UCI doubts Contador will ride 2011 Tour.

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
python said:
but before applying the model to the uci it needs to be thoroughly burnt down...
That seems to be the recurring theme indeed.

What never seizes to amaze me is that the riders themselves are tolerating this organisational cluster**** hanging over their heads. You'd think by now one of them would have initiated a riders' union of sorts, and pressed for things to be a bit less stacked against them.

The only real riders organization I have ever witnessed was a sit-down at the Tour to protest against the sudden doping clamp down.

I can see where they came from (then), but surely they must be frustrated enough by now to muster support for an organization that starts to argue the real riders' cases. It's not like there aren't any issues that don't impact their daily lives and income certainty too directly.
 
Dec 17, 2010
123
0
0
It seem's highly unlikely that he will participate in this Year's Tour any how. Even if the decision is resolved in time, it seem's very likely, at this time, that this impending decision will produce at least a two Year Ban for Contador.
 
Oct 31, 2010
172
0
0
IF, just IF, Berts out of the Tour, that means the field levels out a little, yeah..
So, Basso, Rodriguez, Andy, Frank, even Huschoft, Menchov, Vino, Evans..SSanchez (if he's doing it)

They're all of similar ability, no real specialists in that lot excepting of course that they can all climb well..

Should be pretty good..
 
Mar 10, 2009
350
0
0
Finbouy said:
IF, just IF, Berts out of the Tour, that means the field levels out a little, yeah..
So, Basso, Rodriguez, Andy, Frank, even Huschoft, Menchov, Vino, Evans..SSanchez (if he's doing it)

They're all of similar ability, no real specialists in that lot excepting of course that they can all climb well..

Should be pretty good..
I'm not so sure Huschoft will even be riding, let alone win. :D
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
Monte Zoncolon said:
It seem's highly unlikely that he will participate in this Year's Tour any how. Even if the decision is resolved in time, it seem's very likely, at this time, that this impending decision will produce at least a two Year Ban for Contador.
In case I wasn't clear, I'm totally nonplussed by Contador's case. I find it objectionable in general.

I think it is totally unacceptable that the powers that be have concocted a standard procedure that can be this time consuming.

I think it fails everyone. But I am sure it is there in this form so it pleases a bit of all the organisations that -ahem- look out for the welfare of the sport and riders.

"Pleases all" except the actual (potentially innocent) riders, naturally.
 
Francois the Postman said:
You'd think by now one of them would have initiated a riders' union of sorts, and pressed for things to be a bit less stacked against them.
But they do have a union, the CPA. They recently convinced Gianni Bugno to head them up and he helped clarify nighttime control guidelines.

The problem the CPA has though is two-fold. First, there have been an almost laughable amount of drug busts over the last decade. Second, time after time it's been the CPA's position to defend everything, putting them in the wrong on several occasions. They also have a reputation as being supporters of the omerta. All this has given both fans and authorities the belief that the riders are mostly all doped, and the CPA itself mostly thinks it's okay that they all dope. And when that's the situation, there's almost zero leverage they have to change the rules.

To clarify - Real change as far as doping and control goes can get support from the riders, but it's not going to happen until they acknowledge there is a serious doping problem in the sport, and they have some means to change that. Whining and complaining that they are controlled too much isn't going to get them very far when the sport is riddled with doping scandals and busts.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
It's like saying that one side needs to clean up its act, when really, both sides are essentially individual crime families. One just might be a little bit more organized than the other. But it's in their interest to work together, because together they control cycling. Right now, the UCI side is the powerful one.
 
May 24, 2010
3,444
0
0
Francois the Postman said:
In case I wasn't clear, I'm totally nonplussed by Contador's case. I find it objectionable in general.

I think it is totally unacceptable that the powers that be have concocted a standard procedure that can be this time consuming.

I think it fails everyone. But I am sure it is there in this form so it pleases a bit of all the organisations that -ahem- look out for the welfare of the sport and riders.

"Pleases all" except the actual (potentially innocent) riders, naturally.
A+ I am totally disgusted by the ongoing ineptitude that we see, year after year, regarding resolution of cases against riders. However, In this case, the Spanish Federation should be especially ashamed of themselves for the way the are treating a case that involves one of their own countrymen. They are dragging their feet horrendously. Then shamelessly asking for help to determine a position on the case. They're treating it like a hot potato, because on e hand they don't want to censure their own, but on the other hand, they don't want to appear to be too easy on one of their own. Meanwhile, UCI is having none of their nonsense. Because UCI wants it's own turn at bat ( in an appeal to CAS) after the Spanish have determined how they are going to deal with the situation. And so, the Spaniards are almost guaranteeing that Alberto will be off the road for most of 2011, by (not)dealing with it the way they are. It all sux, all of it.
The only thing I look forward to this year is Greipel and Cavendish head butting each other to finish lines, all season long.
 
Jun 28, 2009
218
0
0
Just heard a blip on BBC world news radio today where McQuaid said that Contador will probably not ride tour because he more than likely will not compete in the events prior to the tour. I know all about the lead-up races and training and such, but to hear him make a stupid comment like that is ridiculous. It's opinion. Someone in his position should keep an opinion like that to himself.

The case should not be dragging on this long. He either ate tainted meat or he did not. Do they have receipts that meat was purchased and was tainted? If so, he possibly got the stuff in his system that way. If they can't prove where the meat came from, he probably doped. Even if he ate the meat, he might have doped. Or, he did not eat the meat, he did not dope, and it is a total false positive. What the hell is taking so long? This is not that complicated.
 
Aug 3, 2009
169
0
0
pistolero said:
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!!

Are you implying Inderain is likely clean? I'd say 20 years. Hopefully Sastre somehow pulled it off clean.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Hmmmmm said:
Just heard a blip on BBC world news radio today where McQuaid said that Contador will probably not ride tour because he more than likely will not compete in the events prior to the tour. I know all about the lead-up races and training and such, but to hear him make a stupid comment like that is ridiculous. It's opinion. Someone in his position should keep an opinion like that to himself.
A comment like (from HIM) that has no place in our sport. Could a rival DS make such a comment? Sure. An opponent? Sure. McQuaid is such a train wreck... or is he? My guess is that he's an unapologetic tyrant bully of a boss. It's sick.
 
May 24, 2010
3,444
0
0
theswordsman said:
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.
Bravo! Well spoken!
 
Hmmmmm said:
Just heard a blip on BBC world news radio today where McQuaid said that Contador will probably not ride tour because he more than likely will not compete in the events prior to the tour. I know all about the lead-up races and training and such, but to hear him make a stupid comment like that is ridiculous. It's opinion. Someone in his position should keep an opinion like that to himself.

The case should not be dragging on this long. He either ate tainted meat or he did not. Do they have receipts that meat was purchased and was tainted? If so, he possibly got the stuff in his system that way. If they can't prove where the meat came from, he probably doped. Even if he ate the meat, he might have doped. Or, he did not eat the meat, he did not dope, and it is a total false positive. What the hell is taking so long? This is not that complicated.
BBC radio gave that bulletin :eek::eek::eek::eek:

Those planks dont even cover the Tour when its on. Even on the big stages or when the winner is declared there is NO mention of it. Afterall they dont show road cycling on the Bbc, so it doesnt count as a sport according to the bbc.

So im really surprised to see them put out a bulletin on a story of such little importance.
 
Jul 11, 2009
13
0
0
i hope INDURAIN was clean,but with the references of his doctor,sabino padilla,i will not put my hand into fire for him...20 years is more accurate,i guess.20 years of cheating,think about it and you will prefere play chess or something like that
 
Jul 19, 2010
110
0
8,830
The Hitch said:
BBC radio gave that bulletin :eek::eek::eek::eek:

Those planks dont even cover the Tour when its on. Even on the big stages or when the winner is declared there is NO mention of it. Afterall they dont show road cycling on the Bbc, so it doesnt count as a sport according to the bbc.

So im really surprised to see them put out a bulletin on a story of such little importance.
BBC Radio London gives the stage winner and current leader in its 6pm News/Sport bulletin every stage of the Tour. Can mess up the highlights for me.
The World's were on BBC.
 
Jun 21, 2010
308
0
0
Wonder if Alberto is gettin' paid by Saxo while this process unfolds. Will this salary be returned when he gets suspended? He's still got some revenue coming from pistolero gear, but what if he gets the standard 2-year ban? Will there still be a market for doper bike spokesmen that were clen-poz?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Director of the Lausanne anti-doping lab states it doesn't really matter how the CLEN entered: AC had CLEN in his blood; there is no threshhold for CLEN; the rules are clear; AC should get a two year ban.

http://es.eurosport.yahoo.com/12012011/47/quiere-cazar-contador.html

Para el director del laboratorio suizo, la explicación de la carne contaminada "no es imposible, pero es tan extraña como altamente improbable". Así lo creen, dice, él y sus colegas. ['According to the director of the swiss lab, the steak-tale "is not impossible, but is as odd as it is unlikely". This is what he, and his colleagues, believe']

"Si contador es exculpado, el ciclismo y el deporte perderán credibilidad. Y la lucha antidopaje, también", subraya. ['"If AC is cleared, cycling and sports in general will loose credibility. As will the fight against doping", he stated']

NB:
El diario describe al abogado de Contador, el suizo Rocco Taminelli, como "un maestro en adentrarse en los fallos de los reglamentos deportivos" y recuerda que ya salió victorioso en los casos de Franco Pellizzoti , Michele Scarponi y Vladimir Gusev.
['The magazine describes AC's lawyer, Rocco Taminelle, as "a master in exposing shortcomings in the rules and regulations of the sport" and recalls that he already won cases for Pellizzoti, Scarponi and Gusev.]
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
sniper said:
Director of the Lausanne anti-doping lab states

snip
for me, the importance of saugy's statements becomes weighty when his latest interview is compared to the one he gave 2 months ago. his position - and lets remember this is the guy who's lab tested or at least evaluated most of contador samples - considerably toughened. he moved from essentially being open-minded to voicing a sanction.

has he seen something we haven't ?
 
Bicicleta said:
So basically they've already made up their mind on the two year ban-even if the decision making is yet to be determined by RFEC..... so what's the pushing on prompt ruling for, if in their judgement,the maximum ban is to be applied regardless what the Spaniards come up with...
another example of the levels of unethical work by the UCI...:mad:
 
May 24, 2010
3,444
0
0
hfer07 said:
So basically they've already made up their mind on the two year ban-even if the decision making is yet to be determined by RFEC..... so what's the pushing on prompt ruling for, if in their judgement,the maximum ban is to be applied regardless what the Spaniards come up with...
another example of the levels of unethical work by the UCI...:mad:
This should prompt the RFEC to promptly acquit AC, then watch the UCI duke it out with AC, at the CAS appeals.
If UCI criticizes RFEC as being easy on their own people, RFEC could rejoin that UCI's position has been prejudiced. And that asking for such a lengthy ban, for such an infinitesimal (and ineffective) quantity of a banned drug is overreaction. In all actuality, neither side can prove their points without a shadow of a doubt. However, in the end run, Alberto is the only one that can lose, due to the clause that states that athlete's are responsible for ANYTHING that is found in their bodies.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
maybe. but the biggest joke is AC, and his denyal, after having been fully undressed by the HUMO, the plasticizers, and the absence of Clen-contaminated meat throughout Spain.

+1 for the UCI if they insist on banning him.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY