UCI Won't Speed Up Clentador Decision

[HoustonHammer]

Lastest non-news: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-puts-the-brakes-on-an-early-conclusion-to-contador-case

What exactly is UCI's role at this stage? They already an Adverse Analytical Finding for AC. Isn't the ball now in RFEC's court? What the heck testing could WADA be doing for McQuaid?

 

[JPM London]

I especially like when Pat says:

“We don’t treat him differently than the others, but let’s be honest, the fact that it was Alberto Contador means that we have to be certain we take the right decision,” McQuaid said.

Right, so we don't treat him differently, but we do because we have to?
Oh, I see, they don't treat Contador differently, they treat the case of Contador differently... Those are obviously two completely separate things.

 

[Boeing]

n fairness to Contador, in fairness to the sport, in fairness to the Tour de France, we need to go into the details to make sure the decision that will be taken is the right one.”

Reading between the lines here. Banning him will do more harm to the sport than good

 

[HoustonHammer]

I especially like when Pat says:



Right, so we don't treat him differently, but we do because we have to?
Oh, I see, they don't treat Contador differently, they treat the case of Contador differently... Those are obviously two completely separate things.

Yes. It's not because it's Contador. It's because it's Contador. Right? Makes perfect UCI sense.

 

[HoustonHammer]

Reading between the lines here. Banning him will do more harm to the sport than good

Exactly. As in, 'hey, we can read the rules too, but do you know who this guy is?'

 

[Roland Rat]

Reading between the lines here. Banning him will do more harm to the sport than good

Will it f**k. Maybe had they managed to sweep it under the carpet, but now it's in the open more damage will(is) being done by not treating him like everyone else.

 

[hrotha]

Seriously, Pat, whoever you're paying to sort your PR matters, you should fire them.

 

[Boeing]

Will it f**k. Maybe had they managed to sweep it under the carpet, but now it's in the open more damage will(is) being done by not treating him like everyone else.

If we take McQ at his word perhaps and assume the best intentions. all of which I have trouble with but that is me

like him or not he is in a tough spot really

AC has the best defense line to date however "I will retire" that has them scrambling with Specialized calling every hour

 

[Berzin]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

A two-year ban and the stripping of his Tour title would be like giving someone caught with 5 kilos of cocaine the same sentence as someone who was caught with a joint in his pocket.

It's stupid, it doesn't make sense and it will not act as the deterrent many think it will.

It will give no one pause, and the machine will just chew him up and spit him out and keep rolling along until the next scandal, which will be much worse than this one.

 

[Boeing]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

A two-year ban and the stripping of his Tour title would be like giving someone caught with 5 kilos of cocaine the same sentence as someone who was caught with a joint in his pocket.

It's stupid, it doesn't make sense and it will not act as the deterrent many think it will.

It will give no one pause, and the machine will just chew him up and spit him out and keep rolling along until the next scandal, which will be much worse than this one.

Good point.

 

[hrotha]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

A two-year ban and the stripping of his Tour title would be like giving someone caught with 5 kilos of cocaine the same sentence as someone who was caught with a joint in his pocket.

It's stupid, it doesn't make sense and it will not act as the deterrent many think it will.

It will give no one pause, and the machine will just chew him up and spit him out and keep rolling along until the next scandal, which will be much worse than this one.

The same could be said about other doping scandals (cough) you don't seem to be equally concerned about.

 

[luckyboy]

Part of me thinks this - that the smaller the offence, the smaller the punishment, because that's kinda logical.

But, it's still doping, and there might be/probably is other stuff that they didn't find/can't get a ban for, and that part of me thinks there should be big bans for all.

I think 1 year ban for a 'minor drug bust/contamination accident' and 2 yrs+ for the major stuff - EPO, whatever..

 

[Merckx index]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

A two-year ban and the stripping of his Tour title would be like giving someone caught with 5 kilos of cocaine the same sentence as someone who was caught with a joint in his pocket.

It's stupid, it doesn't make sense and it will not act as the deterrent many think it will.

It will give no one pause, and the machine will just chew him up and spit him out and keep rolling along until the next scandal, which will be much worse than this one.

Not in this case. The negative test the day before the positive test rules out intentional doping with CB during the Tour. But the contaminated meat claim is also quite unlikely. There just isn't that much contaminated meat around. That makes transfusion the most likely explanation. If the DEHP results stand up, they provide strong support to that explanation.

I think the problem here is that WADA is realizing that the DEHP test results can be challenged--there's just too much variability to be certain about a positive. This is why the case is dragging on.

 

[Roland Rat]

Joe Papp tweeted last night that it was because they know they'd have to give the title to Schleck, initmating they don't want him to benefit either. Wonder if he was caught with plasticizers too, but as there's no "legal" positive for anything they can't release it.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Lastest non-news: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-puts-the-brakes-on-an-early-conclusion-to-contador-case

What exactly is UCI's role at this stage? They already an Adverse Analytical Finding for AC. Isn't the ball now in RFEC's court? What the heck testing could WADA be doing for McQuaid?

My money's on testing him for adverse levels of 'crazy pills'. I bet he eats those things like TicTacs.

 

[warmfuzzies]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

McGruff the Crime Dog says suspend the doper and "Take a bite out of crime."

 

[jae2460]

There's Nothing to Debate

I don't see what the debate is about.

The rules were what the rules were at the start of the Tour, when every one lined up for the event.

There was no tolerable threshold for Clenbuterol, it was a pass or fail and he failed.

Period.

It happened. The B sample confirmed it.

Done.

If "they" don't suspend him and strip the title, the Tour and Cycling will lose credibility and will be irreparably harmed.

Especially when there's rumours about plasticizers in his urine which leaves a plausible reason why there wasn't a positive the day before, not to mention the mysterious Astana rider who said he knew Contador doped--as suspiciously doubtful that is. That mysterious Astana rider has less credibility for me than Greg Lemond, who I understand many of the posters in this forum spoon regularly. But that's another topic.

 

[Cal_Joe]

Results?

The part I found interesting was "We are waiting for the results to come back and I don’t know how long it’s going to take."

Results of what?

 

[_Zipp0_]

Bertie, are you paying attention??

The UCI needs a donation. A BIG one.

 

[meandmygitane]

“We don’t treat him differently than the others, but let’s be honest, the fact that it was Alberto Contador means that we have to be certain we take the right decision,” McQuaid said.

I'm sure Fuyu Li appreciates that Mr McQuack, the even-handed approach. What happened with "all is equal before the law"?

If he gets no penalty what-so-ever (assuming that no credible evidence still hasn't been found): let all doping that is not deterimental to the health free because the war on doping is lost.

 

[thehog]

If "they" don't suspend him and strip the title, the Tour and Cycling will lose credibility and will be irreparably harmed.

Cycling will lose "credibility"? Seriously? You think? What now? Since the Tour has been totally clean since 1999.

Fool.

Cycling will lose credibility if they remove Contador.

Think before you write Junior.

 

[kurtinsc]

The hysteria over this clenbutarol positive boggles the mind.

Regardless of who Contador is (and let's be real, he is a valuable asset to the Tour and to cycling in general) it's ridiculous to punish him for this.

A two-year ban and the stripping of his Tour title would be like giving someone caught with 5 kilos of cocaine the same sentence as someone who was caught with a joint in his pocket.

It's stupid, it doesn't make sense and it will not act as the deterrent many think it will.

It will give no one pause, and the machine will just chew him up and spit him out and keep rolling along until the next scandal, which will be much worse than this one.

The problem is that they've done 1 or 2 year bans for others in various sports based on the same rules. Excepting him from a punishment similar to what others have recieved for the same positive test just because he's a TDF champion will smell very bad... very much like the favoritism shown to a certain rider from Texas everyone hates here.

Perhaps the rule should be changed going forward... but it will be very tough to "backdate" the change to let Contador off without the sport looking very dirty.

 

[petesam]

“We don’t treat him differently than the others, but let’s be honest, the fact that it was Alberto Contador means that we have to be certain we take the right decision,” McQuaid said.

oh dear pat... bit of a boo boo on that one...

 

[hrotha]

Cycling will lose credibility if they remove Contador

Could you elaborate, please?

 

[gobuck]

I don't get you guys. You want Armstrong's head because he doped but Contidor is differant? They should be treated as equals. You dope and get caught, you should pay the price. 2 year ban. If cycling can't survive without Contidor then it can't survive.