no doping at this years tour?

whydoesitalwaysrainonme
whydoesitalwaysrainonme Posts: 532
edited July 2009 in Pro race
I'm sure i've missed something but you never know, i haven't seen or heard of any doping at this years tour, is this correct or have i just missed something.
Ribble Gran Fondo
Focus Black Hills
Raleigh Chopper

Comments

  • aurelio_-_banned
    aurelio_-_banned Posts: 1,317
    The UCI and ASO have just decided to take coffee with team management, rather than try to catch any dopers! Better for 'business' and the image of the sport, you know. :wink:
  • Coriander
    Coriander Posts: 1,326
    edited July 2009
    aurelio wrote:
    The UCI and ASO have just decided to take coffee with team management, rather than try to catch any dopers! Better for 'business' and the image of the sport, you know. :wink:

    That's even more depressing than positive test results coming through every two or three days.
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    GIVE IT TIME. We only got DDL's positive from the Giro through last week - and that was 2 months ago.
  • aurelio_-_banned
    aurelio_-_banned Posts: 1,317
    Pokerface wrote:
    GIVE IT TIME. We only got DDL's positive from the Giro through last week - and that was 2 months ago.
    Sure, a few relatively minor figures might be sacrificed in order to maintain the credulity of the public and to allow the UCI to claim that it is serious about fighting doping. However, the sort of robust approach Patrice Clerc was pioneering - which involved the ASO breaking away from the UCI and setting up a testing program that was independent of the UCI's - is now a thing of the past.

    Interestingly enough it seems that Clerc's dismissal was not unconnected with Armstrong's return. Armstrong was reported as having meetings with both the ASO and McQuaid about how his return would be managed. He also rejected calls for his 1999 Tour samples to be retested. In turn McQuaid - a long time supporter of Armstrong - faithfully expressed his opposition to retrospective testing of rider's samples and also had meetings with the owners of the ASO. It seems that one of the main aims of these meetings was to persuade the owners of the ASO that the best way to deal with the issue of doping (or rather to protect their commercial interests...) was for them to get rid of Patrice Clerc and to adopt the UCI's much more 'measured' approach to the problem. (One which rejects not only the idea of retrospective testing but also on the line testing).

    This is how ESPN reported the sacking of Patrice Clerc back in October last year.

    UCI chief Pat McQuaid subsequently went over Clerc's head to the widow of the ASO founder, with skiing legend Jean-Claude Killy acting as a go-between. An accord that will bring organizers of the Tours of France, Italy and Spain back into the UCI fold was signed two weeks ago. Meanwhile, Marie-Odile Amaury has installed her 32-year-old son in Clerc's place -- for the time being.

    "It's something I shouldn't comment on," McQuaid told ESPN.com Wednesday. "It's an internal Amaury decision. All I would say [to Clerc] is 'goodbye,' and you can read between the lines if you like."
  • stagehopper
    stagehopper Posts: 1,593
    of course we have had Bordry of the AFLD confirming in the last couple of days that all samples taken at the Tour will be retained for retroactive testing thanks to an agreement with the UCI. He also praised McQuaid for his quick intervention after concerns were raised over the "cup of tea" incident.
    @stagehopper
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    aurelio wrote:
    Pokerface wrote:
    GIVE IT TIME. We only got DDL's positive from the Giro through last week - and that was 2 months ago.
    Sure, a few relatively minor figures might be sacrificed in order to maintain the credulity of the public and to allow the UCI to claim that it is serious about fighting doping.

    Er, I wouldn't describe Di Luca as a minor figure, relatively or otherwise.

    On the other hand I agree that it's an absolute disgrace that Clerc was kicked out, and a massive pity that the riders and teams said nothing about it.
  • aurelio_-_banned
    aurelio_-_banned Posts: 1,317
    stagehopper wrote:
    of course we have had Bordry of the AFLD confirming in the last couple of days that all samples taken at the Tour will be retained for retroactive testing thanks to an agreement with the UCI.
    Fair enough, but McQuaid has made it quite clear that he won't stand for retrospective testing from any earlier Tours.
  • stagehopper
    stagehopper Posts: 1,593
    aurelio wrote:
    stagehopper wrote:
    of course we have had Bordry of the AFLD confirming in the last couple of days that all samples taken at the Tour will be retained for retroactive testing thanks to an agreement with the UCI.
    Fair enough, but McQuaid has made it quite clear that he won't stand for retrospective testing from any earlier Tours.

    Not so sure what he can do about last year's Tour or last year's Giro as the samples are held by the FLD and the Italian Police.

    And with all blood passport samples being retained specifically for the purposes of retesting, it seems that there's been a paradigm shift in attitude on this issue. Witness the retesting of Thomas Dekker's old samples after they found his biological passport “demonstrates convincing evidence of the use of the prohibited method of enhancement of oxygen transfer".
    @stagehopper

Categories