The Missing of Doping Tests (aka... pulling a Rasmussen)

[bobbins]

I repeat that I am a Cav fan and I hope that this concludes in his favor. However, this is not like showing up to work late, it's more like showing up to work with no pants. A Spanish Inquisition is not required (at least no racks), but let's, at the minimum, check out his story and see if it makes floats.

Missing one ooc test is not an issue. It happens, that's why athletes get 2 strikes. This is a non story.

If he had missed 2 tests, that's a non story too as the system allows for it. His management at the time are well known for being disorganised so maybe it is't entirely his fault, maybe he has made sure it never happens again.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

60 tests per year and he missed one. You think that's grounds for a Spanish Inquisition? You've never missed a meeting at work, been late for work, got a date wrong?

Loads of times.
But I rang or texted to say I would be late or to reschedule.

Missing a test is not the same as the examples you give.
Have you arranged a meeting or gathering? Offered the time and place that you will be there?
And then at the time offered you get a call "ah, everyones here, where are you?".......

 

[Cobblestones]

How long does it take until a missed test gets 'off' the record again? 2 years?

 

[roundabout]

18 months....

 

[sniper]

Missing a test is not the same as the examples you give.

indeed.

nobody's skipping a day at the job in order to gain an unfair advantage over his/her colleagues.

athletes regularly skip doping tests in order to gain an unfair advantage over their colleagues.

 

[ferryman]

'I was tested by the UCI a couple of weeks before that and twice in the fortnight after'

Find this quite staggering really. 4 scheduled out of comp tests in a month (even if the latter 2 were as a result of the missed one, 2 in a fortnight still seems a lot). Was he being targetted by the UCI

 

[richtea]

I repeat that I am a Cav fan and I hope that this concludes in his favor. However, this is not like showing up to work late, it's more like showing up to work with no pants. A Spanish Inquisition is not required (at least no racks), but let's, at the minimum, check out his story and see if it makes floats.

Here is the BBC footage I think Cav is referring to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cycling/13399242.stm

 

[goggalor]

First Yoann Offredo has been notified of missing three tests in 2011.

Ref: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/offredo-informed-of-missed-doping-controls

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

This breaks my heart.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

'I was tested by the UCI a couple of weeks before that and twice in the fortnight after'

Find this quite staggering really. 4 scheduled out of comp tests in a month (even if the latter 2 were as a result of the missed one, 2 in a fortnight still seems a lot). Was he being targetted by the UCI

Yes & no.
He won Scheldeprijs a couple of weeks before he went to Etna and he would have been at the Giro within a fortnight - they appear to be standard UCI tests.

However I found that quote rather odd as getting tested weeks before or after is completely irrelevant and means little as most detectable banned substances clear the system within days.

 

[Arnout]

I'd be annoyed if I were Cav about this coming out.

A single missed test whilst regretable, is not an indication of anything doping related. Who here has not missed/been late for a meeting at work (or socially) in the last 12 months due to unforseen circumstances that cropped up ?

2 in the 18 month window is good grounds for the team boss to deliver a ship-up talk, this is part of your job, do it and do it right.

Exactly. Give the guy a break.

Condemning him for this means you're not watching cycling, but only hoping something goes wrong for cyclists.

Worried about Offredo too. Hopefully he can show proof to his statements and get away with it

 

[Richeypen]

Missing one ooc test is not an issue. It happens, that's why athletes get 2 strikes. This is a non story.

This




.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

It doesn't exactly help when sometimes you have Dupont and Dupond in charge of testing, remember the Óscar Pereiro in the restaurant story? He availed himself for testing at his house from 7 to 8 am, they showed up from 7 to 8 pm and insisted on testing him, though he was at a restaurant with friends and under no obligation to be anywhere else. Then there wasn't enough room in the restaurant toilets to perform the tests so they had to do it in the hallway. Which, considering some of the rules regarding the tests (for example, that the subject must be stripped to the ankles), could be considered not just an affront to Pereiro's rights, but also could open them up to being sued by the restaurant, as they have every right to be upset about this kind of commotion taking place in a place they're trying to serve food. Plus, of course, given all that went on with the test, the risk of contamination of the sample being high, it would have been nigh on impossible to actually convict Pereiro of any doping offence from that test.

So the testers are fallible, make scheduling errors and do stupid things and make excuses for them too.

I'm sure some people will see this unfavourably for Cavendish, and likely unfairly as after all, there is no sanction required, requested or necessary for a first strike, as the riders are only human and sometimes the requirements of the whereabouts system are difficult to adhere to, even for the most basic of reasons, say you got stuck in traffic and couldn't make it to the place you said you'd be on time, or because you forgot about a prior engagement, or because a meeting you were in overran. At the end of the day, as long as this is just in the cycling press, it's not going to change anybody's opinion of the guy, since it's a complete non-story.

 

[Mambo95]

It doesn't exactly help when sometimes you have Dupont and Dupond in charge of testing, remember the Óscar Pereiro in the restaurant story? He availed himself for testing at his house from 7 to 8 am, they showed up from 7 to 8 pm and insisted on testing him, though he was at a restaurant with friends and under no obligation to be anywhere else. Then there wasn't enough room in the restaurant toilets to perform the tests so they had to do it in the hallway. Which, considering some of the rules regarding the tests (for example, that the subject must be stripped to the ankles), could be considered not just an affront to Pereiro's rights, but also could open them up to being sued by the restaurant, as they have every right to be upset about this kind of commotion taking place in a place they're trying to serve food. Plus, of course, given all that went on with the test, the risk of contamination of the sample being high, it would have been nigh on impossible to actually convict Pereiro of any doping offence from that test.

So the testers are fallible, make scheduling errors and do stupid things and make excuses for them too.

I read a story a couple of years ago about a well known British Olympian. This person lived in an apartment complex which had a entrance gate with a key coded lock. Said Olympian had given the testers the code, but they'd forgotten to bring it. And they couldn't phone the office because it was too early and no-one was in. So they just put the Olympian down for a missed tested. It took the Olympian nearly a year to get that wiped off their record.

 

[Oldman]

I read a story a couple of years ago about a well known British Olympian. This person lived in an apartment complex which had a entrance gate with a key coded lock. Said Olympian had given the testers the code, but they'd forgotten to bring it. And they couldn't phone the office because it was too early and no-one was in. So they just put the Olympian down for a missed tested. It took the Olympian nearly a year to get that wiped off their record.

I'm surprised that the IOC testers went that far. As for a Pro bike rider missing a test; it's the twitter/cell/email era. If they miss a test without some written notice back to the test they aren't doing their job. Unless they're in some part of*** Eygpt with no cell coverage they don't have an excuse. In fact if they plan to be off the grid make the teams provide them with a satelitte link. It ain't the Stone Age.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It doesn't exactly help when sometimes you have Dupont and Dupond in charge of testing, remember the Óscar Pereiro in the restaurant story? He availed himself for testing at his house from 7 to 8 am, they showed up from 7 to 8 pm and insisted on testing him, though he was at a restaurant with friends and under no obligation to be anywhere else. Then there wasn't enough room in the restaurant toilets to perform the tests so they had to do it in the hallway. Which, considering some of the rules regarding the tests (for example, that the subject must be stripped to the ankles), could be considered not just an affront to Pereiro's rights, but also could open them up to being sued by the restaurant, as they have every right to be upset about this kind of commotion taking place in a place they're trying to serve food. Plus, of course, given all that went on with the test, the risk of contamination of the sample being high, it would have been nigh on impossible to actually convict Pereiro of any doping offence from that test.

So the testers are fallible, make scheduling errors and do stupid things and make excuses for them too.

I'm sure some people will see this unfavourably for Cavendish, and likely unfairly as after all, there is no sanction required, requested or necessary for a first strike, as the riders are only human and sometimes the requirements of the whereabouts system are difficult to adhere to, even for the most basic of reasons, say you got stuck in traffic and couldn't make it to the place you said you'd be on time, or because you forgot about a prior engagement, or because a meeting you were in overran. At the end of the day, as long as this is just in the cycling press, it's not going to change anybody's opinion of the guy, since it's a complete non-story.

I do remember the Pereiro story, but the not the version you give.

You can be tested anytime between 6am & 11pm and athletes must supply a precise location for 1 hour each day.
If Pereiro was so worried about his "human rights" he could have gone to the hotel that the testers offered.

 

[bobbins]

I read a story a couple of years ago about a well known British Olympian. This person lived in an apartment complex which had a entrance gate with a key coded lock. Said Olympian had given the testers the code, but they'd forgotten to bring it. And they couldn't phone the office because it was too early and no-one was in. So they just put the Olympian down for a missed tested. It took the Olympian nearly a year to get that wiped off their record.

Is this the one that missed 3 in the run up to beijing?

 

[ferryman]

Yes & no.
He won Scheldeprijs a couple of weeks before he went to Etna and he would have been at the Giro within a fortnight - they appear to be standard UCI tests.

However I found that quote rather odd as getting tested weeks before or after is completely irrelevant and means little as most detectable banned substances clear the system within days.

I was being a bit trolly TBH Your timings of tests at the races make perfect sense. Cheers

 

[Mambo95]

Is this the one that missed 3 in the run up to beijing?

No. Different person altogether. Different sport, too.

 

[Andrichuk]

Offredo says he had missed his last offense because he was at a race added last minute to his schedule and he didn't have time to inform the doping controls. The last race of his season was the 16th of October If I remember correctly, Alex Rasmussen got off because he hadn't been informed within 14 days of his last offense.

If Offredo is just now being informed, he will most likely be acquitted right? And if he had been informed within 14 days, being French, wouldnt you think some action would have been taken against him by now?

EDIT: Do turning in your whereabouts late hold the same weight as missing drug tests?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I do remember the Pereiro story, but the not the version you give.

You can be tested anytime between 6am & 11pm and athletes must supply a precise location for 1 hour each day.
If Pereiro was so worried about his "human rights" he could have gone to the hotel that the testers offered.

Óscar Pereiro never made an issue of his rights in the incident. But he could have done. As he explained, he had no obligation to be anywhere at that point, and why should he leave his engagements? What if you're out on a training ride, do the testers just ride alongside you and do it at the side of the road? Maybe he didn't care as he thought it would be fine to do so in the restaurant toilets.

And if Pereiro didn't have a problem with it, the restaurant sure could have.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Offredo says he had missed his last offense because he was at a race added last minute to his schedule and he didn't have time to inform the doping controls. The last race of his season was the 16th of October If I remember correctly, Alex Rasmussen got off because he hadn't been informed within 14 days of his last offense.

If Offredo is just now being informed, he will most likely be acquitted right? And if he had been informed within 14 days, being French, wouldnt you think some action would have been taken against him by now?

EDIT: Do turning in your whereabouts late hold the same weight as missing drug tests?

According to the UCI the missed tests date back to January and 2 in July - but they also insist that it will not be like Rasmussen.

However, while he didn’t give specifics, Carpani said that this would not apply in this circumstance. “I don’t have all the details myself but I have been told that there are no problems for us. The Offredo case is fully compliant with our rules,” he insisted.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...ed-disciplinary-action-for-Yoann-Offredo.aspx

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Óscar Pereiro never made an issue of his rights in the incident. But he could have done. As he explained, he had no obligation to be anywhere at that point, and why should he leave his engagements? What if you're out on a training ride, do the testers just ride alongside you and do it at the side of the road? Maybe he didn't care as he thought it would be fine to do so in the restaurant toilets.

And if Pereiro didn't have a problem with it, the restaurant sure could have.

No he couldn't - he waived any right when he refused the offer to go to the hotel.
It was Pereiro's choice.

Just to clarify - the rights part I now assume is your position, not his.

 

[Andrichuk]

July was 6 months ago, how are they fully compliant with the rules?

I need to read the rule book one of these days. This seems very strange and I would like a better understanding of what's going on.

 

[Dancing On The Pedals]

I've posted these before, but seems apt to do so again. Tom Fordyce is a BBC journo who was put into the 'whereabouts' system so he could see what it is like for the athletes. An interesting read.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/06/inside_the_anti-doping_system.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/06/inside_the_anti-doping_system_1.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/07/life_on_the_uk_anti-doping.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/07/inside_the_anti-doping_system_3.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/07/is_the_uks_anti-doping_system.html

 

[bobbins]

No. Different person altogether. Different sport, too.

Wasn't there a bike rider who did the same?