Valverde banned for 2 years?

[Michielveedeebee]

For some reason I feel it's slightly wrong to suspend him now when this case was 4 years ago, and as we all know, every top cyclist was doping back then anyway (probably now as well, but I like being optimistic!). Oh well...

well I'm just glad he actually got punished

 

[The Sheep]

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?

according to the UCI website Freire came second there

 

[L'arriviste]

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

Absolutely true. Though the sentencing here is actually consistent with the jurisprudence of most legal systems: the punishment dates from the outcome of the original judgment. Valverde was probably advised that this was the path of least resistance: if he lost, his ban would still run from the same point. Therefore he had nothing (more) to lose in making his appeal, and everything to gain because he could continue riding in the meantime.

That, for me, is where the issue lies - riding in the meantime - though obviously it cuts both ways with the likes of Ballan and Pellizotti. It could be unfair or it could be unfairly advantageous depending on the individual.

 

[Moondance]

Given that Valverde's ban will be backdated to January 1, 2010 I hereby wish to begin a campaign to restore justice to Rinaldo Nocentini, Oscar Freire, Sammy Sanchez, Igor Anton and Simon Spilak... All of whom have been deprived of a victory this season because of Piti's shenanigans, but will not see the results since then changed.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

About time?? Quite the about-face from you, then!

Not really. I'll miss him, as he was always entertaining to watch, but he's had the ban coming for a long long time. I'd rather he have already served it and come back.

My main defence of Valverde has not been anything to do with innocence (I don't believe he has any). It is to do with the fact that the way the guy is treated round here, it's like he's a child molester or something. And coming from a forum full of people who cheer for Vino and admit that they enjoy Riccò, that's hypocritical. It's like an arbitrary decision has been made, "hate Valverde". If Riccò or Vino hadn't failed tests and were being brought down the way Valverde was, i.e. slowly, then you bet they'd have behaved just like Valverde. Vino was never going to be suspended by his team, since it was his team, and Saunier Duval, well, they were just rotten to the core. But because they were dumb enough to fail tests, then dictate the terms of their comeback to the very team they left (Vino) or wax lyrical about themselves (Riccò), they're lauded as exciting, entertaining and sticking it to the way dopers are "supposed to behave", yet Valverde, who wasn't dumb enough to fail a test and was smart enough to manipulate the system to keep himself earning and enlivening races, is the devil incarnate?

For the sport, it's good he's gone, and not before time. For the spectacle, it's a shame because he always brought something to the races.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Absolutely true. Though the sentencing here is actually consistent with the jurisprudence of most legal systems: the punishment dates from the outcome of the original judgment. Valverde was probably advised that this was the path of least resistance: if he lost, his ban would still run from the same point. Therefore he had nothing (more) to lose in making his appeal, and everything to gain because he could continue riding in the meantime.

That, for me, is where the issue lies - riding in the meantime - though obviously it cuts both ways with the likes of Ballan and Pellizotti. It could be unfair or it could be unfairly advantageous depending on the individual.

In the time in which he has been 'banned' he has:

1st, Tour Méditerranéen
2nd, Paris-Nice
2nd, GP Miguel Indurain
2th Overall, Vuelta al País Vasco

1st Stage 1 Vuelta al País Vasco
1st Stage 2 Vuelta al País Vasco
Jersey white.svg 1st Points Classification

8th, La Flèche Wallonne
3rd Liège–Bastogne–Liège
1st Overall Tour de Romandie

1st Stage 5 Tour de Romandie

So at least he should be stripped of those results and return the prize money to the rightful riders.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

In the time in which he has been 'banned' he has:

1st, Tour Méditerranéen
2nd, Paris-Nice
2nd, GP Miguel Indurain
2th Overall, Vuelta al País Vasco

1st Stage 1 Vuelta al País Vasco
1st Stage 2 Vuelta al País Vasco
Jersey white.svg 1st Points Classification

8th, La Flèche Wallonne
3rd Liège–Bastogne–Liège
1st Overall Tour de Romandie

1st Stage 5 Tour de Romandie

So at least he should be stripped of those results and return the prize money to the rightful riders.

That is happening, apparently.

It's nice to see consistency though - Davide Rebellin is still the winner of the 2009 Flèche Wallonne

 

[Flashheart]

Guess I'm the only one who is a bit saddened by this news. I really like him as a rider and I'll miss him.

Seems all Spanish riders I like used dope. First Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano, then Mayo and now Valverde. Only Plaza, Cobo and S. Sánchez left.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Seems all Spanish riders I like used dope. First Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano, then Mayo and now Valverde. Only Plaza, Cobo and S. Sánchez left.

Kelme, Comunidad Valenciana, Liberty Seguros, say no more

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Not really. I'll miss him, as he was always entertaining to watch, but he's had the ban coming for a long long time. I'd rather he have already served it and come back.

My main defence of Valverde has not been anything to do with innocence (I don't believe he has any). It is to do with the fact that the way the guy is treated round here, it's like he's a child molester or something. And coming from a forum full of people who cheer for Vino and admit that they enjoy Riccò, that's hypocritical. It's like an arbitrary decision has been made, "hate Valverde". If Riccò or Vino hadn't failed tests and were being brought down the way Valverde was, i.e. slowly, then you bet they'd have behaved just like Valverde. Vino was never going to be suspended by his team, since it was his team, and Saunier Duval, well, they were just rotten to the core. But because they were dumb enough to fail tests, then dictate the terms of their comeback to the very team they left (Vino) or wax lyrical about themselves (Riccò), they're lauded as exciting, entertaining and sticking it to the way dopers are "supposed to behave", yet Valverde, who wasn't dumb enough to fail a test and was smart enough to manipulate the system to keep himself earning and enlivening races, is the devil incarnate?

For the sport, it's good he's gone, and not before time. For the spectacle, it's a shame because he always brought something to the races.

Vino, Ricco, Valverde - all dopers.

The difference is Vino & Ricco served their sentence and have returned, Valverdes starts now.

If on his return Valverde is not liked by people who shout for Vino or Ricco - then your arguement will have merit..

 

[ttrider]

if he d just accepted it he would be loved by fans and lost 2 years
he d be competitive as its getting cleaner and he is a real natural talent
he can wave good bye to his career
hes ****ed everyone off enough to enter the black list with floyd and rasmussen

 

[Flashheart]

Kelme, Comunidad Valenciana, Liberty Seguros, say no more

"In 2006 he was implicated in the Operación Puerto doping scandal, but was later acquitted of any involvement."

Still, I understand what you mean.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

if he d just accepted it he would be loved by fans and lost 2 years
he d be competitive as its getting cleaner and he is a real natural talent
he can wave good bye to his career
hes ****ed everyone off enough to enter the black list with floyd and rasmussen

Has he? I haven't seen much evidence of him being hated in the péloton. Fans are pretty cheesed off with him, but aside from that tweet about the 'no credibility award' at País Vasco I haven't seen much. And even then I think it seems to depend on which fans. He still seems pretty popular with some fans. Videos of the Ventoux stage last year were all accompanied with gushing eulogies on what a great sportsman he is (!) for handing the victory to Szmyd.

We ought to know just how well-liked he was in the péloton within the next couple of days however. If there are lots of 'ding ****, the witch is dead' type comments!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

"In 2006 he was implicated in the Operación Puerto doping scandal, but was later acquitted of any involvement."

Still, I understand what you mean.

A lot of riders who were acquitted of any involvement who were riding for those teams are now buried in the mire of Portuguese cycling, because nobody will touch them with a barge pole. Perhaps the fact that he's been deemed low-risk enough for a high-profile team to pick him up is a good sign for him being clean, but I think of him as the walking dead.

 

[Fourier]

Quite a surreal sight when logging in to CN, the headlines:

Valverde suspended for 2 years worldwide
Basso basks in Giro glory

four years on and we are still feeling the impact of Puerto.

 

[JA.Tri]

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".

The rules should be written such that, in event of appeal "failing" then ban should proceed from date of original doping result. All results forfeit and all winnings and/or earnings to be refunded (I acknowledge that winnings often are distributed to team therefore some significant fine might be an alternative).

It is ludicrous that VV keeps his results and earnings for a period of time when he would ordinarily be suspended!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

It is ludicrous that VV keeps his results and earnings for a period of time when he would ordinarily be suspended!

I repeat: Davide Rebellin is still the winner of La Flèche Wallonne 2009.

You are asking for consistency and competency on the part of the UCI. More fool you.

 

[Escarabajo]

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.

...

+1.

I am starting to realize that there is a lot of hypocrisy in this forum. I see a lot of posters that are celebrating Valverde's ban and are sooooo happy that he is out, but yet celebrate one of the greatest Giro's in a long time with Basso and his Liquigas doped to the eyeballs team ripping the race apart. I bet that if we do a poll about who'd think Liquigas was doping most of them would say yes.

Irony of life. (???????)

I am happy Valverde is out. I am not happy that not many things have changed in cycling yet.

 

[JA.Tri]

Not really. I'll miss him, as he was always entertaining to watch, but he's had the ban coming for a long long time. I'd rather he have already served it and come back.

My main defence of Valverde has not been anything to do with innocence (I don't believe he has any). It is to do with the fact that the way the guy is treated round here, it's like he's a child molester or something. And coming from a forum full of people who cheer for Vino and admit that they enjoy Riccò, that's hypocritical. It's like an arbitrary decision has been made, "hate Valverde". If Riccò or Vino hadn't failed tests and were being brought down the way Valverde was, i.e. slowly, then you bet they'd have behaved just like Valverde. Vino was never going to be suspended by his team, since it was his team, and Saunier Duval, well, they were just rotten to the core. But because they were dumb enough to fail tests, then dictate the terms of their comeback to the very team they left (Vino) or wax lyrical about themselves (Riccò), they're lauded as exciting, entertaining and sticking it to the way dopers are "supposed to behave", yet Valverde, who wasn't dumb enough to fail a test and was smart enough to manipulate the system to keep himself earning and enlivening races, is the devil incarnate?

For the sport, it's good he's gone, and not before time. For the spectacle, it's a shame because he always brought something to the races.

Valid point. Your thoughts illustrate the foibles of human nature: Individually we decide whether we like (or otherwise) a person/cyclist. Further actions by that cyclist allow us to confirm our initial view or accept that as a reasonable "flaw"/positive attribute in the cyclist. In the event that the individual does something exceptionally good/bad we may allow ourselves to reverse our initial impression.

And boy howdy can we (sometimes) hold tight to that initial impression .

Got to say while I enjoy his riding style, I have allowed his recent actions to well and truly get up my nose.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

The issue is that Piti should have been banned 4 years ago, he wasn't because the Spanish authorities are soft on dopers and doping. They protected him while the likes of Basso, Ullrich, Scarponi etc were losing their careers.

If Piti had been Italian he would be in the same boat as Basso, coming back from his ban. The Spanish kept him going, he kept on winning races he shouldn't have been entering and Spanish cycling was able to bask in the reflected glory of his achievements.

If we think the UCI is corrupt it has nothing on the Spanish cycling authorities.

I repeat: Davide Rebellin is still the winner of La Flèche Wallonne 2009.

You are asking for consistency and competency on the part of the UCI. More fool you.

I am not sure what your point is. It wasn't that Rebellin had failed his test and was being allowed to ride on a technicality.

Piti should have been banned in 2006-2007. He wasn't because his mates in the Spain were protecting him. Even after he was found guilty by CAS, they still protected him and allowed him to race (while for example Ballan was stood down by BMC).

Piti gets no sympathy from me and digging up Rebellin is just a red herring.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I repeat: Davide Rebellin is still the winner of La Flèche Wallonne 2009.

You are asking for consistency and competency on the part of the UCI. More fool you.

I am not sure what your point is. It wasn't that Rebellin had failed his test and was being allowed to ride on a technicality.

Piti should have been banned in 2006-2007. He wasn't because his mates in the Spain were protecting him. Even after he was found guilty by CAS, they still protected him and allowed him to race (while for example Ballan was stood down by BMC).

Piti gets no sympathy from me and digging up Rebellin is just a red herring.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Basso and Scarponi just finished 1st and 4th in the Giro. Basso finished top 5 in two Grand Tours last year and Scarponi won Tirreno-Adriatico and only lost out this year on overall placings (bet he wishes he didn't showboat to the line in stage 5 now!). Scarponi is 30 and has years ahead of him. Basso is 32 and likewise.

Are the Spanish authorities soft on doping? Definitely. But to say that the likes of Basso and Scarponi were "losing their careers" because they got banned is over the top.

Plus, I'll add that the reason Basso and Scarponi were sanctioned - and Valverde too, lest we forget - is because CONI, which is the Italian Olympic authority, not the cycling authority, got involved. The Italian cycling authority are those ones who were so legendarily hard-nosed as to give Danilo di Luca a three-month ban through the off-season for his involvement in Oil For Drugs. I'm not convinced that they're much better than RFEC, but at least CONI treat their job seriously. Even if they should perhaps have shown their evidence to the UCI about a year earlier...

 

[Mellow Velo]

+1.
I am starting to realize that there is a lot of hypocrisy in this forum. I see a lot of posters that are celebrating Valverde's ban and are sooooo happy that he is out, but yet celebrate one of the greatest Giro's in a long time with Basso and his Liquigas doped to the eyeballs team ripping the race apart. I bet that if we do a poll about who'd think Liquigas was doping most of them would say yes.

I'm sorry, but this is complete bollocks.

The really hypocrisy is whining about Basso, a man who has served two years for OP and Valverde, who hasn't.
When Valverde returns, he starts afresh, IMO, same as all the others. No difference regardless of whatever any of them say during their limbo period.

After that, if any proper evidence of infractions turn up, then they return to being fair game.

If you feel unable to wipe the slate clean and rush to judgement, it will be a subjective one, based solely upon the racing results.

As for the remainder of the Liquigas team being "doped to the eyeballs", that is just an unsubstantiated opinion. No evidence whatsoever.
Sounds like a bad case of sour grapes to me.

I can only assume that the Giro was not a great GT, IYO, which, is a pity.

 

[benpounder]

Wow, that only took forever.

Good riddance, I hope he doesn't return.

One thing that I would hope we, as members of the cycling community will adhere to, is a dispassionate view for all doping offences. Not that we dont care, but that we treat all 'villians' similarly. If it is OK for Basso to return and be celebrated as Giro champ, then all others coming off bans should be afforded the same fan/press/organization treatment. Obviously, there are shades of gray. (For example, while both Basso and Valverde were not caught with PED's in their system, their blood was found where it had no right to be. Millar and Kohl were caught and confessed. Ricco and Vino were caught and are unrepentant.) But it is disingenuous to applaud Basso,and/or Scarponi while ripping apart Vino.

I think that part of the reason for the post-dated ban, is because he has already been banned for a year in Italy.

 

[Magnus]

Videos of the Ventoux stage last year were all accompanied with gushing eulogies on what a great sportsman he is (!) for handing the victory to Szmyd.

Great sportsman my a.. he shouldn't have been in the race.

Pesonally I don't care about who dopes and who doesn't. But when some people get years of their careers ruined because of acusations that don't hold in court or people keep on riding when there's evidence they broke the rules that p.... me of.

I hated the final outcome of the sprint on first stage of pay-basque this year. That was just plain stupid.