Reactions and comments to The CIRC report

[DirtyWorks]

Wheels in motion:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...d-his-case-for-reduction-of-lifetime-ban.html

Very interesting. Someone has thought this through.

If the CIRC report doesn't push Verbruggen out, then an Armstrong strategic confession should seal the deal.

Wonderboy gets his reduction, Cookson gets Hein gone and reinflates the UCI by permitting Wonderboy to be around the sport.

This is why I'm not cut out to be in politics.

 

[doperhopper]

So the conclusion is: everybody is The Winner - from Uniballer, Mr. 60%, even Verdruggen and McQuack, up to Vroomie. Verdruggen's comments are unbelievable, old mafia won't change, but one can also imagine what would those Top Nazis say after being "The Winners" of the NIRC report (Nuremberg Independent Review Comittee).

 

[DirtyWorks]

So the conclusion is: everybody is The Winner - from Uniballer, Mr. 60%, even Verdruggen and McQuack, up to Vroomie. Verdruggen's comments are unbelievable, old mafia won't change, but one can also imagine what would those Top Nazis say after being "The Winners" of the NIRC report (Nuremberg Independent Review Comittee).

I think they are trying to make Verbruggen abdicate his throne. Remember his appointed title at the UCI is for life. Sepp Blatter still has one of the few votes and a permanent seat at WADA, so, Hein's got nothing to lose fighting for his "good" name.

This kind of attack seems like it's pretty easy for Hein to deflect. But, I think they've got an Armstrong strategic confession queued up just in case Hein doesn't get the message.

 

[mrhender]

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...disciplinary-action-from-circ-findings-161449

Cookson: We could see disciplinary action from CIRC findings

UCI president Brian Cookson says he may ask the CIRC to provide extra information to aid any potential disciplinary action arising from its report

I understand that there are witness statements and that was given under condition of confidentiality, however it may be that we can look at some of these contributions with a view to learning some lessons at some point in the future, Cookson told Cycling Weekly.

I don't rule out disciplinary action as a result of some of the information that the commission discovered. So we will be analysing anything that we can, and if we feel that there might be additional information elsewhere in the papers and the files of the commission, we will ask for them to reveal it to us.

Despite being 230 pages long and containing testimony from 174 individuals involved with the sport, the report preferred broad statements and generalizations over specific information and details. This anonymity was one condition attached to testimony.

One area that came in for particular criticism was the Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) system, with the report citing claims from doctors interviewed that riders and teams are routinely taking advantage of TUEs in order to use corticosteroids to lose weight and enhance performance.

Cookson explained the UCI was limited by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Code regarding reform of the TUE system but explained he was keen to address their inappropriate use.

TUEs are allowed under the WADA Code, but what we've got is a particular set of circumstances where TUEs are being used in a way that is problematic, he said.

I'm not referring to any individual or case, but it does appear to be the case that TUEs are being used in a way that is probably inappropriate. If it's the case that a process is open to misuse or abuse, then we've got to look at how we can do a better job at controlling that.

The UCI also hopes to introduce a fit and proper persons test for team officials, doctors and medical staff. Many former riders who have served bans for doping are still involved in the sport; Alexandre Vinkourov and Bjarne Riis are both managing teams.

We do have some difficulties with statute of limitations and employment law, Cookson said. As we've seen in other case that the UCI has handled recently, we have to be absolutely certain that if we take action it is legally defensible. We can't always give a knee jerk reaction to things; that's what's gone wrong I would suggest in the past.

I do think we've got to look again at a whole range of issues, like TUEs, like how and where out of competition testing is carried out, even these dreaded middle of the night anti-doping tests that are proposed; I know they would be unpopular with the riders, but maybe that's the price we have to pay.

Continuing to operate in a way which has the support of WADA and the various anti-doping organisatiins and stakeholders, all of those things are important. But I'm also calling on riders, teams, sponsors, suppliers, all to take their responsibilities seriously as well.

 

[Benotti69]

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...disciplinary-action-from-circ-findings-161449

UCI president Brian Cookson says he may ask the CIRC to provide extra information to aid any potential disciplinary action arising from its report

Just goes to show that the report is not 'independent' and lots of stuff was obviously left out.

 

[Benotti69]

The general public think all cyclists dope. That is long established.

Not true with the recent cycling fans in the UK, hell I talk to lots of them blind as bats those...

"Cycling is a sport with a drugs problem," says @Channel4News

Is this not when cycling has always reached mainstream news, always doping?

Prior to TeamSky i am pretty sure the British thought that "Cycling is a sport with a drugs problem", now they have something to cheer some choose to think their sporting heroes dont dope, see Radcliffe, Coe, Redgrave, Farah, etc etc

 

[The Hitch]

Haven't read the report but would just like to echo, as I always do any criticism of david millar. The guy who wants to ride the fame he got from cheating to the UCI presidency who said that its impossible for Alberto Contador to be be good at gts through doping, that its only possible clean Pfffu, one of the most disgusting individuals in the sport.

Surprised the 90% comment hasn't been discussed much here.

.

Not true with the recent cycling fans in the UK, hell I talk to lots of them blind as bats those...

Among cyclists and cycling fans yes. Even in 2015 when I thought even they would have wised up, I still see comments from my former Uni cycling club, chearing Froome winning Andalucia as a triumph of good vs evil against cheating (represented by Contador).

So I agree with that much.

But as in most countries outside of Belgium, cycling is a very minor sport with a very minor fanbase, no matter how much the cycling journos keep trying to paint it as some unstoppable boom. 90% of people have no idea who won the last TDF or what a 1 day classic is. The popular opinion amongst this group is that cycling is a drug sport.

Not that that is a good thing. Most of those people think their beloved football is clean, that Bolt is clean etc and many would send death threats to any journo who even suggested the team they support had used epo.

 

[Bexon30]

Not that that is a good thing. Most of those people think their beloved football is clean, that Bolt is clean etc and many would send death threats to any journo who even suggested the team they support had used epo.[/QUOTE]

So true I've had so many chats with others who believe. When something is glaringly obvious it's normally for reason. Cycling does has a new wave of new fans, many whom I concur no little to nothing of anything outside of July. But still they're funding the boom and being played by higher forces.

As for Millar there was a time I didn't mind him too much ironically enough when he was juicing. Again I wouldn't now listen to a word of his.

 

[Sciatic]

The general public think all cyclists dope. That is long established. Years and years of reports in mainstream sports pages of stories on doping in cycling has the general public probably more clued in then many fans.

It is fans who get emotionally involved with teams and riders who want to believe the UCI has a clean sport as its goal and the testing works.......dream on.

I can only speak for the U.S., but I think you're wrong about "general public think all cyclists dope." Because the general public here doesn't think about cycling AT ALL. But there is a deeply embedded culture of doping in sport here. When "official" revelations (which this report would be considered if reported in U.S. like it is in BBC article) come out in the U.S. about doping oddball spots like cycling, track and field, etc., it may help--albeit only an inch at a time--shift the public perception of doping in sport in general. That's what it takes to eventually move something to Congress. In this regard, the hard-core sports fans, whatever they think, are irrelevant.

 

[DirtyWorks]

That's what it takes to eventually move something to Congress. In this regard, the hard-core sports fans, whatever they think, are irrelevant.

Particular to the U.S., the NCAA and ball sports fans will do whatever it takes to protect their ball sports. An example of this is the shameful handling of the Penn State scandal.
-2012 NCAA announces gigantic fine and good message.
-2014 In 2014, the NCAA reversed course. It rescinded the post-season ban, restored scholarships, and re-credited Penn State and Joe Paterno with their victories from 1998?2011.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_State_child_sex_abuse_scandal

Beloved Joe Paterno's legacy restored. I bet the victims feel good about that.
Check out the UNC academic scandal. A university the size of a small city and only two people, both retired, were to blame.

That's what you are dealing with and those are not even doping. It would be great to start a conversation about questioning college football's giant linemen. But, that's not going to happen.

In my experience, what is understood about cycling in the U.S. is it is corrupt and all riders are doping at Le Tour. The American federation, still run by Thom Wiesel, continues to discourage any credibility. And they work very hard to protect dopers and discourage growth!

 

[Catwhoorg]

That was a disgusting reversal of a entirely justified decision.

 

[ralphbert]

Haven't read the report but would just like to echo, as I always do any criticism of david millar. The guy who wants to ride the fame he got from cheating to the UCI presidency who said that its impossible for Alberto Contador to be be good at gts through doping, that its only possible clean Pfffu, one of the most disgusting individuals in the sport.

St David. The sooner that self important knobjockey does a backflip and disappears up his own rectum the better.

 

[skippythepinhead]

St David. The sooner that self important knobjockey does a backflip and disappears up his own rectum the better.

The other Saint David (Walsh) has blocked me on Twitter for daring to ask why he fails to hold Sky accountable as other cheats. I consider head-stuck-firmly-in-sand his general CIRC/Sky/doping response now.

 

[heart_attack_man]

i think (thoug i should check) that the report makes explicit mention of motorized bikes.

much of the discussion was not about not whether that footage of Ryder was conclusive, but about whether motorization is actually happening at present. there were posters who dismissed that as nonsense.

Page 85 - agree about the Ryder thread. I participated in it a bit, and my viewpoint wasn't necessarily so much about that given footage, more about whether it was something that could be done.

 

[heart_attack_man]

P58 of the CIRC Report:
The Commission also heard that riders are using ozone therapy, which involves extracting blood, treating it with ozone and injecting it back into the blood. One rider informed the Commission that by way of using ozone therapy he felt stronger, and that the muscles recovered, but that it had however not been as efficient as EPO. Several interviewees mentioned that AICAR, which supposedly has similar effects to EPO, has become popular in the peloton.

Popular in the peloton - read that again...

Popular.

An indication of how effective AICAR is:

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2013/04/the-new-epo-gw1516-aicar-and-their-use-in-cycling/

44%!!!!

Did you see the cost of it too? Half a mil. Does it seem likely that it's all just the rouleurs that are throwing down the AICAR at half a mil a pop? Definitely wouldn't be the winners...

Winning cleans? Lolz...

 

[DirtyWorks]

Veloclinic threw out this one-liner.

http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/113130547153/with-epo-the-usual-dose-was-500-ml-per-day-circ

With EPO, the usual dose was 500 ml per day

CIRC

yeah no

so against better judgement I?m skimming the CIRC report

I don't know why that's not true. Can anyone enlighten us?

 

[heart_attack_man]

Veloclinic threw out this one-liner.

http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/113130547153/with-epo-the-usual-dose-was-500-ml-per-day-circ

With EPO, the usual dose was 500 ml per day

CIRC

yeah no

so against better judgement I?m skimming the CIRC report

I don't know why that's not true. Can anyone enlighten us?

Further context from the report - I can't provide any insight that you're looking for though.

p67 of CIRC report:
The Commission was told of a team below the UCI WorldTour recently involved in doping. It was claimed that the team manager and sports director brought a nutritionist into the team who advised a selected group of riders within the team on a doping programme. The instructions were to administer 1000ml of EPO Zeta every second day after 11pm at night, and alternate in the winter with HGH and Lutrelef, a hormone. Their haematocrit levels were to be tested every third day, and amounts of EPO Zeta reduced to 500ml as the season approached. The nutritionist owned a gym, through which substances were procured from Eastern Europe. Other riders were said to have procured substances via a hospital and a pharmacy more locally. It was further explained that the team manager was also a senior person in a prominent anti-doping movement, and had later on introduced strong anti-doping clauses in the team contracts, including the imposition of significant fines for anyone caught doping.

 

[sniper]

Geoff Kabush @GeoffKabush ? 5h 5 hours ago

CIRC: 95% of cyclists don't tick box allowing anonymous anti-doping research w/ sample? If you're for clean sport why not? I tick every time

10 char.........

 

[Merckx index]

p67 of CIRC report:
The Commission was told of a team below the UCI WorldTour recently involved in doping. It was claimed that the team manager and sports director brought a nutritionist into the team who advised a selected group of riders within the team on a doping programme. The instructions were to administer 1000ml of EPO Zeta every second day after 11pm at night, and alternate in the winter with HGH and Lutrelef, a hormone. Their haematocrit levels were to be tested every third day, and amounts of EPO Zeta reduced to 500ml as the season approached. The nutritionist owned a gym, through which substances were procured from Eastern Europe. Other riders were said to have procured substances via a hospital and a pharmacy more locally. It was further explained that the team manager was also a senior person in a prominent anti-doping movement, and had later on introduced strong anti-doping clauses in the team contracts, including the imposition of significant fines for anyone caught doping.

I'm pretty sure they mean 1000/500 units of EPO, definitely it is not ml. You obviously can't drink that much, let alone inject it. Even the total amount given to all the team members would not approach that.

I find the estimate of the proportion of dopers very interesting. I believe the low ball guess was 20%. That's about 40 riders in a GT, say, all the GC contenders and their most important domestiques.

McQ crowing about how he was vindicated because he was not accused of corruption in so many words reminds me of Nixon's "I am not a crook".

 

[heart_attack_man]

p83 of the CIRC Report:
One prominent team manager told the Commission that journalists were refused access if they wrote about doping. At the same time, the Commission was told of reporters who enjoyed being on the inside, mixing with athletes and teams, and were seduced by the environment which affected their objectivity.

Walsh? .

 

[heart_attack_man]

p92 of the CIRC Report
This marked the start of the UCI's rapid development. In 1996
the UCI only had some 15 employees. The federation now has a staff of over 100 if the Cycling Anti-doping Foundation (?CADF?)(now legally independent) is included. UCI also has an extensive network of external consultants.

CADF - Very independent...

Edit: Apologies all - just realised this thread was supposed to be reactions to the CIRC report - I suppose these few posts should be moved to the CIRC thread?

 

[mrhender]

CADF - Very independent...

Edit: Apologies all - just realised this thread was supposed to be reactions to the CIRC report - I suppose these few posts should be moved to the CIRC thread?

No worries... it's easy for these things to overlap....

The intention was actually just to make it possible to go into detail with the reports content in the CIRC thread without constant disturbance from a 1000 new links and comments..

In hindsight the idea worked better in my head so mods feel free to merge threads if it becomes too confusing...

 

[mrhender]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/31809271

Video

Geraint Thomas: Team Sky rider says doping report is insulting

 

[sniper]

Look, this is, imo, why some posters have a feeling that RR has lost his touch in comparison to how he used to be wrt USPS/Lance.

Race Radio ‏@TheRaceRadio 10h10 hours ago
CIRC report says doping today is very secretive, underground. If 90% are doping it would not be underground.....it would be obvious.

RR busy mitigating the damning stuff from the report, instead of expressing concerns that apparently nothing has changed.

 

[mrhender]

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/n...-on-the-cycling-independent-reform-commission

WADA Director General Statement on the Cycling Independent Reform Commission Report

WADA Director General, David Howman: ?Report makes interesting observations and calls for action to end doping in cycling?

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has read with interest the Cycling Independent Reform Commission Report (CIRC) published today by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). The Commission, which was established by the UCI in January 2014, completed a 13-month investigation, independent from the UCI, into ?the causes of the pattern of doping that developed within cycling and allegations that implicate the UCI and other governing bodies and officials over ineffective investigation of such practices.? The Commission should be commended for their extensive investigation into the historical problems relating to the sport of cycling and for the thoroughness of their Report.

The Commission made a number of interesting observations, and included in their Report some helpful information that we at WADA will examine in greater detail as we look to enhance our support of the clean athlete globally. In relation to suggestions and recommendations in the report, WADA will:

1. Examine the UCI?s past failures to apply Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) effectively;
2. Address the need to enhance the process for allocating research funds; details of the WADA Special Research Fund will be announced in the coming days;
3. Continue to advance the new investigative powers permitted by the revised World Anti-Doping Code (as evidenced through the Independent Commission?s investigation into allegations of doping) and also work with the UCI to advance their own information gathering techniques;
4. Continue the implementation of a new Compliance process which includes a newly-appointed independent Compliance Review Committee to ensure efficient and effective anti-doping programs from all Code signatories.


The Report makes a series of recommendations concerning how cycling can address issues of governance and enhance its anti-doping efforts in the future. It acknowledges that doping continues to exist in cycling and therefore recommends that the UCI carries out prevalence studies to determine the current level of doping in cycling in different countries, teams, levels and disciplines. The Report also makes serious allegations that riders made payments to officials in order to avoid testing and/or analysis ? a so called ?anti-doping tax?. WADA is certain that the UCI will address these matters as soon as practicable; and, we will work closely and cooperatively with the UCI to implement the necessary changes.

The Report also makes it clear that, under its previous leadership, the UCI prioritized the protection of the heroic image of cycling and of its star athletes such as Lance Armstrong, ahead of the protection of clean cyclists and the promotion of clean sport. At the time, the UCI leadership did not hesitate to deliberately conceal the truth and attack those who raised concern about doping within their sport, including WADA. WADA invested a great deal of time and resources defending itself against what have now been proven to be completely unfounded and unjustified attacks by the then UCI leadership.

WADA is also shocked to read that the so called ?Vrijman Report? which the UCI had publicly claimed to be independent ? was in fact partially written by the then UCI President himself with the assistance of Lance Armstrong?s legal team. This also raises questions over the ethics and values in place at the highest levels of UCI governance at the time.

Finally, WADA wishes to commend UCI?s current President, Brian Cookson, for his courage in opening up his organization, and the sport of cycling, to such a high level of independent and transparent scrutiny. I have confidence that many of the Reports? findings will propel the sport to move beyond an unfortunate and disturbing time in its history.