What will be the outcome of Caso Contador?

[Caruut]

I believe in the transfusion theory rather than the meat theory. Still, I expect Bertie to be cleared, or at least he will keep his 2010 TdF title.

Banning Bertie or making a mess out of the 2010 TdF now, would damage cycling more than it would do good. There was a time when banning would have been correct. That time has long since passed.

So we give out the message that if cycling as a whole is hurt by banning someone they get away free? Sounds like the big boys get a free pass and the minimum-wage guys take the hits.

If politicians and your national federation back you enough to delay the case for a long time, so it looks like a farce, you can go free. In the short term, not having the biggest star in cycling out on the road will hurt. In the long term, cycling absolutely has to show that if you test positive, with a plausible (I don't consider contaminated meat plausible, in this case) excuse, you walk.

I agree that cycling gets a hard time in the media, but just because other sports play dirty and cover up doesn't mean cycling should stoop to their level. Cycling should let tennis, football and athletics live their lies, and not try and live their own lie.

 

[Caruut]

I hope he is innocent and cleared. Picograms of a substance mid-tour does not make sense. Anyone here willing to resign from their job if some sport drink or beef that you ate has a miniscule trace of a performance enhancing substance?

I realize I am totally giving AC the benefit of the doubt, yet the tour next year will be so much more interesting.

Such a ridiculous comparison - for a start, in most people's jobs, enhancing your performance is not illegal - it is perfectly legal and, in fact, probably encouraged. It's also ridiculous because the prospective ban isn't for eating contaminated meat - it's because he is believed to have performed an illegal doping procedure.

I would flip the example around and say that if you are someone's boss, and there is some evidence that they have performed an act that necessitates some kind of official sanction, can you take their excuse for that behaviour at face value? You absolutely can't, you have to weigh up all the evidence and make an informed decision.

Contador has a huge vested interest in people thinking it was the steak, which is why the claim must be examined, and not taken as gospel.

 

[The Hitch]

I agree that cycling gets a hard time in the media, but just because other sports play dirty and cover up doesn't mean cycling should stoop to their level. Cycling should let tennis, football and athletics live their lies, and not try and live their own lie.

If Bertie walks he will still have a cloud over him following him wherever he goes, he will have people questioning his every result, he will still have to improve his positive test avoidence skills as he will get tested relentlessly, he will still have people boo him (be it for doping or under the pretext of doping for something else) he will still have to control blood values and not be seen with doctors and probably hire lawyers to sue those in the media who claim he is doping.

That is still a punishment, it is still a deterrent. Point is, its a long way from the way someone in other sports would be treated, even if they tested positive for epo. So cycling would not be stooping as low as other sports by letting Contador off. Not even close. When they essentially stop testing and go back to pre Festina times, thats when cycling will stoop as low. Until then, it is in a totally other league when it comes to anti doping.

 

[auscyclefan94]

That would only happen if they took away his 2011 season which would hence count as a ban so late 2012 would be 2 years from the moment his positive was found.

Pretty simple.

Also since his ban would expire 5 days after the Vuelta starts he wouldnt have much to return to in 2012 anyway so would have to wait till 2013 to actually make a comeback, which would be more like a 2 and a half year ban.

Thanks for letting me know. So CAS decides that he should be banned for 2 years, do they decide if he gets to keep his results from 2011?

 

[Maxiton]

If Bertie walks he will still have a cloud over him following him wherever he goes, he will have people questioning his every result, he will still have to improve his positive test avoidence skills as he will get tested relentlessly, he will still have people boo him (be it for doping or under the pretext of doping for something else) he will still have to control blood values and not be seen with doctors and probably hire lawyers to sue those in the media who claim he is doping.

That is still a punishment, it is still a deterrent. Point is, its a long way from the way someone in other sports would be treated, even if they tested positive for epo. So cycling would not be stooping as low as other sports by letting Contador off. Not even close. When they essentially stop testing and go back to pre Festina times, thats when cycling will stoop as low. Until then, it is in a totally other league when it comes to anti doping.

Yep. I agree with pretty much the whole of this.

If they are going to be hardass about it, they don't have to accept any explanation, not even a reasonable one. On the other hand, if they are looking for a reason to let Contador off - be it for the sake of cycling, or simply because they believe it to be a positive in name only, or for whatever - then it's incumbent on Contador's defence to provide an explanation that holds water and allows everyone to save face.

So the outcome really comes down to: their attitudes and his defence.

 

[roundabout]

Thanks for letting me know. So CAS decides that he should be banned for 2 years, do they decide if he gets to keep his results from 2011?

I don't know what CAS will do but I prefer a 2 year ban to be a 2 year ban, not 1 year and 1 season worth of results removed.

 

[El Pistolero]

Why does he get to come back late 2012 if he gets a two year ban? Sorry but that doesn't make sense nor sounds fair. He has only been banned for a short time.

Because otherwise he'd get a 4 year ban instead of a 2 year ban.

 

[ElChingon]

I thought we were getting a ruling on Friday? Or did I miss something?

 

[JA.Tri]

CAS findings reported to be available in the New Year.

 

[Benotti69]

If Bertie walks he will still have a cloud over him following him wherever he goes, he will have people questioning his every result, he will still have to improve his positive test avoidence skills as he will get tested relentlessly, he will still have people boo him (be it for doping or under the pretext of doping for something else) he will still have to control blood values and not be seen with doctors and probably hire lawyers to sue those in the media who claim he is doping.

That is still a punishment, it is still a deterrent. Point is, its a long way from the way someone in other sports would be treated, even if they tested positive for epo. So cycling would not be stooping as low as other sports by letting Contador off. Not even close. When they essentially stop testing and go back to pre Festina times, thats when cycling will stoop as low. Until then, it is in a totally other league when it comes to anti doping.

Contador has a slightly larger cloud over him than those who have not been caught as most non cycling fans think that all pros dope. Most cycling fans dont care.

If he gets a ban the cloud will be slightly larger but nothing he cant deal with if he does it in the same manner as Basso, Valverde, Di Luca, Gesink, Millar etc and can come back and have further years of racing.

I dont see him facing extra testing if he gets off, considering the UCI cant afford or dont want to test as much as they should, the Spanish wont and the French dont want another TdF positive to ruin their biggest Tourist advert. The Italians might go after him but they had him in the Giro this year and he sailed through.

I dont see anything changing for Bertie if he gets off. He raced all year and managed all the testing and values required.

It will be his reaction that will be interesting if he gets a ban, will he be 'sport smart' and react in a way that can pave the way back for his return to the peloton or will he do a Landis, Manzano and all those others who felt victimised as all they did was what everyone else is doing.

 

[Cimber]

CAS findings reported to be available in the New Year.

They changed that to the end of this year. So maybe before xmas if we are lucky.

PS: I am quite surprised about the poll, with so many believing he will be cleared. Personally I am really not sure. Could go any way I reckon.

 

[Anonymous]

I think he will be cleared, but I hope he isn't. To clear him "for the sake of the sport" is the poorest excuse imaginable. If Contador infused a bag that contained Clen because he didn't wait long enough to draw out the blood after using Clen, then he deserves a ban. Protestations of mystery meat are laughably transparent.

What I also find interesting are the people who froth at the mouth wanting Armstrong exposed, yet defend a rider who by performance indication is as dirty as anyone. I will never forget the "tranquillo" look on Contador's face at the top of the climb in the final TT in 2009. Everyone else that came through that point looked like they were about to die, but not Bertie, he looked fresh as a daisy. I don't know if you guys are aware of this, but many of those guys who looked dead were doped to the eyeballs...but not so for Bertie. Contador is a doping cheat who hadn't tested positive until 2010. They found a banned substance in his system, and he deserves to be punished for it. He won't be because the pressure is on to "save"cycling, and having another winner of the TdF disqualified is bad press, but that will never change the fact that Contador is as dirty as any rider in the peloton...but you guys make sure you only crucify Lance.

I want both punished because there isn't any difference between the two in regards to their preparation. Maybe Contador is a nicer guy, but that has nothing to do with whether you deserve to suffer the consequences of your actions.

 

[Walkman]

Contador has a slightly larger cloud over him than those who have not been caught as most non cycling fans think that all pros dope. Most cycling fans dont care.

If he gets a ban the cloud will be slightly larger but nothing he cant deal with if he does it in the same manner as Basso, Valverde, Di Luca, Gesink, Millar etc and can come back and have further years of racing.

I dont see him facing extra testing if he gets off, considering the UCI cant afford or dont want to test as much as they should, the Spanish wont and the French dont want another TdF positive to ruin their biggest Tourist advert. The Italians might go after him but they had him in the Giro this year and he sailed through.

I dont see anything changing for Bertie if he gets off. He raced all year and managed all the testing and values required.

It will be his reaction that will be interesting if he gets a ban, will he be 'sport smart' and react in a way that can pave the way back for his return to the peloton or will he do a Landis, Manzano and all those others who felt victimised as all they did was what everyone else is doing.

Have I missed something here or what?!

 

[JA.Tri]

Have I missed something here or what?!

Ditto...I was thinking "I must be in the Twilight Zone!"

 

[Andynonomous]

The question is "Will he be banned ?", not "Does he deserve to be Banned ?". I voted no, he won't be banned, but believe that he deserves to be.

"Reading the tea-leaves" can often tell you what the mindset of the hearing participants are like. The UCI, and WADA seem to be detached and legalistic, as though their hearts are not really in this, in spite of their appeal. I suspect this hearing is just a show, to "prove" they "did everything in their power to seek justice". When he is "acquitted", the UCI, and WADA will say the process worked, and it is "time to move on".



What many stating the strength of Contador's case keep forgetting, is how his case became public knowledge.

There was a long delay before the positive finding was made public. The positive was not publicized, until IMMEDIATELY AFTER a German journalist got leaked information that Contador had failed a test. When confronted, Contador, and others mentioned that "they wish it could have been handled internally".

The appearance was that the UCI was about to give Contador a "silent ban" (he keeps the TDF 2010, takes a couple of months off during the offseason, and the public never finds out). If Contador was willing to accept any sanction, is a strong indication that HE thought he was guilty.

This fact alone casts great doubt of the "tainted meat" theory. The fact that Contador was given so much time to invent this theory with his lawyers, and medical experts (and possibly the UCI's help), casts serious doubt on his defence, let alone the unlikely chance of eating tainted meat from the EU.



Many people had strong suspicions against Contador, before he got caught red-handed, through a freak set of circumstances (Contador getting sloppy with his preparations, a lab with more sensitive equipment doing the tests, a leak to a journalist outside of cycling's Omerta).


If you can't nail him on this, then cycling deserves it's reputation (not that other sports don't deserve a bad reputation as well).

 

[GJB123]

The appearance was that the UCI was about to give Contador a "silent ban" (he keeps the TDF 2010, takes a couple of months off during the offseason, and the public never finds out). If Contador was willing to accept any sanction, is a strong indication that HE thought he was guilty.

That doesn't necessarily prove his guilt in any way. If anything it could just as easily show that he is a pragmatic kind of guy who understands when you have to fight your corner and when you have to sit tight and be quiet. Contador only stood to lose by insisting on it being made public in any way, shape or form. Even when innocent the stigma would be there for always. So an off-season vacation is a smal sacrifice to make and I could well understand him taking the easy way out. The judicial systems all over the world are awash with people accepting plea bargains just to be done with it, even in cases where it is abundantly clear they are innocent. If the powers that be (UCI & McQuaid) offer you an easy way out it is very tempting to say yes.

Having said that, I do still think he used in some shape or form (perhaps not even with he CB as such), and therefore I am still unsure as to the outcome. Even though I can appreciate the legal strategy followed and don't quite understand the risk WADA is taking with it's strategy.

Regards
GJ

 

[beelzebozo]

What's the point of adding 'I don't know' to this poll??? If you don't know you don't post. 'I don't know' is not an opinion is it? This is madness!

 

[Cobblestones]

What's the point of adding 'I don't know' to this poll??? If you don't know you don't post. 'I don't know' is not an opinion is it? This is madness!

Every good poll has a 'don't know' or 'other' option. Otherwise you force the poll taker to make a decision and your results might become quite biased.

 

[Angliru]

Why would you hope he would be cleared? You should just hope that justice pevails and that the truth comes out which ever way it goes. Thats all i want.

Having said all that i do think he will be banned. Look at kolo toure in football, he took his wife"s water tablets coz he was worried about his own weight. It was later confirmed he tested positive for a specified substance. WADA defines a specified substance as "more susceptible to a credible, non-doping explanation". Everyone knew it was unintentional. He got banned for 6 months and the football association said he would of got banned for longer only he admitted to the offence.

With contador putting up such a stern defence and admitting to nothing i think he is in for a hefty ban.

Nevertheless, I hope he's cleared.

 

[Cloxxki]

If that Austrian blood doper can get 2 years from a case back in 2005, and keep al results, then Contador can get those 2 years now, and lose the TdF he was found to dope in. Seems logical.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

I think he will be cleared, but I hope he isn't. To clear him "for the sake of the sport" is the poorest excuse imaginable. If Contador infused a bag that contained Clen because he didn't wait long enough to draw out the blood after using Clen, then he deserves a ban. Protestations of mystery meat are laughably transparent.

What I also find interesting are the people who froth at the mouth wanting Armstrong exposed, yet defend a rider who by performance indication is as dirty as anyone. I will never forget the "tranquillo" look on Contador's face at the top of the climb in the final TT in 2009. Everyone else that came through that point looked like they were about to die, but not Bertie, he looked fresh as a daisy. I don't know if you guys are aware of this, but many of those guys who looked dead were doped to the eyeballs...but not so for Bertie. Contador is a doping cheat who hadn't tested positive until 2010. They found a banned substance in his system, and he deserves to be punished for it. He won't be because the pressure is on to "save"cycling, and having another winner of the TdF disqualified is bad press, but that will never change the fact that Contador is as dirty as any rider in the peloton...but you guys make sure you only crucify Lance.

I want both punished because there isn't any difference between the two in regards to their preparation. Maybe Contador is a nicer guy, but that has nothing to do with whether you deserve to suffer the consequences of your actions.

so.. he is still the best then?

 

[The Hitch]

They changed that to the end of this year. So maybe before xmas if we are lucky.

Would make an extra special Christmas either for Contador fans or for Evans fans.

 

[JA.Tri]

Would make an extra special Christmas either for Contador fans or for Evans fans.

I understand why Contador fans might be happy however to put Evans fans (and Evans fans only) on the otherside of the equation is an enormous leap. The assumptions made are numerous and unpalatable.

 

[ferryman]

I understand why Contador fans might be happy however to put Evans fans (and Evans fans only) on the otherside of the equation is an enormous leap. The assumptions made are numerous and unpalatable.

I suspect he was only (flippantly) meaning in relation to the Tour de France where Evans's chances for a 2nd win are considerably enhanced if Contador is not there.

 

[Anonymous]

so.. he is still the best then?

Yep, he doped better than all of them.