UCI doubts Contador will ride 2011 Tour.

Jun 20, 2010
181
0
0
I can only hope. he's another doper. Saw this coming when he stood on the podium at LA's last TDF win. It was a changing of the guard and not for the better IMO. Now if I'm really lucky AS will suddenly have a serious case of Montezumas Revenge a week prior to the TDF and we can see some real racing this year.
 
Dec 17, 2010
123
0
0
Apr 9, 2009
976
0
0
Kodiak said:
I can only hope. he's another doper. Saw this coming when he stood on the podium at LA's last TDF win. It was a changing of the guard and not for the better IMO. Now if I'm really lucky AS will suddenly have a serious case of Montezumas Revenge a week prior to the TDF and we can see some real racing this year.
Nope. AS has achieved most-favored-rider status with McQuaid. This year's Tour is his to lose.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
I must admit, I like how Pat has been critical on AC's CLEN case in the press, at least after the positive hit the news.
Whatever his agenda maybe regarding AC, Pat is at least hinting regularly that he doesn't want to see AC walk away without a suspension and thereby hinting that he doesn't believe the steak-tale.
 
Kodiak said:
I can only hope. he's another doper. Saw this coming when he stood on the podium at LA's last TDF win. It was a changing of the guard and not for the better IMO. Now if I'm really lucky AS will suddenly have a serious case of Montezumas Revenge a week prior to the TDF and we can see some real racing this year.
I thought LA's last TDF win was 2005. Which one are you referring to?:confused:
 
Personally I think the UCI decided long ago this isn't a battle they can win (or a battle worth fighting), so for a while now they've been preparing the ground for a suspension, with Andy Schleck taking over.
 
Pat has no limits on corruption, does he?
I always find extremely unethical for an Sporting authority-specially a "president of an International sporting federation" to make public his "personal opinion" on athletes ,regardless what the nature of the question is.
As far as AC's participation in the TDF, Pat must wait for a final ruling & then opine how "good or bad" Alberto's presence might be-- even ASO/Prudhomme are "prudent" enough to wait for results before they expel him from the race.
 
sniper said:
I must admit, I like how Pat has been critical on AC's CLEN case in the press, at least after the positive hit the news.
Whatever his agenda maybe regarding AC, Pat is at least hinting regularly that he doesn't want to see AC walk away without a suspension and thereby hinting that he doesn't believe the steak-tale.
Yes, while UCI has given over authority to RFEC to decide on Conti, Paddy's constant hints tells what he'll do if RFEC does not suspend him.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
Yes, while UCI has given over authority to RFEC to decide on Conti, Paddy's constant hints tells what he'll do if RFEC does not suspend him.
Yeah, so for once Paddy is showing authority there where it is needed.
Hope he's not bluffing.
 
Jul 11, 2009
13
0
0
Last 15 years in tour de france's history:
1996 b.riijs........doped!
1997 j.ullrich.....doped(operacion puerto proves that)
1998 m.pantani....doped and tragically dead
1999-2005....l.armstrong (in 1999 there's epo in his blood)if we believe f.landis he doped in all those years,we'll see...
2006..f.landis....doped!
2007.a.contador after a strange case with rasmussen
2008.c.sastre(with vinokourov case and ricco)
2009.a.contador
2010 a.contador(doped with clenbuterol or selfblood transfusion)
after 15 years of cycling,nothing has changed,only their names.i think it's time to do something with this sport,with the uci and all those who are guilty...it's time!!
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
hfer07 said:
Pat has no limits on corruption, does he?
I always find extremely unethical for an Sporting authority-specially a "president of an International sporting federation" to make public his "personal opinion" on athletes ,regardless what the nature of the question is.
As far as AC's participation in the TDF, Pat must wait for a final ruling & then opine how "good or bad" Alberto's presence might be-- even ASO/Prudhomme are "prudent" enough to wait for results before they expel him from the race.
Remember **** Pound? As much as I was on his side, he was hardly objective and impartial.
 
Mar 12, 2009
2,521
0
0
hfer07 said:
Pat has no limits on corruption, does he?[B
I always find extremely unethical for an Sporting authority-specially a "president of an International sporting federation" to make public his "personal opinion" on athletes ,regardless what the nature of the question is.
As far as AC's participation in the TDF, Pat must wait for a final ruling & then opine how "good or bad" Alberto's presence might be-- even ASO/Prudhomme are "prudent" enough to wait for results before they expel him from the race.


+1

He sure does not.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
veganrob said:
McQuaid is not really saying anything that anyone can say is a possibility. He is a clown shoes.
He IS a clowns shoes.

I can't believe he's talking smack again so soon. Sunday he was saying that there was no truth to the El Pais story. Monday early Enrico Carpani, UCI spokesman, was able to give Tuttobiciweb the details - that the RFEC had asked for feedback, and they agreed to get it to the Competition Committee by January 24. If nothing else, that date should have sounded familiar to McQuaid - was he totally clueless as to what was going on, or was it just another anti-Spanish lie?
http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=35328&tp=n

The timetable of the Competition Committee hasn't changed lately, so why this statement about the Tour de France now? Valverde raced for months last Spring while the UCI waited on a CAS decision against him. If the RFEC says Contador is innocent, why wouldn't he be allowed to race while waiting for someone to decide about an appeal and for the process to take place?

And how can he go on and on about the delay in the process with what the UCI is doing to Pellizotti? CONI set him free in October, and while there are teams that want him, he hasn't signed a contract because the UCI might file an appeal. His lawyer had to threaten them with an additional 800,000 Euro lawsuit to try to get them to act tomorrow.

The guy thinks having his face and words in the news every day is good for the sport. Funny, I watch other sports, and can't tell you who's in charge, and they seem to run much more smoothly that the drama fest that is pro cycling.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
theswordsman said:
He IS a clowns shoes.
As with Armstrong's situation, the best solution any of us can hope for is the mere element of time. Keep him talking. Just like Armstrong is a pathological liar, so is McQuaid.

Eventually, given enough time, he'll be literally swimming in a pool filled with his own lies.

So everyone, just be cool and wait.

 
Great. Now i wanna know what Pattie thinks about other dopers (besides those who isn´t from "an-english-speaking-country") if you know what i mean.

Too many paying your bill for telling the whole story, pattie?
 
sniper said:
I must admit, I like how Pat has been critical on AC's CLEN case in the press, at least after the positive hit the news.
Whatever his agenda maybe regarding AC, Pat is at least hinting regularly that he doesn't want to see AC walk away without a suspension and thereby hinting that he doesn't believe the steak-tale.
Yes, because it damn is an agenda. And as a UCI-official you shouldn´t have any against specifics riders, no matter if they are doping-suspect or not.

No wonder pro-cycling is a circus when a corrupt uber-clown is in charge.
 
Apr 28, 2010
1,588
0
0
hrotha said:
Personally I think the UCI decided long ago this isn't a battle they can win (or a battle worth fighting), so for a while now they've been preparing the ground for a suspension, with Andy Schleck taking over.
+1. I don't see this as a doping case any more, rather AC being thrown under the bus and the promotion of AS as the chosen one.
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
Guilty or innocent, I think it is a travesty that someone's case for last year's TdF is (potentially/likely) still not resolved when the next one comes around. That doesn't serve anyone. We are still dealing with sportsmen who have a very limited shelf life, teams that need to schedule their seasons, etc.

There should be a procedural path that guarantees that an innocent rider can go the whole length to clear his name, and doesn't lose more than a whole year. Far less even, I'd say.
 
Francois the Postman said:
Guilty or innocent, I think it is a travesty that someone's case for last year's TdF is (potentially/likely) still not resolved when the next one comes around. That doesn't serve anyone. We are still dealing with sportsmen who have a very limited shelf life, teams that need to schedule their seasons, etc.

There should be a procedural path that guarantees that an innocent rider can go the whole length to clear his name, and doesn't lose more than a whole year. Far less even, I'd say.
I think thats the idea.
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
thehog said:
I think thats the idea.
But it's not.

"A ruling before the start of the Tour in July is not guaranteed [when appeals are lodged] ".

Ignoring the fact that a hypothetical OK on the eve of a sporting event scuppered a normal run-up to peak performance for that event.
 
I quote myself:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-decision-expected-no-later-than-february-15


Francois the Postman said:
Guilty or innocent, I think it is a travesty that someone's case for last year's TdF is (potentially/likely) still not resolved when the next one comes around. That doesn't serve anyone. We are still dealing with sportsmen who have a very limited shelf life, teams that need to schedule their seasons, etc.

There should be a procedural path that guarantees that an innocent rider can go the whole length to clear his name, and doesn't lose more than a whole year. Far less even, I'd say.
Nice point but very optimistic. They need that year to spin a certain name in the dirt (hello mr McQuaid) creating a smooth path for his successor (or save his own image).

Articles like the one from HUMO and "un-identified ASTANA-member watching Contador take the juice" is a part of that.

Mark my words. In "mid-January" we will have an press-release stating that the Contador-case will be solved in "Mid-february".
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
Francois the Postman said:
snip

Ignoring the fact that a hypothetical OK on the eve of a sporting event scuppered a normal run-up to peak performance for that event.
that should be no problem for berto as he once won a gt coming straight from the beach ;)

but seriously, i agree with you - the process of adjudication is too inefficient and cumbersome. there are many culprits, including the athletes (hello valverde and flandis !) and the federations themselves but the main reason was pointed to by the tdf wada independent observer team: the uci may need to change from delegating to national feds to assigning their own independent panel.

this model works well in many sports and i even recall reading a recent cas appeal of a sports federation (can' t recall which one atm) against their own independent anti-doping panel.

but before applying the model to the uci it needs to be thoroughly burnt down...


and then rebuilt from the root up.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY