Rasmussen also pulls a Rasmussen.

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 6, 2011
37
0
0
My understanding is that within certain period of time ( 18 months if I remember it correctly) 3 incidents (of whereabouts failure) will face a potential sanction. Rasmussen's incidents occurred on Feb, October 2010 and April 2011 respectively, so only two still stay assuming there is no other un-reported cases from June 2010 to now.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Offredo gets a year!

So now what about Rasmussen?

Is he likely to get off on a technicality due to the length of time it took to notify him?

The UCI took ten weeks to report the infringement to the athlete, while the international standard dictates a deadline of 14 days.”

The rule referred to is article 111 of the UCI’s anti-doping regulations, which lays out a clear timeframe. It is not known how CAS will receive the appeal, but the UCI may have an uphill battle in not following its regulations.
 
Jan 10, 2012
452
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Offredo gets a year!

So now what about Rasmussen?

Is he likely to get off on a technicality due to the length of time it took to notify him?
I wouldn't call it a technicality, at least not more or less than the violation itself (presuming innocence). The whole idea of notifying athletes (on time) is giving them a wake-up call and end sloppiness. If you don't, you undermine your own system and the athletes right to know if he/she dis something wrong (within a certain time frame)...
 
Benotti69 said:
Offredo gets a year!

So now what about Rasmussen?

Is he likely to get off on a technicality due to the length of time it took to notify him?
The question I'm asking is whether Offredo was notified in due time. If he wasn't (and I think I have read that he wasn't), he has a good case to get his suspension repealed - unless of course Rasmussen gets banned too.

I just want consistency in this.
 
Fus087 said:
The question I'm asking is whether Offredo was notified in due time. If he wasn't (and I think I have read that he wasn't), he has a good case to get his suspension repealed - unless of course Rasmussen gets banned too.

I just want consistency in this.
I agree - the inconsistencies in recent rulings is extremely disturbing and disheartening. It makes it all the more challenging to remain an objective supporter of vigorous anti-doping effort when one repeatedly sees the testers or governing bodies not following their own rules at the same time they crucify some riders while giving total passes to others.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
UCI has never had consistency and never will as long as McQuaid and his ilk run it.

The Danes think Rasmussen did nothing worthy of a suspension yet he missed 3 test in the space of 18 months.

Offredo did the same and got one year from the French.

Li Fuyu got treated badly over his Clen positive, the press were told before him and Contador looked to be avoiding his positive till a German journalist let the cat out of the bag.

That illustrates the UCI very well.
 
Benotti69 said:
...That illustrates the UCI very well.
The UCI isn't independently responsible for the doping problem or the failure to solve it. National federations, CAS, media who first avoided it and now sensationalize it, fans who lived in denial about it and in the case of one idol still do while others now seem to follow the sport only in hopes of being able to pontificate about doping, and the cynical riders who continue to use (and their entourages who continue to enable)...all of those groups bear responsibility and not just the UCI.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
joe_papp said:
The UCI isn't independently responsible for the doping problem or the failure to solve it. National federations, CAS, media who first avoided it and now sensationalize it, fans who lived in denial about it and in the case of one idol still do while others now seem to follow the sport only in hopes of being able to pontificate about doping, and the cynical riders who continue to use (and their entourages who continue to enable)...all of those groups bear responsibility and not just the UCI.
UCI is the International Federation, all other Federations have got to fall in line with UCI. If, as we have seen countless times, the UCI cant get its act together why would we expect the national federations to do so?

Cycling media with a few exceptions are not worth commentating on.

CAS, well is CAS and generally do a decent job.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Jonathan Vaughters answered the Rasmussen question today in another part of the forum. He also mentioned Offredo.

For those who did not see it.

Rasmussen was not even charged, as it could not be filed, due to the UCI not meeting WADA guidelines. If Rasmussen must fill out the paperwork, so too must the UCI. Fairness is for everyone, not just the ruling party.

That said, from a pragmatic standpoint, I think both Offredo and Rasmussen should be suspended. But for 6 months, retroactive to the date of 3rd missed test. It's a warning shot, not shoot to kill. And if they do it again, 2 yrs, no questions.

I highly doubt Offredo was doping and I know Rasmussen was not. So, I think sometimes things need to be fair and pragmatic, as opposed to always looking for a solution that gives the appearance of being "strong against doping"..

Lets actually fight doping, as opposed to trying to look like we are.
How he knows Rasmussen wasn't doping when he wasn't riding for Garmin beats me.
 
Feb 15, 2012
19
0
0
Benotti69 said:
UCI is the International Federation, all other Federations have got to fall in line with UCI. If, as we have seen countless times, the UCI cant get its act together why would we expect the national federations to do so?

Cycling media with a few exceptions are not worth commentating on.

CAS, well is CAS and generally do a decent job.
Why the national federation and not some sort of an independent comitee are the ones who decides if an athlete get a suspension and for how long have always baffled me. It makes it near impossible to have a fair system where the same offences are punished in the same way.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
ophene said:
Why the national federation and not some sort of an independent commitee are the ones who decides if an athlete get a suspension and for how long have always baffled me. It makes it near impossible to have a fair system where the same offences are punished in the same way.
I agree that doping testing and penalties should be centralised through some independent body free from intervention by federations and answerable to only to WADA.

My point above was that national federations are hardly worried about obeying the rules when the international federation ignores their own rules.
 
Benotti69 said:
How he knows Rasmussen wasn't doping when he wasn't riding for Garmin beats me.
I suspect people within the pro peleton teams know a hell of a lot about who is and who isn't doping.

Waterloo Sunrise said:
Quite some stunt today, just to avoid the mandatory leaders dope test.
????
 
Feb 17, 2012
2,762
0
0
18 months for messing up the whereabouts, 6 months for actually doping.

Seems legit...

Obviously coming from the Lance camp. Digging his own grave.
 
Jul 29, 2009
85
0
0
Alex lived in a glass house....and threw stones even.

What a knob.
When Chicken Rasmussen was sacked, Alex was all holier than thou and making snarky remarks that he's above it all....
Maybe Pharmstrong will hire him as a pool boy...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY