publicly clear but privately they indicate they will appeal on jurisdiction and perhaps SOL. This is driven by Verburggen, not McQuaid

I think it would be a great move as it would completely expose them. They have to announce by November 1st.

That would be the equivalent of Full ***.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q

Never go Full ***,

 

[thehog]

That would be the equivalent of Full ***.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q

Never go Full ***,

Never go full ***.

I still can't see them doing it. The public backlash would be too great. I would also suspect USADA might expect it and keep something up their sleeve?

Just not buying it. I can't see what the UCI gains from it. Why get 2-3 Tours back. What does that do?

But like I say. The UCI always surprise.

 

[erader]

it would be ironic if Lance were put in a position that the only way be could lash out at his accusers is rat on them. man i'd like to see that .

 

[BroDeal]

Never go full ***.

I still can't see them doing it. The public backlash would be too great. I would also suspect USADA might expect it and keep something up their sleeve?

The information released by the USADA is focused on supporting the action against Armstrong and his coconspirators. The affidavits are very thin on anything that happened outside of Postal/Disco. There were undoubtedly a lot of sighs of relief throughout cycling. The USADA has the information to do a huge amount of extra damage to many of the stakeholders in cycling. Releasing the rider interview transcripts the affidavits were derived from would be a nuclear option. Many people in cycling will be very unhappy if the UCI risks exposing more than has been uncovered. Those people have a lot to lose and they should be pressuring the UCI to make this go away as quickly as possible.

 

[ebandit]

surprise?

Never go full ***.



But like I say. The UCI always surprise.

will fat pat truly surprise me and accept responsibility for this dark era of cycling?
so far fat pat acts as though all 'this mess' was beyond his control

was the issue of jurisdiction not answered by judge sparks to the satisfaction
of uci?

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

Many people in cycling will be very unhappy if the UCI risks exposing more than has been uncovered.

Thus pitting USAC and Weisel against Armstrong if you are right.

Wouldn't you love to know the conversations between Weisel and Armstrong right now?

 

[Benotti69]

Thus pitting USAC and Weisel against Armstrong if you are right.

Wouldn't you love to know the conversations between Weisel and Armstrong right now?

I get that Weisel has been the brains behind it all. He ha been calling all the shots about what to do. I also guess Weisel will dump Armstrong if it gets to close to him.

I wonder does Weisel have a back up plan for that.

 

[Pazuzu]

As far as UCI corruption goes the evidence so far is the signed affidavits from Floyd and Tyler saying that Lance told them he tested positive in the 2001 Tour of Switzerland, this third hand evidence is not strong.

But at the same time, UCI refused to hand over the data showing the purported EPO positive from the 2001 Tour of Switzerland test. They claimed they needed Armstrong's permission, which of course, he refused to grant. So much for Wonderboy having 'nothing to hide'.

it would be ironic if Lance were put in a position that the only way be could lash out at his accusers is rat on them. man i'd like to see that .

I'd love to see that too. Doubt it will happen.

Another thing to consider: How real is the danger cycling gets booted from the Olympics if a UCI appeal is viewed as impeding the fight against doping?