Rasmussen also pulls a Rasmussen.

[Dr. Maserati]

Garmin the anti-doping team. "Oh hey, we just hired Alex Rasmussen and Thomas Dekker."

as recommended by David Millar....

Who is the team owner? What was his history?

What you guys fail to understand is that JV has never said he was not going to hire ex-dopers - which is quite correct as to exclude them would be hypocritical.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Who is the team owner? What was his history?

What you guys fail to understand is that JV has never said he was not going to hire ex-dopers - which is quite correct as to exclude them would be hypocritical.

Exactly. It is one thing to take the view that Garmin's anti-doping stance is less than credible, but it is quite another thing to find it less than credible based on a misunderstanding of what their stance actually is.

It is not and never has been that they will only hire riders who have never doped.

 

[hrotha]

Who is the team owner? What was his history?

What you guys fail to understand is that JV has never said he was not going to hire ex-dopers - which is quite correct as to exclude them would be hypocritical.

There's a difference between hiring ex-dopers (like Dekker) and hiring possibly current dopers (like Rasmussen).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

There's a difference between hiring ex-dopers (like Dekker) and hiring possibly current dopers (like Rasmussen).

If you didn't include the highlighted word there would be a difference - that word makes the point moot.

Rasmussen missed tests - including one where he was tested elsewhere.
That shows he is sloppy, not necessarily a doper.

 

[hrotha]

If you didn't include the highlighted word there would be a difference - that word makes the point moot.

Rasmussen missed tests - including one where he was tested elsewhere.
That shows he is sloppy, not necessarily a doper.

It doesn't make my point moot. I understand the difference, but what matters here is that he only got off on a technicality, and had the UCI been competent/non-corrupt, he'd be suspended. I find it very disappointing that a team with the stated ideology of Garmin would go by the letter and not the spirit of the law when it suits them.

 

[simonk]

I dont really see whats wrong with Saxo taking Contador on the team. Yes, it was a very stupid mistake, but everybody knows that Contador is not a cheater. He have never been, and he never will be. Contador is just unprofessionel in the lifestyle - or was, i think he learned something from this, and now will take it more serious.

Hmm.. Is Alex tested positive? Nope. Is Contador? Yes. Huge difference? Yes.

Is Alex even being linked AT ALL to something involved doping? Nope. When you hear riders, managers talk about his case, NO ONE thinks he have ever doped, or ever will do. They just say he isnt professionel enough, and that he have been stupid to forget to type in information - which indeed he have. Contador-case is something totally different.

Anyways its fantastic he is free to ride

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It doesn't make my point moot. I understand the difference, but what matters here is that he only got off on a technicality, and had the UCI been competent/non-corrupt, he'd be suspended. I find it very disappointing that a team with the stated ideology of Garmin would go by the letter and not the spirit of the law when it suits them.

Fair enough - but the rule is 'missed tests', not doping. So when you say 'spirit of the law' it is a stretch to assume doping.

So the valid question for Garmin/JV has to be is/was AR doping or just sloppy? Garmin would have access to his Bio Passport file amongst other things so I would assume the latter.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Hmm.. Is Alex tested positive? Nope. Is Contador? Yes. Huge difference? Yes.

Is Alex even being linked AT ALL to something involved doping? Nope. When you hear riders, managers talk about his case, NO ONE thinks he have ever doped, or ever will do. They just say he isnt professionel enough, and that he have been stupid to forget to type in information - which indeed he have. Contador-case is something totally different.

Anyways its fantastic he is free to ride

Well you are stretching logic here - do you expect ARs team or managers to turn around and admit doping?
Likewise you could dismiss Contadors 'positive' as merely accidental ingestion.

Liking one rider over another is not the best way to assume ones guilt or innocence.

 

[hrotha]

Fair enough - but the rule is 'missed tests', not doping. So when you say 'spirit of the law' it is a stretch to assume doping.

So the valid question for Garmin/JV has to be is/was AR doping or just sloppy? Garmin would have access to his Bio Passport file amongst other things so I would assume the latter.

Well, I don't think it's a stretch to consider the rule exists solely to prevent dopers missing tests whenever they're not sure they won't test positive, but to each his own. I also don't think (and this seems to be the most common position) that the biological passport can be used as a negative proof of anything.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well, I don't think it's a stretch to consider the rule exists solely to prevent dopers missing tests whenever they're not sure they won't test positive, but to each his own.

Yes, that is very much stretching.
The missing testes & whereabouts rules do not prove (or even suggest) doping.

They are quite rightly there to ensure compliance and close the possible abuse of missing tests.

I also don't think (and this seems to be the most common position) that the biological passport can be used as a negative proof of anything.

I hope you enjoyed the tasty snack I provided in the Bio Passport.

If Garmin use the Bio Passport to review ARs data then either:
a) they run a clean program they will understand it and be able to spot any anomalies in his profile.
b) Garmin arent really anti-doping the BP is just BS PR - which leaves all opinion on the signing of AR over missed tests as moot.

 

[simonk]

Alex even got tested one of those times where he forgot to type in data, cause he was at the 6-days in Berlin. He got tested there, so its pretty obvious that he had nothing to hide. Otherwise it would be really stupid to go to a 6-days, where you get tested (specially when you, like Alex, always are in the top of the ranking in 6-days races)

 

[El Pistolero]

If you didn't include the highlighted word there would be a difference - that word makes the point moot.

Rasmussen missed tests - including one where he was tested elsewhere.
That shows he is sloppy, not necessarily a doper.

Contador was sloppy with the meat he ate, not necessarily a doper.

Now you'll come with the argument saying a cyclist is responsible for what goes in his body. Well, damn it, a cyclist is responsible about filling in his whereabouts correctly as well. If this kid lived in Belgium he'd be banned for life already as the where-about system is way tougher here then in most other countries.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Contador was sloppy with the meat he ate,

No, he wasn't. They have receipts and everything - showing where it was bought, which narrows down the plausibility of his story of contaminated meat.......

not necessarily a doper.

Hmmmm.......

Now you'll come with the argument saying a cyclist is responsible for what goes in his body. Well, damn it, a cyclist is responsible about filling in his whereabouts correctly as well. If this kid lived in Belgium he'd be banned for life already as the where-about system is way tougher here then in most other countries.

No - my argument on Contador is simple - the reason Clen was found in his urine is because he was using it as part of his doping regime.


As for Rasmussen - like AC he is responsible for what he does and he should have been punished accordingly, not his fault that the UCI are incompetent.
I doubt you were complaining when Saxo continued with AC even before he was heard by RFEC.

Yourself and 'simonk' have a lot in common as you are judging these issues on your support of these individual riders - you are two cheeks of the one arse.

 

[El Pistolero]

No, he wasn't. They have receipts and everything - showing where it was bought, which narrows down the plausibility of his story of contaminated meat.......


Hmmmm.......



No - my argument on Contador is simple - the reason Clen was found in his urine is because he was using it as part of his doping regime.


As for Rasmussen - like AC he is responsible for what he does and he should have been punished accordingly, not his fault that the UCI are incompetent.
I doubt you were complaining when Saxo continued with AC even before he was heard by RFEC.

Yourself and 'simonk' have a lot in common as you are judging these issues on your support of these individual riders - you are two cheeks of the one arse.

I'm not proclaiming Contador is clean. Nor am I proclaiming Alex Rasmussen is clean. Just rewording what he/you said to point out the weakness of your arguments: they're nothing more then personal opinions as we don't know Contador or Rasmussen personally.

My reason for Rasmussen is simple: doper and needs to get banned. Michael Rasmussen must be ****ed right now.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm not proclaiming Contador is clean. Nor am I proclaiming Alex Rasmussen is clean. Just rewording what he/you said to point out the weakness of your arguments: they're nothing more then personal opinions as we don't know Contador or Rasmussen personally.

My reason for Rasmussen is simple: doper and needs to get banned.

Well you are definitely not claiming AR is clean - you are claiming he is a doper.
(And you suggest AC is not "clean', yet you want him cleared?!)

Yet Rasmussen hasn't been caught or sanctioned for that - he was caught for failing to be be where he claimed and not filling out his whereabouts.

As I said, he deserved to be sanctioned - but he has benefited from typical UCI incompetence.

 

[El Pistolero]

Well you are definitely not claiming AR is clean - you are claiming he is a doper.
(And you suggest AC is not "clean', yet you want him cleared?!)

Yet Rasmussen hasn't been caught or sanctioned for that - he was caught for failing to be be where he claimed and not filling out his whereabouts.

As I said, he deserved to be sanctioned - but he has benefited from typical UCI incompetence.

No, I'll just go with whatever WADA decides to do with him.

AR got of easy, very easily. Other athletes who got banned over the whereabouts must be angered.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No, I'll just go with whatever WADA decides to do with him.

AR got of easy, very easily. Other athletes who got banned over the whereabouts must be angered.

No he didn't off easily. He has escaped punishment because the UCI did not follow their own procedures. The DCU had no alternative but to abide by that as AR would have rightly appealed any sanction.

 

[El Pistolero]

No he didn't off easily. He has escaped punishment because the UCI did not follow their own procedures. The DCU had no alternative but to abide by that as AR would have rightly appealed any sanction.

Ergo he got off easily. Just like a murderer who gets free because of procedural errors gets off easily.

I know there was no alternative, but we still have the right to be ****ed off about it, no?

 

[craig1985]

The problem would be that (to my understanding) that they had already signed the contract as of the date that the UCI advised the DCU and Rassmussen of the 3rd missed test - to then cancel the contract prior to any disciplinary hearing would leave them open to claims of damages and breach of contract. The pending offences are null and void due to a UCI procedural stuff up of the most basic kind - whether there were the missed tests or not is now irrelevant.

Obviously the UCI is either a) so overworked, they need more staff, b) so inept and hopeless, they should not be in the role that they are, or c) so corrupt.....

I reckon you have it spot on there. I don't think there is corruption as I doubt AR would have the cash to 'donate' to the UCI like a certain Texan did.

 

[craig1985]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/michael-rasmussen-finds-alex-rasmussen-outcome-unfair

I think Chicken has a point there.

 

[RedheadDane]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/michael-rasmussen-finds-alex-rasmussen-outcome-unfair

I think Chicken has a point there.

Yeah... I suppose he has. Yet I gotta say what makes Chicken's case slightly worse and mind you, I never thought he was doped, I just thought he was an idiot... because he upfront lied about his whereabouts while Alex was just being sloppy.
Still, a two-year-ban for lying but not actually testing positive while convicted dopers get exactly the same punishment is a little stupid. I think he [Chicken] should've gotten a shorter verdict, a year or so. Unfortunately his punishment can't be changed now. Done is done...

 

[Benotti69]

Yeah... I suppose he has. Yet I gotta say what makes Chicken's case slightly worse and mind you, I never thought he was doped, I just thought he was an idiot... because he upfront lied about his whereabouts while Alex was just being sloppy.
Still, a two-year-ban for lying but not actually testing positive while convicted dopers get exactly the same punishment is a little stupid. I think he [Chicken] should've gotten a shorter verdict, a year or so. Unfortunately his punishment can't be changed now. Done is done...

A Rasmussen might have and probably did lie, sloppy was the excuse, not necessarily the truth.

As for M Rasmussen he can always try to convince a court he was wronged and pursue compensation, no? He is suing Rabo.

 

[learn to ride]

UCI will appeal Rasmussen wherebouts case to CAS

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...l-Alex-Rasmussen-whereabouts-case-to-CAS.aspx

 

[learn to ride]

JV's reaction to UCI's appeal

Alex Rasmussen is free to race as the appeal goes through ...

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...ts-to-UCIs-appeal-in-Alex-Rasmussen-case.aspx

 

[Dr. Maserati]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...l-Alex-Rasmussen-whereabouts-case-to-CAS.aspx

It must be the UCI Christmas party night, not a word on the Rasmussen case until today to announce they are appealing their own mistake?!