Valverde Appeal To CAS

[Aguirre]

Valverde is out of the Tour now. So ASO could not help him with the Italian authorities. So it looks like the Italians won the first battle.

http://www.todociclismo.com/

but not the war, this is only one battle, and valverde will win the overall, will see

 

[toppermost]

I dont care.

Just suspend the jerk. He gave blood to a doper. Its a fact. Juristicstion be damned.

As much as I am loathe to say this... this doesnt bother me as much as I know it should. This is ultimately a game. Sure these people make a living doing it....

But this is not human rights law folks. We are not talking about right to privacy, search and seizure, etc. These are grown men who have glamour jobs. Yes its a hard sport, but they get paid to play what is essentially a childrens game. Remember before 1984 when only amateurs could ride in the olympics? Same reasoning here. Its about fun and competition. Not the sponsor dollars and how much this rider will lose or this team will lose.

If you dope. F-you. See ya later. (and spare me the "someone will spike someone's drink" conspiracy theories).

I really dont care if Italy bans him based on the evidence they've got. In fact the only people that should be excoriated in this whole debacle is the Spanish court system.

If Italy has the nuts to step in - BRAVO!

 

[biker jk]

well, Now Valverde is officially out of the Tour. Is a meassure by his team, since the CAS cannot judge before the start of the Tour.

But, sorry for all you who want condem Valverde. Sorry because he wil be cleared by CAS, sorry for all you, guys, because UCI wants to leave behing the OP, and ASO will welcome him next year. Loosing today will mean to win (logic of dialectics).

And of course: he will win spanish championship this week-end, then he might win the Vuelta and Worlds. Finishing first at UCO class.

Remember that Contador was left out the Tour last year. ANd? why?

Sorry for all you, guys, because the half of you shows to have little cycling culture, ah, it's called globalisation.

You can keep your Spanish doping culture. Please don't try to globalise it. A win for Valverde at the CAS would be a loss for the sport and a slap in the face for the fans of clean cycling.

 

[BroDeal]

It is disturbing that the translation posted above indicates that the ASO was trying to find a way to let Valverde race. It confirms what Lemond has said about the ASO selling out and giving up the fight against doping.

We have gone so far backward the last ten or so months that Valverde winning at CAS will just be a single drop in a rain storm.

 

[rhubroma]

Given your stated position, the irony in this statement is overwhelming. You are the proverbial "Pot calling the kettle black"

The guy has a DNA match with a Fuentes bloodsack, and people like you are defending him, calling the Italians corrupt (and not Valverde), etc. That's overwhelming...without even being ironic.

 

[toppermost]

CONI has overstepped it's authority in this matter.

Pretty sure CONI can stop anyone from riding in Italy. Armstrong was scared enough of them not to even try to ride there for a couple of years.

 

[rhubroma]

well, clasical cop discourse

You'll have to explain that one to me.

Anyway I threw the last comment in in my last post as a bold ironic statement, which was therefore not to be taken seriously as some have, because its impossible (unfortunately) to be completely rational in such a case as Valverde's. But it seems to me mind boggling that people are in support of his defense with a DNA match as evidence against him. No matter how you feel about Italy's campaign against the man, it has prooved irrifutably that the Valve-Piti sack had the rider's own blood in it. And anybody who won't recognize this has his judgment "clouded by sentiment." That was my point.

That he may win the war, even if he looses the battle of riding this year's Tour, is probably a given. But that somehow Valverde is an innocent victom of all this and not the usual doper/liar is just absurd.

 

[rhubroma]

It is disturbing that the translation posted above indicates that the ASO was trying to find a way to let Valverde race. It confirms what Lemond has said about the ASO selling out and giving up the fight against doping.

We have gone so far backward the last ten or so months that Valverde winning at CAS will just be a single drop in a rain storm.

ASO has "sold out" because Valverde's team is a major Tour sponsor. It's like Nike and Armstrong and the Tour. These guys are protected because it's exclusively about money. Money not truth prevales.

 

[toppermost]

That he may win the war, even if he looses the battle of riding this year's Tour, is probably a given. But that somehow Valverde is an innocent victom of all this and not the usual doper/liar is just absurd.

Exactly. This is not criminal law. These are sporting organizations sanctioning athletes who cheat at playing a game. The apologists have lost all perspective. Its pure silliness. One of the only countries that actually has codified doping as a criminal offense -SPAIN!- is actively ignoring a blatant violation of its own law. Given this travesty, Italy is doing the right thing!

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Money not truth prevails.

Completely accurate.

Exactly. This is not criminal law. These are sporting organizations sanctioning athletes who cheat at playing a game!

True. But it's hard to see what's exactly just and fair here, as I posted many times.

CAS has been pretty fair and even in the past, I hope to think that they are still mostly beyond reproach. Though obviously I don't trust the UCI, or now that Clerc is gone, the ASO either it seems.

I'm a little surprised that RFEC hasn't done with Valverde what CONI did with DiLuca and give him a relatively off-season suspension, and declared it over. Maybe they'll do that after the Vuelta...

 

[Aguirre]

You can keep your Spanish doping culture. Please don't try to globalise it. A win for Valverde at the CAS would be a loss for the sport and a slap in the face for the fans of clean cycling.

listen, I don't support doping, I hate doping, BUT if I have to list the cyclists have been positive at least once in their live, or involved in any affaire or just confess I should have to change my addiction to cycling. and I Won't:

I list: Fignon, Rooks (the two last to confess) Jose Manuel Fuente, Eddy Mercks, Tom Simpson, Armstrong, Freddy Maertens, Ulrich, Pantani, VDB, Musseuw, Zabel, Virenque, Rijs, etc.

That means Stephen Roche, Sean Kelly, Saronni, Michele Bartoli, Phil Anderson, Coppi and Bartoli, Indurain, Cancellara, or Rick Van Loy also recurred (to a more or a less degree) to some tricks... And this is (or was) cycling!!!!

There is a double razor (o triple) judging cycling in our days. By chance the sport is much more controlled in our days and it's more difficult to cheat.
But I think the Valverde's case has become the perfect global conspiracy "valvergate" and eveyone has its opinion based in what: thousands of posts and media distorsion?

 

[Aguirre]

You'll have to explain that one to me.

Anyway I threw the last comment in in my last post as a bold ironic statement, which was therefore not to be taken seriously as some have, because its impossible (unfortunately) to be completely rational in such a case as Valverde's. But it seems to me mind boggling that people are in support of his defense with a DNA match as evidence against him. No matter how you feel about Italy's campaign against the man, it has prooved irrifutably that the Valve-Piti sack had the rider's own blood in it. And anybody who won't recognize this has his judgment "clouded by sentiment." That was my point.

That he may win the war, even if he looses the battle of riding this year's Tour, is probably a given. But that somehow Valverde is an innocent victom of all this and not the usual doper/liar is just absurd.

surprised how just because one is a cyclist and the other is a judge (Torri) the thruth must be in the hands of the second. This is the system of values that people believe? Did someone investigate the modes of the Sr. Torri?
Regarding Fuentes. Ok, he was involved in doping practices but he was also a team doctor when doping (to a more or less degree) was generalised in cycling (in all teams!!!) it's valverde guilty of have signed for that team? In 2004!!!! The evidence is there is not proove the blood contains epo, neither that it was in valverde's body. There is only a bag with blood that matches with Valverdes DNA, and that the whole process to get this has been set up by a mafia judge searching for his own glory. And from 2005 onwards there is nothing against valverde, one of the most controlled cyclists.
There is a huge hypocresie in this case, just remember when Zabel admitted to be a doper in the past and everyone looked to the other side!!!!!!!

 

[nobody]

There is a double razor (o triple) judging cycling in our days. By chance the sport is much more controlled in our days and it's more difficult to cheat.

I do think that is more efficient to cheat today than yesterday. Dopers can be helped by very nice doctors who are paid a lot so because it's a business I doubt that they accept to pay a lot for nothing.

 

[nobody]

surprised how just because one is a cyclist and the other is a judge (Torri) the thruth must be in the hands of the second. This is the system of values that people believe? Did someone investigate the modes of the Sr. Torri?
Regarding Fuentes. Ok, he was involved in doping practices but he was also a team doctor when doping (to a more or less degree) was generalised in cycling (in all teams!!!) it's valverde guilty of have signed for that team? In 2004!!!! The evidence is there is not proove the blood contains epo, neither that it was in valverde's body. There is only a bag with blood that matches with Valverdes DNA, and that the whole process to get this has been set up by a mafia judge searching for his own glory. And from 2005 onwards there is nothing against valverde, one of the most controlled cyclists.
There is a huge hypocresie in this case, just remember when Zabel admitted to be a doper in the past and everyone looked to the other side!!!!!!!

How could you complain about hypocrisis when you write something like that?

 

[rhubroma]

surprised how just because one is a cyclist and the other is a judge (Torri) the thruth must be in the hands of the second. This is the system of values that people believe? Did someone investigate the modes of the Sr. Torri?
Regarding Fuentes. Ok, he was involved in doping practices but he was also a team doctor when doping (to a more or less degree) was generalised in cycling (in all teams!!!) it's valverde guilty of have signed for that team? In 2004!!!! The evidence is there is not proove the blood contains epo, neither that it was in valverde's body. There is only a bag with blood that matches with Valverdes DNA, and that the whole process to get this has been set up by a mafia judge searching for his own glory. And from 2005 onwards there is nothing against valverde, one of the most controlled cyclists.
There is a huge hypocresie in this case, just remember when Zabel admitted to be a doper in the past and everyone looked to the other side!!!!!!!

You are obviously someone with serious critical judgment problems, and perhaps worse.

Torri is legit. CONI is not a mafia organization (not everthing, you know, in Italy is mafia related which is racist sentiment anyway). The DNA match is perfectly credible, unless you believe they dumped the blood in the Fuente's sack and replaced it with Valverde's.

No if there is anybody to critisize here as mafioso, it is the Spanish judge who is protecting the omerta by not opening up OP.
Valverde doesn't have to have doped to be banned, because any blood stored by Fuentes is enough on grounds of "attempted doping" which is the same ofense as actual doping in the eyes of the UCI. It's what Basso recieved his 2 years out for.

Your rational here is completely moronic and even racist in its accusations against Torri.

 

[subzro]

You are obviously someone with serious critical judgment problems, and perhaps worse.

Torri is legit. CONI is not a mafia organization (not everthing, you know, in Italy is mafia related which is racist sentiment anyway). The DNA match is perfectly credible, unless you believe they dumped the blood in the Fuente's sack and replaced it with Valverde's.

No if there is anybody to critisize here as mafioso, it is the Spanish judge who is protecting the omerta by not opening up OP.
Valverde doesn't have to have doped to be banned, because any blood stored by Fuentes is enough on grounds of "attempted doping" which is the same ofense as actual doping in the eyes of the UCI. It's what Basso recieved his 2 years out for.

Your rational here is completely moronic and even racist in its accusations against Torri.

You're missing one very important fact. CONI has no jurisdiction in this case.

Any sane person is going to draw the logical conclusion he doped. But he will be the fish that got away. Well, he's partly paying a price by missing TdF, but I don't think it will go on much longer than that.

The UCI's silence since receiving the report has been deafening, anyone willing to bet they overturn CONI's decision a week or so into the tour?

 

[RdBiker]

You are obviously someone with serious critical judgment problems, and perhaps worse.

Torri is legit. CONI is not a mafia organization (not everthing, you know, in Italy is mafia related which is racist sentiment anyway). The DNA match is perfectly credible, unless you believe they dumped the blood in the Fuente's sack and replaced it with Valverde's.

No if there is anybody to critisize here as mafioso, it is the Spanish judge who is protecting the omerta by not opening up OP.
Valverde doesn't have to have doped to be banned, because any blood stored by Fuentes is enough on grounds of "attempted doping" which is the same ofense as actual doping in the eyes of the UCI. It's what Basso recieved his 2 years out for.

Your rational here is completely moronic and even racist in its accusations against Torri.

I haven't seen an article showing that Valverde's DNA matches the blood in the bag. I've only read CONI saying that "we have matched the blood" so if someone has a link to actual proof it would convince me more. I don't think CONI would get away with lying about a thing like that but it would convince me more to see more than words.

I think this case differs to the Basso case in one way: Fuentes was Valverde's team doctor. It doesn't put his old team in a very good light but that doesn't matter in this case. What matters is that now Valvarde has a small rope to hang on since he can argue that he just gave blood to his team doctor for "testing". In Basso's case the blood had no other reason to be at Fuentes' than doping but Valverde can argue that he didn't know the blood was for doping.

This all goes in the dumbster if it can be proven that Valverde gave the blood while riding for Caisse and while Fuentes was not his team doctor. OR if the amount drawn from Valverde could not have been used for anything else than doping. If not then this is something Valverde can hang on to.

 

[rhubroma]

I haven't seen an article showing that Valverde's DNA matches the blood in the bag. I've only read CONI saying that "we have matched the blood" so if someone has a link to actual proof it would convince me more. I don't think CONI would get away with lying about a thing like that but it would convince me more to see more than words.

I think this case differs to the Basso case in one way: Fuentes was Valverde's team doctor. It doesn't put his old team in a very good light but that doesn't matter in this case. What matters is that now Valvarde has a small rope to hang on since he can argue that he just gave blood to his team doctor for "testing". In Basso's case the blood had no other reason to be at Fuentes' than doping but Valverde can argue that he didn't know the blood was for doping.

This all goes in the dumbster if it can be proven that Valverde gave the blood while riding for Caisse and while Fuentes was not his team doctor. OR if the amount drawn from Valverde could not have been used for anything else than doping. If not then this is something Valverde can hang on to.

I don't have a link to any official documents held by CONI and have only read in the Italian newspapers about the DNA match. The documents must exist though, because CONI would not be so sinister to fabricate such an accusation out of thin air.

In terms of the legal basis of your arguments, ok. The points are valid, from a legal standpoint, which doesn't help the fight against doping however. But in terms of what rational human beings choose to believe, without such a legal burden of proof hanging over our heads, then if you believe that the blood is Valverde's, but was only intended to be used for "testing" proceedures by his team doctor, Fuentes, and not for doping along with all the other unidentified sacks (of which there were over 200): well, then, I just give up and have lost all possible hope for human society.

 

[nobody]

I think this case differs to the Basso case in one way: Fuentes was Valverde's team doctor. It doesn't put his old team in a very good light but that doesn't matter in this case. What matters is that now Valvarde has a small rope to hang on since he can argue that he just gave blood to his team doctor for "testing". In Basso's case the blood had no other reason to be at Fuentes' than doping but Valverde can argue that he didn't know the blood was for doping.

This all goes in the dumbster if it can be proven that Valverde gave the blood while riding for Caisse and while Fuentes was not his team doctor. OR if the amount drawn from Valverde could not have been used for anything else than doping. If not then this is something Valverde can hang on to.

We are not so stupid, you don't give so much blood for testing... and if it's for testing why did he keep it then in a fridge? Paper's or electronical records of the measurement are more usefull.

 

[rhubroma]

You're missing one very important fact. CONI has no jurisdiction in this case.

Any sane person is going to draw the logical conclusion he doped. But he will be the fish that got away. Well, he's partly paying a price by missing TdF, but I don't think it will go on much longer than that.

The UCI's silence since receiving the report has been deafening, anyone willing to bet they overturn CONI's decision a week or so into the tour?

No the important point being missed here is that a serious anti-doping program, and not the legal farce of the actual one, needs to be internationally coordinated where no juristiction borders exist in a spirit of mutual cooperation and respect given that sport is played out in an international arena. Here just the opposite holds true, in what amounts to a grotesque parody of justice.

 

[subzro]

No the important point being missed here is that a serious anti-doping program, and not the legal farce of the actual one, needs to be internationally coordinated where no juristiction borders exist in a spirit of mutual cooperation and respect given that sport is played out in an international arena. Here just the opposite holds true, in what amounts to a grotesque parody of justice.

I don't think you will get any argument that anti better doping systems, laws and tests will benefit pro cycling, certainly not one from me. But, that's an argument for now and in the future. Valverdes case will get judged on the law as it stands now, and rightly so. Anything else will be a grotesque parody of justice!

 

[subzro]

I haven't seen an article showing that Valverde's DNA matches the blood in the bag. I've only read CONI saying that "we have matched the blood"

I think you can read a lot into the fact that Valverde hasn't appealed any of the evidence as such, and instead concentrated just on issue of jurisdiction as fairly strong proof that match probably exists.

 

[rhubroma]

I don't think you will get any argument that anti better doping systems, laws and tests will benefit pro cycling, certainly not one from me. But, that's an argument for now and in the future. Valverdes case will get judged on the law as it stands now, and rightly so. Anything else will be a grotesque parody of justice!

No, the law as it stands now has caused the grotesque parody of justice we have!

 

[subzro]

No, the law as it stands now has caused the grotesque parody of justice we have!

Hey, the law is the law, it doesn't have to imitate justice ... it is justice.

Anyone enough circular arguments for on this topic. CAS will overturn CONI, UCI should have overturned CONI but didn't have the balls and that will be the end of the matter.

 

[nobody]

I don't think you will get any argument that anti better doping systems, laws and tests will benefit pro cycling, certainly not one from me. But, that's an argument for now and in the future. Valverdes case will get judged on the law as it stands now, and rightly so. Anything else will be a grotesque parody of justice!

The grotesque parody of justice is born in Madrid. Spanish laws were not available to prosecute directly that case but there is clear civil laws that have been broken in that case.
Fuentes had no agreement to store blood, no agreement to transport blook especially outside medical control, and so... there is a lot of broken medical laws.
Why Fuentes is not prosecute on those points? Because all involved athletes would be named.

Now you know where has begun the parody of justice and why it's like that.

Valverde could be seen as a scapegoat but he is more gulty than his victims, the few riders who are cleaner than him.