Schenk encourages independent investigation of UCI

[DirtyWorks]

Negative Bribery

While Schenk dismissed the idea that the UCI could cover up a positive doping result in return for a bribe - simply because national federations and accredited labs would also have knowledge of it

Her opinion can be legitimately challenged in the U.S.
Her claim might be true in countries with larger, State-funded cycling programs. In the U.S. I think there's plenty of reasons to believe USAC would do it.
-Tailwind principals are the same ones running USAC.
-We know from the SI article that USADA is crippled by the federations they service.
-We know USAC was doping Juniors without reported positives too.


Unrelated comment: we don't see much information leaking out of USADA. A good anonymous leak would be another bunker buster straight to the heart of USOC sports federations. Swimming and Track and Field come to mind....

 

[JPM London]

"I doubt that a positive result could be covered up in return of a payment," the lawyer and chairwoman of an international organisation fighting corruption, Transparency International, told Cyclingnews on Monday. "But I could imagine that a medical explanation - whether accurate or not - would be found and accepted."

I think this a scary statement from someone that was on the inside. I think she is telling the investigation - should it happen - what to look for. If you read between the lines, she could be telling us how positives get 'hidden'...

My only issue is why is she coming forward now - she's been out of the UCI since 2005... What's her motive?

I think she's saying a lot more... She's basically daring Paddy to do a proper 3rd party investigation and opening up everything - she doesn't need to opine or speculate as to what corruption is possible or not. She can just say "I'm sure Paddy has nothing to hide and it's easy for him to just show it"... The elegance

It's not like she's denying the possibility of corruption - she's merely stating it's difficult.

I don't think she's "coming forward". It's not like she's been hiding and have bursted onto the scene. Probably just some journalist simply giving her a call for a statement and a few questions.

 

[Oldman]

I think she's saying a lot more... She's basically daring Paddy to do a proper 3rd party investigation and opening up everything - she doesn't need to opine or speculate as to what corruption is possible or not. She can just say "I'm sure Paddy has nothing to hide and it's easy for him to just show it"... The elegance

It's not like she's denying the possibility of corruption - she's merely stating it's difficult.

I don't think she's "coming forward". It's not like she's been hiding and have bursted onto the scene. Probably just some journalist simply giving her a call for a statement and a few questions.

I wouldn't be surprised if Novitsky hasn't spoken with her and plotted the trail deep into USAC territory. Next stop, USOC. This would help close a loop started with Marion Jones & company.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

While Schenk dismissed the idea that the UCI could cover up a positive doping result in return for a bribe - simply because national federations and accredited labs would also have knowledge of it

Well, as no federation wants to see their own riders busted, this is sort of a zero-sum argument. The labs didn't start leaking stuff until recently...

Although Schenk said that she had never been a witness of corruption during her time in the UCI management committee (from 2000 to 2005), she also warned, "It depends on how you define corruption, whether you only take into account criminal law infringements or the abuse of power for personal advantage, as Transparency International defines it.

"This advantage does not have to be material; it can be a specific honour for example like the attendance of the podium celebration at the Worlds

Seriously? The UCI nobs are such bike-nerds that being at a podium ceremony means that much to them? These toads need to get booted, if for no other big reason than they're so banal...

What a bunch of losers. Not only are they corrupt, they're pathetic. How about Schenk and Gripper get together and kick some serious *ss? I'd vote for them...

 

[stainlessguy1]

good stuff

There is some good posts on this thread . I sense a bit of momentum brewing between this thread and the national information contact thread which has just become a sticky .
Good work , guys keep it up .

 

[BotanyBay]

"The UCI has very little credibility because of this, and an independent investigation could restore it. This should be done by a consulting company like PWC or Deloitte and include public monitoring, for example by WADA representatives and by people from outside of the sport. The UCI should give access to all documents, including those in relation to the Armstrong donation."

 

[BotanyBay]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-reveals-armstrong-made-two-donations-to-the-uci

McQuaid showed Cyclingnews a photocopy of the invoice of the Sysmex blood testing machine that a large part of Armstrong $100,000 donation was used to buy. He refused to let us take a photograph of it, keeping it in a file marked 'Confidential'.

We've got nothing to hide, but we won't let you photograph the proof (heck, not even "proof"... the evidence!).

 

[sniper]

hmm...cryptic...

 

[mtb Dad]

While Schenk dismissed the idea that the UCI could cover up a positive doping result in return for a bribe - simply because national federations and accredited labs would also have knowledge of it

Well, as no federation wants to see their own riders busted, this is sort of a zero-sum argument. The labs didn't start leaking stuff until recently...

It was the (Paris?) lab that leaked that Delgado was positive for probenicid in 1988. ...When the FICP (Guess who as president?) had neglected to add it to their banned list (it had been banned for a year by the IOC) and denied it was a positive.

In 1991 the Spanish IOC accredited lab director told me directly that the two worst sports for doping in his lab were body building and ....cycling. (Jesus, doesn't that just make you cringe?) No, the labs have been letting cycling know for a while.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

It was the (Paris?) lab the leaked that Delgado was positive for probenicid in 1988. ...When the FICP (Guess who as president?) had neglected to add it to their banned list (it had been banned for a year by the IOC) and denied it was a positive.

In 1991 the Spanish IOC accredited lab director told me directly that the two worst sports for doping in his lab were body building and ....cycling. (Jesus, doesn't that just make you cringe?) No, the labs have been letting cycling know for a while.

Agreed.

I was speaking more of the broad public release of who got popped via lab leaks. There have obviously been some historically relevant releases, but I'm sure we can agree that the majority of results go from lab to UCI/Federation with an interesting (and whispered) conversation about what to do about it following the results.

The AC leak is obviously a big, current one.

Haha! I had a 'lab-rat' tell me the two worst sports were weight-lifting and then cycling. Close enough, I guess...

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

While its great to see that CN have finally gone and spoken to Schenk (How long have we been saying 'Speak to Schenk). It is also depressing because you wonder where the sport would have be now if Schenk rather than McQuaid had been elected head of the UCI.

She is cycling's lost leader.

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-reveals-armstrong-made-two-donations-to-the-uci



We've got nothing to hide, but we won't let you photograph the proof (heck, not even "proof"... the evidence!).

It would be more interesting if the UCI would make public all of Armstrong and Verburggen's business dealing.....far larger then just a blood machine.

 

[microdose]

While its great to see that CN have finally gone and spoken to Schenk (How long have we been saying 'Speak to Schenk). It is also depressing because you wonder where the sport would have be now if Schenk rather than McQuaid had been elected head of the UCI.

She is cycling's lost leader.

Many good points on this thread. Someone get Kimmage onto Schenk for a detailed expose to probe into more depth on all of these issues.

 

[Merckx index]

The UCI has very little credibility because of this, and an independent investigation could restore it.

I agree with everything in this sentence except the second-to-last word. I was thinking more on the lines of "destroy", "ruin", "obliterate", and the like.

I always respected her, and only wonder why she has taken so long to come out with this call for an investigation. I guess she felt she had to wait until McQ in effect invited someone to start one.

 

[Dallas_]

Sylvia in the chair

Schenck is obviously a bitter, malicious ex-UCI management member with an axe to grind and zero credibility.

Well if Sylvia Schenk was at the helm of the UCI, cycling would be in a better position today. Just my opinion.

She would not tolerate rider 'donations'.

When Landisgate broke, I found it hilarious that Pat attacked Floyd in a similar way to Armstrong! Did LA and Pat confer before launching similar attacks on Floyd?
Sylvia would not have attacked Landis the way Pat did.

Sylvia is pure class.

cheers

 

[sartain]

"I doubt that a positive result could be covered up in return of a payment," the lawyer and chairwoman of an international organisation fighting corruption, Transparency International, told Cyclingnews on Monday. "But I could imagine that a medical explanation - whether accurate or not - would be found and accepted."

I think this a scary statement from someone that was on the inside. I think she is telling the investigation - should it happen - what to look for. If you read between the lines, she could be telling us how positives get 'hidden'...

My only issue is why is she coming forward now - she's been out of the UCI since 2005... What's her motive?

Timing is EVERYTHING . . . WTFN . . . pile on, I say!!!

 

[stainlessguy1]

More info

Here is something to read incase you havent read it yet . Concerning other organizations accusing uci . More stuff hits the fan .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10484158.

You can draw your own conclusions concerning the other posts and information so far and add this on top . So maybe its true then favourite status was given to LA by UCI during testing .

 

[thehog]

Here is something to read incase you havent read it yet . Concerning other organizations accusing uci . More stuff hits the fan .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10484158.

You can draw your own conclusions concerning the other posts and information so far and add this on top . So maybe its true then favourite status was given to LA by UCI during testing .

"This is just another example of the improper behavior by the French laboratory and the French anti-doping organizations," Armstrong said. "I am sorry that they are disappointed that all the tests were negative, but I do not use any prohibited drugs or substances."

 

[stainlessguy1]

"This is just another example of the improper behavior by the French laboratory and the French anti-doping organizations," Armstrong said. "I am sorry that they are disappointed that all the tests were negative, but I do not use any prohibited drugs or substances."

WEll maybe that is true too . Or maybe we should have Iceland do all the testing . Some country with no affiliation to any cycling be totally neutral , in the testing. So no history to maintain , and then we can get somewhere . ? yes / No . ?

 

[BotanyBay]

I found it hilarious that Pat attacked Floyd in a similar way to Armstrong! Did LA and Pat confer before launching similar attacks on Floyd?
Sylvia would not have attacked Landis the way Pat did.

Police detectives learn this in interrogation class:

The innocent tend to attack the evidence. The guilty tend to attack the accuser. So they watch the initial reactions very closely and then decide how to proceed.

Pat never mentions the evidence and ALWAYS attacks the accuser.

 

[mtb Dad]

Police detectives learn this in interrogation class:

The innocent tend to attack the evidence. The guilty tend to attack the accuser. So they watch the initial reactions very closely and then decide how to proceed.

Pat never mentions the evidence and ALWAYS attacks the accuser.

+1 I think I know who he learned that from. VerDRUGgen always goes for the jugular, and hardly ever discusses evidence. Probably a good thing. Hein's manifesto on doping, posted here, and footnoted by FMK at Podium Cafe, is laughable.

 

[BotanyBay]

+1 I think I know who he learned that from. VerDRUGgen always goes for the jugular, and hardly ever discusses evidence. Probably a good thing. Hein's manifesto on doping, posted here, and footnoted by FMK at Podium Cafe, is laughable.

Thanks for that link!

 

[Dallas_]

Maybe .....

Ok, so Frau Schenk is one of the good guys. Is there anything realistic or sensible that we can do to support her?

Well maybe Sylvia needs to address the problem from another angle!

Sylvia probably knows which national delegates support her. Now if she was to lobby more national delegates and then at the next election Sylvia takes over from Pat.
Now Sylvia at the helm, can clean in house. Am I making any sense Sylvia?

maybe forum members with connections could help lobby? just thinking

cheers to S Schenk

 

[Darryl Webster]

My only issue is why is she coming forward now - she's been out of the UCI since 2005... What's her motive?

Perhaps she cares...those kinda peeps do exist!

 

[Oldman]

+1 I think I know who he learned that from. VerDRUGgen always goes for the jugular, and hardly ever discusses evidence. Probably a good thing. Hein's manifesto on doping, posted here, and footnoted by FMK at Podium Cafe, is laughable.

HV operated in a less media-savvy environment with almost no opposition from promoters, DS's or riders; at least none he couldn't squelch. Festina pried the lid off that can of toxic waste and Verbruggen saw a good time to "retire". Unfortunately for the UCI, McQuaid still lives in the 20th Century...Fortunately for sporting transparency; the rest of us live in the very current and staggering news environment. Pat and Lance can't catch up with the facts anymore...