• 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!

Valverde banned for 2 years?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 8, 2010
1,257
0
0
Visit site
Zoncolan said:
My thoughts exactly.
Look at Basso - he did his time, came back and won a wonderful Giro.
Mind you, Valverde got a sweet deal - won several big classics and a Vuelta in the meantime.
Personally, I think they should have banned him back in '06.

He's got

LBL, two Tour stages, VaE, San Sebastian, Dauphine, Romandie, klasika primavera and several other results while he should've been out.

I don't know about you, but I think most pros would be more than happy with a palmares with nothing but those races...
 
May 29, 2010
54
0
0
Visit site
"Mind you, Valverde got a sweet deal" - Zoncolan

I don't know if I'd call his existence sweet for the last four years, not that I feel sorry for him in any way. I find it absurd the amount of stress these guys inflict upon themselves via the press and legal battles in an attempt to cover their tracks.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
Keeping all results from June 2006 - Dec 31, 2009 makes no sense at all.

At minimum, should be enforceable from time CONI had their verdict. The memorializes a decision against him based on evidence of doping. The rest was just the appeal and stall process.

Doesn't the WADA code provide for longer suspensions should a racer have an aggravated circumstance? Continuing to race, while a valid decision had been rendered and an appeal is ongoing, should qualify as "aggravated".
 
Cue the wave of triumphalism by hypocritical posters who'll happily support another bunch of known or suspected dopers, but because Valverde's actually had to do his running from the law in the public eye rather than outside of it, the dice has been rolled and he's become a hate figure.

Wheee, I'm off to join the others and cheer for Vino and talk about how I'm liking Riccò more these days, cos Valverde's just such an unapologetic cheat.

It's about time the guy was banned, but from the deal he gets on here compared to other dopers you'd think he wore an inverted cross pendant, blood doped using the blood from the victims he collected in his stabbing sprees at kindergartens, punched David Moncoutié in the face and held up depictions of the prophet Mohammed to celebrate stage wins.
 
Apr 1, 2009
1,488
0
0
Visit site
lightandlongshadows said:
"Mind you, Valverde got a sweet deal" - Zoncolan

I don't know if I'd call his existence sweet for the last four years, not that I feel sorry for him in any way. I find it absurd the amount of stress these guys inflict upon themselves via the press and legal battles in an attempt to cover their tracks.

I think Sammy Sanchez thinks he got a sweet deal:rolleyes:
 
Colm.Murphy said:
Doesn't the WADA code provide for longer suspensions should a racer have an aggravated circumstance? Continuing to race, while a valid decision had been rendered and an appeal is ongoing, should qualify as "aggravated".

It does, but unfortunately the provisions for this were brought in after the beginning of the Italian ban. They could perhaps attempt to append this but because there was no provision for this at the time he was originally banned, it would be difficult for them to add it, but it would open up the possibility of yet further extensive appeal scenarios.
 
victory.jpg


It does taste sweet though.

Muchos gracias to all those involved over the years, esp. CONI of course
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
shame it took so long.. but finally justice is served.. great day for cycling..

shame that riders have not been able to enjoy their moment on the podium because valverde was still riding, like Spilak in romandy etc.

wheres that troll gone thats been claiming valverdes innocence for the last two years...
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
I wonder if/when McQuaid will come forward and state:

"I think CAS has done cycling a disservice, considering this matter started back in 2006, and this is just another episode that damages cycling. the past is the past. If CAS really cared for cycling they would have just refused to rule. As it is, cycling is dragged down further instead of moving on with the future."

I'd like to hear the level of outrage at this finding from guys like Armstrong, Rogers, Vaughters, etc.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
I'm all for banning riders involved in doping, but the whole OP mess is still a mess. How many names that most of us could decode are still riding or never banned? Valverde was caught but slow handed and only after some coy blood testing (I'm not saying its wrong) but why not back in 2004? I know rules and what not but still no one could cross match a test in 2005? I know, blood bags locked up. The whole OP mess is still a mess and only the headliners will be brought up on charges if they can. What of the remainder of the list? Not to mention the other half of the list that was magically made to disappear?

When will this (OP) finally run its course, or are we to get more riders like Valverde caught once they qualify for a justified headline?

Yes, one at a time but we all know its one headliner at a time.

I'm wondering if the Spanish Fed's will now start to get even with Italy and pop another Italian from the list?
 
ElChingon said:
I'm all for banning riders involved in doping, but the whole OP mess is still a mess. How many names that most of us could decode are still riding or never banned? Valverde was caught but slow handed and only after some coy blood testing (I'm not saying its wrong) but why not back in 2004? I know rules and what not but still no one could cross match a test in 2005? I know, blood bags locked up. The whole OP mess is still a mess and only the headliners will be brought up on charges if they can. What of the remainder of the list? Not to mention the other half of the list that was magically made to disappear?

When will this (OP) finally run its course, or are we to get more riders like Valverde caught once they qualify for a justified headline?

Yes, one at a time but we all know its one headliner at a time.

I'm wondering if the Spanish Fed's will now start to get even with Italy and pop another Italian from the list?

You have to wonder how many testing machines Frank Schleck ended up donating
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,245
2
0
Visit site
Oh what a joyous day.

Valverde still racing all this time was a slap in the face to fans and riders everywhere. Caisse d'Epargne should have put him on suspension a long long time ago, they really suck for not doing that
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
hfer07 said:
Finally a bolt decision!! See ya in 2012 Piti:)
BTW that means the door is open for Contador to join the team....

Isn't this is the last year of sponsorship by the French Bank Caisse?

Maybe they will quit sooner?

So many other riders have bllod bags in OP...Maybe Piti need to send a "Floyd style" e-mail to help clean up the sport.
 
May 29, 2010
54
0
0
Visit site
Zoncolan said:
I think Sammy Sanchez thinks he got a sweet deal:rolleyes:

I hear ya'. Too much monkey business for me though, don't think there'd be too much satisfaction in accomplishing things the way these baffoons go about it. I doubt we'll hear Sanchez or anyone else from the peloton protest about Valverde's wins over the last years though.
 
Óscar Freire was DQed from stage 1 of the Vuelta al País Vasco. Valverde crossed the line 2nd but got the win. Le Mevel was 3rd.

Freire was demoted to the back of the group, but then at the start of stage 2 was placed 2nd and wearing the points jersey.

Who won stage 1, Freire or Le Mevel?
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Visit site
Libertine Seguros said:
Cue the wave of triumphalism by hypocritical posters who'll happily support another bunch of known or suspected dopers, but because Valverde's actually had to do his running from the law in the public eye rather than outside of it, the dice has been rolled and he's become a hate figure.

Wheee, I'm off to join the others and cheer for Vino and talk about how I'm liking Riccò more these days, cos Valverde's just such an unapologetic cheat.

It's about time the guy was banned, but from the deal he gets on here compared to other dopers you'd think he wore an inverted cross pendant, blood doped using the blood from the victims he collected in his stabbing sprees at kindergartens, punched David Moncoutié in the face and held up depictions of the prophet Mohammed to celebrate stage wins.

About time?? Quite the about-face from you, then!
Anyway, Mr. Pitiful is different. While there may be uncertainty about other "suspected" dopers, we've actually had DNA-evidence saying with certainty that he was guilty, a long time ago. All the legal finagling, cynically dragging their feet while he was building up his pension-fund, trying each and every legal loophole while we all the time KNEW he was guilty, is probably the worst disservice Mr. Pitiful could to to the sport and its loyal followers.
Shame on you, Mr. Pitiful! Too bad there are technicalities that won't let the sport serve you a lifetime-ban. You've earned it, and I hope I'll never ever see you in competition again.
 
Also, it isn't a two year ban. It is a 18 month ban. He gets to keep all the money he's won while he should have been banned, depriving prize money from the likes of Sanchez, Evans etc

As for there is no evidence that Piti hasn't been doping since 2006, they obviously never watched very much racing.