WorldTour License

[LaFlorecita]

As a guess, because Old&slow is a fan of a certain retired rider.

And because he's old and bitter. And slow.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Maybe the UCI will be lenient.

-They let Saxo keep their WT spot because without Contador there last year, the team would've gone stage hunting and arguably would've scored more points.

-Alberto can keep on scoring points for the team he's on because he actually isn't convicted for doping/cheating/whatever you want to call taking banned substances to enhance performance. So if Saxo re-sign Alberto, they aren't signing a doper/cheater/whatever you want call someone who took takes banned substances to enhance performance.

That's how I hope it goes and how I think it should go.

 

[FreeWheelin]

Maybe the UCI will be lenient.

-They let Saxo keep their WT spot because without Contador there last year, the team would've gone stage hunting and arguably would've scored more points.

-Alberto can keep on scoring points for the team he's on because he actually isn't convicted for doping/cheating/whatever you want to call taking banned substances to enhance performance. So if Saxo re-sign Alberto, they aren't signing a doper/cheater/whatever you want call someone who took takes banned substances to enhance performance.

That's how I hope it goes and how I think it should go.

Um... what are you talking about? The CAS did not give him two years off because 'he is just too good'. He has failed a doping test, therefore he has been suspended for doping. Valverde did not even fail a test and he cant gain points.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Um... what are you talking about? The CAS did not give him two years off because 'he is just too good'. He has failed a doping test, therefore he has been suspended for doping. Valverde did not even fail a test and he cant gain points.

Okay... I will try to explain it, without getting worked up over it. It's only the umpteenth time I explain this, so why would I?

CAS has suspended him on strict liability. He couldn't prove the contaminated meat was the most likely source, so he was banned. CAS namely finds, that a contaminated supplement is the most likely source, and that the transfusion theory is equally unlikely as the meat theory, namely, highly unlikely.

So basically, CAS finds it highly unlikely he doped (and with doping, I mean taking banned substances with the intention to enhance performance, there seems to be a lot of disagreement about the word "doping"), and even thinks the most likely cause of his positive is accidental ingestion, namely a contaminated supplement. And as the whole thing about ex-dopers not earning points for two years is to discourage teams to take ex-dopers on their team, I don't think this rule should apply to Alberto and Saxobank.

 

[FreeWheelin]

Okay... I will try to explain it, without getting worked up over it. It's only the umpteenth time I explain this, so why would I?

CAS has suspended him on strict liability. He couldn't prove the contaminated meat was the most likely source, so he was banned. CAS namely finds, that a contaminated supplement is the most likely source, and that the transfusion theory is equally unlikely as the meat theory, namely, highly unlikely.

So basically, CAS finds it highly unlikely he doped (and with doping, I mean taking banned substances with the intention to enhance performance, there seems to be a lot of disagreement about the word "doping"), and even thinks the most likely cause of his positive is accidental ingestion, namely a contaminated supplement. And as the whole thing about ex-dopers not earning points for two years is to discourage teams to take ex-dopers on their team, I don't think this rule should apply to Alberto and Saxobank.

I dont think the Police should book me for speeding either, but if I was speeding... even if it was by accident because my speedo is faulty I have to pay the fine. That is also how the doping rules work. You have a banned substance in your system then you have 'doped' therefore you are treated like a 'doper' and all the 'doping' rules are applied... is it fair, probably not. I dont think the rule about not gaining points for 2 years is fair at all. In society once a criminal has served their sentence (except in exceptional circumstances) they are considered free and treated as a normal citizen. But anyway, my point is, it would be inconsistent of the UCI to not apply the rule to Contador... but you never know consistency is hardly the UCI's strong point.

 

[Thomsena]

Had a very similar conversation in a corresponding Clinic thread, but I will repeat it here.
The only one I see them getting into with any degree of certainty is the Vuelta. Giro - no way (A&S takes their spot). TDF would be a 50/50 with Cofidis and Europcar guaranteed stops, Saur and 1t4i almost guaranteed one. Now they're duking it out with some other good teams for that last spot.

With 3 stages in Denmark I don't think you should rule it out like that.

 

[ingsve]

And why should a entire team (from dirctors to mechanics to riders) have to suffer and lose their job, just as the seasons is starting, because it took so long to finish the investigation of their top rider. Plus he failed the test when he was with Astana not Saxo.

Well, it's not certain that anyone would lose their job just because they lose their license. It would probably just mean that they ride out the year as ProConti instead.

 

[Forunculo]

http://translate.google.es/translat...w.dr.dk/Sporten/Cykling/2012/02/10/153305.htm

I'm not able to link well the site with the google translate tool but look at one related news titled "Contador might still get points".


So there is a chance for Conti to take many points at the end of the season. But who knows

 

[greenedge]

A pity Riis could not resign Porte ( or sign De Le Fuente ). I still think they should get an invite to the TDF and defenitly one to the Vuelta if Contador returns to them. If Riis has faith in Majka they should get an invite to the Giro.

 

[ingsve]

http://translate.google.es/translat...w.dr.dk/Sporten/Cykling/2012/02/10/153305.htm

I'm not able to link well the site with the google translate tool but look at one related news titled "Contador might still get points".


So there is a chance for Conti to take many points at the end of the season. But who knows

Well, at the moment that is simply the interpretation that their anti-doping chairman is making. They still need to convince the UCI of that or get some type of court decision in their favour.

(The analogy made in the article about it being like Messi's goals not counting in ludicrous. A returning rider can still win races and help others, it's just the sporting criteria points that don't count. He make it sound like gathering sporting criteria points is the only goal with cycling. I thought winning races was the goal...)

 

[maxmartin]

but if you don't have points you can not even enter into the race, as a law professional I can see this rule very unfair

Well, at the moment that is simply the interpretation that their anti-doping chairman is making. They still need to convince the UCI of that or get some type of court decision in their favour.

(The analogy made in the article about it being like Messi's goals not counting in ludicrous. A returning rider can still win races and help others, it's just the sporting criteria points that don't count. He make it sound like gathering sporting criteria points is the only goal with cycling. I thought winning races was the goal...)

 

[Forunculo]

Well, at the moment that is simply the interpretation that their anti-doping chairman is making. They still need to convince the UCI of that or get some type of court decision in their favour.

(The analogy made in the article about it being like Messi's goals not counting in ludicrous. A returning rider can still win races and help others, it's just the sporting criteria points that don't count. He make it sound like gathering sporting criteria points is the only goal with cycling. I thought winning races was the goal...)

It's seems go against WADA rejection of "extra punishment". CAS ban him with 2 years, a fine and his victories from Tour 2010 so UCI can't punish more. It's challenge WADA code and the think of dane anti-doping charmain is an important opinion.

And even more important is a rule from 2011 and Contador failed test was at 2010 and is no retroactive.

Wait what WADA has to say.

 

[Fus087]

And even more important is a rule from 2011 and Contador failed test was at 2010 and is no retroactive.

This part is certainly true.
BUT: Valverde was suspended in 2010, for something that happened in 2006.
So the rule shouldn't count for him either - but apparently it does.

No idea if it would hold up in court, but at the moment I think it's only the media filling the pages.
Until someone (Movistar? Saxo Bank?) challenge the UCI rule, it will stay in use anyway.

 

[ingsve]

but if you don't have points you can not even enter into the race, as a law professional I can see this rule very unfair

That's not true for specific riders. Just because a single riders points doesn't count there is nothing that forbids the rider or the team from entering a race. It's true that if a team as a whole has enough points to get a WT license then they get automatic invitations but even those that don't have the points can get wild cards.

It's seems go against WADA rejection of "extra punishment". CAS ban him with 2 years, a fine and his victories from Tour 2010 so UCI can't punish more. It's challenge WADA code and the think of dane anti-doping charmain is an important opinion.

And even more important is a rule from 2011 and Contador failed test was at 2010 and is no retroactive.

Wait what WADA has to say.

Ya, it's a matter of interpretation though I'm not so sure what the interpretation should be. If you are extremely strict with the no extra punishment stance then that would mean the UCI wouldn't even be allowed to use doping as a criteria when deciding on licenses since that could also be considered as extra punishment.

 

[jens_attacks]

in today's gazzetta dello sport:

L’Uci: «Togliete la licenza alla squadra di Contador»

uci wants of course the license of saxo bank to be retired.the world tour will have only 17 teams

 

[BRCYC11]

Does somebody have access to the "paper edition" of the Gazzetta, so one could read the article?

 

[Midnightfright]

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit dense but i missed this story. what is it excatly that's happening? are uci wanting to takeaway Saxos license because Contadors points don't contribute anymore?

 

[BRCYC11]

Don't know exactly. Just know the headline from Gazzetta says, that UCI wants The License Commision to take the license from Saxo Bank

 

[jens_attacks]

remember that gazzetta was wrong a lot of times in cycling rumours...but i think this will happen

 

[BRCYC11]

Thank you very much, Jensie

 

[LarsAU]

Breakaway league?

If this turns out to be true will it be the straw that finally breaks the camels back?

Breakaway League in 3, 2, 1...

 

[T-Nielsen]

It is kind of interesting, that the UCI spends millions trying to spread cycling around the world, but the nearest they are coming to make a difference, is killing it in Scandinavia.