• 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's response to USADA report

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
GreasyMonkey said:
Since LA declined to participate in the Arbitration process and accept the default judgement, he waived the right to appeal to CAS.

Anti-doping procedures were never Pat's strong suit. Denying suspicious tests, and blocking tests of suspicious bipassport cases, though, is a well entrenched art form.

... can I say it here? Pat is a clown.

Dave.
 
luckyboy said:
Prudhomme press conference later today.

Probably to confirm that those 7 years will have a blank space against the Yellow jersey. I cant imagine that they will be having any retrospective Yellow Jersey presentations as the doubts about some of the recipients would be enough scare them off that.
 
gooner said:
Pat just said on Sky that anyone who gets caught with EPO or doing blood transfusions should get 4 year bans. Also got asked about Millar's comments about Verbruggen and said that cyclists are the ones with the main resposibility here and that they are grown adults and no one forced them to dope but themselves and that they should'nt be shifting the blame on to the UCI. Refused to say anything against Verbruggen.

Does that mean the UCI's price just went up for covering these up?

Dave.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
RaceRadio you made it a thriller for me. Thanks. :)
Up to today i was sure the UCI won´t strip LA his titles, b/c of your post some time ago that UCI will appeal since Heini wants that.
It was a great feeling switching my computer on and see the headlines "Armstrong has no place in cycling". McQuaid saying this.
Wow, i am still shivering.
LA complete history. Unthinkable. Omg, what a great late satisfaction. I am shocked, but positiveley.
To me this day is the end of cycling because there is no other sport where someone is stripped of his/her titles 13 years after the race is finished. It has been a system failure.
What will happened next - will BW be stripped of his titles in 2025? And don't tell me that TDF winners from 2013 onwards will be cleaner than in 1999-2005 or that LA was more doped than winners in 1991-1998 or 2006-2012.
I hate this crap "we are closing dark page to have brighter future" because there won't be a brighter future. Riders will continue their usual practices to win.
 
Oct 12, 2012
99
0
0
Visit site
From the UCI decision:

UCI will recognize and implement the decision of USADA, which implies that all
competitive results achieved by Mr Armstrong in cycling since August 1, 1998 will be
disqualified, including his seven Tour de France wins.
This recognition is subject to the following:
a. The recognition does not alter UCI’s position on the issue of the statute of
limitations as exposed above;
b. The recognition also depends on whether Mr Armstrong or WADA will appeal
USADA’s decision to CAS. If Mr Armstrong or WADA appeals to CAS, the UCI
must wait until CAS delivers its award: the USADA decision might be overruled in
whole or in part by CAS.

I'm assuming that the waiving of the USADA arbitration has no impact on his right to appeal to CAS because it isn't a formal decision yet. He basicly was invited to give his view to USADA before they made a decision. Now that UCI has agreed with USADA's findings and made a decision on their findings there is a formal decision that he can appeal to, hence the right to appeal to CAS.
 
guncha said:
....
I hate this crap "we are closing dark page to have brighter future" because there won't be a brighter future. Riders will continue their usual practices to win.

Festina Deja Vu.

Anyone notice if Pat was looking for a carpet to sweep this under?

skimazk said:
From the UCI decision:



I'm assuming that the waiving of the USADA arbitration has no impact on his right to appeal to CAS because it isn't a formal decision yet. He basicly was invited to give his view to USADA before they made a decision. Now that UCI has agreed with USADA's findings and made a decision on their findings there is a formal decision that he can appeal to, hence the right to appeal to CAS.

Either:

1. This is the last token gesture the UCI can offer Lance
2. This is simply what the UCI lawyers say
Or
3. There is a wrinkle in anti-doping sanctioning procedures we don't know about

Lance's plea is the biggest Nolo Contendre since Spiro Agnew.

Dave.
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Visit site
skimazk said:
From the UCI decision:
I'm assuming that the waiving of the USADA arbitration has no impact on his right to appeal to CAS because it isn't a formal decision yet. He basicly was invited to give his view to USADA before they made a decision. Now that UCI has agreed with USADA's findings and made a decision on their findings there is a formal decision that he can appeal to, hence the right to appeal to CAS.
In any case there isn't anything limiting LA's legal team from submitting an appeal to CAS. Whether CAS will summarily dismiss, based on LA's decision not to contest, or allow the appeal is not so clear.

UCI seems to have left a 'hint' about an issue that might be suitable for an appeal in it's response:

"The UCI is of the opinion that the Code is very clear in this respect:
No action may be commenced against an Athlete or other Person for an
anti-doping rule violation contained in the Code unless such action is
commenced within eight (8) years from the date the violation is asserted
to have occurred.
The Code does not provide for any possibility for an anti-doping organization to take
away from the athlete or other person the benefit of this clause.
It is UCI’s view that USADA’s reference to national law is not appropriate. First
article 24.3 of the Code states that the Code shall be interpreted as an independent
and autonomous text and not by reference to the existing law or statutes of the Code
signatories or governments. Secondly it would be in full contradiction with the
purpose of harmonisation of the Code that an action could be commenced against
one athlete but not against another because of different national legislations
governing the statute of limitations. Where WADA emphasizes the need for
harmonisation of sanctions, there should be no disharmony in the possibility to
sanction an athlete at all."
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,639
0
0
Visit site
guncha said:
To me this day is the end of cycling because there is no other sport where someone is stripped of his/her titles 13 years after the race is finished. It has been a system failure.
What will happened next - will BW be stripped of his titles in 2025? And don't tell me that TDF winners from 2013 onwards will be cleaner than in 1999-2005 or that LA was more doped than winners in 1991-1998 or 2006-2012.
I hate this crap "we are closing dark page to have brighter future" because there won't be a brighter future. Riders will continue their usual practices to win.

That's because no other sport gets investigated. What's the difference between stripping a title in 13 days and stripping it in 13 years? Are we to say that if you can evade justice for long enough then cheating is okay? Maybe there won't be a brighter future - you punish cheats not because you know it will be better, but because that's the only way it might get better. While the UCI remains the same, I think we all remain pretty pessimistic, but how is the current situation worse than if we were all still pretending it was all okay?
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Visit site
I must say that McQuaid's performance sickened me.

OK, let's be generous at this point and say that the UCI isn't guilty of covering up any positive tests, in the sense of a test backed up by a B sample that would pass all legal challenges. However, the UCI have been very aggressive in their defence of Armstrong over the years, despite having had notice of at least 2 tests 'indicating' Armstrong's use of Epo in 2001 and 2002; then in 2005 they were made aware of the fact that Epo had been found in his 1999 Tour samples, their response to this being the notorious Vrigman report which gave them an excuse to do nothing; then there is the way they accepted a pre-dated medical certificate when Armstrong tested positive for corticosteroids in 1999; the way they allowed him to make a comeback without undergoing the required period of pre-competition testing; then there was the fight to stop the USADA investigation progressing, the multiple statements made in defence of Armstrong over the years etc. etc. etc.

In short had the UCI done their job properly Armstrong would have been busted as a doper back in 1999 and none of this mess might have come about. They are as responsible as he is and yet seem intent in pretending what was in the report was a big 'shock'. What a joke when most of it had been public knowledge for years!

And why didn't the 'journalists' present (I use the term loosely) point out any of the above. Have their old habits re-established themselves already?

The UCI seems to be very focused on stopping anyone from saying that they covered up positive tests by Armstrong. In reality this is a side issue: more pertinent is the fact that they had good evidence he was doping and yet they protected him for years. Someone with some balls needs to hammer this fact home. Let's hope that Paul Kimmage is the man for the job.
 
Jul 6, 2012
133
0
0
Visit site
thrawn said:
Sanctions have been ratified.

Phil Liggett has claimed that Lance has now raised $600 million for cancer. Also stated that drugs don't turn donkeys into racehorses... All on foxsports in Australia.

Edit: Lance hasn't confessed or failed a dope test. Nothing to see here.

Takes a jackass to know a jackass, Liggett.
 
Oct 26, 2009
654
0
0
Visit site
If I were Johan Bruyneel, I would conclude that I should save my money and cancel my request to fight the charges. Isn't he just wasting money now?
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Visit site
motivator1b187105cc7437.jpg
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Visit site
guncha said:
To me this day is the end of cycling because there is no other sport where someone is stripped of his/her titles 13 years after the race is finished. It has been a system failure.
What will happened next - will BW be stripped of his titles in 2025? And don't tell me that TDF winners from 2013 onwards will be cleaner than in 1999-2005 or that LA was more doped than winners in 1991-1998 or 2006-2012.
I hate this crap "we are closing dark page to have brighter future" because there won't be a brighter future. Riders will continue their usual practices to win.

You want some cheese with that whine?
 
Don Quixote said:
But Verbruggen is history anyway - he has no future in the sport.

McQuaid needs to go for clean cyclings sake - there are very few without vested interests who have any confidence in him steering cycling in the right direction.

This is what I mean - every time Millar seems to open his gob he shifts the attention away from where it needs to be.

I thought McQuaid mentioning Team Sky by name, but not Garmin a flag.

Hein is dictator for life. Another "bad rider" message masterfully delivered including the fake press conference. How many more times will people believe this play?

Wonderboy is taking the hit for Hein and Pat. I wonder what that deal looks like. As dirty as Wonderboy is, Hein and Pat are so much better at it. McQuaid nailed it today. That is how and why they own competitive cycling.

Millar is clearly seeking a job inside the UCI.
 
DirtyWorks said:
Hein is dictator for life. Another "bad rider" message masterfully delivered including the fake press conference.

Wonderboy is taking the hit for Hein and Pat. I wonder what that deal looks like. As dirty as Wonderboy is, Hein and Pat are so much better at it. McQuaid nailed it today. That is how and why they own competitive cycling.

Be interesting to see if Lance wants to get revenge on Hein and Pat. He’s got nothing to lose anymore. Wouldn’t surprise me for him to go full genius.
 

TRENDING THREADS