ASO, the dictator??

Arkibal

Apparently ASO wants complete control, no UCI or WADA.

If a rider gets caught doping, his team must pay 100.000 euros, which goes to
the French Cycling Federation (which is by the way bankrubbed at the moment), and the guilty rider has no right to plea the case or take the (positive) case to CAS, it's the French Federation and their labs who have the final say (!!??!!). And of course all the tests will be run by the French, without UCI or WADA.
No race radios on the flat stages.

This is really scary stuff!!!

I'm fine with the idea that the teams get some sort of fines/bans if their rider tests positive, but in I'm horriefied of the outcome the ASO is pushing for. Looks like ASO is really trying to do everything they can to get a French rider winning this race?!?

I'm getting happier that Astana is out of this one, horrible situation for the teams and riders.

donrhummy

I really don't understand why the riders don't form a union. They're getting screwed big time in this whole affair.

iainf72

Arkibal wrote:

Apparently ASO wants complete control, no UCI or WADA.

If a rider gets caught doping, his team must pay 100.000 euros, which goes to
the French Cycling Federation (which is by the way bankrubbed at the moment)

Wow, there's no conflict of interests there at all, is there?

If I paid 200K would they overlook my positives? Or what if I gave them 500K for "research"?

deal

Arkibal wrote:

No race radios on the flat stages.

This is really scary stuff!!!

terrifying

Kléber

Maybe a change is needed? It's not as if the UCI has shown itself competent. I know there will always be cheats but people have posted ideas on how to improve things on here, if the fans can point out the flaws in the system for years, no wonder the teams can run rings around the rules. For example, why hasn't the UCI moved to bring in startline blood testing, to check haematocrit minutes before the start of a race rather than 6 hours before the racing begins?

As Iain hints, riders have made donations to the UCI in the past and escaped their doping controls.

But ASO is probably going for the media spin too, trying to say "look we're doing everything" but in reality, they will still test just 2% of the riders per day and won't bring in startline blood controls either.

aurelio_-_banned

Arkibal wrote:

I'm fine with the idea that the teams get some sort of fines/bans if their rider tests positive, but in I'm horriefied of the outcome the ASO is pushing for. Looks like ASO is really trying to do everything they can to get a French rider winning this race?!?.

Looks to me that the ASO are simply taking the sort of measures needed to tackle doping that the UCI should have taken years ago!

As to your suggestion that the ASO are simply trying to engineer a French win. What absolute crap! Just look how the ASO fought to have Richard Virenque - France's biggest prospect for a Tour win since the Hinault / Fignon era - excluded from the Tour in the wake of the Festina scandal. Back in 1999 Leblanc said that Virenque's presence is the Tour was "incompatible to the image and reputation of the event we want to preserve." When the UCI once again sided with the dopers and insisted that he be given a place Leblanc's response was "If Virenque won the Tour, it would be a very serious setback for our race"

I too am glad that Astana won’t be in the Tour this year. Unlike the Giro (where I couldn’t be bothered to see if Bruyneel`s legendary `800 ml of packed cells` preparation methods could once again give him a grand tour `win`) I might even watch the Tour if there is a chance that the podium order will actually indicate who was the most gifted/dedicated/determined rider in the race rather than who had the most effective doping regime!

micron

They will run the race on the same lines as P-N with WADA controlling the testing, more random testing and different tests like testing hair samples. Whilst there is, of course, media spin behind this, better, more effective testing has to start somewhere.

It's the age old argument - does it matter what the motivation is if the outcome is for the good of the sport?

Arkibal, a serious question - what would you propose the sport does about doping? It seems from many of your posts that you would prefer it if riders were simply left to get on with it? Or do you believe some riders are clean e.g. Astana and all the rest are dirty e.g. LPR?

blazing_saddles

I don't think this thread is panning out the way Arkibal had hoped. I seem to recall others were obssessed with doping? :roll:

He doesn't think Astana are clean, Micron. Otherwise, why would he say he's now glad they won't be there to be tested under such scrutiny?

I agree with Iain's post. It's pretty well a gimme, out there.
So too, with subsequent posts.

The UCI has run this doping "protection racket", for too long. Look at the lengths they are prepared to go to, trying to nail a rider like Mayo, who, either won't pay, or hasn't got enough inside dirt, to keep them off his back.
Other riders and their teams never turn in even a slightly dubious test.

So, if the UCI are playing with the welfare of both the sport and us.
It's left to the ASO step up to the plate.

What are the odds, of those year after year of record Tour speeds, being a thing of the past?

iainf72

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, if the UCI are playing with the welfare of both the sport and us.
It's left to the ASO step up to the plate.

But they're not - They're performing some kind of marketing exercise under the guise of being anti-doping. Do you really think they'll be doing much different?

Lets say our friend Clément Lhotellerie is up to no good and has been caught out by the UCI's half baked passport. Why did the uber-FFC testing not catch him?

And lets say a rider tested positive in the Tour? Who would sanction him? Or would it be lets make it up as we go along a-la Landis? He was being sanctioned by the USADA but at the same time the AFLD decided to sanction him too (which is against the WADA code)

OllyBianchi

You can look at the TdF breakign away from the UCI as part of a bigger picture of French sports - they have a habit of hosting events which are bigger than the rest of the sport.

Le Mans is thriving out of a championship structure, but in the 80s the organisers were arguing with the FIA in the same way - the Monte Carlo Rally is making noises about not going back to the World Championship - Paris Dakar (also ASO) has spawned a championship give people something to do for the rest of the year.

Admittedly these haven't broken away from the ruling body but if you are a French sports administrator you have good examples of events doing well outside a structure.

Oh - and no radios on flat stages... I'm prepared to bet money on spectators and riders being hit by team cars this year as they push up and down the side of the bunch - it's been much safer to be a Tour spectator in the radio era.

micron

aurelio, BS, I think this is simply another 'bash the French' thread informed by the usual xenophobia.

iain, the French imposing independent sanctions on riders is nothing new - Igor Gonzales de Galdeano was banned from competing in France for a year because he had returned tests with suspicious levels of asthma medications. There is a precedent. So you would accept, then, that Armstrong's donations to 'fight doping' may well have been bribes with quite another prupose? Or are only the French capable of corruption?

jimmythecuckoo

donrhummy wrote:

I really don't understand why the riders don't form a union. They're getting screwed big time in this whole affair.

Likewise. It is their livelihood at stake here and they seem unable to get organised.

They should be looking to break the Omerta and get the cheats out of the sport by being strong and unified.

The increasingly likely alternative is that they will all lose their jobs as the sport downscales towards oblivion.

It should be so simple.

Form a collective and weed out the cheats, then work together to make the sport entertaining, competitive and fair.

micron

jimmy, it is far more likely that any riders union would close ranks against the whistleblowers and preserve omerta. It will take a huge cultural shift to make doping seem unacceptable - and that includes fans as well as sponsors and governing bodies and riders. The doping culture has been there from the start of the sport - maybe it needs draconian measures like team exclsuion and fines. Maybe there should be automatic lifetime bans for the first offence. But asking a diseased sport to cure itself won't happen, unfortunately.

jimmythecuckoo

I would have more respect for the sport if they did issue lifetime bans.

I just can't believe the clean riders are allowing this to happen and are gambling with their own livelihoods and in trying to keep up with the 'charged' riders, their health.

iainf72

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

I just can't believe the clean riders are allowing this to happen and are gambling with their own livelihoods and in trying to keep up with the 'charged' riders, their health.

Behaviour like that is not in human nature. No one likes a grass.

IMO, if you looked at your life and found a situation which might involve opening your mouth about something someone else may be doing, 9/10 you'd keep quiet.

Remember that time at school someone threw something at the teacher? Did you grass them up or accept the collective punishment? The silence about doping is just that on a much larger scale.

Arkibal

micron: I have no idea how to get rid of the doping problem except for better testing. I really am all for cleaning the sport up, whatever it takes.

But I don't like the idea that a rider(or any other athlete) has no rights to plea, in this case the FCF and their lab testing would decide a rider's career, and as we have seen in the past, the labs do too make mistakes.

And the possible fine money from the teams going to FCF... very convinient since they are bankrubbed...

Blaze, I still believe innocent until proven guilty... Not guilty before proven innocent.

About banning race radios, I'm all for it, let's see how it plays out.

drenkrom

Attempts to set up a union within the peloton have happened in the past, usually heralded by the bigger riders. But you have to remember the vast majority of pro cyclists have zero job security. They are simply chasing the next contract, hoping to keep living the dream. In that situation, the last thing you want to do is rustle feathers. You want to be nice with anyone who could, at some point in the future, save your career with a contract. In that situation, you're going to have a lot of work getting those guys to stand up to the team managers and organizers. A rider like Boonen has a standing that ensures his security and gives him power to stand up. The big riders have little to lose, as someone will sign them anyways. A guy like Blaise Sonnery has everything to lose by making too much noise.

Anyways, that's the explanation I got when I put that question to ex-teammates who've moved way up the cycling food chain.

As for the FFC, if they get a positive for a rider and fine him, what about a suspension? They do not have the power to suspend a rider who isn't French, and the UCI started procedures against the federation, so may not be inclined to collaborate. And that was before the TdF snub! What a mess.

iainf72

micron wrote:

iain, the French imposing independent sanctions on riders is nothing new - Igor Gonzales de Galdeano was banned from competing in France for a year because he had returned tests with suspicious levels of asthma medications. There is a precedent. So you would accept, then, that Armstrong's donations to 'fight doping' may well have been bribes with quite another prupose? Or are only the French capable of corruption?

On the Armstrong thing, absolutely. Hush money.

On the other thing - Are the French ADA a WADA signatory? Yes. Is imposing independant sanctions against the WADA code. Yes. If Landis didn't hold a license somewhere that's a different story.

This is not xenophobia. ASO are just trying to protect their commerical interests and there is nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't mean they're beyond reproach.