Tour de France: Astana banned

GroupOfOne MkII

Moray Gub wrote:

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.

Well it'd be preferable to watching Contador and Rasmussen climb like something out of a Rocky movie, neither seeming to suffer from the others punches.
Surely removing Astana will also make the race more open, with less chance of them controlling the race Disco style (albeit we didn't see that last year), so in theory we'll have a wider, closer range of pre-race contenders.
Not sure why the bitter attitude over Moreau, he's in exactly the same boat as Millar yet I don't see quite the same problem with having him potentially ride this summers Tour. CM confessed and was banned (perhaps for not long enough, but them were the rules in '98/'99).

iainf72

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

Surely removing Astana will also make the race more open, with less chance of them controlling the race Disco style (albeit we didn't see that last year), so in theory we'll have a wider, closer range of pre-race contenders.

Ahhh, it sounds like 2006 all over again! What a great race that was!

GroupOfOne MkII

iainf72 wrote:

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

Surely removing Astana will also make the race more open, with less chance of them controlling the race Disco style (albeit we didn't see that last year), so in theory we'll have a wider, closer range of pre-race contenders.

Ahhh, it sounds like 2006 all over again! What a great race that was!

It was Oh...by the way, who won?

iainf72

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

It was Oh...by the way, who won?

A Spanish guy - Not sure what he's done since then.

So, this summer we can look forward to a generally dull rider, rinse it in a TT, then defend on the climbs, lose some time, do an out of character attack uphill and win overall. They won't be an oil painting and should speak English.

*whistles*

Kirky

aurelio wrote:

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.

That's one extremely dangerous statement!! Do you have PROOF that any of Lance's TdF wins were dope fueled?? If so maybe you should pass it on to the UCI - considering the way a certain LA goes after people that look to drag his name through the mud I hope no one connected to him or Bruyneel are reading your post!!

I've read all of these posts and am amazed by some of them!! My personal view is that Astana have been given a bit of a kicking, but the sponsors have to understand if they're in it for the long haul then missing one TdF won't make a difference - once they've proved themselves clean with a completely dope free 2008 then 2009 will see the invites come flooding in. Granted, they may have a completely new team management in place - but that management have to prove themselves. At the end of the day the ownership of the team (and therefore the pressures to perform) are still the same.

I hope it won't turn sponsors away - if anything it should encourage sponsors, Slipstream are getting invites to everything and the big race organisers are showing they want to clean up the sport.

It'll be a shame the big names are missing from this years TdF and it will be an interesting one to call - but Conti and co new the risk when they moved to Astana.

It's been said elsewhere on this thread, but with the current state of our sport it needs to be beaten to it's knee's and then re-build itself from there.

KIRKY

secretsqirrel

Kirky wrote:

My personal view is that Astana have been given a bit of a kicking, but the sponsors have to understand if they're in it for the long haul then missing one TdF won't make a difference - once they've proved themselves clean with a completely dope free 2008 then 2009 will see the invites come flooding in. Slipstream are getting invites to everything and the big race organisers are showing they want to clean up the sport.

How can Astana prove themselves if they are not allowed to race?

And what have Slipstream done to prove themselves?

Kirky

SecretSqirrel wrote:

How can Astana prove themselves if they are not allowed to race?

And what have Slipstream done to prove themselves?

Good point, well made. I think the thing here is that Astana have been banned from the big events – and they have the most to lose from more doping scandals at their events (as they’re the ones with the most global TV coverage etc). Therefore Astana need to be competitive in the smaller events (and the Vuelta as I think they’ve been told they’ll be in that) and make sure they have a squeaky clean year.

As for Slipstream – they’re a new (to the top ranks) team with the right ethos etc so should be given the opportunity. If they get a positive then god help everyone in the pro ranks!!

Astana are suffering from association of their sponsor – it probably would have been better for them to change their name for year and then they might have got in (like High Road!!).

KIRKY

Brian B

This has confirmed my worst fears that cycling deserves to be the most comical of sports. This is a silly move and you can wave bye bye to potential sponsors in the future. What a farce!

micron

I don't see how that works - sponsors leave a race when it's dirty, not when it tries to clean up (or suppress any scandal depending on your viewpoint).

The thing is, Astana aren't really the all new, squeaky clean team they'd have us believe and you can see why ASO would be cautious - they gave them another chance last year and look what happened - once bitten twice shy.

dave_1

1) If Astana execs were not firm on anti-doping in the past 2 years, then perhaps that is a worry for ASO...laizze faire attitdues...like Bruyneel's until this year when he saw a real danger of his guys not being invited and so signed to anti-doping

2) Bruyneel needs brought under control after 9 years and hopefully will realise he threatens everyone's employment with his imperious attitude

3) I don't like the idea of any Astana rider from 07 being there in 08...

well done ASO...now go after the others

girofan

I want to see cycle racing where when going up steep moutain passes at 20mph, riders all over the road with pain, mouths hanging open and slobbering over their handlebars. Ambulances being called to pick up those who cannot continue. Not the closed mouths and smiling faces, breathing through their noses, that we have seen for the last few decades!
We all know that other teams are 'at it', but Astana's signing of Bruyneel as DS is comparable to Bruyneel signing Basso! If the exclusion of Astana does nothing else it sends a message to other teams that the days of extracting the urine are over, and anyone with the slightest connection to doping will be singled out.
ASO and the other Tour organisers are now doing what the UCI and Old Mother McQuaid should have done years ago. House cleaning so that their commercial stake in cycle sport is protected, instead of doing what McQuaid is at present in standing in Astana's corner.
If I had my way all teams implicated in doping since 1998 would be excluded!!!
It's no use peeps posting saying that drug taking has been endemic for decades, this is the last chance saloon, or the sport will die and we will all be the losers!

Philip S

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?"

A hollow victory perhaps?

Presumably no more hollow than the victory secured while doped up to your eyeballs and with a couple of extra pints of blood swilling around your veins...

iainf72

girofan wrote:

We all know that other teams are 'at it', but Astana's signing of Bruyneel as DS is comparable to Bruyneel signing Basso! If the exclusion of Astana does nothing else it sends a message to other teams that the days of extracting the urine are over, and anyone with the slightest connection to doping will be singled out.

Remind me how that works - So Rabobank, Silence-Lotto, Saunier etc etc etc don't have a "slight" connection?

Let's not delude ourselves, the only message this sends is "we do what we like"

micron

You have to wonder about a rider, Contador, who manages to get themselves banned from 2 out of the last 3 TdFs...

GroupOfOne MkII

micron wrote:

You have to wonder about a rider, Contador, who manages to get themselves banned from 2 out of the last 3 TdFs...

Ahh but he's not banned. Could always take himself off to another team and ride the Tour. Whether or not he could extricate himself from his Astana contract is another matter. Perhaps if we see Astana not invited to the Vuelta then he will try and move.

Or perhaps this is all a cunning plan by ASO to raise the profile of the Vuelta. They'll buy it cheap sometime soon, allow Astana to ride and voila, last year's Tour winner will be basing his season around riding & winning the Vuelta, so returning some kudos to the race...or is that a bit too far fetched.

alanmcn1

Just got back from trip and saw this this morning.....................fan-bloody-tastic :P :P :P . Obviously there are Bruyneel/LA fans is uproar, but think logically. Astana should never have been allowed to happen, US cycling journalists are now openly predicting an expose on Lance and doping with Bruyneel soon, and in this months Procycling DSs and riders are openly asking questions about the new Astana setup. A shot in the arm for common sense and a better sport

micron

Contador can only get out of his contract if someone on the team is found doping...catch 22 anyone?

victorponf

I think is not fair because T-Mobile, Saunier, Rabobank and Cofidis had affairs last year and they aren´t banned

Sorry for my bad english

iainf72

victorponf wrote:

I think is not fair because T-Mobile, Saunier, Rabobank and Cofidis had affairs last year and they aren´t banned

Sorry for my bad english

Have a look at the top 10 of last years Tour and figure out how many of those teams should be there.

I make it one. (CSC)

victorponf

You are right, CSC as well

Boicot to the Tour, i´d like every star goes to Giro and Vuelta and say f...k off Tour this year

Bronzie

Yesterday's Cycling Fans Anonymous blog on this subject is really good:
http://cyclingfansanonymous.blogspot.co ... e-end.html

LangerDan

girofan wrote:

If I had my way all teams implicated in doping since 1998 would be excluded!!!

The following is a list of the new, ASO - approved squads with added blue-whitener and Spring fragrances, along with some character-blemishing individuals who either got chucked out while riding for them or are now on their roster from the 10 year period you mention. Exclude these and the Tour is looking fairly meagre.
Anyhow, why are ASO suddenly having an attack of conscience at this late stage?

ALLEMAGNE
Gerolsteiner (GST) - Hondo
High Road (THR) - where would you start
Team Milram (MRM) - Zabel,


BELGIQUE
Quickstep (QST) - Museeuw
Silence - Lotto (SIL) - Brandt, Leukemans

DANEMARK
Team CSC (CSC) - Riis, Basso

ESPAGNE
Caisse d’Epargne (GCE) - Fertonani
Euskatel - Euskadi (EUS) - Aketza Pena, Mayo, Jesus Losa
Saunier Duval - Scott (SDV) ÉTATS-UNIS - Mayo
Slipstream Chipotle (TSL) - Millar

FRANCE
Bouygues Telecom (BTL) -Brochards home until end of last season
Credit Agricole (C.A)
Cofidis crédit par téléphone (COF) - Moreni
Française Des Jeux (FDJ)
AG2R - La Mondiale (ALM) - Moreau, now to Agritubel
Agritubel (AGR) - Moreau

( It does appear that the bigger French squads are having a bit of a spring clean.)


ITALIE
Lampre (LAM) - Rumsas
Liquigas (LIQ) - DiLuca

PAYS-BAS
Rabobank (RAB) - Rasmussen
Skil-Shimano (SKS)

GroupOfOne MkII

Think you've missed a few out there if anything Dan. Am sure somebody a bit dodgy was employed by Skil before, and wasn't FDJ a bit suspect pre-1998?

So erm, Credit Agricole to win the Tour...oh balls, they've employed Moreau before haven't they

Kléber

This isn't about lone riders, as clumsy and random as it it, ASO's move seems aimed at the collective team structure and the management behind it. Anyone can see Cofidis is cleaning up, for example.

LangerDan

Kléber wrote:

This isn't about lone riders, as clumsy and random as it it, ASO's move seems aimed at the collective team structure and the management behind it. Anyone can see Cofidis is cleaning up, for example.

As evidenced by last years positive and the departure of Wiggins for what he believed were cleaner pastures?

Kléber

Yes, because Moreni was a fool from the old days with old ways. He wasn't on some team program of bulk doping. He even had the grace to quit the Tour immediately, didn't even ask for his B-sample to be checked. Compare this to Vino's "swollen leg" denials and how Kazakh cycling and government officials sided with him.

Did Wiggins leave Cofidis because of doping?

bipedal

Prudhomme explains all:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id= ... feb14news3

I haven't got that much sympathy for Contador - I remember him saying when he signed with Astana that he recognised the risk of being associated with the team. He took the risk and got his finger's burned...

aurelio_-_banned

Kirky wrote:

aurelio wrote:

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.

That's one extremely dangerous statement!! Do you have PROOF that any of Lance's TdF wins were dope fueled?? If so maybe you should pass it on to the UCI - considering the way a certain LA goes after people that look to drag his name through the mud I hope no one connected to him or Bruyneel are reading your post!!

I don't think I have much to fear! One I now live in France and when Armstrong tried to get 'LA Confidential' banned in France he ended up being fined for abuse of process. Secondly, most of the allegations against Armstrong have been well documented, as in the book 'From Lance to Landis' and so far Armstrong hasn't had the balls (or common sense...) to try to take Walsh to court for libel, and for good reason.

donrhummy

You know, by kicking out Astana after they restructured the entire team, ASO's basically saying, we'd prefer that cycling lose all its sponsors than have the sponsors stick by cycling and try and help us fix the problem and keep the sport alive/strong. They'd apparently prefer Phonak, T-Mobile, etc solutions - i.e. dropping the entire team and getting out of the sport altogether. That's not a good solution for the sport of cycling as a business.

The funny thing is that ASO's been pushing for years for a return to national teams, claiming that somehow it would help fight doping. While they'd never admit it, Astana kind of disproved that idea...

Moomaloid

So what happens if all the dodgy riders with suspect rep leave astana join another team and end up in the tour?? Has ASO actually proved anything there? We lose Astana as a sponsor which in turn detracts other sponsors entering the sport, and Contador the chief whiffy one would still be riding. Don't see the benefit there.

I really really hope that this doesn't become a who's got bigger balls contest between ASO and the UCI, just when the sport is turning around it doesn't need to be torn apart and have its heart ripped out.