• 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 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
ValleyFlowers said:
3cBUs.jpg


Suggestions that Armstrong bought off the UCI are "absolutely untrue" says McQuaid.

What an a-hole.
Given the persistency of those rumors, he should be calling for an independent investigation and stand down of his UCI presidency as long as the issue isn't cleared.
How do journalists let him get away with this crap?
 
rhubroma said:
I'm wondering what LA's next move will be? I mean he must have lots of dirt on what the UCI did (advanced warning of doping his controls) and what they didn't do (ban him for the his 99 cortisone positive, rather than accept a backdated prescription - something in flagrant breech of the rules), etc.

Good point. Lance might pull a Landis and blow the lid.
 
May 1, 2012
166
0
0
Visit site
THe UCI have gotten away with this and their troubled past. The journo's are not asking the right questions and the only people who could hurt them, Lance or Johan, aren't going to worsen their own situation just for the hell of it.

Its as good as could be expected, at least the current crop of riders have reason to believe that dopers will eventually get caught.
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Visit site
Reporter and McQuaid going back and forth over 'suspicious test' and 'positive result'.

McQuaid says UCI will still accept financial contributions from riders in the future. "The UCI aren't like Fifa with billions in the bank."

The other feed:

Addressing the issue of the money that Armstrong gave to UCI, McQuaid says if a current star of today's Tour offered them money for development or youth programmes they would accept it ... but announce it differently ....

More on the donation large sums of money from Armstrong. McQuaid: "We used the money to help fight doping. It was done and done openly and the money was put to good use." He is repeatedly challenged on how that could be not seen as suspect in light of the rumours and suspicious EPO test of Armstrong but is unrepentant. "We're not as rich as Fifa.""
 
Oct 7, 2012
37
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
Hope somebody asks will they drop the case against Kimmage.

It has already been asked. He said it was a separate matter of defamation, limited only to the claim that they were corrupt and covered up a test.
 
The UCI clearly hope that by not contesting Armstrong takes the fall and the UCI gets away scott free and that next year we can all go back to pretending that doping is a thing of the past.

The media really needs to call McQuaid and the UCI to account much much more.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Visit site
luckyboy said:
UCI Management Committee will meet on Friday to decide whether TDFs will be left blank or if they will be inherited etc..
Pat said they have authority for that.

Good luck with that. I suspect ASO will have something to say about that. Until UCI pays the bills, they don't get to decide... ASO has already said they will be left vacant. Honestly, they have no choice. The sport was so corrupt that they have no way to know who was clean. Especially after you get pace the placings that were tested.
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Visit site
McQuaid says there's a meeting scheduled with all teams in early December to discuss the issue and the route forward. "The UCI is listening and prepared to listen."
 
Moose McKnuckles said:
The UCI is perhaps betting on the fact that Lance cannot disclose what he knows lest he face charges of perjury and an immediate suit from SCA.

Yeah perjury is a problem of couse but he could still say he "bought" UCI because he was concerned these suspicious tests would hurt him.

I thought FatPat was going to lose it with the "taking money from a suspicious rider" question !
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Ask McQuaid some hard questions, the backdated TUE (1999), the Vrijman-support (2005), UCI's fight for jurisdiction (2012), the 500.000 donation Schenk spoke about, the pre-test warnings, etc.

How can Phat not take responsibility for this? Even if he himself didn't actively engage in the conspiracy (which I doubt), it still happened under his watch. The only normal thing to do is to step down.

What a farce.