Anne Gripper interview

Kléber

In Cycling Weekly:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... rview.html

A few interesting points in there. One suggestion is that the five cases named are those with watertight cases and once the evidence against them has been used and tested, especially in Italy and Spain, then we'll see further names being exposed.

DaveyL

That's not quite how I read it.

Surely the point is that the cases have to go through several tiers of review to make sure the case is watertight, and only then will a case be brought against the rider. It just happens that these are the first five to "pop out" the other end and more will follow once they (the other cases) pass muster?

Kléber

CW: With more cases said to be ‘likely’, is it a case that the UCI has opened proceedings against five riders against whom it feels there is a cast-iron case, so that the biological passport will not fall at the first legal challenge? If that is the case, why is the UCI reluctant to say so?
AG: Yes. We have opened the five cases which show the most convincing evidence of doping. We make no secret of that. We have not “chosen” these five. They were the five cases where we had enough evidence on which to proceed further. When we have other profiles which the experts are convinced indicate doping and our legal review reveals no major areas of challenge, we will open further cases.

DaveyL

Nothing wrong with that - the cases have to pass legal scrutiny or else what's the point of bringing them? I think it is important not to give the impression that these are the cast-iron "test cases" to set the legal precedent, and that future cases with more shaky evidence will be "coat-tailed" through after them. Gripper says that all cases brought will have to reach the same minimum standard, it's just that some have come out of the system before others. That's the way I look at it anyway.

An interesting aside thopugh, the passport will provide more than one way to catch a rider. Those cyclists whose profiles look dodgy, but which don't meet the minimum standards to raise a case, will no doubt face a barrage of very targeted tests, and some of them could well be caught via conventional testing but with the help of the passport.