Valverde case delayed AGAIN!

[yakko!]

You wonder if the Spanish courts have anything to do with CAS!?

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/2162/Valverde-CAS-appeal-delayed-again.aspx

I mean come on...it wouldn't be as bad if he wasn't winning races, but now are they going to retract victories if he's proven guilty?

 

[Psalmon]

Seems the next step in doping should be a convention that somehow every country signs to. The process could remain in each country's jurisdiction, but there would be some uniformity and resolution speed when it comes to these cases.

I wish he'd gone the way Basso did, I "attempted", serve time, and come back, done. This soap opera continues to make a joke of the sport even with the positive strides that have occurred.

 

[Mellow Velo]

The UCI president Pat McQuaid has stated on several occasions that the UCI feels there is considerable evidence against Valverde.

That's why he's done nothing to extend the ban, worldwide and avoid this farce.

 

[icefire]

The UCI president Pat McQuaid has stated on several occasions that the UCI feels there is considerable evidence against Valverde.

Who would trust a court who rules based on feelings?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Might as well just suspend it until after he retires.

 

[DavidVilla7]

Am I the only one who thinks this might be a good decision?

Cuz I don't think that there's any clear evidence.
And Alejandro has never tested positive.
And there are more names linked to OP, why is valverde the only one?

+ this case is kinda old, so even if he used dope in the past, he's likely not using it anymore.

And in my eyes he has a good image. ( ok, you know what I mean)

 

[Anonymous]

Am I the only one who thinks this might be a good decision?

Cuz I don't think that there's any clear evidence.
And Alejandro has never tested positive.
And there are more names linked to OP, why is valverde the only one?

+ this case is kinda old, so even if he used dope in the past, he's likely not using it anymore.

And in my eyes he has a good image. ( ok, you know what I mean)

1/there is evidence.. they got a bag of blood with his DNA on it for a start...
2/neither have contador, lance, and a bunch of other people.. think they are clean
3/Several of the OP riders have been done, valverde continues to escape
4/Oh so because he doped, but is probably ok now he should be allowed to get away with it..?
5/Good image.. the guy has done more to damage the reputation of cycling this year that any other...

i assume your post was a **** take..?

 

[Anonymous]

The UCI president Pat McQuaid has stated on several occasions that the UCI feels there is considerable evidence against Valverde.

That's why he's done nothing to extend the ban, worldwide and avoid this farce.

i dont think he can... he cant do anything while CAS are overseeing any appeals.. the uci have no power in this one..

stick in spokes... ive said it before, but it would solve a lot of problems..

 

[yakko!]

I think the UCI has their hands tied as well - the biological passport seems to be taking shape now....(hopefully)

 

[maltiv]

Am I the only one who thinks this might be a good decision?

Cuz I don't think that there's any clear evidence.
And Alejandro has never tested positive.
And there are more names linked to OP, why is valverde the only one?

+ this case is kinda old, so even if he used dope in the past, he's likely not using it anymore.

And in my eyes he has a good image. ( ok, you know what I mean)

The evidence is very clear, and no, the fact that you obviously thinks he is very hot (or whatever you are implying with your last sentence) doesn't change that.

 

[usedtobefast]

i am tired of hearing about it. just sweep it under the rug and lets all have a beer.

 

[Galic Ho]

1/there is evidence.. they got a bag of blood with his DNA on it for a start...
2/neither have contador, lance, and a bunch of other people.. think they are clean
3/Several of the OP riders have been done, valverde continues to escape
4/Oh so because he doped, but is probably ok now he should be allowed to get away with it..?
5/Good image.. the guy has done more to damage the reputation of cycling this year that any other...

i assume your post was a **** take..?

We don't know they have a bad with Valverde's dna on it. The Spanish had the bag. CONI never touched it. We're going on a lot of extended faith to the Italians who have every reason to be biased after what happened to Basso.

It still isn't clear how CONI got access to dna records from bags that Judge Serrano had closed from inspection. Sure the rumour of Interpol getting the data is here but thats it. Want to know why it keeps being put further back. The UCI have nothing. The first CAS case is not important. The second one matters. If Valverde is unsuccessful in that case he doesn't race period. He can afford not to race in Italy.

More to damage cycling? Come on, the 60 odd who actually tested positive have done far worse than Valverde has. They actually tested positive. So what if he is using? His image is untarnished to the unaccomplished viewer who knows little about doping in cycling and also that of cycling. Can DiLuca say that? We all know he looked like he was on CERA. Valverde looked like his usual self.

Next, Contador and Lance in the same sentence! Lance has the infamous 7 positives. Contador is all rumour. There is nothing on him. Nothing. AC from the blacklist. Who else has those initials? We've been over this before in the Clinic. There is enough dirt on Lance to bury him. You won't find squat on Contador. Doesn't however mean he is clean...but we need something to go on before he ends up in the same pool as Lance.

 

[Anonymous]

We don't know they have a bad with Valverde's dna on it. The Spanish had the bag. CONI never touched it. We're going on a lot of extended faith to the Italians who have every reason to be biased after what happened to Basso.

It still isn't clear how CONI got access to dna records from bags that Judge Serrano had closed from inspection. Sure the rumour of Interpol getting the data is here but thats it. Want to know why it keeps being put further back. The UCI have nothing. The first CAS case is not important. The second one matters. If Valverde is unsuccessful in that case he doesn't race period. He can afford not to race in Italy.

More to damage cycling? Come on, the 60 odd who actually tested positive have done far worse than Valverde has. They actually tested positive. So what if he is using? His image is untarnished to the unaccomplished viewer who knows little about doping in cycling and also that of cycling. Can DiLuca say that? We all know he looked like he was on CERA. Valverde looked like his usual self.

Next, Contador and Lance in the same sentence! Lance has the infamous 7 positives. Contador is all rumour. There is nothing on him. Nothing. AC from the blacklist. Who else has those initials? We've been over this before in the Clinic. There is enough dirt on Lance to bury him. You won't find squat on Contador. Doesn't however mean he is clean...but we need something to go on before he ends up in the same pool as Lance.

sorry, you cant use the general publics niavity to defende valverde (what the public dont know dont hurt them) yet at the same time critisise lance (what the public dont know hurts them)...

 

[elapid]

I'm with the naysayers. My main reason is that all riders should be treated equally in this affair, not have some riders singled out while other riders are free to ride without prejudice. I know that this is hypocritical to some extent because Jan Ullrich was forced to retire (never suspended) and three riders later admitted to their guilt and were subsequently suspended (Basso, Scarponi and Jashke), but these suspensions were a result of confessions and not investigations. Of the 53 remaining cyclists implicated in OP, only Valverde has been investigated and regionally suspended. What about the other 52 riders?

Although not so important to me personally, but there is also the legal precedent of an Italian federation investigating and convicting a Spanish rider and in doing so contravening the ruling of the Spanish legal system. While this is not important to me, this will be a very, very important factor in the ruling by CAS.

P.S. I'm with usedtobefast. A beer would be good, even if it is 9am!

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

...

1. I don't think that there's any clear evidence.

By all indication, at least one bag of plasma that contains EPO was matched to his DNA. His initials/code-name also appears in the ledgers (along with many other athletes), though not attached to any dates.

2. Alejandro has never tested positive.

As DIM said, because of so many false negatives, this means almost nothing. Kayle Leogrande never tested positive. Think he was clean?

3.And there are more names linked to OP, why is valverde the only one?

This is a valid argument. He has been somewhat singled out. Partly because many others in OP have retired, but he is a high profile name, and thus they've gone after him. I agree that justice has not been equal in this regard. None the less, all evidence seems to point to his doping in the past.

4 This case is kinda old, so even if he used dope in the past, he's likely not using it anymore.

What? Yes, the case is old. And I fully agree he should have been suspended over three years ago now. But to say he's likely clean not only has nothing to do with his past, and is not relevant to the present, one could argue it's presumptuous.

5. And in my eyes he has a good image. ( ok, you know what I mean)

Sure. Roberto Heras was one of my favorite riders. But that doesn't mean I think he should have never been suspended for getting caught using EPO. Sure sucks though that even after three years, no team would sign him. So, as we see, not only does the sport entirely fair, it doesn't seem to care about nice guys.

One thing to add, and here Elapid and I are probably in agreement. I think it's become almost a farce that this case is still dragging on, and almost hinged on Valverde. At this point it may be better to just consider it done, and chalk the whole thing up to a hard lesson learned. Having it drag on and on and on, getting nowhere, is arguably causing more damage to the sport than anything.

 

[blackcat]

why dont they get Frank Schlecks dna?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Ahhh, he only spent all that money for training tips from Fuentes, didn't he?

And he's a nice guy.

 

[Cogombre]

3.And there are more names linked to OP, why is valverde the only one?

This is a valid argument. He has been somewhat singled out. Partly because many others in OP have retired, but he is a high profile name, and thus they've gone after him. I agree that justice has not been equal in this regard. None the less, all evidence seems to point to his doping in the past.

I don't see that as a valid argument. It's true, but not a valid argument. The fact that there are other athletes involved in the OP doesn't mean that Valverde shouldn't be banned, on the contrary, the others should be banned, or investigated, as well. It's like not arresting a thief because you haven't arrested the rest of his band, for whatever reason.

why dont they get Frank Schlecks dna?

I think that there isn't a bag with Schleck's blood, but just a transference of money to the Fuentes' account. Correct me if I'm mistaken please.

 

[Galic Ho]

sorry, you cant use the general publics niavity to defende valverde (what the public dont know dont hurt them) yet at the same time critisise lance (what the public dont know hurts them)...

I wasn't defending Valverde, just highlighting the differences between him and others. Reread my second paragraph. It is not just the general public's naivety that is important. Here in the clinic most know what an epo test is, intricacies of blood doping and what parameters indicate, facts that elude most people. My point was to infer that until the UCI, WADA or whatever regulatory body has solid evidence that can stick in a court we have to distinguish the differences between Valverde and Lance, especially given that we know more than most do. We have a responsibility to make that comparison. There is a noticeable difference with the information at hand about Valverde and Lance in relation to doping practices.

We are all informed and accomplished enough to distinguish what the general public cannot. As I said, the facts on the dna and how CONI reportedly got hold of them matter. We don't know how but we do know they evidence was sealed by a Spanish court. Legally that is a big no no. So we have to ask were CONI being prudent and opportunistic or merely making stuff up? elapids point makes one wonder even more about why Valverde is the only rider being pursued. Reliability is of importance in this context. Lance on the other hand is free game, especially here. Books, testimony from witnesses and that lovely angle Ashenden put on those epo tests. We have the figures and data. Compare that to Valverde...massive divide between the two.

Our personal thoughts on doping (intangible idea)and our impression of what an individual may have done with PEDs (tangible andfactually based within the real world) can be separated in a discussion if we allow it. I am sure you can distinguish between the two. By all means hold onto your belief Valverde is dirty, he may well be, but make allowances for the conceptual differences between him and Lance whilst they currently remain.

 

[skidmark]

I think that there isn't a bag with Schleck's blood, but just a transference of money to the Fuentes' account. Correct me if I'm mistaken please.

Well, wasn't there a bag called 'amigo di brillo' that people suspected was Schleck's, as he was Basso/'brillo's teammate? Of course that's tenuous as he had many teammates (and probably a few friends), but maybe there's a bag?

As far as the whole case, I think I'm part of the faction that's just tired of it. Some careers were ruined, some put on hold, some ended only slightly prematurely, and some not affected at all. The justice in this case has hardly been equally meted out, and it's gotten to the point where I'd rather just forget about prosecuting the riders and work on a) using this case to address the systemic part of doping, from teams to doctors, and b) working on getting more effective tests for current dope, or at least doing more retroactive testing. Of course, I like Valverde's racing style and want to see him race, so maybe that figures into it, but in general, I think it should be all or nothing if you're going to prosecute riders in a case like this, and it certainly hasn't been 'all'.

 

[craig1985]

I'm with the naysayers. My main reason is that all riders should be treated equally in this affair, not have some riders singled out while other riders are free to ride without prejudice. I know that this is hypocritical to some extent because Jan Ullrich was forced to retire (never suspended) and three riders later admitted to their guilt and were subsequently suspended (Basso, Scarponi and Jashke), but these suspensions were a result of confessions and not investigations. Of the 53 remaining cyclists implicated in OP, only Valverde has been investigated and regionally suspended. What about the other 52 riders?

Although not so important to me personally, but there is also the legal precedent of an Italian federation investigating and convicting a Spanish rider and in doing so contravening the ruling of the Spanish legal system. While this is not important to me, this will be a very, very important factor in the ruling by CAS.

P.S. I'm with usedtobefast. A beer would be good, even if it is 9am!

I don't think that has stopped any of us before (certainly not me)

 

[Cogombre]

Well, wasn't there a bag called 'amigo di brillo' that people suspected was Schleck's, as he was Basso/'brillo's teammate? Of course that's tenuous as he had many teammates (and probably a few friends), but maybe there's a bag?

Yes, I forgot that bag. Anyway, it isn't sure that the bag is filled with his blood, we just have the word of a newspaper. I accept that not all riders accused by a newspaper should be investigated to see if his blood matches or not. But the bag n.18 was reported by the police as a bag filled with Valverde's blood, so it definitely should be compared to Valverde's DNA. If it matches, then...

 

[Highlander]

It appears that Operation Puerto is finally closed - at least for now.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/operacion-puerto-case-closed

What does this mean for Valverde when he finally get his hearing? Will it be much harder for the UCI to try to extend this suspension beyond Italy or will he be 'grandfathered' in because of the samples that CONI had already taken?

 

[hfer07]

It appears that Operation Puerto is finally closed - at least for now.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/operacion-puerto-case-closed

What does this mean for Valverde when he finally get his hearing? Will it be much harder for the UCI to try to extend this suspension beyond Italy or will he be 'grandfathered' in because of the samples that CONI had already taken?

It's less likely that Valpiti's ban will be global-since the Spanish Federation had already cleared him from any implication in the case and because of it, WADA & UCI just simply cannot act upon it. He'll complete his ban on Italian soil, and resume his career like nothing happened. VERY SAD

 

[Ripper]

OK, Valve-piti, that rank steaming vat of dog shit, must have appeased someone somewhere. I mean, at this rate pharmstrong will get busted before he does

But seriously, and FFS, this makes me crazy. So many people have been hammered with less evidence, and this guy just keeps on going'.

Arrrrggggg. Fack fack fack fack fakk!!!!

OK, I feel a bit better now. Thanks for putting up with reading a rant.