UCI biased ?? Tom Boonen

[PuncturedTyre]

the recent mess that was Tom Boonen's use of cocaine, has clearly upset the UCI.

The recent claim by Pat McQuaid that his conduct (Boonen's) "damages cycling" and has resulted in the UCI seeking a suspension, and the ASO openly stating that Tom is not welcome at the Tour.

Right or Wrong, some supporters of Tom Boonen believe the conduct of the UCI has been disproportionately "biased" relative to some of the ongoing or more recent scandals which the UCI/ASO have chosen to selectively ignore.

Most of us who participate in this forum, can name at least 5 -6 instances this season involving Astana (which do not solely revolve around Armstrong) Valverde - Puerto : Caisse des Epargne / Rebellin : Dicqui etc ...

so they are seeking emails of support, with stated reasons.

click the link for details :

http://www.gva.be/nieuws/sport/wiel...agne-voor-boonen-en-tegen-hypocriete-uci.aspx

 

[Steel4Ever]

These days EVERYTHING in cycling that has even a single thread of connection to a governing body, doping "authority", testing lab, etc. is a mess. There is no uniformity of rules, regulations, and/or decisions among all those in cycling who don't actually do the cycling.

It really is a joke. I'd probably have to start doing drug too if I was a professional, just to be able to wrap my head around the suit-and-tie crowd.

Just sit back and enjoy what goes on on the road.

 

[nobody]

the recent mess that was Tom Boonen's use of cocaine, has clearly upset the UCI.

The recent claim by Pat McQuaid that his conduct (Boonen's) "damages cycling" and has resulted in the UCI seeking a suspension, and the ASO openly stating that Tom is not welcome at the Tour.

If Boonen had used CERA on last GIRO, he would have no problem with McQuaid.

 

[tifosa]

Boonen's recent cocaine debacle was merely another domino tumbling onto cycling's already crumbling "we're trying to eliminate the doping issue" facade - that's why the UCI feigns outrage.

I'll believe that cycling is cleaning up its act when it presents a unified front and truly does something both persistent and effective to eliminate the decay in our sport.

Until then, I'll remain a hopeful cynic. Or something like that.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Agree. Agree with all.

The UCI needs a total flush. Pat, Hein, they need to go and we need to start anew, with a new leader (Sylvia Shenk would still be my pick) who knows how to work in conjunction with WADA, IOC, ASO, CONI, RFEC, USADA, etc. and be firm, clear, consistent, and aggressive towards doping.

The fish stinks from the head.

 

[BigBoat]

Its not individuals that are the problem.... Boonen is not a nice guy from what I here but I could be off. These guys do get too much fan worship.

You see when BIG MONEY is on offer at the top of a sport everybody scrambles and grabs what they can (takes what they can.)

You can keep switching gov. bodies and thats great, I think all new recruits wish they could do the right thing; but eventually they all give in. Every one of them unless insane or with strong convictions.

 

[stephens]

Work in conjunction? Bleh! Throw all that away!

What they really need is ONE doping/rule organization for pro cycling. And ONE strong union representing the interests of the cyclists and making the sport what they want it to be (good showing today protesting the dangerous course design). If the cyclists decide they want the bio passport, then fine. If they decide they want their whereabouts know to the organization for random testing purposes 24-7-365, then fine. If they decide that it's the organization's business what recreational drugs they use when partying in their time off, then fine. But whatever it is, the riders should have the say so, not just those who sit around in their comfy chairs making money off of the riders efforts (the promoters, the sponsors, etc.).

Cyclists can sign exclusive deals with the organization and thus promoters will have to play by the rules of the organization or not have those riders participate in their, uh, Tour.

 

[BigBoat]

interests of the cyclists .

They wish they had a level field (except those profiting from doping.)

Its tough bro because Lance wants part ownership of the Tour and other top guys that have benefited from being super respoders to drug therapy and had good doping doctors also have huge influence in the sport.

 

[lookkg386]

So many fingers in the pie it's all a shambles, problem is that each countries doping organisations are so different. The fact that a rider can be banned from racing in certain countries or races and be fine elsewhere just makes no sense.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

But whatever it is, the riders should have the say so, not just those who sit around in their comfy chairs making money off of the riders efforts (the promoters, the sponsors, etc.)..

Uh, have you been paying attention? The sport has been completely decimated by doping scandals. It has the reputation, more than any other sport in the world, of being dominated by doping. It's just barely above pro wrestling as far as reputation for integrity goes.

The riders have a union, the AIGCP run by Eric Boyer. For several years the riders sought to have less strict standards, less testing. They defended Richard Virenque when the ASO (yes, he ASO) wanted him out of the 1999 Tour. They sided with the UCI when the ASO wanted control over it's own race because it was being humiliated by all the doping scandals. Every step of the way the AIGCP has fought for less testing. So much so that they're now considered impotent, and not taken seriously and have almost no voice in discussions.

Judging by AIGCP's past, it would mean that there would be NO testing, and the riders with the most money, and most connections would have the best doctors and best drugs. It would be like 1996, but to the tenth fold. Far worse actually. No health conscious rider would have the ability to compete. It would be completely impossible. And those that do speak out, would be humiliated like Lance did to Bassons or Simeoni, but with encouragement and acceptance as the way it is. We'd be back to the days when young cyclists die from doping related illness, and riders like Marco Pantani or Jose Marie Jiminez lives are overcome, and they die young.

Is that really the sport you want to see? Or do you really, truly think the riders and AIGCP would vote for stricter controls in order to clean up the sport? And even if they did, what possible path do you think they'd take?

 

[stephens]

Or do you really, truly think the riders and AIGCP would vote for stricter controls in order to clean up the sport? And even if they did, what possible path do you think they'd take?

My opinion is that whether they'd clean up the sport or not, it ought to be their choice. They are the ones risking their health by cycling 110km/hr down sketchy mountain roads. They are the ones training their guts out. And they should be the ones deciding what substances they can and can't put in their bodies. It should then be all out in the open and the marketplace can decide whether to support it or not. If the public disagrees with the choices the athletes make, the athletes won't make a living and will adjust their strategy.

But we all know that what we have right now is ridiculous. It's the suits who have gotten us to this point. I don't see them ever cleaning up the sport because they are in it for the money and it's still flowing.

 

[cyclingtyger]

poor guy can't even party after his big roubaix win!

this is reminiscent of Michael Phelps' marijuana bust. Boonen was just looking to get wasted. He was taking ambien and drinking, which leads easily to black outs, but is also the best time of your life! poor guy prolly didn't even remember taking the yaya

 

[rhubroma]

Agree. Agree with all.

The UCI needs a total flush. Pat, Hein, they need to go and we need to start anew, with a new leader (Sylvia Shenk would still be my pick) who knows how to work in conjunction with WADA, IOC, ASO, CONI, RFEC, USADA, etc. and be firm, clear, consistent, and aggressive towards doping.

The fish stinks from the head.

As long as pro sports (and not just cycling) trys to clean house by those living in it, its drug problem will never go away. But pro sports won't allow a totally independent body to clean house, because they would do "too good of job"! And the negative publicity would goe counter to the logic of the market and the conflict of interests which are at the very basis as to why such a non-existent independent body isn't called upon to do the jiob in the first place.

Having said that, it is obvious that I agree with your belief that the UCI need a "total flush" as you say. But political bodies, and it is a body politic, are the most conservative and protectionist entities out there. So it's sad to say that that aint gonna happen.

As far as the Boonen case goes, I find the UCI's position so hypocritical. And not only because of OP, Valverde, etc., but because Boonen has otherwise been one of the darlings of the sport and, when, he was winning Paris-Rubaix for the third time how delighted was Pat McQuaid that the guy existed! How much taking advantage of "Tornado Tom's" exploit for sheer profit (and it's only about profit for the UCI) was the governing body of pro cycling able to do before this cocain thing broke out? And how insipidly "moralistic" has the UCI became afterward?

 

[bikepure]

These days EVERYTHING in cycling that has even a single thread of connection to a governing body, doping "authority", testing lab, etc. is a mess. There is no uniformity of rules, regulations, and/or decisions among all those in cycling who don't actually do the cycling.

It really is a joke. I'd probably have to start doing drug too if I was a professional, just to be able to wrap my head around the suit-and-tie crowd.

Just sit back and enjoy what goes on on the road.

on the button
bikepure.org

 

[bikepure]

the sport could self regulate.
post the blood passport results please mr and mrs UCI


the results have remained 'secret' as if acted on, (was told off the record) there would be a Clear out top line pros. and this "would be bad for cycling"

or good / great a new start.
The technology is there to catch the cheats but the implementation of the rulings is weak, inconsistant and shadowy.

 

[elapid]

The one BIG problem is that the UCI has a conflict of interest because it is both the regulating and policing body of cycling. The UCI should continue as the regulating body and transfer the policing of doping to an independent organization. I believe WADA is a little like the UN, all words and no action, but if they would be the logical choice IMO if given the mandate and budget.

 

[elapid]

In regards to suspending Boonen for negatively affecting the image of cycling, this is definitely not a new concept. A famous footballer in Australia, Ben Cousins, was suspended for a year because of a cocaine addiction. He was a lot worse than Boonen. All of the football codes in Australia can suspend players testing positive to recreational drugs (marijuana, cocaine, etc).

However, I also do not know why the authorities expect anything different. These are young people, often men, in their 20s that are in their prime and have heaps of money. I know I got into enough trouble in my 20s with hardly any money. I would hate to think what would have happened if I was being paid millions and wanted to blow off some steam after working so hard. As others have stated, these athletes did not sign up to be role models but this is increasingly being forced upon them by organizations such as the UCI, organizations whose behaviour and practices are far worse than any individual and certainly do nothing to engender respect and improve the image of cycling.