No more Team Barloworld

phil s

http://www.teambarloworld.com/news_view.php?l1=2&l2=2&cat=1&id=589&l=1

afx237vi

They should make Moises Duenas break the news to all the other riders.

campagchris

Theres going to be an awful lot of riders looking for work next season.

emadden

just shows how much of an absolute a**hole Moises Duenas is... I had my suspicions about that muppet Soler too

sicrow

Maybe this sort of thing will have the drip effect that if you do sponsors will withdraw, it con only help long term even if in the short term it possibly weakens the depth of pro cycling

donrhummy

I disagree with this. They say they have a zero tolerance which they told the riders. Well, what if all the other riders are drug-free? They followed it but are punished for what another guy did? Is Barloworld saying that if one of their employees got caught for drug use (or even drug dealing) that they'd shut down the company and close the doors? Of course not, they'd fire the offending employee -- and that's what the management did here.

sing_for_absolution

Ouch, gotta feel sorry for Baden Cooke.

DaveyL

We may be very close to reaching a situation where new sponsors will only come into the sport if the team has an independent anti-doping programme. That might be quite a good thing.

emadden

donrhummy wrote:

I disagree with this. They say they have a zero tolerance which they told the riders. Well, what if all the other riders are drug-free? They followed it but are punished for what another guy did? Is Barloworld saying that if one of their employees got caught for drug use (or even drug dealing) that they'd shut down the company and close the doors? Of course not, they'd fire the offending employee -- and that's what the management did here.

Its not the same thing as a company finding out that an employee did something sackable...

Barloworld are a sponsor and it is fair to say that the reason they are in cycling is to obtain brand recognition.... Being seen as a backing a team that has had a positive rider does not help portray an attractive brand image. Most sponsorship contracts, if properly drafted, have get outs in such cases.

Jez mon

Not if by internal anti-doping regime, you mean internal controlled doping regime....

DaveyL

No, I am referring to the programmes that Garmin, Columbia and CSC are running.

Jez mon

And the precise difference between Astana's anti doping regime and CSC's is? (presuming you left Astana out of you list on purpose)

Internal anti doping regimes seem a huge conflict of interest to me. Instead, how about all the "clean" teams put their internal anti doping regime money into a large pot and have a large independant anti doping program.

DaveyL

Jez mon wrote:

And the precise difference between Astana's anti doping regime and CSC's is? (presuming you left Astana out of you list on purpose)

Internal anti doping regimes seem a huge conflict of interest to me. Instead, how about all the "clean" teams put their internal anti doping regime money into a large pot and have a large independant anti doping program.

I haven't heard a peep about Astana's - that's why.

Teams like CSC and Garmin do not have *internal* anti-doping regimes. They are run by independent scientists and the teams have no control over them.

Jez mon

Well, according to Wikipedia (not the most reliable of sources I know, but I can't be bothered to do more whilst the tour is on!!) Astana's regime is the same as CSC's.

My point is, surely unscrupulous independent companies may well be happy to accept money to provide a team with a layer of shiny cleanliness.

Then there is the comparison between the team's regimes. (almost) everyone believes Garmin, fewer people believe Colombia, less still CSC and seemingly few believe Astana.

If there was one central strong anti doping regime (perhaps based on Garmin's anti doping regime) the teams would be as clean as eachother.

Kléber

Jez mon wrote:

Well, according to Wikipedia (not the most reliable of sources I know, but I can't be bothered to do more whilst the tour is on!!) Astana's regime is the same as CSC's.

Wikipedia? It was probably written by some Let-Levi-Ride lunatic. :roll: Astana made some PR gains announcing an anti-doping scheme but I've search high and low, and in the middle too, and I can't find any details of the scheme.

Credit Agricole also have a scheme, but it's less extensive. The team doctor just does more testing during the season, not to catch riders but to keep a closer eye on them.

You get what you pay for. If you're a corporate sponsor and hire a rampant doper who remains in denial about his past to run your team, with no external screening program, you are taking serious risks. You wouldn't hire a convicted fraudster as an accountant, would you? Yet some big companies seem happy to link up with types who are as crooked as a horseshoe.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Wikipedia? It was probably written by some Let-Levi-Ride lunatic. :roll: Astana made some PR gains announcing an anti-doping scheme but I've search high and low, and in the middle too, and I can't find any details of the scheme.

Damsgaard has said he'll be releasing data from the Astana program later this year (August / September I believe)

blazing_saddles

iainf72 wrote:

Kléber wrote:

Wikipedia? It was probably written by some Let-Levi-Ride lunatic. :roll: Astana made some PR gains announcing an anti-doping scheme but I've search high and low, and in the middle too, and I can't find any details of the scheme.

Damsgaard has said he'll be releasing data from the Astana program later this year (August / September I believe)

Sounds like they will appear after the Vuelta. Not sure what to think of that schedule.
I would have thought the best timing would have been just before the start of the Tour and give the ASO even more sweats over these dodgy baseliners.

Jez mon wrote:

Internal anti doping regimes seem a huge conflict of interest to me. Instead, how about all the "clean" teams put their internal anti doping regime money into a large pot and have a large independant anti doping program.

This concerns me too, I must admit. I'd feel a lot happier with the independant approach on the grand scale. Then there could be no doubts.

dave_1

seems a bit over the top IMO...Barloworld must have been looking for the door and found a reason. I feel sorry for those riders and would want to punch the doper many times

Kléber

iainf72 wrote:

Damsgaard has said he'll be releasing data from the Astana program later this year (August / September I believe)

Thanks Iain. But you'd think a team clean to prove it is clean despite all the negative publicity and rumours would have been publishing data from January...

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Damsgaard has said he'll be releasing data from the Astana program later this year (August / September I believe)

Thanks Iain. But you'd think a team clean to prove it is clean despite all the negative publicity and rumours would have been publishing data from January...

Takes a while to build up a profile I guess. Also, publishing during the TdF could annoy ASO so I expect thats why they've not done it.



I can't wait to see the Rock Racing profiles

diarmuid

Dave_1 wrote:

seems a bit over the top IMO...Barloworld must have been looking for the door and found a reason. I feel sorry for those riders and would want to punch the doper many times

Companies sponsor teams for a reason, business. They want brand recognition and marketing for their product. I had never heard of Barloworld before the TdF and I still don't know what they do but I do know that their team was involved in cheating. That's why Barloworld are pulling the plug. Bad PR.

afx237vi

Dave_1 wrote:

seems a bit over the top IMO...Barloworld must have been looking for the door and found a reason. I feel sorry for those riders and would want to punch the doper many times

So does Robbie Hunter...

"He needs to be punched in the nose for his arrogance. Just remember how he made so many accusations to Contador in the Giro mean while he is the dirty little snake.. Idiot.. I doubt he will ever show his face again in the pro peleton cause nobody likes him, and for sure nobody will miss him.. . i certainly wont.."

http://www.robbiehunter.net/diary.php

Had to laugh at his description of Duenas as "the quiet one [who]never really spoke to anybody..."

Kinda like when the police catch a murderer and you always have one of their neighbours on the news going "he was a bit of a loner, kept himself to himself, if only we'd known..."

Arkibal

DaveyL wrote:

No, I am referring to the programmes that Garmin, Columbia and CSC are running.

you forgot to name Astana too...

edit. I see others noticed this too.
I highly recommend you to read some of Damsgaards work, he means serious business.

DaveyL

DaveyL wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

And the precise difference between Astana's anti doping regime and CSC's is? (presuming you left Astana out of you list on purpose)

Internal anti doping regimes seem a huge conflict of interest to me. Instead, how about all the "clean" teams put their internal anti doping regime money into a large pot and have a large independant anti doping program.

I haven't heard a peep about Astana's - that's why.

Teams like CSC and Garmin do not have *internal* anti-doping regimes. They are run by independent scientists and the teams have no control over them.

Arkibal

DaveyL, what have you heard from Garmin and High Road?
I haven't seen anything so far...

DaveyL

I have heard that their schemes have been implemented and are in progress. I haven't heard that from Astana, only that Damsgaard *was going to start* monitoring them. Happy to include them on the list (as if it matters) when we hear it is underway.

Arkibal

DaveyL wrote:

I have heard that their schemes have been implemented and are in progress. I haven't heard that from Astana, only that Damsgaard *was going to start* monitoring them. Happy to include them on the list (as if it matters) when we hear it is underway.

If you read any of his (Damsgaards) interwiews, you'd know that he started to monitor the team last year and started the program on Jan 7th....

DaveyL

OK - Garmin, Columbia, CSC and Astana. Happy now?

Arkibal

DaveyL wrote:

OK - Garmin, Columbia, CSC and Astana. Happy now?

yes I am.

DaveyL

Well thank goodness for that. Are you a "fanboy" by any chance?

knedlicky

DaveyL wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

And the precise difference between Astana's anti doping regime and CSC's is? (presuming you left Astana out of you list on purpose)

Internal anti doping regimes seem a huge conflict of interest to me. Instead, how about all the "clean" teams put their internal anti doping regime money into a large pot and have a large independant anti doping program.

I haven't heard a peep about Astana's - that's why.

Teams like CSC and Garmin do not have *internal* anti-doping regimes. They are run by independent scientists and the teams have no control over them.

Isn't the large independent anti-doping programme what the 12 teams in the MPCC want, and why they remain suspicious of CSC, and the rest? The suspicion is partly based on the likelihood that teams with internal programmes do actually have control and that the programes are possibly used to test how far one can go, and whether certain substances can be picked up.

When CSC's Riis was questioned today about the spanish doping testing laboratory ran by Prof. Maynar Marino at the University of Extremadura, he appeared very uncomfortable and unconvincing in his 'know-nothing' answer. He may not have anything to do with Maynar Marino but , instead, have another lab working underhand for CSC. The Milram manager Van Gerwen wasn't any more convincing either.