UCI screws Astana

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
We just know they dusted off some positives to give watchers a reason for denying the license.
That would require a pretty vast conspiracy involving the Dutch and the AFLD as the caught the Astana riders, not the UCI
 
Will they surely just downgrade them to Pro Conti if they deny the license?
Thought they want to get rid of Vino?

Martinelli, Nibali and Aru want a new Italian pro team, Alonso, Bettini and Banco Santander (?) may want to help out, UCI would've a free spot

1,2,3 ... Bye bye Vino ...

Otherwise why deny the license? They will get invited anyway. At least by RSO.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Race Radio said:
That would require a pretty vast conspiracy involving the Dutch and the AFLD as the caught the Astana riders, not the UCI
well, if Interpol are targeting a criminal, they'll send out a description of that criminal to smaller agencies who can then join the search. Not much of a conspiracy. Perhaps UCI/WADA did something similar here?

Perhaps UCI/Wada are sitting on some piece of intel (perhaps obtained through CIRC?) suggesting Astana is one of the last old school doping strongholds left in the peloton, with old school lunch boxes and all?
An old school French-type douane doping bust involving Astana would be very bad for UCI's business, so I could understand UCI trying to put them out of play if indeed they have such intel.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
sniper said:
well, if Interpol are targeting a criminal, they'll send out a description of that criminal to smaller agencies who can then join the search. Not much of a conspiracy. Perhaps UCI/WADA did something similar here?

Perhaps UCI/Wada are sitting on some piece of intel (perhaps obtained through CIRC?) suggesting Astana is one of the last old school doping strongholds left in the peloton, with old school lunch boxes and all?
An old school French-type douane doping bust involving Astana would be very bad for UCI's business, so I could understand UCI trying to put them out of play if indeed they have such intel.
If I have to choose between a conspiracy between the UCI, WADA, AFLD, and the Dutch or the possibility that Vino is running a dirty team.....I am going with Occam's razor. Vino running a dirty team and got caught is easier to believe.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
I kinda doubt Astana will lose license. They'll be put on probation. Katusha set legal precedent for this at CAS. Warning must be issued, first.
 
May 8, 2009
837
0
0
Race Radio said:
I kinda doubt Astana will lose license. They'll be put on probation. Katusha set legal precedent for this at CAS. Warning must be issued, first.
IAM are getting one says twitter
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,246
0
0
It's kind of an odd message that the UCI is sending, "we don't want teams that dope in the World Tour, ProConti and Continental are fine though"
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Race Radio said:
If I have to choose between a conspiracy between the UCI, WADA, AFLD, and the Dutch or the possibility that Vino is running a dirty team.....I am going with Occam's razor. Vino running a dirty team and got caught is easier to believe.
it's clearly not either/or...
we know (and knew well before the stream of positives) that he's running a dirty team.
only relevant question, imo, is whether or not UCI/WADA have put in an extra effort to grab Astana by the balls or whether Astana are just massively failing the IQ test.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
sniper said:
it's clearly not either/or...
we know (and knew well before the stream of positives) that he's running a dirty team.
only relevant question, imo, is whether or not UCI/WADA have put in an extra effort to grab Astana by the balls or whether Astana are just massively failing the IQ test.
I doubt Astana are failing the IQ doping test. Martinelli is in the sport a long time. I guess other 'agents' are at work.
 
Race Radio said:
That would require a pretty vast conspiracy involving the Dutch and the AFLD as the caught the Astana riders, not the UCI
:confused:
AFLD or any other NADO has no authority to do anything. They act at the direction of the anti-doping authority.

Here's the long-winded process:

-athlete attends event with an anti-doping authority. (UCI???)
-samples are collected based on the standard rules.
-Additional samples might be taken for suspicious (UCI provided names, national federation for lower ranked events) and/or purely random choice.
Anti-doping authority directs the NADO to perform tests.
NADO passes results back to the anti-doping authority. (UCI??)
Anti-doping authority is free to decide whether or not to open a case.

Let's say the UCI is the anti-doping authority and decides to open the case:
The UCI would direct the athlete's federation and NADO to start the sanction procedure. NADO sanctions athlete based on the UCI's rules.

NADO's cannot say no.
 
sniper said:
it's clearly not either/or...
we know (and knew well before the stream of positives) that he's running a dirty team.
only relevant question, imo, is whether or not UCI/WADA have put in an extra effort to grab Astana by the balls or whether Astana are just massively failing the IQ test.
There are two Iglinsky brothers. Miracles do happen as they were both tested for EPO 10 days apart in two different countries at two different races. One in Holland, one in Spain.

All whilst they were smashing up the field finshing 96th & 26th respectively.

Meanwhile at the 2012 Tour of Britan they decided not to run EPO tests....

Nice work UCI :rolleyes: the haunting words of Hein reverberate... "I will make you positive" :cool:
 
Apr 16, 2014
533
0
0
thehog said:
There are two Iglinsky brothers. Miracles do happen as they were both tested for EPO 10 days apart in two different countries at two different races. One in Holland, one in Spain.

All whilst they were smashing up the field finshing 96th & 26th respectively.

Meanwhile at the 2012 Tour of Britan they decided not to run EPO tests....

Nice work UCI :rolleyes: the haunting words of Hein reverberate... "I will make you positive" :cool:
Are you saying that the Iglinsky bro's positive EPO tests were obtained in 2012...at the same time as the Tour of Britain? :confused: And if that is the case, why would they hold a positive test like that for two years?

just trying to understand :eek:
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
pigoonse said:
Are you saying that the Iglinsky bro's positive EPO tests were obtained in 2012...at the same time as the Tour of Britain? :confused: And if that is the case, why would they hold a positive test like that for two years?

just trying to understand :eek:
He's saying exactly what he wrote - there's nothing to understand.

The brothers were tested for EPO.
No EPO tests were done at Tour of Britain.

That's it.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
He's saying exactly what he wrote - there's nothing to understand.

The brothers were tested for EPO.
No EPO tests were done at Tour of Britain.

That's it.
Correct. Two lowly ranked riders randomly tested for EPO! Both from the same team and brothers!

Can't believe why the UCI directed these two to be tested... I just can't think why :rolleyes:

What are the chances of this randomness..? :p

I mean it's not like the UCI request EPO tests much these days... ;)
 
Apr 16, 2014
533
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
He's saying exactly what he wrote - there's nothing to understand.

The brothers were tested for EPO.
No EPO tests were done at Tour of Britain.

That's it.
I was trying to understand the timing of the tests, eg were they obtained in 2012 and held for 2 years?

nevermind...
 
pigoonse said:
I was trying to understand the timing of the tests, eg were they obtained in 2012 and held for 2 years?

nevermind...
Don't be silly. I'm making light of the situation. Random tests for EPO of lowly ranked riders from the same team. Both positive. Do you think the UCI order EPO tests are all Top 100 riders just for fun? Of course not. They bearly test for EPO these days. It was a target test and got thr desired result for the UCI...

The 2012 reference was to nightlight the lack of EPO testing these days....

Wasn't that hard was it? :cool:
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Just re-read this interview from 26.10.14
(still paywall and google translate)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems to fit in nicely with what happened next.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=21872&page=9

Q:What do you do with them that does not exist 'fit and proper'?

A: (Cookson)- The ones we may refuse a license, so they can not take part in our sport. And if such a person in the management of a team, then this team will be sanctioned, says Brian Cookson.

- But I must stress that none of this of course is done without full legal backing.
So is the legal backing all the Astana positives..
(combined with CIRC findings maybe?)

I know there is talk of CAS precedence.
But why would UCI risk the humiliation of being seen as powerless towards a team that is so dirty..?
Unless of course they feel forced to do so, and even if they lose in the end -they can claim to have done all within their power...

And why would Cookson repeatedly comment on Vino if he has no aces?

The question is -If time has run out for Vino and co?

I think so...
 
I remember Vayer tweeted sometime at the beginning of the year, when Astana had bad results that they are under observation. Of course Vayer says lots of things but this hint proved to be right. Would be interesting to know how many times Nibali was tested compared to the other top dogs.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY