One of the naughty 23?

iainf72

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... list-16205

A Frenchman, surely not? What about the amazing French AD scheme?

ContrelaMontre

Surely not! Skil claim to have an anti-doping programme don't they?

I hope he's not a cheat as he looks like an exciting young rider.

micron

Is he registered as a rider in France? If he is then he is subject to the FFC programme but if he is registered somewhere else then he is not.

GroupOfOne MkII

Hans-Michael Holczer (Gerolsteiner boss) has said that the teams of the 23 riders have received letters from the UCI informing them (adding Gerolsteiner weren't one of these teams), but the UCI have said no letters were sent, with both Rabobank and Skil have said they haven't received any word from the UCI on the matter.

Kléber

He is denying this.

I think it's low journalism of Bike Radar to parrot rumours from another newspaper, to use a headline with a question mark and then not to give a right of reply to the rider, no mention even that they'd tried to contact him.

I wouldn't write something nasty about the writer Jeff Jones, he seems a nice guy. But If I did, he might sue me. But using a question mark allows you to get away with a lot more. For example if I ask in a bold headline:
Is Jeff Jones a flasher?
...it is still not nice but allows the name to be smeared. [sorry Jeff ]

iainf72

Kleber, bet you'd be singing a different song if it was someone from Astana :P

LangerDan

Someone from Astana is a flasher?

Kléber

No, my point isn't about the riders, it's the journalism.

But I'll still have a pop at the UCI: they've released a giant cat out of the bag, saying they've got some potentially dodgy riders but saying little more. This is opening the main sluice on the rumour mill and only makes for more doping noise in our sport. They should get on with things in the background but I suspect the need for the UCI to say "look, we're working on something" just before the Giro over-ruled the need for due process, also to counter headlines about Villa and Petacchi.

micron

A 'he said' 'a newspaper said' rumour is very different to blood bags and detailed doping plans though

GroupOfOne MkII

Kléber wrote:

No, my point isn't about the riders, it's the journalism.

But I'll still have a pop at the UCI: they've released a giant cat out of the bag, saying they've got some potentially dodgy riders but saying little more.

They did the same last year though with the 'Men in Black' thing, albeit I think they claimed afterwards it was an accident and they didn't mean it to come out.

I think it's their way of sending a message to certain riders who they suspect (whether rightly or wrongly) that they're onto them, regardless of whether they have definitive evidence or not.

I suppose the difference this year is they claim to have some sort of evidence to back up these claims, but I'd far rather they just said 'Yes the passport programme is going well blah blah blah and providing us with interesting information which we can use in our continued fight against doping blah blah' and then when they've got solid evidence that will stand up in court, nailing someone. Not leaking/announcing to the press 'Yeah there's some dodgy riders out there and we're onto them. In fact there's 23 of them. Possibly.' and allowing a general smear campaign to be carried out in the press.

Not being a legal expert, but isn't this the sort of thing that sometimes causes trials to collapse?

Kléber

It's like taking a small village of 400 people and the police give a press conference saying 23 people in this town are tax dodgers, pedophiles, or what ever: soon enough you'll have a witch hunt and finger pointing.

Maybe a hotshot journalist can get this information and after checking their sources, break the story. But the governing body is standing up here and doing it!

Besides, it says to some riders "watch out, we're onto you" when in reality, they should put more surveillance on the riders and catch any cheats in the act, shake them and possibly their team / suppliers down.

Jeff Jones

Kléber wrote:

He is denying this.

I think it's low journalism of Bike Radar to parrot rumours from another newspaper, to use a headline with a question mark and then not to give a right of reply to the rider, no mention even that they'd tried to contact him.

Take your point, but I didn't randomly pick up this story, and wouldn't publish something that didn't have legs. Rumours are news and you have to act fast. It has an angle and a reaction from Lhotellerie (added) and his team management.

I wouldn't write something nasty about the writer Jeff Jones, he seems a nice guy. But If I did, he might sue me. But using a question mark allows you to get away with a lot more. For example if I ask in a bold headline:
Is Jeff Jones a flasher?
...it is still not nice but allows the name to be smeared. [sorry Jeff ]

Hey, it might be true :-)

vermooten

Kléber wrote:

It's like taking a small village of 400 people and the police give a press conference saying 23 people in this town are tax dodgers, pedophiles, or what ever: soon enough you'll have a witch hunt and finger pointing.

OMG!!! Which village is this? And how do you know...?

sing_for_absolution

Never trust French riders who aren't with a French team. I cite Jaja and the other one as examples.

iainf72

Here's my theory on why his name has leaked - He performed well in an ASO race and was tested a few times by whoever was running the anti-doping for the FFC. So if the UCI find something that ASO's guardians didn't it's doubley embarrassing.

Also, if he is registered in France and undergo's their testing, does that mean the French have been lazy wasters all these years and could've been "acting professionally" all along?

deejay

Kléber wrote:

No, my point isn't about the riders, it's the journalism.

But I'll still have a pop at the UCI: they've released a giant cat out of the bag, saying they've got some potentially dodgy riders but saying little more. This is opening the main sluice on the rumour mill and only makes for more doping noise in our sport. They should get on with things in the background but I suspect the need for the UCI to say "look, we're working on something" just before the Giro over-ruled the need for due process, also to counter headlines about Villa and Petacchi.

Your earlier point about Jeff Jones "allegedly" being a flasher is the way that well known Ian Hyslop of Private Eye would put it.

The above point about the Compost UCI leaving an inuendo statement for the whole world to discuss without merit.
Just shows what an awful job the UCI do for Cycle Sport as they drag it lower and lower.

forearms Van Petegem

Jeff Jones wrote:

Kléber wrote:

He is denying this.

I think it's low journalism of Bike Radar to parrot rumours from another newspaper, to use a headline with a question mark and then not to give a right of reply to the rider, no mention even that they'd tried to contact him.

Take your point, but I didn't randomly pick up this story, and wouldn't publish something that didn't have legs. Rumours are news and you have to act fast. It has an angle and a reaction from Lhotellerie (added) and his team management.

I wouldn't write something nasty about the writer Jeff Jones, he seems a nice guy. But If I did, he might sue me. But using a question mark allows you to get away with a lot more. For example if I ask in a bold headline:
Is Jeff Jones a flasher?
...it is still not nice but allows the name to be smeared. [sorry Jeff ]

Hey, it might be true :-)

Jeff, be curious to know if that same paper went tuff on the defacto national team, Rabo, when their riders, Rass, Mench, Weening, Posthuma, were supposed to have been involved in the Austrian clinic.

Sources I have said that the Russian and the jnr Dekker might have had blood in Fuentes storage.

So Rabo has obviously got some systematic internal program, even if they outsource it for two degrees of separation and plausible deniability. Then there is the stench surrounding the espoir team. Then you have Kai Reus, coming back, saying he wants to return and makes a reference to the dark side, which was unusual to say the least. Seems he tripped himself up there, or perhaps there was speculation in the Dutch media, or online, that there might have been another reason for his accident. Then you have Gesink, who obviously has been given the same treatment as the 4 at the Austrian docs.

One Odessa Gunn said someone she was quite close to was getting topped off with blood transfusions in his first year at the orangemen in 2002.

So, the Dutch press go after the 22yo French guy, albeit he rides on the Dutch team. Easy mark. I hope the journo went after the Austrian bloodbank and does some digging about Dekker and Fuentes.

I think a Dutch paper also spilled the "amigo de birillo" = Frank Schleck. There is still loads of speculation if is was indeed Schleck, Mazzoleni, or Lombardi.

drenkrom

wow... good thing libel laws don't apply to forums! Or do they...

GroupOfOne MkII

drenkrom wrote:

wow... good thing libel laws don't apply to forums! Or do they...

Oh they very definitely do!

forearms Van Petegem

drenkrom wrote:

wow... good thing libel laws don't apply to forums! Or do they...

yet to meet a judge pay one cent on an accusation of doping to a cyclist.

Ofcourse, we dont know what was in the Kurt Arvesen settlement :roll:

I think there was one finding for the plaintiff (cyclist) yet the judged issued token damages of one buck.

Really, how can one impugn their reputation. Rabobank especially, their form precedes them. They are as dodgy as they come.

forearms Van Petegem

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

drenkrom wrote:

wow... good thing libel laws don't apply to forums! Or do they...

Oh they very definitely do!

online media qualifies see: Wall Street Journal v Gutnick

forearms Van Petegem

drenkrom wrote:

wow... good thing libel laws don't apply to forums! Or do they...

drenkrom perhaps you should ask Hesjedal about what went on at USPS and Phonak. Will he pony up the info? Not that we need it spelled out.

OffTheBackAdam

sing_for_absolution wrote:

Never trust French riders who aren't with a French team

Errr, Festina?

iainf72

OffTheBackAdam wrote:

sing_for_absolution wrote:

Never trust French riders who aren't with a French team

Errr, Festina?

I think he meant in the post Festina landscape when the french took action.

Jeff Jones

forearms Van Petegem wrote:

Jeff, be curious to know if that same paper went tuff on the defacto national team, Rabo, when their riders, Rass, Mench, Weening, Posthuma, were supposed to have been involved in the Austrian clinic.

Sources I have said that the Russian and the jnr Dekker might have had blood in Fuentes storage.

Not sure if AD reported on the humanplasma affair, but it would surprise me if they didn't.

Leon de Kort did do a story on "Thomas Dekker chooses Cecchini" though.

alanmcn1

What really disturbs me here as a mere cycling fan deep in the middle of England, is that there are journalists, members of the public, etc displaying open knowledge of doping practices, and yet no action is taken by the authorities. Surely if you guys can come on here and tell us you heard so and so did such and such, then UCI or feds must also get this info, and must take approporiate action to end such practices????????

really bloody annoys me....................sorry

iainf72

alanmcn1 wrote:

Surely if you guys can come on here and tell us you heard so and so did such and such, then UCI or feds must also get this info, and must take approporiate action to end such practices????????

They need to work within a framework of rules. So failing x test means you can be punished. But the authorities need evidence, but at the same time aren't police men - In a lot of ways, they're powerless to investigate. So you end up with situations where they might know something but the only way to do something about it is get a positive test.

Doping isn't a crime in a lot of countries either so it further complicates matters.

alanmcn1

So is this why info is "leaked". We can't catch em at it so shame them in public??? Thnking of my profession, if you were pretty certain someone was cheating by say faking results. Very difficult to prove, could bring alot of hassle to you as well as suspect. So you take them off what they are working on, put them on crap little pieces of work, discreetly spread word that this person is bad news. Fairly soon they dissappear out the system.

Only we don;t seem to be getting that with this problem in cycling

iainf72

alanmcn1 wrote:

So is this why info is "leaked". We can't catch em at it so shame them in public???

My theory is it's another chapter in the UCI vs ASO (I posted about it above)

What's funnier is they can't use this stuff to sanction riders anyway because they annoyed WADA.

LangerDan

Surely if UCI wanted to p!ss off ASO, they'd have made their announcement in June when it would be not only closer to the TdF but they may also have been able to hang out to dry some big name rider (who may have made it through all the tests on an ASO race). With the appearance of riders like DiLuca, Kloeden and Contador, RCS would appear to have fairly comprehensively broken ranks with the ASO stance and thus be less of a target for the UCI.

As regards the objections to La Gripper stating that there were 23 riders profiles "needing further investigation", shouldn't the riders be welcoming this? 23 riders out of over 850 tested? Less than 3% giving cause for concern? Given that the public would reckon that every single pro is doping (with the exception of their own personal favorite), 3% makes it look like things are all sweetness and light in the peleton.

(Of course it probably actually means that the passport approach is a complete waste of time and they'd be better off examining the gizzards of sacrificed chickens. As Jim Royle might say "Three percent, my @rse!")

iainf72

RCS have been playing nice with the UCI this year. They agreed to the new calendar in Treviso and have stuck to it. ASO on the other hand have not.

Skil are not invited to the Tour either so you're not gaining much waiting til then.

I'm still puzzled about how they've built up a profile of the riders with 2 tests each.

The whole thing is nonsense.