-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
I would be impressed if the UCI actually did pull the points garnered by AC and Ricco. It would be big step in the right direction. We shall see...
Bjarne has Options
The only thing Bjarne needs to do if Pharmador has an extended vacation is contribute some more funds to Pat's 'anti-doping' efforts. (quotes denote primitive use of irony) Soon after, a complex interpretation of some rules without any semblance of consistency or simplicity will be used to fabricate a favorable outcome for Team Bjarne. Same thing for Vancansoleil. (sp??)
The only thing Bjarne needs to do if Pharmador has an extended vacation is contribute some more funds to Pat's 'anti-doping' efforts. (quotes denote primitive use of irony) Soon after, a complex interpretation of some rules without any semblance of consistency or simplicity will be used to fabricate a favorable outcome for Team Bjarne. Same thing for Vancansoleil. (sp??)
this is stupid, then they will suspend Astana too, oh! astana was the AC team when things took place and they are free of all guilt, is Saxo guilt????
The whole AC and Ricco cases are full of hipocresy,
saxo and Vacansoleil have they licenses in line (no matter what happens with specific riders within the team)
If the rule is applied to all teams could happen that from now to september only few teams Pro Tour might stand...
The whole AC and Ricco cases are full of hipocresy,
saxo and Vacansoleil have they licenses in line (no matter what happens with specific riders within the team)
If the rule is applied to all teams could happen that from now to september only few teams Pro Tour might stand...
JMBeaushrimp said:
Not in the case of Vacan, they'd still be in the top 18 teams WITHOUT Ricco's points, and hadn't included Zeke's when they applied for PT.
Vacan are safe, i can see why Saxo might be dodgy.
Nothing will come of it until next time round with the licenses though.
Did Ricco even have points after his suspension? Points don't carry over after 20 months. Saxo is a current matter but how do you manage retroactive? First Contador is not yet sanctioned if he actually gets popped. If he appeals or as things are now, the UCI or Wada appeals it could be September before the matter is closed. Take away their status then? How does that work?
Master50 said:
One of the criteria for a PT licence is ethical, but how the uci would go about taking a away a licence mid season god only knows.
With the UCI nothing would surprise me.
DAOTEC
BANNED
Saturday, February 12, 2011 | 3:51 PM EST
UCI confirms that Licence Commission (may) examine Saxo Bank’s position ....
Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...n-if-Contador-is-suspended.aspx#ixzz1DmaV6JI9
UCI confirms that Licence Commission (may) examine Saxo Bank’s position ....
Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...n-if-Contador-is-suspended.aspx#ixzz1DmaV6JI9
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...-Banks-position-if-Contador-is-suspended.aspx
As usual, that goes completely against what Pat McQuaid said just two weeks ago:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-says-saxo-bank-will-not-lose-contadors-ranking-points
So, the UCI was aware of the Contador positive in August, and never made any sort of conditions on the team. They took their own darned time coming up with 600 pages of scientific documents for the delay.
Now the fate of a Danish team, it's riders and sponsors lies in the hands of a Spanish cycling federation. Suppose a country called Farmville had a national team that had just barely made tthe Pro Team cut. An athlete from Farmville is accused of doping, and the Federation has to make a decision, knowing that if they find the rider innocent, the team will have no problem for months as they await a CAS appeal, and they can sign someone with points to keep their license the following year. Would any federation be willing to let an entire team of athletes, plus sponsors, from their country suffer based on a decision they made about one rider, when they could let someone else punish him later in the year?
There are all kinds of scenarios you can play around with, like the Italian federation gladly taking a team with one Italian star out of contention for the Giro.
What if it wasn't February? Would the UCI think the same way in June, or in August? If they don't want to honor their own agreement, what if, God for bid, a team's big star was in a serious accident in March? Would they remove their Pro Team status because he couldn't race in the grand tours?
There are a lot of hoops that a team has too jump through by the end of each year to be set up for the next. Last year a lot of teams had no clue what the requirements were. Now the UCI is stepping forward, contradicting their own statements, saying we can do whatever we want whenever we want and you guys are going to take it.
Right now, there's a talented cyclist who won his fifth grand tour at the age of 27. Thanks to 50 picograms of a substance that could not have helped him win that race, the Spanish Federation is being pushed towards a decision to strip him of a Tour de France title, give up two years of his career and salary, give over three million Euros to the UCI, and possibly kick 25 of his teammates out of the top level, forcing them to beg for races, and pushing sponsors out of the sport?
Nice system.
Would be suprised if it actually happened but in vacan's case they only have thenselves to blame it was only a matter time before ricco got busted again, in saxo's case I think it would be unfair seen as they have done nothing wrong seen as they didn't know what contador was getting up to behind the scenes(well they probably did but thewy didn't know he was under investigation)
Is Saxo's Pro Tour ticket really in jeapardy?
I apologize for starting a new thread. I posted this to one the AC threads but it was glossed over.
When the RFEC recommended that AC receive a 1 year ban, McQuad said that Saxo Banks ProTour Status would not be in jeapardy. Now I see a story that the UCI may "review" Saxo's status is AC is suspended. These seems to be nothing but strong arm tactics to get AC to stop his appeal. This is basically mod tactics..."I will not only punish you but I will punish everyone around you".
What is the points rule for when a rider is suspended? Is the theat to Saxo Bank legit or empty words? McQuad has said that because of how the points were awarded that Saxo Bank status was not up to a legal challenge. I assume that he was sending a message to the teams that didn't make the cut like Geox.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-says-saxo-bank-will-not-lose-contadors-ranking-points
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...-Banks-position-if-Contador-is-suspended.aspx
This thread is not a debate about Cantadors guilt or innocence. Thats more than covered elsewhere. all I'm wondering about is what ramifications there may be to Saxo Bank. Personally I think that if any team is penalized it should be Astana since AC was an Astana rider when his positive happened.
I apologize for starting a new thread. I posted this to one the AC threads but it was glossed over.
When the RFEC recommended that AC receive a 1 year ban, McQuad said that Saxo Banks ProTour Status would not be in jeapardy. Now I see a story that the UCI may "review" Saxo's status is AC is suspended. These seems to be nothing but strong arm tactics to get AC to stop his appeal. This is basically mod tactics..."I will not only punish you but I will punish everyone around you".
What is the points rule for when a rider is suspended? Is the theat to Saxo Bank legit or empty words? McQuad has said that because of how the points were awarded that Saxo Bank status was not up to a legal challenge. I assume that he was sending a message to the teams that didn't make the cut like Geox.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-says-saxo-bank-will-not-lose-contadors-ranking-points
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...-Banks-position-if-Contador-is-suspended.aspx
This thread is not a debate about Cantadors guilt or innocence. Thats more than covered elsewhere. all I'm wondering about is what ramifications there may be to Saxo Bank. Personally I think that if any team is penalized it should be Astana since AC was an Astana rider when his positive happened.
theswordsman, you know an awful lot about this sport but appear to be willfully blind when it comes to Contador. Clen may not have improved his performance if taken in July, but if it was taken in June and helped him shed weight in preparation for the Tour de France, I'd say it helped him win that race.theswordsman said:
I think that if Contador or any other rider is found guilty of a doping offence his points should be removed from his current team's standings. Even if the offence occurred while he was attached to another team. Buyer beware. That would be terrible for the other riders and staff, but perhaps we need that kind of penalty to break omerta and bring out whistleblowers. But the rules need to be clearly set out before being applied and not debated during a season. On that point I agree with you completely.
If the UCI wants to review Saxo for next years ProTour status, so be it. This year, they should stay where they are. The only reason I would think the UCI should pull their status mid-season is if they are caught in a Festina level violation.
UCI considers revoking Valconsoleil license, yet Conta's team is OK!!
CN article has the UCI considering revoking a ProTour team's license over suspected rider involvment in doping. How does Bjarne Riis and his squad escape this consideration? It gets worse every time these guys open their mouths....
CN article has the UCI considering revoking a ProTour team's license over suspected rider involvment in doping. How does Bjarne Riis and his squad escape this consideration? It gets worse every time these guys open their mouths....
Goodbye multi-year contracts. And perhaps you'll start to see contracts shorter than one year. Who'd want to risk their WorldTour license (or whatever this year's stupid brand name is)?
Well since Clentador has been "cleared" I guess it makes sense, sort of.
Unless you recall that they had said Saxo could hold on to Bert's points even before the verdict.
Even the rules seem to be a moving target.
Unless you recall that they had said Saxo could hold on to Bert's points even before the verdict.
Even the rules seem to be a moving target.
How many suspended riders does Saxo have? That's right, none.
Comparing the Ricco and Contador cases is just silly. Did we really need a new thread for this? I mean, seriously.
Comparing the Ricco and Contador cases is just silly. Did we really need a new thread for this? I mean, seriously.
Moose McKnuckles said:
Perhaps we don't need a new thread but the comparison is not silly as the UCI still has Mosquera as able to ride. Ricco aside, Mosquera's case would seem as "silly" on the surface as Contador's (positive for hydroxyl starch) and the team's license in the same circumstance.
there was already a thread on this.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=12357
can we have a merge please mods.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=12357
can we have a merge please mods.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram