Stinkewitz accuses Bettini

phil s

according to this report in L'Equipe, for those who can undestand French...
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/breves2007/20070926_182527Dev.html

drenkrom

My personal translation for those who can't:

"An information to take with a grain of salt. According to the German channel ZDF, which says it had access to a private document, Patrick Sinkewitz, who tested positive for testosterone on June 8th, declared he was supplied in doping products by... Paolo Bettini, the world champion. 'Italian riders supplied me with the Testogel. I can name Bramati and Bettini' according to this document, quoted in a ZDF communiqué. "

Can I retract my prediction in the WC thread?

skavanagh.bikeradar

No you can't mainly because Bettini is supposed to have been seen/overheard ringing Sinkewitz up immediatley on hearing about it and giving him a bollocking, and the whole thing is based on a rummoured leak. The UCI with it's feet of clay won't react in time to either declare him okay to ride or stop him from doing so. Bettini already has them in a stress over the 'pledge', I don't suppose he's going to give them anything here either.

jimmythecuckoo

Bettini must be feeling the glare of the spotlights on him now. I really hope he isn't implicated and his stance on DNA is just misguided as opposed to an attempt to conceal something.

nick hanson

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

No you can't mainly because Bettini is supposed to have been seen/overheard ringing Sinkewitz up immediatley on hearing about it and giving him a bollocking, and the whole thing is based on a rummoured leak. The UCI with it's feet of clay won't react in time to either declare him okay to ride or stop him from doing so. Bettini already has them in a stress over the 'pledge', I don't suppose he's going to give them anything here either.

Of course Bettini would bollock him,he's hardly likely to thank Sinkewitz,is he?

nick hanson

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Bettini must be feeling the glare of the spotlights on him now. I really hope he isn't implicated and his stance on DNA is just misguided as opposed to an attempt to conceal something.

My personal thoughts are that anyone innocent wouldn't have any problems giving a DNA sample.After all,if they are reliable enough for a court of law to convict someone for a life sentance,then you can't discount them as evidence in a doping case.If the rider knows he is innocent,surely he would want to clear his name at the earliest opportunity?

andyp

I know I've mentioned this elsewhere already today but it this edition of the Worlds turning into cycling's version of the Salem witch trials?

iainf72

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Bettini must be feeling the glare of the spotlights on him now. I really hope he isn't implicated and his stance on DNA is just misguided as opposed to an attempt to conceal something.

Methinks there is a lot of misinformation about the Cricket at the moment. He did sign the thing with some amendments.

Being a leftie hippy I would also refuse to give me DNA if requested. Although I'm not sure cyclists are tin foil hat wearing loons like me, but anyway....

andyp

Bettini has agreed to provide his DNA if requested.

His refusal to sign the UCI 'pledge' is due to his disagreeing with the idea of donating a year's salary should he be convicted of doping offences.

nick hanson

andyp wrote:

Bettini has agreed to provide his DNA if requested.

His refusal to sign the UCI 'pledge' is due to his disagreeing with the idea of donating a year's salary should he be convicted of doping offences.

Think that answers itself,then :x

iainf72

nick hanson wrote:

andyp wrote:

Bettini has agreed to provide his DNA if requested.

His refusal to sign the UCI 'pledge' is due to his disagreeing with the idea of donating a year's salary should he be convicted of doping offences.

Think that answers itself,then :x

Would you sign it? A non-legal document which says you'll give up a year of your salary if you test +?

Anonymous

nick hanson wrote:

andyp wrote:

Bettini has agreed to provide his DNA if requested.

His refusal to sign the UCI 'pledge' is due to his disagreeing with the idea of donating a year's salary should he be convicted of doping offences.

Think that answers itself,then :x

If you mean he has little faith in the current procedures that culminate in doping convictions,then yes it does.
If,on the other hand ,you mean that he obviously has something to hide,then no it doesn't.

iainf72

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Bet ... 46080.html

Sounds reasonable to me.

skavanagh.bikeradar

A quick reply to Nick Hanson - I wasn't suggesting anything else, just stating what I'd read.

oily sailor

Now this is what I call a nuanced answer:

I promised I'm not involved in Operacion Puerto, promised to not make mistakes in the future and to give my DNA in the future if needed

nick hanson

oily sailor wrote:

Now this is what I call a nuanced answer:

I promised I'm not involved in Operacion Puerto, promised to not make mistakes in the future and to give my DNA in the future if needed

We'll forget about the past then,shall we?

skavanagh.bikeradar

This is why as much a Bettini has a point, he's merely rewording a toothless, unenforcable, token gesture with a slightly more in-his-favour version. This is truly fiddling while Rome burns. Again, they are all prisoners of their own recent history, in the case of the UCI their attitude has gone from turning a blind eye to trying to ruin your career. In the case of the teams and riders it's gone from 'you aint seen me, roight?' to 'bloody hell, that's unfair'.

Nobody is 100% right, and the answer surely won't be to keep lurching into these arguments everytime a major event takes place.

Anonymous

nick hanson wrote:

oily sailor wrote:

Now this is what I call a nuanced answer:

I promised I'm not involved in Operacion Puerto, promised to not make mistakes in the future and to give my DNA in the future if needed

We'll forget about the past then,shall we?

You know something about Bettini that no-one else does?

Salsiccia

nick hanson wrote:

oily sailor wrote:

Now this is what I call a nuanced answer:

I promised I'm not involved in Operacion Puerto, promised to not make mistakes in the future and to give my DNA in the future if needed

We'll forget about the past then,shall we?

Nothing can be implied by his mention of the future, apart from the fact that he is talking directly about the pledge, where riders sign an agreement not to dope from the date of signing onwards. This statement is just in agreement to what the pledge specifically 'commits' riders to doing.

The witch hunt isn't just in Germany, it seems.

vanguard

Sinkewitz talked to the German cycling federation anti-doping committee. They may have leaked this info to the press. Thus off-the-record info is now on German TV.....and omerta is back bigtime as Sinkewitz gets threatened from all sides.

http://cyclingfansanonymous.blogspot.co ... tails.html

Noodley

vanguard wrote:

Sinkewitz talked to the German cycling federation anti-doping committee. They may have leaked this info to the press. Thus off-the-record info is now on German TV.....and omerta is back bigtime as Sinkewitz gets threatened from all sides.

http://cyclingfansanonymous.blogspot.co ... tails.html

from the link: "If other potential witnesses see how Sinkewitz has been treated, the chances that they will cooperate with the authorities is much decreased."

very true.

Kléber

Smells like the German authorities are extra embarrassed by Bettini and are doing all they can to stop him from starting, including leaks.

Who knows what the race will bring but on the eve of the race, the two principal favourites for the title, Valverde and Bettini, are 'persona non grata' at the race. What a mess...

OffTheBackAdam

oily sailor wrote:

promised to not make mistakes in the future

So perhaps he should promise "not to make mistakes in the past?
Talk about Chinese Whispers!

iainf72

Bettini says he's going to sue ZDF

http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/13428.0.html

LangerDan

iainf72 wrote:

Bettini says he's going to sue ZDF

http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/13428.0.html

Personally, I think that ZDF should encourage the Gilded Gnome to bring it on. Bettini is second only to LA in his desire to sue the world and a court case may prove very interesting.

dave_1

am dissapointed Bettini didn't sign the agreement on anti-doping....Festina was sign of a need for change and what did the peleton do? They turn to Dr Fuentes...the current big names and the ex dopers who run teams are not the solution. Bruyneel should not be allowed into team management

iainf72

Dave_1 wrote:

am dissapointed Bettini didn't sign the agreement on anti-doping....Festina was sign of a need for change and what did the peleton do? They turn to Dr Fuentes...the current big names and the ex dopers who run teams are not the solution. Bruyneel should not be allowed into team management

Here's a question : Someone asks you to sign something which says you'll give 1 years worth of salary if you do something naughty. Hmmm, that's my income, let me consult my lawyer. Lawyer suggests not signing it regardless of your good or badness.

What would you do?

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

am dissapointed Bettini didn't sign the agreement on anti-doping....Festina was sign of a need for change and what did the peleton do? They turn to Dr Fuentes...the current big names and the ex dopers who run teams are not the solution. Bruyneel should not be allowed into team management

Here's a question : Someone asks you to sign something which says you'll give 1 years worth of salary if you do something naughty. Hmmm, that's my income, let me consult my lawyer. Lawyer suggests not signing it regardless of your good or badness.

What would you do?

True, he is in the sport for money first...the health of the sport itself much lower down..Paulo Bettini shares some responsibility in the sorry state of affairs the sport is in...the top rider in the world should really boost the image of the sport unless he fears being caught. Let's face it , he was a pro the 1990s..so one wonders if he is uncomfortable with that. I hope he leaves the sport soon...the olg guard really must be run out of the sport.

top_bhoy

In much the same way that lawyers, teachers, etc have to be mmebers of a professional body or have a licence to carry out their profession (or both) then it should be a condition of obtaining a cycling racing licence that certain conditions have to be met.

It may be a bit less simplistic than I make it out to be but surely to have a carefully worded legal agreement as a condition of obtaining that racing licence isn't beyond the abilities of a team of UCI lawyers. (Then again, National federations like Spain and Italy would probably opppose it and show that the UCI isn't actually in control of events.)

Something new and bold has to be done to take back the initiative to those running the sport which as it stands, is the UCI, whether people like that or not.

andyp

Hold on a second - Bettini has signed the part which says he'll hand over his DNA on request if bags of blood alleged to be his are found.

What he objects to, and he's been consistent on this previously, is the financial penalty if he or any other rider is found guilty of doping. Bettini has consistently used his position as a major rider to stand up for the rights of all professional riders. Which is fair enough.

Has anyone asked Pat McQuaid this week how they've been getting on in obtaining the money owed to them by Vinokourov and Kashechin?

LangerDan

andyp wrote:

Hold on a second - Bettini has signed the part which says he'll hand over his DNA on request if bags of blood alleged to be his are found. ?

Bettinis has signed A DNA clause - it hasn't been confirmed that it is the same clause as contained in the UCI document, at least according to cyclingnews. If anyone has a copy of the text, I'd be interested in seeing it.

andyp wrote:

Has anyone asked Pat McQuaid this week how they've been getting on in obtaining the money owed to them by Vinokourov and Kashechin?

The money only comes due AFTER the doping conviction has been confirmed AND the standard 24 month+ suspension applied. IIRC, Kash's case doesn't come up for a month or two yet.