Why is Astana excluded from TdF?

hevipedal

Christian Prudhomme says "History teaches us that great things can be expected when the Tour takes off from france’s Celtic shores. Such has been the case five times previously, and the names of the five winners speak volumes: the majestic Coppi in 1952, Anquetil getting the better of Poulidor in 1964, year of the legendary Puy de Dôme stage, Merckx in 1974, highlighting a season during which he also triumphed in the Giro and World Championship, Hinault in 1985, for a flamboyant homecoming, and lastly Indurain in 1995, the year he made it five in a row."
However possibly the greatest rider of his generation, Alberto Contador, is not invited because Astana are not invited. Why? What is the rationale behind this decision? Should ASO allow the politics between them and The UCI to infect the team selection, so much so that the race will always fall short? The question of any winner will always be "what would have happened if Astana had been present?"
Astana have done as much as most teams to show that they are clean and honest, the past should not be held against them, as it is not held against CS or High Road (as T-Mobile).
Let's be fair and also give the public what they want, let's have 21 teams and invite Astana.

Hevipedal

Kléber

Astana have yet to give details of their anti-doping programme, they promised a scheme but haven't published a paragraph yet.

If the face of the team is different, thanks to the import of half of the Discovery Team, the people behind the team in Kazakhstan are the same, the very ones who have yet to properly sanction Vinokourov and Kasheckin for their doping offences. A one year suspension here, to let the dust settle is perfectly adequate.

Remember, Contador is free to ride the Tour de France. In a move that would have delighted any other team, he could have surely been released from Astana to ride the Tour in July. This has happened in the past and indeed in the Tour this summer, one French rider from the Armor Bretagne team is joining Agritubel for July only. It's all possible. Contador could also bring Astana as a sponsor, so you could have Bouygues - Astana or Barloworld - Astana this July. I'm sure that Astana would have liked this, they get publicity, Contador too.

RichN95.

I think they're right to exclude them. In 2006 (as Liberty Seguros) they were right in the centre of Puerto. Then they said "we've changed, we're good now" but their two top riders get busted. Again they say "we've changed, we're good now". So TdF, who don't trust Bruyneel, say "You said that last time, we're going to need a little proof this time".

As for this year's winner being devalued by Contador's absence - that will soon be forgotten. Take Stephen Roche for example. He's Stephen Roche, Tour de France winner. End of story. Not Stephen Roche, Tour de FRance winner, but only because Hinault had retired and LeMond got shot.

For what it's worth, I believe that if Rasmussen had never started last year then Evans would have beaten Contador.

alanmcn1

Astana are the kind of team that cycling doesn't need. No details of their super anti-doping policy, a despicable track record, and some dubious riders.

Even if they were beyond repraoch, Bruyneel super teams make a race boring and predictable, be better without em.

And as for Contador...................dirty little toad a la Valverde IMHO

Trev36

RichN95 wrote:

I think they're right to exclude them. In 2006 (as Liberty Seguros) they were right in the centre of Puerto. Then they said "we've changed, we're good now" but their two top riders get busted. Again they say "we've changed, we're good now". So TdF, who don't trust Bruyneel, say "You said that last time, we're going to need a little proof this time".

Why are people still getting confused with the Astana history.
Under the management and licence of Manolo Saiz
1998 — ONCE
1999–2000 — ONCE-Deutsche Bank
2001–2003 — ONCE-Eroski
2004 — Liberty Seguros
2005–2006 — Liberty Seguros-Würth
2006 — Würth Team
2006 — Astana-Würth Team
2006 — Astana Team

The team then disolved Siaz lost his licence or was unable to renew it.
Vinokourov who moved into the Liberty Seguros-Würth team in 06 and instigated the new Astana sponsorship, essentially formed a breakaway team and took the Astana sponsorship with him. Meanwhile Saiz was in limbo with Puerto as was a large percentage of the original Liberty/Astana team.

The Astana now has no relation with the previous Astana under Siaz.
So you can not tar them with the same brush as to the former liberty team. You can though tar them with a different brush

While I'm on it, with the (now) Astana team with Bruyneel at the helm, they say they are a new team blah blah blah, the licence is still held by the same people all that really happened from the Vino year was a few riders didn't get resigned and they hired a few others mainly from the former Disco team. It is the same team just with a few different employees. They should get tarred with the brush of last years team from the Vino, Kashechkin (& 2? others) positive tests.

From an outsiders viewpoint they have done nothing to warrant a start in the TDF after the stir from last year. They lost their privilege and now they have to earn it again.

andy_wrx

What have ASO to lose by not having Astana present ?
- not a lot, just a bit of a stir on cycling forums like this. Big deal !

What have ASO to lose by having Astana present and another drug scandal ?
- *massive* negative publicity for the Tour in mainstream newspapers and TV, the reputation of the Tour shattered in the eyes of the man in the street.

Weighing-up pros and cons, even if they are a new team (if) under new clean management (if) with a new clean anti-doping policy implemented (if) and all their riders are without suspicion (if), I wouldn't have them either.

iainf72

alanmcn1 wrote:

Astana are the kind of team that cycling doesn't need. No details of their super anti-doping policy, a despicable track record, and some dubious riders.

Hmmm. Which teams could we not apply that to?

CSC or High Horse? Ummm, nope. Slipstream? Nope. Rabobank? Nope. Caisse...Nope. Liquigas? Barloworld? Quick.Step?

Arkibal

iainf72 wrote:

alanmcn1 wrote:

Astana are the kind of team that cycling doesn't need. No details of their super anti-doping policy, a despicable track record, and some dubious riders.

Hmmm. Which teams could we not apply that to?

CSC or High Horse? Ummm, nope. Slipstream? Nope. Rabobank? Nope. Caisse...Nope. Liquigas? Barloworld? Quick.Step?

+1

alanmcn1

The question was not asked of those other teams!

secretsqirrel

alanmcn1 wrote:

The question was not asked of those other teams!

Why not?

alanmcn1

best ask the originator of the thread...........................no????

iainf72

alanmcn1 wrote:

The question was not asked of those other teams!

But they were the clauses used to exclude Astana in your example. So if they apply equally well to other teams then that's a bit problematic, isnt it?

alanmcn1

It would be if i was in officialdom, but am not. I was offered to air my opinion on Astana and took the opportunity to do so!

Pretty much the same as ASO have done now they have finally divorced themselves form the farce that is UCI and protour.

I don't like Bruyneel, Astana, or Contador............and that's all that matters to me.

micron

I'll be quite happy watching Cunego add a second GT to his palmares - which, with his Classics successes, would make him a far worthier candidate for 'the greatest rider of his generation'.

Of course, it is quite possible to say that Contador only won the TdF because Rasmussen was thrown out of the race. This game is like saying that Lance Armstrong would have won Giro-Tour double 7 times - if only he had bothered to ride the Giro.

Hopefully it will be an exciting race and Astana will be there next year - as will Basso - that's the TdF I'm looking forward to.

alanmcn1

Basso!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :shock: :? :P

LangerDan

hevipedal wrote:

Christian Prudhomme says "History teaches us that great things can be expected when the Tour takes off from france’s Celtic shores. Such has been the case five times previously, and the names of the five winners speak volumes: the majestic Coppi in 1952, Anquetil getting the better of Poulidor in 1964, year of the legendary Puy de Dôme stage, Merckx in 1974, highlighting a season during which he also triumphed in the Giro and World Championship, Hinault in 1985, for a flamboyant homecoming, and lastly Indurain in 1995, the year he made it five in a row."

How many of those illustrious names would have been prevented from starting if the Tour had applied the current criteria way back when?

donrhummy

ASO's more than happy to take money from the huge TDF sponsor Festina. Rabobank (which knew about Rasmussen's lie before the TDF - the management, that is) and Cofidis are still riding the TDF. It's all a joke. ASO is very selective in when they want to show their indignation. Sure Rabobank dumped Rasmussen, but Astana dumped not only Vino but almost the entire team and the management from before. Neither Rabo nor Cofidis went that far.

Trev36

donrhummy wrote:

. Sure Rabobank dumped Rasmussen, but Astana dumped not only Vino but almost the entire team and the management from before. Neither Rabo nor Cofidis went that far.

For a little info

Astana management 2007
General Manager: Marc Biver
Team Managers: Walter Godefroot, Mario Kummer
Assistant Team Managers: Adriano Baffi, Giovanni Fidanza, Alexander Sheffer

Astana management 2008
General Manager: Johan Bruyneel (Bel)
Sports Directors: Alain Gallopin, Sean Yates, Viatcheslav Ekimov, Alexander Shefer, Andrey Teteryuk
In 08 they took on 12 new riders. (8 from Disco) 11 riders where dropped from the 07 team. Plus Yates & Ekimov also came from Disco
They had 4 positive dope tests in 07

(the above info can be found at cyclingnews.com in the teams database.)


What came first? the management shuffle or the signing of Bruyneel who then replaced management/sporting director staff?

donrhummy

Trev36 wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

. Sure Rabobank dumped Rasmussen, but Astana dumped not only Vino but almost the entire team and the management from before. Neither Rabo nor Cofidis went that far.

For a little info

Astana management 2007
General Manager: Marc Biver
Team Managers: Walter Godefroot, Mario Kummer
Assistant Team Managers: Adriano Baffi, Giovanni Fidanza, Alexander Sheffer

Astana management 2008
General Manager: Johan Bruyneel (Bel)
Sports Directors: Alain Gallopin, Sean Yates, Viatcheslav Ekimov, Alexander Shefer, Andrey Teteryuk
In 08 they took on 12 new riders. (8 from Disco) 11 riders where dropped from the 07 team. Plus Yates & Ekimov also came from Disco
They had 4 positive dope tests in 07

(the above info can be found at cyclingnews.com in the teams database.)


What came first? the management shuffle or the signing of Bruyneel who then replaced management/sporting director staff?

Does it matter? The point is the current team is completely different. They cleaned house - MUCH more so than any of the others I mentioned INCLUDING High Road (which I forgot to mention) which only changed the team name and lost a sponsor. They didn't change management.

Kléber

I'll repeat it again, it is not the new staff you'll see at the races that cause a problem for ASO, it is the Kazakhs in the background who remain the same, the same people who part of Vinokourov's entourage are still calling the shots. It is not Bruyneel, but the people who hired Bruyneel that invite open suspicion.

blazing_saddles

Kléber wrote:

I'll repeat it again, it is not the new staff you'll see at the races that cause a problem for ASO, it is the Kazakhs in the background who remain the same, the same people who part of Vinokourov's entourage are still calling the shots. It is not Bruyneel, but the people who hired Bruyneel that invite open suspicion.

It was the Kazakhs who forced Bruyneel to send Bertie to the Giro. THEY got the team invited. It was the point on which the whole issue hung.
If Bruyneel had got his way, Contador would not have raced (and won) the GT, so the team would not have been seen.
This proves who wields the real power within the set-up.

It doesn't matter what you say, or how many times you say it. People will continue to chuck their toys out of their prams over this. They won't let facts get in the way of their personal wishes.
I'm afraid July is going to be a let down for those of the one team pursuasion.

jimmythecuckoo

This thread has to be a wind up, no?

secretsqirrel

Blazing Saddles wrote:

It was the Kazakhs who forced Bruyneel to send Bertie to the Giro. THEY got the team invited. It was the point on which the whole issue hung.
If Bruyneel had got his way, Contador would not have raced (and won) the GT, so the team would not have been seen. This proves who wields the real power within the set-up.

Blaze,
Just out of interest what would have been the thinking around this? (the bold bit)
And what is wrong with the Kazakhs wanting their team to race in the Giro or any other Grand Tour. I think if I had invested in team I would want them to race.

Jimmythecuckoo,
Gotta be a wind-up
I haven't bothered to vote as the post is pretty pointless, Astana are not in the Tour, won't be invited, and the likes of Contador and Kloden have already said that they wouldn't race even if another late invite was on the cards.

blazing_saddles

Absolutely would expect the Kazakh's to want their team in the Giro. Nothing at all wrong with their thinking.
I hope, by now, we all realise that negotiaitions had been going on since March, but it wasn't until the beginning of May, that the agreement was reached.

It is my understanding, as it came from someone I consider a reliable source, that the participation of Contador, had been the stumbling block.
As to why Bruyneel was reluctant to offer Bertie to the RCS, that is open to speculation.
I cannot fathom a logic behind it, other than he still held some hope, however faint, that the ASO would relent. Or, he was following his principal of concentrating his main man's efforts upon one major goal (the Vuelta) for the season, as per Lance.

Others may prefer to speculate upon more sinister motives, no doubt.

I don't have the definitive answer.

Oh and BTW: Just heard. Scarponi has signed a two year deal with Simoni's PVC lot. (Ban over from 1st August)
More ammo for the Pro Conti knockers......

secretsqirrel

Thanks for the reply Blaze

Blazing Saddles wrote:

I hope, by now, we all realise that negotiaitions had been going on since March, but it wasn't until the beginning of May, that the agreement was reached.

I seem the recall that Bruyneel, had mentioned in an interview (or maybe Yates), that lines of communication had been open with RCS, since the announced that Astana had not been invited (due to the quality of the roster put forward). Once Astana offered all of their star riders they were in. Canny work by RCS!

All very logical, and unsurprising really?

hevipedal

No it wasn't a wind up; and no I don't expect a late change of heart for the TdF like there was for the Giro.
However I am disappointed by the inconsistancies of ASO,
encouraged by the open mindedness of lots of posters
and unsurprised by those who support ASO. (I don't mean that in a negative way)
We won't solve all of cycling's problems on a forum, and even if we have a valid solution it may never get used, but open discusion can only be good.

micron

You should read the interviews by the Kazakh backers of the team - peppered with bon mots like 'it doesn't matter what Bruyneel says in public' (re his 'over my dead body' comment about Vino returning to Astana).

Bruyneel wanted to pull Contador after a week and race him in the D-L - wanted to rub the French's nose in it, apparently. Obviously the Hog doesn't realise that ASO don't organise D-L.

And the quote from CN above - hilarious - look at who the Hog bought in to the new clean superteam - PLUS his Disco doctors who came from ONCE and you don't need me to repeat what we all know about what was going on at ONCE - which became Liberty - which became Astana and....the vicious circle repeats itself.

feersumendjinn

Or T-Mobile look at the doping college that must have been. Where are all the former members of that team now? How many years of knowledge on covering up do former members have? Surely they will pass that knowledge on to their new teams.
How many times do we hear “ he was in such & such team so he must be a doper” Well if that is true please, someone, point to a rider or team that is likely to be clean ......Slipstream? Millar, CSC? Riis, LPR? Di Luca, Milram? Petacchi, Zabel,.........and on and on.....
If you don't believe a particular team is clean or capable of changing then you can't believe any of the teams are clean or can change & if that is the case why are you bothered with pro cycling at all?
If the line “You can't win the Tour on water alone” is true then anyone who wins a 3 week tour or, basically following the logic any race, is by implication doping & we should be celebrating the guy who comes last, though he'll be on weed or beta blockers or just glass cranking depending on your team preference
And before anyone gives the “just because they haven't been caught doesn't mean their not...” line if this is the case then all & any of the test any & all the organisations do are a waste of time & money & therefore both positive & negative results are & have been potentially inaccurate
So which organisation,team, rider will you put your belief & trust in? If the answer is none then the tennis is on Eurosport ......always!


rant over, toys back in pram', thanks for reading...

Arkibal

feersumendjinn wrote:

Or T-Mobile look at the doping college that must have been. Where are all the former members of that team now? How many years of knowledge on covering up do former members have? Surely they will pass that knowledge on to their new teams.
How many times do we hear “ he was in such & such team so he must be a doper” Well if that is true please, someone, point to a rider or team that is likely to be clean ......Slipstream? Millar, CSC? Riis, LPR? Di Luca, Milram? Petacchi, Zabel,.........and on and on.....
If you don't believe a particular team is clean or capable of changing then you can't believe any of the teams are clean or can change & if that is the case why are you bothered with pro cycling at all?
If the line “You can't win the Tour on water alone” is true then anyone who wins a 3 week tour or, basically following the logic any race, is by implication doping & we should be celebrating the guy who comes last, though he'll be on weed or beta blockers or just glass cranking depending on your team preference
And before anyone gives the “just because they haven't been caught doesn't mean their not...” line if this is the case then all & any of the test any & all the organisations do are a waste of time & money & therefore both positive & negative results are & have been potentially inaccurate
So which organisation,team, rider will you put your belief & trust in? If the answer is none then the tennis is on Eurosport ......always!


rant over, toys back in pram', thanks for reading...

excellent post!

LangerDan

Just an idea - the Kazakh cycling federation should seek to engage the services of ASO to run the Tour of Kazakhstan or just a big crit in Astana and offer them a couple of million Euros for the trouble. We'd see very quickly how committed ASO are to their principles.