• 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 @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

UCI blacklist.

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Visit site
Ferminal said:
That would require some sort of actual reporting/journalism, something CN has a lack of.

Like almost all cycling websites and other news outlets which are depended on a small circle of sources. They are too afraid to do anything which bites the hand that feeds it
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
Let's not forget the parent company in all this - after all, how can we expect UCI et al to be free of corruption when they were born out of the Olympic movement and the IOC - possibly one of the most corrupt organisations of all time

Agreed. When you take this quote:
“I am not concerned if people confess or are unrepentant,” he explains. “I for one am not interested in holding up the riders as being the evil characters in this. I refuse to use terms ‘lie,’ ‘cheats,’ etc because what is at issue is the structure of the sport, not individuals. Some riders are able to come back, others are not. There does appear to be two standards at play here. Some riders are asked to make donations to the UCI to come back after bans and they refuse and hence never come back,” he claims.

[B]And add the veiled comments by Floyd Landis at the anti-doping conference regarding the uneven, secretive application of bio-passport findings you see the tools for the ongoing extortion.
 
Sep 9, 2009
16
0
0
Visit site
I was actually worried that Landis' attendance at that event potentially damages the credibility of it.
Landis clearly is at the clutching-at-straws stage, and hiring him for your event puts you in a similar frame.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
I have been following the New Pathways for Pro Cycling conference today on twitter.

Professor Verner Møller spoke about the case of Michael Rasmussen and how he and others had been 'blacklisted' by the UCI from returning.

Here are a selection of tweets from the NPCC:
an internal UCI email, Pat McQuaid expresses the wish to tell Rasmussen to "**** off"... quoted verbatim there

Gianetti of Footon Servetto, also offered Rasmussen a contract, but Rumpf (UCI CEO) told Gianetti, not to sign him

Andrei Tchmill of Katusha, also wished to sign Rasmussen, but the UCI forwarded Katusha with a list of riders that they were not to sign
We can have long discussions about it being absolutely regretfull that the UCI would do something like that, but unfortuntately there are frauds everywhere (not saying that the UCI is, just that it could happen). But what i don't get is the e-mails. Seems to me that chapter 1 in fraud for dummies is about not leaving traces. Why would they even write these things in an e-mail?
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Roninho said:
We can have long discussions about it being absolutely regretfull that the UCI would do something like that, but unfortuntately there are frauds everywhere (not saying that the UCI is, just that it could happen). But what i don't get is the e-mails. Seems to me that chapter 1 in fraud for dummies is about not leaving traces. Why would they even write these things in an e-mail?

That's where the Omerta concept of mutual destruction comes into play. UCI has been a habit-bound group of corrupt promoters, DS, sponsors for some time. The riders are nothing more than the animals in a circus to them and until the most powerful offenders among them are called out it's not going to change. The riders have the power as a unified group to force a change but they are deep into the same code of silence and won't come to agreement to do anything about their plight.
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Visit site
ike2112 said:
I was actually worried that Landis' attendance at that event potentially damages the credibility of it.
Landis clearly is at the clutching-at-straws stage, and hiring him for your event puts you in a similar frame.


Really, Lance? :rolleyes:
 
Oldman said:
That's where the Omerta concept of mutual destruction comes into play. UCI has been a habit-bound group of corrupt promoters, DS, sponsors for some time. The riders are nothing more than the animals in a circus to them and until the most powerful offenders among them are called out it's not going to change. The riders have the power as a unified group to force a change but they are deep into the same code of silence and won't come to agreement to do anything about their plight.
Yeah, understand that, but even in that situation i would be more inclined to do it in a telephone call then via e-mail (and most preferably simply tell it in person). Sure a telephone call can be wired/taped, but that it seems to me that the odds are quite high that someone will someday get disgruntled and search his e-mail archive to find that mail you sent 2 years ago...
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Roninho said:
Yeah, understand that, but even in that situation i would be more inclined to do it in a telephone call then via e-mail (and most preferably simply tell it in person). Sure a telephone call can be wired/taped, but that it seems to me that the odds are quite high that someone will someday get disgruntled and search his e-mail archive to find that mail you sent 2 years ago...

Stupid is as stupid does.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Roninho said:
We can have long discussions about it being absolutely regretfull that the UCI would do something like that, but unfortuntately there are frauds everywhere (not saying that the UCI is, just that it could happen). But what i don't get is the e-mails. Seems to me that chapter 1 in fraud for dummies is about not leaving traces. Why would they even write these things in an e-mail?

If there is a rule saying you can't sign a rider who has active court procedings like someone else stated... and the "don't sign" list was simply those who have active legal proceedings... then there's nothing wrong with having it in an e-mail. The profanity would be unprofessional, but the list would be completely above board.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
If the "BlackList" has less that one hundred riders - it is way too short!

"They served their time" waawaa what a joke.
 
Jun 21, 2009
847
0
0
Visit site
ike2112 said:
I was actually worried that Landis' attendance at that event potentially damages the credibility of it.
Landis clearly is at the clutching-at-straws stage, and hiring him for your event puts you in a similar frame.

1285623502174.jpg
 
ike2112 said:
Only if Batman was the one responsible for the inadequate rules, lack of appropriate procedures and lack of accountability...in the first place.

I am not saying what the UCI is doing is right. But I didn't want Rasmussen to sign for a Pro Tour team 3 weeks after Rabobank fired him, and ride in all the big races that year. I don't want dopers getting away with it. My preference would be that the UCI rules work.



What is the American way? Isn't it greed? I thought that was exactly what this was all about...

The most successful dopers are getting away with it every day, and with the UCI's help. The guys on this blacklist are there for being "trouble makers" not for being dopers.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Hugh Januss said:
The most successful dopers are getting away with it every day, and with the UCI's help. The guys on this blacklist are there for being "trouble makers" not for being dopers.

Polish posted this from Wordsmans' ongoing monitor of the drug conference:

Ashenden recently completed a study in which he injected subjects intravenously twice weekly with microdoses of EPO over a period of three months, then ran their blood values through the biological passport software. "Not one of them failed," he said.

The three of you are right. UCI uses it to control their pack of dogs.
 
Roninho said:
We can have long discussions about it being absolutely regretfull that the UCI would do something like that, but unfortuntately there are frauds everywhere (not saying that the UCI is, just that it could happen). But what i don't get is the e-mails. Seems to me that chapter 1 in fraud for dummies is about not leaving traces. Why would they even write these things in an e-mail?

Because at a certain point, corruption becomes so pervasive that it isn't even noticed by those in an organization.

-dB
 
Escarabajo said:
What about Heras? I thought he was in the blacklist too.:confused:
He's on there, you just missed it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think there was a decent chance that Heras was set-up. Not that he was clean. No, he rode in the EPO era for JB then Saiz. But he was riding for Saiz in the Vuelta while it's very likely Saiz, Fueltes and the team were under initial investigation. It was also during a time when doping was absolutely rife in the sport, a year after Hamilton was caught, and there was a growing pressure on organizations to do something. His tests results were re-examined in order to deem both positive, and even after he quietly served his ban, no team would touch him other than one tiny continental team with no budget attempting to make an offer.
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
He's on there, you just missed it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think there was a decent chance that Heras was set-up..

Same point Floyd has made...he was jacked on EPO, but NOT testosterone. If true, at least the UCI is an equal opportunity saboteur. They'll falsify your controls without regards to nationality :eek:
 
Mar 10, 2009
341
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
He's on there, you just missed it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think there was a decent chance that Heras was set-up. Not that he was clean. No, he rode in the EPO era for JB then Saiz. But he was riding for Saiz in the Vuelta while it's very likely Saiz, Fueltes and the team were under initial investigation. It was also during a time when doping was absolutely rife in the sport, a year after Hamilton was caught, and there was a growing pressure on organizations to do something. His tests results were re-examined in order to deem both positive, and even after he quietly served his ban, no team would touch him other than one tiny continental team with no budget attempting to make an offer.

Always wondered why he couldn't get a ride and was hung out to dry. He never made any comments to the press and served his time so if others can come back surely he can too.

Seems to me the only solution is to get rid of the UCI and setup a new body with no previous members of the UCI on it.

How can a governing body blacklist riders just because they don't like them ?
 
kurtinsc said:
If there is a rule saying you can't sign a rider who has active court procedings like someone else stated... and the "don't sign" list was simply those who have active legal proceedings... then there's nothing wrong with having it in an e-mail. The profanity would be unprofessional, but the list would be completely above board.
Maybe i'm reading it incorrectly but imo the quote in the first post of this topic is reffering to the situation in which Rasmussen had served his 2 year ban and still the uci told astana not to sign him.

A list provided by the uci of riders currently being banned or having active legal proceedings would imo not be a problem (since these guys aren't allowed to ride by rules). The situation as described in the o-p seems different though, and if true is imo absolutely NOT 'above board'.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
He's on there, you just missed it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think there was a decent chance that Heras was set-up. Not that he was clean. No, he rode in the EPO era for JB then Saiz. But he was riding for Saiz in the Vuelta while it's very likely Saiz, Fueltes and the team were under initial investigation. It was also during a time when doping was absolutely rife in the sport, a year after Hamilton was caught, and there was a growing pressure on organizations to do something. His tests results were re-examined in order to deem both positive, and even after he quietly served his ban, no team would touch him other than one tiny continental team with no budget attempting to make an offer.

Dr. Fuentes messed up. After Heras was popped, Saiz was so angry that he broke off relations with Fuentes while still owing Fuentes money. It took pressure from Vino's manager manager, Tony Rominger, for him to reestablish the relationship.

With Heras there is a story that we do not know about that has caused the blacklisting. It could be as simple as the anger and embarrassment of Unipublic. Could be that Heras refused to make a donation to Verbruggen's retirement fund.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
Dr. Fuentes messed up. After Heras was popped, Saiz was so angry that he broke off relations with Fuentes while still owing Fuentes money. It took pressure from Vino's manager manager, Tony Rominger, for him to reestablish the relationship.

With Heras there is a story that we do not know about that has caused the blacklisting. It could be as simple as the anger and embarrassment of Unipublic. Could be that Heras refused to make a donation to Verbruggen's retirement fund.


The riders that come back successfully seem well-funded and desired by teams with solid sponsorship. Heras also left the Lance/JB fold before Lance was done using him as a domestique, perhaps. That seems a common theme.
 
Disagree

ike2112 said:
I was actually worried that Landis' attendance at that event potentially damages the credibility of it.
Landis clearly is at the clutching-at-straws stage, and hiring him for your event puts you in a similar frame.

One's stance on FLandis' credibility depends entirely on one's outlook on his situation. Most people it's somewhere between "Still lying and not credible" and "Finally, the guy is being honest"

It doesn't seem to me at all that FLandis is "clutching at straws." The guy is a pariah, no doubt. But apparently he's got a place to live in a small, beautiful mountain community near L.A. and has enough money to make races. That's nowhere near "clutching at straws." Best case scenario is the guy enters the regular working world with some success. IMHO, that would be the best case scenario.

IMHO, a better example of "clutching at straws" is Alexi Grewal. Way more fringy-desperation in that story.