Valverde - my suspension is a great injustice

[Dallas_]

Alejandro Valverde - my suspension is a great injustice

Alejandro asserts he was the most tested rider in the world - where have we heard that bs before?

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...d-and-is-determined-to-return-to-the-top.aspx

cheers

 

[hrotha]

If he's going to keep protesting his ban and claiming it's unfair he could, you know, say he didn't dope. Or shut up.

 

[craig1985]

Meh, if he had taken this earlier, he would be racing this year.

 

[python]

the evidence of valverde blood doping is bullet-proof. imo, it’s beyond any reasonable doubt. the two cas panels performed marvelous job sifting through the facts. Without prejudging, i wish contador’s jury is as thorough and comprehensive. too bad valve is perhaps the last fully exposed op member.

that being said, valverde is likely one of the most talented riders out there and it would exciting to see him race again but clean.

 

[Ferminal]

The injustice is that he was only one of a few who got a two year ban out of hundreds of names.

And we know who to blame there... but somehow I don't think Piti is going to come out and say that.

"so it is clear that I won despite the tension that I was living with and despite being the most tested rider in the world"

Did he have to pay a fee to use that line?

 

[Berzin]

The injustice is that he was only one of a few who got a two year ban out of hundreds of names.

Absolutely. At least some people can think clearly about this issue. How refreshing.

And we know who to blame there... but somehow I don't think Piti is going to come out and say that.

Who is it that we can blame for? I'd like to know.

"So it is clear that I won despite the tension that I was living with and despite being the most tested rider in the world".

Did he have to pay a fee to use that line?

The same fee Armstrong paid to make the color of the leader's jersey at the Tour his own.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

“The UCI president Pat McQuaid said that cases such as those relating to me should be punished with four years of a suspension. It is a great injustice. [snip]”

Perhaps something has been lost in translation or editing and he thinks the injustice is Pat saying he should have got 4 years, not the fact that he was sanctioned.

Dopers who hunt endlessly for legal loopholes to avoid sanction (and absorb substantial resources that could be better spent elsewhere) get little sympathy from me. But it may have come as a surprise to Valve that his good friend Pat isn't looking out for him anymore. He's just another expendable doper for Pat to whine about when he needs to score a few PR points in the media.

“I have passed hundreds of drug tests in my career and they have all my blood values. I was the UCI world number one for three years and know that I have never created any problem nor had suspect values, so it is clear that I won despite the tension that I was living with and despite being the most tested rider in the world.”

Did valv piti mean to satirize a certain douchebag from texas, or is this unintentional comedy....

 

[bianchigirl]

I seem to remember a certain Texan writing a letter to the UCI about doping in Spain and then, what do you know? Iban Mayo gets popped...

If I were Valverde, I'd be ****ed off at being the only Puertee to serve a ban too

 

[frenchfry]

The day that Valverde stops lying and apologises to cycling fans is the day that I may start to have any respect for him.

Until then he is just another serial doper/liar. Champion? Make me laugh.

 

[la.margna]

While the unfairness might be that he was the only Puerto-Spaniard to be banned, I nevertheless fully agree with frenchfry. That's why I suddenly have respect for Di Luca, who recently confessed.

But sadly, most are notrious liars and even in such a clear case like Valv.Piti's, continue to throw lies straight in our faces. Sad, Valv.piti was one of my favourite riders until 2006...

 

[sniper]

The fact that he had the name is his dog written all over his bloodbags is pretty intriguing.
This could mean:
a. that Valv. was really close with Fuentes (they would walk the dog together on sunny days)
b. that Valv. was using his dog's name for all sorts of purposes, including as passwords and the like.
c. that the blood wasn't Valverde's, but actually his dog's...

 

[Squares]

If I were Valverde, I'd be ****ed off at being the only Puertee to serve a ban too

I seem to remember a 2 year ban for a guy named Ivan Basso.

I also just read an article on the front page of Cyclingnews.com about Jan Ullrich where it says he has been essentially banned from the sport after his DNA was linked to OP blood bags.

So, to say he was the "noly Puertee to serve a ban" is a little disingenuous.

 

[movingtarget]

The only injustice was that the ban was too short. A two year ban is not enough, to state the obvious.

 

[Kerbdog]

Yeah Valverde milked the legal loopholes till there was none left. I despised him while he was racing, the evidence against him was so overwhelming it was a joke he kept denying. He could have been back by now but its his own fault.
And now he is denying again...........
Spare me.

 

[nobilis]

The day that Valverde stops lying and apologises to cycling fans is the day that I may start to have any respect for him.

Until then he is just another serial doper/liar. Champion? Make me laugh.

Forget about the Puerto Affair. If you look at his achievements from 2006 to 2010, one has to be really blind to not admit that he's one of the strongest if not the strongest in the last 5 years.

 

[frenchfry]

While the unfairness might be that he was the only Puerto-Spaniard to be banned, I nevertheless fully agree with frenchfry. That's why I suddenly have respect for Di Luca, who recently confessed.

But sadly, most are notrious liars and even in such a clear case like Valv.Piti's, continue to throw lies straight in our faces. Sad, Valv.piti was one of my favourite riders until 2006...

That's why I said I might start to have respect for him.

I found Di Luca's "confession" as pathetic as the rest of his pathetic doping and lying. Far too little, far too late. Hopefully we never see him again in the pro peloton.

 

[The Hitch]

The injustice is that he was only one of a few who got a two year ban out of hundreds of names.

My thoughts exactly. He, like Vino and Ricco is paying for the sins of much of the peloton over the last 20 years and to an extent the world of sport.

They are the sheep on to whom everyone elses sins are put, and then driven out into the desert.

Hes a liar, yes, and i hope he cringes a bit when he says that crap.

And no way is Valverde going to be racing clean when he comes back. If he wants to compete he will have to do exactly what Contador, Schleck, Menchov, Sanchez, Basso, Evans etc are doing, and it doesnt involve being clean.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah Valverde milked the legal loopholes till there was none left. I despised him while he was racing, the evidence against him was so overwhelming it was a joke he kept denying. He could have been back by now but its his own fault.
And now he is denying again...........
Spare me.

+1

He doped and has yet to confess. He is still part of the problem.

I also seem to remember my 2nd grade teacher not letting me off because I said "I wasn't the only one, why are you picking on me?" At the time I thought it was the greatest injustice in the history of mankind to be busted when I wasn't the only one doing it. As an adult, I can see that I was guilty of an offense, and decided to act like a child instead of just admitting MY offense and moving on. What happens with others is not my business. I guess Valvpiti never learned that lesson. Seems some here never did either.

Also, if I am so concerned with others not getting busted, and I knew of others who should get busted and I genuinely want to clean up the sport. Maybe providing information to the proper authorities about who should also be suffering the same punishment as I would be more appropriate than crying about being the only kid in class who got caught.

 

[Berzin]

That's why I said I might start to have respect for him.

I found Di Luca's "confession" as pathetic as the rest of his pathetic doping and lying. Far too little, far too late. Hopefully we never see him again in the pro peloton.

The browbeating, the hyper-moralizing, the uber self-righteous bloviating is seriously over the top given what we're talking about here.

Valverde has a point, whether any of you internet Cotton Mathers believe so or not. He is no different than anyone else accused of any type of violation or transgression. Regardless of innocence or guilt most people will attempt to mount a defense, as would any of you. So he is that much more reprehensible because his lawyers (not he, he's just a bike rider) tried to get him off on whatever technicality they could find?

And even if a rider like DiLuca confesses, that's still not enough? What's it going to take for you guys to happy? A pound of flesh is no longer enough?

Were any of you guys just as upset knowing Dr. Fuentes kept on working after getting busted in Spain in 2006?

Why no outrage at a system that places all the onus on the riders getting punished and not the doping system ran by so many of these backroom charlatans who never seem to receive any sanctions whatsoever?

"FREE ALEJANDRO VALVERDE!!!"

 

[Cloxxki]

Any reason to believe Valverde quit blood doping after Puerto? His permances if anything, got better?

 

[roundabout]

Just because Fuentes didn't get punished doesn't mean that an obvious doper like Valverde should be free to ride. It's quite simple, no?

 

[The Hitch]

The injustice isnt in Valverde getting punished.

The injustice is punishing Valverde then claiming you have clean cycling , knowing full well how easy it is to not test positive, not get caught, and knowing full well that you are rewarding Valverdes opponents who are just as doped up and now have one less competitor to contend with.

The analogy i would put up is of a city ridled with 10 mafia clans. You take out one, put all their members in prison, then shake the hands of the 9 remaining clans and claim that the city is now FREE of crime.

Going down hard on a doper now and again, gets you nowhere if the majority see P(getting caught) < P (not getting caught).
Especially when the rest of them are now made to look clean.

 

[roundabout]

Is anyone here claiming that cycling is now clean? Apart from the trolls of course.

This argument is a non-starter.

 

[The Hitch]

Is anyone here claiming that cycling is now clean? Apart from the trolls of course.

This argument is a non-starter.

The head of UCI.

And the other cyclists now point to the fact that one or two Valverdes have been caught to claim the system is working, hence they must be clean because they havent been caught. Which is what the media says as well.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Valverde got a lot of stick cos he was still riding, while people were happy to see the likes of Vino and Riccò back, cos they'd served their time. So Valverde was being treated as if he celebrated victories by punting babies in the head and waving depictions of the prophet Muhammad around, and they were treated as returning heroes because they entertained us. Why? Because Valverde was a) not stupid enough to test positive, and b) able to manipulate the system to his advantage to delay his ban. If any of you think that Vino, Riccò or anybody else wouldn't have done the same as Valverde if they had the chance to, you're crazy.

Should Valverde have been banned? Most definitely.

Should Valverde get treated worse than any other doper because he managed to keep himself on the road because he had a good legal team? No.

Should more of the Puerto guys have been pursued, especially considering for some it would have been their second offence (David Bernabéu for example) and others have continued to dope and have indeed tested positive since (Eladio Jiménez for example), so that it didn't seem like quite so much of a witchhunt? Yes.

Does making it a witchhunt make it an injustice that Valverde was banned? No, he still deserves to be banned because he still did something wrong. He has the right to say "why are you picking on me?" because they are, but they've still got him bang to rights.