• 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 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 28, 2012
9
0
0
Visit site
Let's not celebrate yet...

I think you guys are celebrating a bit too prematurely...the Golden Fleece will be resurrected and returned to Cancer Jesus in 3 days.
 
skimazk said:
if you read the UCI decision (not the press release) you will see that UCI has numerous issues worthy of appeal with the USADA report. specificly the statute of limitations where UCI states USADA is acting illegaly. UCI however considers this to be a cause for arbitration by Armstrong and not by UCI (his rights are being violated).

Apart from that UCI states that USADA didn't follow proper procedure, and that it isn't independant enough at times (inciting retoric etc.)

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/g...bjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODE5MjI&LangId=1

so no i would't say that it was weird to think UCI would appeal...in fact the decicion to strip armstrong isn't final yet as both WADA and LA can still go to CAS according to the decision

Yeah i had read that too and immediately i was wondering how Lance can appeal still... I thought (more like presumed) that once he gave up his right to a hearing he had no further bearing on the outcome, however the UCI and then WADA could appeal, and since the UCI arent appealing, then only WADA can...

On another note after reading everything in here for the past year and a half i was shocked when only one guy pushed Pat in regards to the donation... Where were the actual journalists??
 
skimazk said:
if you read the UCI decision (not the press release) you will see that UCI has numerous issues worthy of appeal with the USADA report. specificly the statute of limitations where UCI states USADA is acting illegaly. UCI however considers this to be a cause for arbitration by Armstrong and not by UCI (his rights are being violated).

Apart from that UCI states that USADA didn't follow proper procedure, and that it isn't independant enough at times (inciting retoric etc.)

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/g...bjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODE5MjI&LangId=1

so no i would't say that it was weird to think UCI would appeal...in fact the decicion to strip armstrong isn't final yet as both WADA and LA can still go to CAS according to the decision

Thanks for the link , they have issues but :

UCI would have come to the conclusion that Mr Armstrong had a case to answer indeed and that UCI would have asked USA Cycling to open disciplinary proceedings against Mr Armstrong. Then USA Cycling, under its own rules, would have referred the case to USADA to deal with the disciplinary proceedings. If then, as he did now, Mr Armstrong would also have decided not to proceed to an arbitration hearing, USADA would have taken a decision in the same way as it has done on 10 October 2012.

The recognition also depends on whether Mr Armstrong or WADA will appeal USADA’s decision to CAS.

FatPat taunting WADA, amazing...anyway what's the delay to appeal to CAS, not that Dopestrong has a leg to stand on not having gone to arbitration, but...
 
skimazk said:
if you read the UCI decision (not the press release) you will see that UCI has numerous issues worthy of appeal with the USADA report. specificly the statute of limitations where UCI states USADA is acting illegaly. UCI however considers this to be a cause for arbitration by Armstrong and not by UCI (his rights are being violated).

Apart from that UCI states that USADA didn't follow proper procedure, and that it isn't independant enough at times (inciting retoric etc.)

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/g...bjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODE5MjI&LangId=1

so no i would't say that it was weird to think UCI would appeal...in fact the decicion to strip armstrong isn't final yet as both WADA and LA can still go to CAS according to the decision[/QUOTE

Just read it--wow lots of room there for an appeal.

WADA won't appeal so it is up to Lance; I think he'd be a Fool to even consider it.....
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Visit site
skimazk said:
if you read the UCI decision (not the press release) you will see that UCI has numerous issues worthy of appeal with the USADA report. specificly the statute of limitations where UCI states USADA is acting illegaly. UCI however considers this to be a cause for arbitration by Armstrong and not by UCI (his rights are being violated).

Apart from that UCI states that USADA didn't follow proper procedure, and that it isn't independant enough at times (inciting retoric etc.)

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/g...bjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODE5MjI&LangId=1

so no i would't say that it was weird to think UCI would appeal...in fact the decicion to strip armstrong isn't final yet as both WADA and LA can still go to CAS according to the decision
Thanks for including the link.

Having Lance under oath and facing Travis Tygart at CAS would be 'interesting'.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Visit site
Pantani_lives said:
Congratulations to Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault and Indurain for a record five TdF wins!

It would be more accurate to say:

" Congrats on winning 5 TdF before useful testing". It nearly certain that they all used drugs that would be illegal today.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
I had a dream, I mean 3 dreams, 3 wishes…

wish 1. the devastating evidence of the armstrong fraud to become public. check

wish 2. The fraud being officially stripped and disgraced. check

wish 3. the uci corruption publicly exposed… One more to go.

Oh, and the entire press-conference was a boring, desperate pr stunt of someone pushed against the wall.

except for seeing mcquaid visibly shaken when a journo asked why they accepted money from armstrong AFTER he produced a suspicious epo test. ccquaid blushed and then mumbled his old crap. ’there was no positive test blah, blah, blah. The journo confidently came back, ’I did not say a positive test, I said a suspicious test’ to hear more mindless babble.

if paul plays his cards right, the uci crooks will be nailed with their own lies.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Visit site
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.
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Visit site
cocteau_ireland said:
Tygart for the legion d'honneur.

Je supporte pleinement cette proposition de bon aloi.

J'ajoute un diner à l'Elysée pour Betzy, RaceRadio, Walsh, Ballester, Ressiot, Ashenden, Kimmage et Bassons.
 
Mar 22, 2010
908
0
0
Visit site
ValleyFlowers said:
Thanks for including the link.

Having Lance under oath and facing Travis Tygart at CAS would be 'interesting'.

I want to see yellow sneakers and tie boy and some of the other drones from the gala mlk ball on the stand explaining themselves.
 
Sep 2, 2012
191
0
0
Visit site
sniper said:
yes, it's disingenuous. but it's still an important blow to verdruggem, given that Millar has an audience of people who believe in him.
So while I think Millar stinks, we should nonetheless welcome these comments.

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.
 
Oct 12, 2012
99
0
0
Visit site
why would he have to face Tyggart at CAS? he can simply appeal on the grounds that the decision by USADA/UCI is invalid as it extends the statute of limitations. I doubt even if he has to appear in person. Should CAS agree that USADA is bound by the SOL almost the entire case goes out the window and het gets to keep every victory until 2004/2005
 
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.

As in, Pat knows what side his bread is buttered on?

i.e. who is under UCI protection now?

Dave.
 
Dec 21, 2010
513
0
0
Visit site
skimazk said:
<Snip> in fact the decicion to strip armstrong isn't final yet as both WADA and LA can still go to CAS according to the decision

Since LA declined to participate in the Arbitration process and accept the default judgement, he waived the right to appeal to CAS.
 
skimazk said:
why would he have to face Tyggart at CAS? he can simply appeal on the grounds that the decision by USADA/UCI is invalid as it extends the statute of limitations. I doubt even if he has to appear in person. Should CAS agree that USADA is bound by the SOL almost the entire case goes out the window and het gets to keep every victory until 2004/2005

I'm confused. Didn't Lance essentially "plead no contest" by refusing arbitration? He chose not to fight in the first place, so how can he appeal?