• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Why is wada silent?

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
What about wada reaction ?

We've heard from many today re the uci non-appeal...except the elephant in the room -WADA, the only party with the remaining voice to appeal to CAS.

WADA's Site has no official news on the uci decision today. None. Also there are no media reports on the wada reaction except a brief statement that wada is reviwing the uci response.

Why is wada so silent when clearly the world is crashing?

the simplistic answer would be - they have almost 2 more weeks to make up their position.

A more delicious answer, particularly taking into consideration that they said they are still reading the uci 5-page official document (btw, it took me 2 minutes) may suggest that they are considering something much bigger...

...an appeal of the uci controversial (to say the least) role in all things mr.armstrong.

If at the end of the day wada decides NOT to appeal the uci's controversial role, it surely would be attributable to the IOC/sports politics dirty kitchen.

Just my opinion. Would be interested in hearing yours.
 
USADA is WADA's American agency. There is no need for WADA to add anything specific to this case. It would be practically redundant.

I agree with you that they have to formulate a response to UCI's crying like babies about a minor loss of control of doping enforcement before they publish anything.. The UCI has earned it.

Nothing that's happened so far is bad. If the UCI had not bought into the myth and created this mess, we'd be complaining about the other widespread corruption at the UCI.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
DirtyWorks said:
USADA is WADA's American agency. There is no need for WADA to add anything specific to this case. It would be practically redundant.

I agree with you that they have to formulate a response to UCI's crying like babies about a minor loss of control of doping enforcement before they publish anything..

Nothing that's happened so far is bad. If the UCI had not bought into the myth and created this mess, we'd be complaining about the other widespread corruption at the UCI.

I would expect a small comment at least.
 
python said:
What about wada reaction ?

We've heard from many today re the uci non-appeal...except the elephant in the room -WADA, the only party with the remaining voice to appeal to CAS.

WADA's Site has no official news on the uci decision today. None. Also there are no media reports on the wada reaction except a brief statement that wada is reviwing the uci response.

Why is wada so silent when clearly the world is crashing?

the simplistic answer would be - they have almost 2 more weeks to make up their position.

A more delicious answer, particularly taking into consideration that they said they are still reading the uci 5-page official document (btw, it took me 2 minutes) may suggest that they are considering something much bigger...

...an appeal of the uci controversial (to say the least) role in all things mr.armstrong.

If at the end of the day wada decides NOT to appeal the uci's controversial role, it surely would be attributable to the IOC/sports politics dirty kitchen.

Just my opinion. Would be interested in hearing yours.

Could also be a good idea to let this oppurtunity to pressure the UCI go. Johan is heading to arbitration, and I would imagine Johan might have more to say about UCI complicity than an arbitration proceding in this case is likely to bring.

Also I think UCI has responded to some of the allegations. Likely WADA would need to take them into account when they make their decision.
 
http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/s...fahey-on-uci-decision-in-lance-armstrong-case

Having had the opportunity to examine the decision of the UCI regarding United States Anti-Doping (USADA) versus Lance Armstrong, WADA understands why the UCI has chosen not to appeal based on the overwhelming evidence of systematic doping in the US Postal Team.

WADA is encouraged that the UCI feels it can use this case as a catalyst to thoroughly clean up its sport and remove any remaining vestiges of the doping programs that have clearly damaged cycling over the last decade.

WADA awaits with interest the outcomes of the ‘special meeting’ the UCI has called for its Management Committee on Friday, Oct. 26, and in the meantime will take the opportunity to address all of the issues that the UCI raised in its statement.

For some time now WADA has made it clear that testing and analysis alone is not sufficient to expose the doping of athletes who have the support of sophisticated and unscrupulous individuals. The evidence gathered by USADA in the Armstrong case is proof of that, as it is almost entirely based on non-analytical data.

It has always been incumbent on anti-doping organizations to undertake a more coherent approach to widespread allegations of doping, and it is not sufficient to claim that enough was done just because testing did not lead to analytical violations.

The fact the World Anti-Doping Code only came into force in 2004 is not a valid excuse for an organization failing to act on evidence of widespread doping, and nor is the Statute of Limitations contained within the Code an excuse not to investigate evidence of doping that dates back longer than eight years.

WADA’s mandate under the Code is to now decide whether to exercise its independent right of appeal, which it will do after its 21-day appeal period commences on Oct. 31, the appeal expiry date for other parties in this case.

It will announce that decision in due course, and will continue to examine the evidence encouraged by the fact that the biggest doping scandal in the history of sport is close to reaching a correct conclusion.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Visit site
The UCI called WADA out:

"The statute of limitations is a fundamental rule of the World AntiDoping Code. It is WADA’s role and responsibility to ensure compliance with the Code and to appeal to CAS in order to warrant, as is the mission of WADA, that the Code is applied in a uniform way worldwide and that all athletes are treated equally,"

UCI have essentially accused WADA of allowing Armstrong to be treated unfairly. WADA is simply taking time to prepare a compelling and watertight defense IMO.

Throughout this whole process, the UCI has sought to create doubt about WADA. McQuaid has made comments implying that WADA has failed to provide effective anti-doping tools, although the UCI has avoided using the investigation tools WADA recommend. UCI are in for another humiliating smackdown.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
i am glad fahey had finally spoken up…(or i missed it due to the time zone difference :))

…re-reading the uci decision, some things stand out as a poorly veiled jab at usada and wada.

on p.3 of 5 with regard to statue of limitations as provided by the wada code:

It is UCI’s view that USADA’s reference to national law is not appropriate.

then, after some confused verbiage as to the reasons why uci won’t appeal what mcquaid essentially alluded to as the code non-compliance by usada, he cheekily invited wada’s appeal

…it is WADA’s role and responsibility to ensure compliance with the Code and to appeal to CAS …

later, in what seems to me a bizarre statement, the uci put a condition to it’s recognition and implementation of the usada decision:

b. The recognition also depends on whether Mr Armstrong or WADA will appeal USADA’s decision to CAS. If Mr Armstrong or WADA appeals to CAS, the UCI must wait until CAS delivers its award: the USADA decision might be overruled in whole or in part by CAS


once again, the uci goads wada to appeal usada’s decision :confused: Given all wada reactions to-date, which in summary were uci rebukes whilst fully supportive of usada, it is inconceivable that wada would try to undercut usada at this stage !

in fact, reading fahey statement carefully, it is clear that wada is very unhappy with how the uci tried to make wada responsible for it’s own failure to act prior to 2004 on the wealth of non-analytical evidence.

Atm I can not see any ground for wada appeal to cas except broadening usada charges to include more names that uci would rather not.

if no appeal by wada, i can easily see another sharp rebuke of the uci
should the managing committee fail to address cycling's past.
 
Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
Visit site
"WADA awaits with interest the outcomes of the ‘special meeting’ the UCI has called for its Management Committee on Friday, Oct. 26, and in the meantime will take the opportunity to address all of the issues that the UCI raised in its statement."

Somehow, I just get the feeling from this statement, that WADA is about to sink the boot