Unrepentant

[Darryl Webster]

with respect, this sounds like a bunch of crap. those sanctioning bodies only have jurisdiction over events that they sanction. they have no right to tell anyone what to do in events outside of their influence. only a court of law has that sort of authority.

A ban from compettion is just that...regardless of who`s regs it is..if you try and circumvent that by riding under a differant sanctioning body or even change to another compettitive sport while the ban from competition is in force then it aint much of a ban from competition is it?.
Most bodies sign up to this because it reduces the likley hood of new bodies riding rough shod over accepted regs and ethics that by and large most bodies share ( at least on paper).
A ban in one sport at the Olympics is a ban from every sport at the Olympics.

 

[BroDeal]

From a PM I received from a forum member:

Forgive me for being a cynic.

The problem is that I would not be surprised if his positive was no fault of his own. I also do not think that drug testing should waste time, effort, and money on worhtless or near worthless substances like DHEA. But the guys who are innocent have been sabotaged by the denials of the guilty. You cannot believe anyone's denials. Scott Moninger and his crew are still telling people he tested positive because of supplement contamination; in fact they go even further by claiming that he proved supplement contamination when the arbitration decision makes it clear that they did not believe him and certainly did not accept his excuse.

The riders who are clean and afraid that they might one day test positive due to contamination or some other no fault reason should be mad as hell that those who have tried to weasel their way out of a charge by lying have destroyed the chance an innocent man has of being believed.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

The problem is that I would not be surprised if his positive was no fault of his own. I also do not think that drug testing should waste time, effort, and money on worhtless or near worthless substances like DHEA. But the guys who are innocent have been sabotaged by the denials of the guilty. You cannot believe anyone's denials. Scott Moninger and his crew are still telling people he tested positive because of supplement contamination; in fact they go even further by claiming that he proved supplement contamination when the arbitration decision makes it clear that they did not believe him and certainly did not accept his excuse.

Sorry a bit OT, but I always thought Scott M did prove contamination... until I read a similar comment you made in another thread. I re-read the arbitration finding. And YOU ARE RIGHT. The panel thought his contaminated supplement excuse was total hoowey.

But they did give him a reduction on his suspension. Based on testimony of his peers--that he's a great guy and has integrity, and in consideration of his age, and potential career post suspension.

Thanks for pointing this out about Moninger. I appreciated having it cleared up!

Anyhow back to Zirbel. Interesting that you are saying you find his story 'credible' and that he could have in fact inadvertently ingested DHEA. I thought you normally took a pretty hardline on these cases? What is it particularly about Zirbel that leads you to give him the benefit of the doubt?

Finally, lets go OT again: while we're dredging up past US domestic cases, what about Adam Sbeih... rumour on the street was he could have actually been innocent too - that his natural egyptian (or arabic) physiology did bla bla bla. I'd always given him the benefit of the doubt too. Do you have any 'cool' insights on that case like you had with Moninger? I'm vague on the details... long time ago.

 

[Black-Balled]

with respect, this sounds like a bunch of crap. those sanctioning bodies only have jurisdiction over events that they sanction. they have no right to tell anyone what to do in events outside of their influence. only a court of law has that sort of authority.

That is kinda logical, but not wholly...

The punishment is no racing (be it UCI, NCAA, NASCAR), so the governing body's saying '~you will not compete at this sport prior to your return to our races'.

While it is correct that the body does not have any authority in other's races, it does have the option to preclude the suspended racer from its future races- future participation being the understood goal of the racer- should he not abide by the terms of the suspension.

 

[SeventhSon]

That is kinda logical, but not wholly...

The punishment is no racing (be it UCI, NCAA, NASCAR), so the governing body's saying '~you will not compete at this sport prior to your return to our races'.

While it is correct that the body does not have any authority in other's races, it does have the option to preclude the suspended racer from its future races- future participation being the understood goal of the racer- should he not abide by the terms of the suspension.

Cease Fire, boys. Don't you think Zirbel asked for and received permission? And, you realize it was a charity race event, right? They raised money to fight cancer and for the Red Cross. It's not like he took home a new Volvo, for crying out loud.