Sinkewitz and WADA

hommelbier · June 2009

http://frontal21.zdf.de/ZDFde/inhalt/19/0,1872,7600147,00.html

In a programme on German tv channel ZDF tonight, Sinkewitz claims to be telling WADA in November 2007 about routine doping at Quick Step. However it seems that the report compliled by WADA has only just been forwarded to the UCI in the past week.

My German is very patchy so someone better qualified may do a better translation than Babelfish.

iainf72 · June 2009

How much is Pat L. going to sue for this time?

afx237vi · June 2009

^ Funny 'cos it's true.

dave_1 · June 2009

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

calvjones · June 2009

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

dave_1 · June 2009

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

old news re-heated for the millionth time though on the forum... fair enugh though...if am not welcome on this thread, will stay out of it... :?

skavanagh.bikeradar · June 2009

The OP did say the program was on ZDF last night, that puts it in the 'current' category doesn't it?

hommelbier · June 2009

The programme is on tonight at 2000 UK time (2100 CET) so I shall be watching it in about 90 mins. Hopefully it will be subtitled to give me a figthing chance of following it.

finchy · June 2009

Bit of info on the case in English here:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sinkewi ... quick-step

moray_gub · June 2009

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

He has a point though it seems ex dopers who squeal all seemed to be believed beyond any reasonable doubt in this forum. Nobody seems to consider the various reasons why they talk and one is without a doubt to somehow lessen their doping crimes if they come out with the old everybody is doing it defence.

moray_gub · June 2009

Dave_1 wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

old news re-heated for the millionth time though on the forum... fair enugh though...if am not welcome on this thread, will stay out of it... :?

Dave if you have a point to make (and in this case you do) then please feel free to make it . If other posters dont like that then basically thats tough excrement.

iainf72 · June 2009

He spoke to WADA.

WADA thinks there is some merit in what he says and has passed the information to the UCI. That's new information to us. If we want to discuss it, then it's fine but to claim it's just a rehash of an old story is not accurate.

Now if he'd been trying to get a buck by selling his story to the Bild again, then I'd have to agree.

moray_gub · June 2009

iainf72 wrote:

He spoke to WADA.

WADA thinks there is some merit in what he says and has passed the information to the UCI. That's new information to us. If we want to discuss it, then it's fine but to claim it's just a rehash of an old story is not accurate.

Now if he'd been trying to get a buck by selling his story to the Bild again, then I'd have to agree.

The Quick step doping allegations from him are not new though he says it here in 2007

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sinkewi ... ng-details

Im sure the UCi were already aware of his allegations he said it in 2007 , old news.

blazing_saddles · June 2009

Ignoring the old forum Omerta call, for a moment.
I'd be more concerned with when WADA have chosen to speak, rather than what Sinkewitz has said.

"David Howman, WADA's director general, told the television program Frontal-21 that Sinkewitz's statement was forwarded to the Union Cycliste International (UCI) last week and that he had no explanation for the delay."

Uuuummm, could it be something to do with a bit of a bike race, about to start, once again?

Now that really does suck.

T Mobile, Quick Step, Phonak, Liberty Seguros, Saunier Duval.....

So no pattern there then. :roll:

finchy · June 2009

Unlike the retired Kohl, Sinkewitz is back racing, and therefore these allegations aren't being made with a man with nothing to lose. If anything he's further damaging his own interests and reducing his chances of making a comeback at the top level.

moray_gub · June 2009

johnfinch wrote:

Unlike the retired Kohl, Sinkewitz is back racing, and therefore these allegations aren't being made with a man with nothing to lose. If anything he's further damaging his own interests and reducing his chances of making a comeback at the top level.

Please explain how he is he damaging his interests now by statments that he made public two years ago ?

finchy · June 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Unlike the retired Kohl, Sinkewitz is back racing, and therefore these allegations aren't being made with a man with nothing to lose. If anything he's further damaging his own interests and reducing his chances of making a comeback at the top level.

Please explain how he is he damaging his interests now by statments that he made public two years ago ?

I don't mean with this week's statements specifically, more the fact that he is spilling the beans on (presumably) his whole doping past.

But even by repeating these statements, he's keeping the QS doping issue in the public eye, whereas making an allegation once and then never speaking about it again would mean that the cycling authorities might have been tempted just to let the whole thing drop.

hommelbier · June 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

Im sure the UCi were already aware of his allegations he said it in 2007 , old news.

However, in the absence of an official report from WADA, it seems Pat McQuaid (at last weeks Tour de Suisse?) is able to say "I never heard of it. No." Meanwhile. Quick Step team Doctor Manuel Rodriguez, named by Sinkewitz as being at the team training camp in Seville in May 2004 and responsible for their "training programme", looked suitably evasive when questtioned about Sinkewitz at the same event.

Kléber · June 2009

iainf72 wrote:

How much is Pat L. going to sue for this time?

You mean how much will he shout about suing but actually never even go as far as instructing a lawyer

A large cycling team that won many races during the past decade has a doping programme? I am shocked :shock:

dave_1 · June 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

He spoke to WADA.

WADA thinks there is some merit in what he says and has passed the information to the UCI. That's new information to us. If we want to discuss it, then it's fine but to claim it's just a rehash of an old story is not accurate.

Now if he'd been trying to get a buck by selling his story to the Bild again, then I'd have to agree.

The Quick step doping allegations from him are not new though he says it here in 2007

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sinkewi ... ng-details

Im sure the UCi were already aware of his allegations he said it in 2007 , old news.

Cheers Moray Gub...it's reheated doping gossip and not current at all.

richard wants a baum · June 2009

How is the lateness of the report an reheated issue? If you dont like doping threads then dont open them, and generalising everyone into about every forum member believing caught dopers is just stupid. It seems like the hole system is setup to catch only the people the UCI wants to. How can it take that long to lodge a report no wonder things like Puerto hang around no one wants to actually put them to bed.

stagehopper · July 2009

richard wants a baum wrote:

It seems like the hole system is setup to catch only the people the UCI wants to. How can it take that long to lodge a report no wonder things like Puerto hang around no one wants to actually put them to bed.

This is a WADA delay, not a case of UCI tardiness.

richard wants a baum · July 2009

Why do i get the feeling though that this is one of those dont ask and i wont tell type things. But yes WADA have seemed to have dragged heels now if thats on purpose or not probably never know but you would think that UCI would be calling for this information, that they would be annoyed at not being informed but it seems to be the opposite and thats pretty disappointing for an organistation thats suppose to be tough on doping.

moray_gub · July 2009

johnfinch wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Unlike the retired Kohl, Sinkewitz is back racing, and therefore these allegations aren't being made with a man with nothing to lose. If anything he's further damaging his own interests and reducing his chances of making a comeback at the top level.

Please explain how he is he damaging his interests now by statments that he made public two years ago ?

I don't mean with this week's statements specifically, more the fact that he is spilling the beans on (presumably) his whole doping past.

But even by repeating these statements, he's keeping the QS doping issue in the public eye, whereas making an allegation once and then never speaking about it again would mean that the cycling authorities might have been tempted just to let the whole thing drop.

Two years ago when he first said it you had a point now two years later when its only the lateness of the report thats at issue your point about harming his career now isnt really valid, the damage to it has already been done.

calvjones · July 2009

Dave_1 wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

old news re-heated for the millionth time though on the forum... fair enugh though...if am not welcome on this thread, will stay out of it... :?

I never said you weren't welcome, just not looking forward to the re-hashing of the Kohl debate we had with the same arguments/people on the same sides.

You have recently said you prefer Omerta because you think its better for the sport, but that mindset surely means it's MORE likely that Kohl and Sink are telling the truth - otherwise there'd be no need for rampant bullying and threats a la Lance, Pozzatto etc to protect the soup?

And if it's old news, maybe you should be emailing cyclingnews to tell them not to report it?

dave_1 · July 2009

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Sinkewitz...can say anything and he will be believed...if he says it, it must be true, right guys??

jeez, Dave, change the record

old news re-heated for the millionth time though on the forum... fair enugh though...if am not welcome on this thread, will stay out of it... :?

I never said you weren't welcome, just not looking forward to the re-hashing of the Kohl debate we had with the same arguments/people on the same sides.

You have recently said you prefer Omerta because you think its better for the sport, but that mindset surely means it's MORE likely that Kohl and Sink are telling the truth - otherwise there'd be no need for rampant bullying and threats a la Lance, Pozzatto etc to protect the soup?

And if it's old news, maybe you should be emailing cyclingnews to tell them not to report it?

Seen from the point of view of a 22 year old amatuer trying to break into pro tour teams point of view, what good could new revelations about Armstrong and Indurain do? ..they'd be denied the chance of teams cause sponsors would not enter the sport..rightly or wrongly, solving problems behind the scenes seem better to me.

Kléber · July 2009

Your 22 year old amateur Dave would end up on a team where there could be strong pressure to cheat. He might sign for a team only for it to collapse when more doping scandals erupt. You seem to think the teams should be wafting some air freshener around to mask the stench of scandal, I'd prefer the removed the source of the stink instead.

Cycling is a great sport but it is attracting few big sponsors. The top teams in the sport at the moment are backed by a Belgian laminate floor company, a Danish currency brokerage and the Kazakh government.

Where are the Vodafones, the Nestlés*, the VISAs, the Peugeots? No where near the sport, they don't want to be associated with a team. There are a few multinationals like Columbia, Garmin, HTC but spot where they are going: to the teams promising clean riding.

* I know they back the Tour de France

hommelbier · July 2009

iainf72 wrote:

How much is Pat L. going to sue for this time?

Don't know how much for, but the process of QS sueing tv channel ZDF has begun (well maybe!)

http://www.velo-club.net/article?sid=53485

dave_1 · July 2009

Kléber wrote:

Your 22 year old amateur Dave would end up on a team where there could be strong pressure to cheat. He might sign for a team only for it to collapse when more doping scandals erupt. You seem to think the teams should be wafting some air freshener around to mask the stench of scandal, I'd prefer the removed the source of the stink instead.

Cycling is a great sport but it is attracting few big sponsors. The top teams in the sport at the moment are backed by a Belgian laminate floor company, a Danish currency brokerage and the Kazakh government.

Where are the Vodafones, the Nestlés*, the VISAs, the Peugeots? No where near the sport, they don't want to be associated with a team. There are a few multinationals like Columbia, Garmin, HTC but spot where they are going: to the teams promising clean riding.

* I know they back the Tour de France

fair enough Kleber, I accept I might be wrong...just know there are a few out there in top 10 or so in premier calendar who no doubt would give anything for a season on one of those big teams that doesn't exist , or will not exist next season with the doping profile cycling has itself among companies thinking of sponsoring a sport. T mobile should still exist IMO...one would guess Columbia could have been attracted as a seperate team sponsor, not as a replacement.

dave_1 · July 2009

...Quickstep deny and eh...Bettini is not backing down in his libel action regarding Sinkewtz allegations..

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/quick-s ... zs-charges

andyp · July 2009

How many times has Leferve threatend legal action? How many cases has he successfully won?

Sinkewitz and WADA

Comments

Categories