Visconti's Relegation: The Flip Side

[Archibald]

I can't locate the thread, but there was a lot of discussion regarding who would be considered the winner of the Giro should Contador get bounced by CAS. Many were saying that he would still be considered the winner regardless.

So... If you use today's relegation of Visconti as an example of the "crossing the line first" winner who was stripped of his win by breaking the rules of the sport. In light of this, does anyone still consider that should Contador be stripped of his win, that he should still be considered the actual winner of the overall?

This isn't a Clinic discussion about the reasons for having the win taken away, but do you view both situations in the same light or somehow justify a [possible] double standard?

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=13606

more or less the same

 

[boomcie]

This comparison isn't without fault. Contador didn't do anything wrong during this Giro. Visconti did. Blatently. Therefore it is a totally different situation.

In the end, IMO both should be stripped of their respective wins. But for reasons that are hard to compare with one another.

 

[YoRUsh]

Big difference on two point how i see it.
First the timing: the one who is declared the winner is the one standing on the podium kissing the girls.
Second is the fact that the reason why Visconti is stripped of his win happened during today's stage. In the Case of Contador it's not in the same tour.

 

[RedheadDane]

If a rider wins a race and afterwards is taken for doping he or she, I guess females can dope as well obviously should have taken the win away.
But if said rider (as is the case with Contador) continues racing until the verdict in the doping case has been passed and wins during that time but isn't tested positiv he or she should be allowed to keep the win.

For me the issue isn't as much Should a rider who wins a race while having a doping case coming up be allowed to keep the win? but rather Should a rider who have a doping case coming up even be allowed to race?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If a rider wins a race and afterwards is taken for doping he or she, I guess females can dope as well obviously should have taken the win away.
But if said rider (as is the case with Contador) continues racing until the verdict in the doping case has been passed and wins during that time but isn't tested positiv he or she should be allowed to keep the win.

For me the issue isn't as much Should a rider who wins a race while having a doping case coming up be allowed to keep the win? but rather Should a rider who have a doping case coming up even be allowed to race?

It is a good issue, but suppose Contador is innocent. Just for the sake of an argument. He eventually gets cleared by CAS, but has lost an entire year of his career because of not being able to race while fighting his case. He's officially been exonerated, but the exoneration is being challenged. As long as Contador has been exonerated he has every right to race, because in the eyes of the regulations he is no longer guilty, he is innocent, until the UCI/CAS can prove (again) that he is guilty.

Besides, CAS have shown they can lay down some barmy punishments anyway - "we have no reason to suspect any of Valverde's 2010 results were due to doping, but we're going to take them away anyway". Should Vally have been banned? Definitely. But taking away his 2010 results and not, say, his 2004 ones, is most definitely illogical.

Anyway, this post probably belongs in the Clinic so I'll stop it there.

 

[The Hitch]

One other difference is that we can see that the guys in this race were not doing the same thing as Visconti. Replays show beyond doubt that Ulissi and Lastras arent waving their arms at Visconti, nor have there even been any accusations agains them having done it before.

With regard to doping, you have a history of people getting suspended while their brothers in crime get rewarded.

I mean atm if Contador gets dq'd it goes to Michelle Scarpoini. If he gets dq'd in the tour 2010, it goes to Andy Schleck. Not exactly people known for sticking by the same rules Contador has broken.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Visconti seems very desparate to get a win in the giro in his Italian clours. Doesn't seem overly likely.

 

[icefire]

If Lastras had been faster and his front wheel had not been fully behind Ulissi's rear wheel, the crash would have been impressive. Visconti deserves a 2 years ban.

 

[lagartija]

If a rider wins a race and afterwards is taken for doping he or she, I guess females can dope as well obviously should have taken the win away.
But if said rider (as is the case with Contador) continues racing until the verdict in the doping case has been passed and wins during that time but isn't tested positiv he or she should be allowed to keep the win.

For me the issue isn't as much Should a rider who wins a race while having a doping case coming up be allowed to keep the win? but rather Should a rider who have a doping case coming up even be allowed to race?

not trying to beet you up , or the point, but do understand alberto contador has been cleared, the end...........now the UCI and WADA have filed an appeal to that ruling at a higher court , think of it just in legal terms. the initial court found him to be not at fault. therefore as in criminal law he is a free man. its not about liking it or not, its simply the legal rules they are playing with at the moment

 

[SiAp1984]

This comparison isn't without fault. Contador didn't do anything wrong during this Giro. ...

Oh, I'm quite sure he did. He just didn't get caught yet.

Of course, in both cases, the wins should be taken and the reasons are the same: The guys both broke the rules. AC should have never been allowed even to start this Giro because of two positives. So, if CAS finds so, his results have to be deleted like as if he never had reached them. Visconti had a little wrestling matchj before crossing the line. This should never have happened, so his win has to be taken from him. Same situation.

 

[just some guy]

I think the thing about this yesterday has more to do with the time it takes to come to a conclusion.

10-15 min after the stage yesterday we had a decision right or wrong doesn´t matter, they (which ever party) could have then challenged the decision, then again 5 mins later decision final winner announced you get the kiss from the pretty girls.

The other issue is 10 months now - why so long ?, each step should have a time limit say 6 weeks.

+ve test A sample - 6 weeks for rider to accept or ask for B sample, but once you are +ve you can not ride or be associated with a team

6 weeks for federation to make decision

then UCI or rider has 6 weeks to go to CAS

But they should not be able to ride, if a criminal is charged with murder ( I thinking clinical issues is the highest form of cheating ) most of the time they sit behind bars or have limitations on their lives, same for riders. No riding until you are found innocent or guilty, but we will get the time down.

Classic example of time wasting was the UCI going to CAS waiting for the last day, Pat said that they had to go to CAS because of the Political influence and remarks from the Spanish el pres. but if thats so why wait till the last day ?


In my mind Contadorrrrr should have already had an answer and be riding or watching on TV not waiting for a CAS ruling.


Dear Mods and admins - my post is rethe time it takes rather than clinic issues, I understand you concern but I think my post does not cross any lines.

 

[Archibald]

Folks, this isnt' about the reasons for their being stripped of their win, but whether still perceive them as the race winner (be it stage or overall).

Many stated that they believed contador to be the rightful winner regardless of whether he's stricken from the records. Does that same view extend to Visconti's relegation?
I guess the same could go for Cav after the Hushovd protest at the Tour...

 

[ultimobici]

The two cannot be compared.

Contador's situation is ridiculous to say the least. That we still have no conclusion almost a year after the original positive test is laughable. That's what makes it so messy.

Yesterday's stage & the ensuing disqualification is much clearer. The riders sprinted, there was a blatant infraction in the sprint, the rider was adjudged to have broken the rules & the win was awarded accordingly.

The whole process yesterday probably took less time than it took to tell Contador about his positive.

Visconti was never awarded the win, he never received the bouquet & kisses nor the applause from the crowd.

 

[just some guy]

Folks, this isnt' about the reasons for their being stripped of their win, but whether still perceive them as the race winner (be it stage or overall).

Many stated that they believed contador to be the rightful winner regardless of whether he's stricken from the records. Does that same view extend to Visconti's relegation?
I guess the same could go for Cav after the Hushovd protest at the Tour...

Ok - Nope they both are not winners - maybe 1st across the line but they broke rules so ..... if Contador gets a holiday that is, if CAS says no ban then his is the winner of the Giro 2011.

 

[thirteen]

apples and oranges.

Visconti endangered others with his actions and he was mighty lucky no one went down.

 

[Njbb1995]

apples and oranges.

Mmmmmm, Apples and Oranges...

 

[simo1733]

you have to admire Contador's ability to ignore his troubles and still perform.Of course he already proved at Astana ,that despite his slender appearance , he clearly has skin like a rhinoceros.
No sympathy for Visconti though.He f***ed up.No need for him to pass on the barriers any how.

 

[inri2000]

I don't understand why there is so much debate about the CAS decision regarding Contador. In my opinion there is no chance of a guilty verdict when you consider the implication to the sport. Look at the case of Philip Nielsen, his case hasn't even been appealed, and it is clear to me the tide has turned regarding microscopic amounts. Heck, the UCI even told Contador that it looked like food contamination, and the only reason they are appealing (half heartedly) is to cover their a**es.

I understand there are lot of people who don't like Contador, but if you love the sport you shouldn't hope for a verdict that embarrasses it's already tainted status further.

Btw, I am not saying it was necessarily the right decision to clear him as that is certainly debatable, I am just calling for some realism about the outcome of the appeal.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

I don't understand why there is so much debate about the CAS decision regarding Contador. In my opinion there is no chance of a guilty verdict when you consider the implication to the sport. Look at the case of Philip Nielsen, his case hasn't even been appealed, and it is clear to me the tide has turned regarding microscopic amounts. Heck, the UCI even told Contador that it looked like food contamination, and the only reason they are appealing (half heartedly) is to cover their a**es.

+

I understand there are lot of people who don't like Contador, but if you love the sport you shouldn't hope for a verdict that embarrasses it's already tainted status further.

If I understand you correctly, you're actually hoping that Contador gets cleared whether he's innocent or not just because it would be bad for the reputation of cycling if he gets banned?

I would argue that it would undermine the sports dignity to a much higher degree if the decision to clear him was made based on the premisses you mention. Surely it would be a lot more embarassing if Contador was cleared based on the reasons you mention than if he rightly so was found guilty.

I too neither claim Contador to be either guilty or not, I'm merely responding to the "corruptness issue" of this statement.

 

[inri2000]

If I understand you correctly, you're actually hoping that Contador gets cleared whether he's innocent or not just because it would be bad for the reputation of cycling if he gets banned?

I would argue that it would undermine the sports dignity to a much higher degree if the decision to clear him was made based on the premisses you mention. Surely it would be a lot more embarassing if Contador was cleared based on the reasons you mention than if he rightly so was found guilty.

I too neither claim Contador to be either guilty or not, I'm merely responding to the "corruptness issue" of this statement.

My argument is that since he has been acquitted it would embarrass the sport if that verdict is overturned due to the time he has been riding since and all the wins he has in that period. It would undermine all the races he has participated in if the results are nullified. As others have pointed out the slow process is at fault for this.

Also the goalposts have been moved if you look at the cases of other riders who have been acquitted or received reduced punishment. With regards to last example one can be called negligible if you eat meat in Mexico or China, but in Spain? I don't think so.

 

[The Hitch]

Folks, this isnt' about the reasons for their being stripped of their win, but whether still perceive them as the race winner (be it stage or overall).

Many stated that they believed contador to be the rightful winner regardless of whether he's stricken from the records. Does that same view extend to Visconti's relegation?
I guess the same could go for Cav after the Hushovd protest at the Tour...

Well it could just be a case of people rejecting the authority of the governing bodies and assessing every situation individually for themselves.

Your question is based on the premise that we accept the governing bodies as legit and follow what they say. Personally i always decide these things for myself, and the argument for authority doesnt mean much to me.

The commissars decide who gets the money and the podium. But i can decide for myself whether i see that person as the winner.

If Viscontil almost causes a crash i can agree with the commissars but if for instance they dq someone for swearing for example i can decide that they were wrong and continue to see that person as the winner.

Which brings us to CAS. Some people might decide that a decision that gives a title to Michelle Scarponi who is just as likely to have broken the rules in this gt, after the have both ridden it, isn't one they accept.

 

[William H]

Folks, this isnt' about the reasons for their being stripped of their win, but whether still perceive them as the race winner (be it stage or overall).

The reasons are fundamental to the perception.

The actions for which Visconti has been punished were committed on that stage and may have affected the result. So it's natural that Ulissi should be awarded the win.

Contador's actions in last years Tour de France cannot be said to have changed the result of this Giro, so the situation is clearly different.

 

[inri2000]

Apparantly the hearing has now been postponed to mid July or September due a request from Contador's team to have more time to prepare his defense.

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/contador-vista-tas-retrasara/20110526dasdaicic_2/Tes

 

[The Hitch]

Apparantly the hearing has now been postponed to mid July or September due a request from Contador's team to have more time to prepare his defense.

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/contador-vista-tas-retrasara/20110526dasdaicic_2/Tes

Wow thats big news. Deserves a new thread. Start it, but quick