Tour de France: Astana banned

iainf72

aurelio wrote:

Fantastic news!

Now that the shadow of Bruyneel will not be hanging over the 2008 Tour I might even go and watch a couple of stages!

Hopefully nobody from Rabobank, Silence-Lotto, Quick.Step, Gerolsteiner, Caisse d’Epargne, Liquigas, Lampre, Saunier or Milram win on the days you go, eh?

Or is his lack of attendence suddenly going to fix everything?

FFS people, B-I-G picture.

DaveyL

Come on ian, why ask people to look at the big picture when Bruyneel has been given a bloody nose - it's what they've wanted to see for years, for a whole variety of reasons. Few of them to do with him being le grand fromage de dopage.

iainf72

Dave_1 wrote:

I agree with Astana being excluded by ASO. People like Johan Bruyneel are the past and he must be punished for the Basso signing. ASO must scare these team managers...force them to run clean teams even if the management of the teams don't passionately believe in clean racing...well done to ASO for making an example, punish 1 and you scare 100!

But you might end up punishing many many people through this action. Imagine trying to secure a sponsor now. How many teams looking for a sponsor this year?

Imagine you're marketing man from big corporate : So, this team has an anti-doping program, supposedly the best there is, the winner and 3'rd place rider from last years Tour and they can't get into any of the races? Hmmmm, I'll going to sponsor triathlon / running / etc, it's must safer.

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

Come on ian, why ask people to look at the big picture when Bruyneel has been given a bloody nose - it's what they've wanted to see for years, for a whole variety of reasons. Few of them to do with him being le grand fromage de dopage.

I know - I just want people to admit what they've done is effectively nothing. It's not some grand statement and it's going to make no difference, aside from drive sponsors away. Makes the outside world look at cycling as even more quirky.

iainf72

So rage fueled Berties attackin Majorca today.

And a bit of interesting analysis here

Will be interesting to hear what Evans says now. If he did win without Contador there then his victory would be devalued.

Kléber

iainf72 wrote:

So, this team has an anti-doping program, supposedly the best there is, the winner and 3'rd place rider from last years Tour and they can't get into any of the races? Hmmmm, I'll going to sponsor triathlon / running / etc, it's must safer.

Possible. But this team is also one that has abused the rules in the most blatant way, how many of their riders tested positive in 2007? Vino's positive was a big scandal. The Kakazhs started off siding with Vino and his "my swollen leg" nonsense. And then what do they do, they hire the bloke who felt he had to sign Basso, despite having Contador and Leipheimer on board already.

I could equally prove to a marketing guy that the approach is to follow the Slipstream way. Independent testing, only hire riders committed to clean ways and go out of your way to please ASO, eg fly to Qatar, attack non-stop in Paris-Nice. Do this and you're in.

Comes down to humility vs. arrogance.

vermooten

I wonder if this might be the beginning of a great schism - imagine a world of two pro cycling universes, one of which is Pro Tour, the other Grand Tour. And Adtana and CSC shall race against each other ever again. That type of thing.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

I could equally prove to a marketing guy that the approach is to follow the Slipstream way. Independent testing, only hire riders committed to clean ways and go out of your way to please ASO, eg fly to Qatar, attack non-stop in Paris-Nice. Do this and you're in.

Comes down to humility vs. arrogance.

But how different is the new Astana from Slipstream, really?

Both run by guys who probably doped in the 90's.
Riders who know a lot but keep their mouths shut
Teams populated with riders who have doped in the past (possibly)
Independent testing
Riders with associations with dodgy doctors
Both have really awful kit

colint

great, another tour not worth watching

Kléber

vermooten wrote:

I wonder if this might be the beginning of a great schism - imagine a world of two pro cycling universes, one of which is Pro Tour, the other Grand Tour. And Adtana and CSC shall race against each other ever again. That type of thing.

ASO can run the Tour, Paris-Roubaix, Liege, Fleche Walloone, Paris-Nice and more. Add on possibly the Vuelta and Tour of Germany if their take-over ambitions proceed.

The UCI, having irked RCS, can run the Eindhoven team TT and the Worlds. Maybe the Tour of Qinghai Lakes too.

Which one are you going to watch?

redddraggon

The winner of the 2008 tour will (perhaps) always have on his mind, "What if Contador had been racing? Would I have won then?"

A hollow victory perhaps?

Kléber

iainf72 wrote:

But how different is the new Astana from Slipstream, really?

Both run by guys who probably doped in the 90's.
Riders who know a lot but keep their mouths shut
Teams populated with riders who have doped in the past (possibly)
Independent testing
Riders with associations with dodgy doctors
Both have really awful kit

You're just being provocative.

Millar might have doped in the past but we can see how sanctimonious he is about it now, more power to him. I'd like to hear one Astana rider condemn doping, they seem to claim testing infringes human rights the last time I checked. For sure, Zabrikie could speak out. Or the team kit design could be changed.

But the ethics and styles of the team are very different. Slipstream says "we're fighting to be clean". Astana says "doping? Let's talk about the weather". Astana is being punished excessively perhaps but they are miles from Slipstream.

grimpeur

If Astana are out then so should High Road, a team just as synonymous with doping.

Kléber

redddraggon wrote:

The winner of the 2008 tour will (perhaps) always have on his mind, "What if Contador had been racing? Would I have won then?"

Contador won without having to face Rasmussen, Basso, Vinokourov, Kloeden and many others.

Until Bertie does a DNA test and offers the results to Anne Griper, I'll reserve judgement.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

You're just being provocative.

I am, of course.

But if you look at Astana NOW and Slipstream NOW, there are a lot of similarities. I'm not bothered if someone is "nice" - JV ain't that nice, I said hello to him in London and he ignored me.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Until Bertie does a DNA test and offers the results to Anne Griper, I'll reserve judgement.

But why? He may as well draw her a picture for all the good it would do. What exacly do you propose she does with the DNA?

GroupOfOne MkII

Countless years we've had a Tour winner about who people have said 'Oh but such and such wasn't racing'.

In '99 we had people saying 'Aah but there was no Ullrich or Pantani', in '06 we had 'Aah but all the big names had been pulled out'. You can only beat who you race, and the fact remains that whoever wins the Tour was the best (or richest ) of the 180 starters.

If I was Evans I'd be perfectly happy having won the Tour even if I was up against 179 geriatrics who'd never ridden a bike. At the end of the day (Brian), the record books just record the winner, not that fact that S.Schmidt and D.Doppelganger weren't riding.

Moomaloid

I really don't understand how ASO can make that decision and not punish the other teams, seems very suspect to me, but then who's gonna argue the fact. Seems they can do anything they want. It is their race afterall.

I don't get why some are saying it won't be worth watching, of course it will, so Contador aint there? And? Levi is never gonna make a mark and i'm betting Kloden with end up on another team before July.

I'm still not sure whether i agree with the decision completely, and i feel very sorry for Kazakstan.

ian222

A line has to be drawn some where and the TDF organisers have done it. Look at the history of this team going back to the days when Sainz was running it!

It has been dogged with doubt, suspicion and guilt.

If they are the victims of the organisers taking a stance then so be it. It has to start some where!

Hopefully it will make the other teams and the riders think about the consequences of their actions.

The UCI was never going to do anything about!

DaveyL

Didn't the UCI bust some of their riders with "smart", targeted out-of-competition testing?

secretsqirrel

As others have mentioned I agree that this years winner will have a very hollow victory.
And as far as Joe Public is concerned, TDF riders all dope anyway, so expect accusation to fly whoever wins regardless of whether Astana race or not.

If the riders don't take action then they must wonder who ASO will bully out of the sport next.

If I were Pat McQ I would be on the blower to Putin and offer a date for the Tour of Russia during July, and the proposed Tour of USA for May. Its time the UCI showed its teeth.

moray_gub

I think that this a crap decision , why just Astana why not as others have said High Horse etc ? I dont have a lot of time for Brunyeel but his comments about this are bang on

"Only the name of the sponsor remained. No pressure was put on us, there was no demand for big wins. We are spending 460,000 euros on internal anti-doping efforts for 2008," he said.. ''



To all those that think this is a good thing i am sure you are looking forward to a right yawnsville mountain slugfest between the ultimate wheelsucker Evans and the self confessed EPO user Old Man Moreau. It says it all that Moreau is now being talked of as a potential winner . Think ill take my holidays in July after all now.

cheers
MG

top_bhoy

Astana deserve all they get, I don't know why some people are shedding crocodile tears over their exclusion. Its punsihment. The difference between Astana and some of the other teams is that Astanas midemeanors were far more visibly a team directive. Rabobank could fall into the same category and I wouldn't rule out further announcements in this area.

What some are forgetting is the influence and goodwill of the French politicians and the Govt. money and co-operation which is needed every year.ASO need to keep the politicians on their side and a little PR like this can go a long way.

As for making it difficult for teams to get sponsors next year, that is no reason to allow dopers to continue. I said last year it would get worse before it got better and I think it has yet to get a lot worse. Only then when cycling is almost on its knees and when heads are taken out the sand will there be a realisation that the use of drugs scares away the sponsors with money and influence. You have to fear for pro-cyclings long term future at the moment as it tears itself apart.

ut_och_cykla

If astana has to go then so should Rabobank. In my opinion Rabobank were fully aware from botom to top about what was going on with Rasmussen, and both supported him during the deception and backed him as things went belly up. The only difference is that no-one in the team actually got caught- but they were all more or less as complicit as anyone in Astana...
:x

iainf72

Top_Bhoy wrote:

Only then when cycling is almost on its knees and when heads are taken out the sand will there be a realisation that the use of drugs scares away the sponsors with money and influence. You have to fear for pro-cyclings long term future at the moment as it tears itself apart.

Drug taking doesn't scare away sponsors - Being caught does. There is a big difference. Bruyneel said one of the companies he spoke to last year about taking over from Discovery basically said they wanted him to guarantee the Tour de France win.

Wonder if Johan is tempted to offer the UCI some anonymous "advice" on targetting their testing during the Tour. I would, but I'm a spiteful sod.

secretsqirrel

iainf72 wrote:

Wonder if Johan is tempted to offer the UCI some anonymous "advice" on targetting their testing during the Tour. I would, but I'm a spiteful sod.

Maybe better if UCI withdrew doping controls altogether from the TDF. Then it would have no cred whatsoever. I can be spiteful too.

skavanagh.bikeradar

I welcome the decision. Clearly it's a utilitarian one - intended to send a VERY LOUD MESSAGE that nobody can mess with ASO's reputaton including TdF winners and 8 time winning DS's. This is a shot across everyone's bows - don't hurt ASO's reputation or we will most definately hurt you. Astana are the fall guys, this might not be entirely fair given Rabobank's behaviour but that's how they've called it (so far).

As for the thing about it ruining the race and being a hollow win for whoever does so if Contador isn't around - rubbish. And the 'man in the street' wouldn't be able to name the top 3 last year so won't notice they aren't there in 2008.

Besides, ASO have clearly stated that if Astana proves itself capable of keeping it's nose clean in 2008 they will be back in 2009. Fair enough, if they want to be there, they know what they need to do.

aurelio_-_banned

There is, perhaps, a delicious irony in all this. After what happened last year Astana certainly deserve to be excluded from the Tour more than any other team in the race. Also, Bruyneel is the only manager who proved himself to be able to shamelessly dope his way to 7 and possibly 8 Tour wins without being caught red handed and penalised. (Although he has had a few close calls, as with the Actovegin bust and Armstrong's positive for steroids). This suggests that Bruyneel was just what Astana 'needed', given that their doping and doping control management was so unsophisticated that they were frequently caught out. Against such a background the much talked about 'internal testing' regime might also be seen as just another doping control management tool. However... Perhaps Bruyneel really did, at long last, want to try to run a 'clean' team. After all, in his interview with cyclingnews.com on 5th January he claimed that Astana was "not a copy of Discovery Channel. The general situation of the sport does not allow this."

aurelio_-_banned

iainf72 wrote:

Wonder if Johan is tempted to offer the UCI some anonymous "advice" on targetting their testing during the Tour.

Good idea. After all the most expert poacher often makes the most effective gamekeeper!

iainf72

aurelio wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Wonder if Johan is tempted to offer the UCI some anonymous "advice" on targetting their testing during the Tour.

Good idea. After all the most expert poacher often makes the most effective gamekeeper!

Except if he did it with the express purpose of bringing the Tour to it's knee's.

ASO aren't interested in a clean race, they're just interested in no scandals.