AFLD: UCI tipped off Astana on doping controls
The AFLD has published a report on the 2009 Tour de France, which has been sent to WADA, ASO and others. The ten page document has been leaked to French paper Le Monde.
Two independent medics were charged with monitoring the testing procedures and they point the finger at the UCI. "Always controlled as the last team in the morning and [Astana riders were ] allowed delays to show themselves to the testers" says the report. The UCI refused AFLD escorts during these tests and the report alledges the UCI was giving Astana riders at least 45 minutes advance notice of testing. No other team was dealt with in the same way.
"Such a tolerance, granted with no real reason, doesn't allow, in the absence of escorts, a correct procedure, especially to ensure no manipulation happened" says the report.
The UCI also gave the AFLD details of all the teams and rider locations prior to the Tour, in order to effect out of control tests when the riders were on stage recces for example, but of all teams except... Astana.
The report goes on to list more bungling. For example giving riders notice before a stage that they'd be tested afterwards, storing samples in the boot of a car on a hot day instead of the requisite 4°C etc.
More at http://www.lemonde.fr/sport/article/200 ... _3242.html
Two independent medics were charged with monitoring the testing procedures and they point the finger at the UCI. "Always controlled as the last team in the morning and [Astana riders were ] allowed delays to show themselves to the testers" says the report. The UCI refused AFLD escorts during these tests and the report alledges the UCI was giving Astana riders at least 45 minutes advance notice of testing. No other team was dealt with in the same way.
"Such a tolerance, granted with no real reason, doesn't allow, in the absence of escorts, a correct procedure, especially to ensure no manipulation happened" says the report.
The UCI also gave the AFLD details of all the teams and rider locations prior to the Tour, in order to effect out of control tests when the riders were on stage recces for example, but of all teams except... Astana.
The report goes on to list more bungling. For example giving riders notice before a stage that they'd be tested afterwards, storing samples in the boot of a car on a hot day instead of the requisite 4°C etc.
More at http://www.lemonde.fr/sport/article/200 ... _3242.html
0
Comments
-
Thanks for this, very interesting. The issue of the preferential treatment was mentioned back during the race, but this report really puts it into detail. It is frankly disgusting. In essence, should an Astana Tour rider test positive, then it isn't too far fetched to say that the UCI were complicit - this is damning and makes the UCI lose any credibility that it had left.Contador is the Greatest0
-
If this is true its more serious than doping.
It gives the impression that the governing body CONDONES doping by enabling it. And if it hasnt enabled doping, it certainley sounds like its approach to doping erradication is at best flawed. Not good for credibility.
And what a surprise that the recipient of this possible support includes the race winner AND Mr no smoke without fire Armstrong.
If its true0 -
Other points mentioned:
Samples couldn't be taken on the 25th (Mt Ventoux stage) as the UCI under-estimated the time taken to reach Astana's hotel.
On the 24th, a photographer took a photo during Lance's tests in his room, without permission, which could potentially invalidate the procedure.
The last paragraph I cannot quite understand but it seems that the report is saying that the UCI classed tests done the morning or evening in hotel rooms as 'outside of competition', The importance of this is that these tests are more relaxed so don't include such things as stimulants and coritcoids.Contador is the Greatest0 -
BikingBernie will soon be along to tell how back in 2003, when Manzano made a confession about doping, that he said US Postal were getting tipped off as to when they would be tested.
I just do not understand how the UCI can get away with behaviour like this
0 -
I think Kleber's description of this as 'bungling' is generous in the extreme.___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
So the rumours are becoming more factually based, the whole thing is bloody rigged! Doping, back handers etc etc. Race? It's a bit of a bloody farce.......Colnago C60 SRAM eTap, Colnago C40, Milani 107E, BMC Pro Machine, Trek Madone, Viner Gladius,
Bizango 29er0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Thanks for this, very interesting. The issue of the preferential treatment was mentioned back during the race, but this report really puts it into detail. It is frankly disgusting. In essence, should an Astana Tour rider test positive, then it isn't too far fetched to say that the UCI were complicit - this is damning and makes the UCI lose any credibility that it had left.
I think this renders the possibility of any Astana rider testing positive remote in the extreme!"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
The UCI is cycling's global body, charged with promoting the positive image of professional cycling, and making its money from professional cycling.
Riders caught doping are bad for cycling.
Big name, 7-times Tour winners caught doping would be very bad for cycling.
What we need is a smoking gun - either in MacQaeda's hand (or Verbruggen's) or pointing at his head, I'm not too bothered which0 -
-
disgruntledgoat wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Thanks for this, very interesting. The issue of the preferential treatment was mentioned back during the race, but this report really puts it into detail. It is frankly disgusting. In essence, should an Astana Tour rider test positive, then it isn't too far fetched to say that the UCI were complicit - this is damning and makes the UCI lose any credibility that it had left.
I think this renders the possibility of any AstanaRadioshack rider testing positive remote in the extreme!
Just sorted that for you there.___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
Cycling can bleat all it wants about the amount of drug testing but it will fall on deaf ears if this story does implicate the UCI in being compicit with contravening drug testing procedures. The world will continue to see cycling as a 'dirty sport'.0
-
Heres a question, who do you guys think should run the UCI becase Patty seems to be doing a bang up job of running the sport into the ground. Who has the creditability and know how to run the sport?Take care of the luxuries and the necessites will take care of themselves.0
-
C'mon guys, we all know it's part of a French conspiracy plot..I mean, AFLD are French and have only one motive!! :?Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
For the sake of argument - if this WERE true - what benefit exactly would Astana riders get from these slack procedures? I would think it's one thing to get advanced warning, but another to avoid detection if something is in your system? Will an extra 45 minutes really make a difference?
I also want to point out that there were 8 other riders on the team besides Mr. Armstrong that would have benefitted from any such help if it were to exist. (Not saying any of them were doping/manipulating).0 -
Pokerface wrote:For the sake of argument - if this WERE true - what benefit exactly would Astana riders get from these slack procedures? I would think it's one thing to get advanced warning, but another to avoid detection if something is in your system? Will an extra 45 minutes really make a difference?
In short, yes, it could make a huge difference. Be it sorting out your blood or popping some clean urine in.
I'll try find a link but a few experts have said you can do a lot in that kind of time frameFckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I'm interested as to why the AFLD didn't get whereabouts info about Astana - was this information not transmitted because a) the UCI didn't receive it from Astana - in which case shouldn't they have been sanctioned? or b) the UCI had it but, um, didn't want Astana to be tested in the all important pre-race 'prepapration' period?
They'll need more than a whitewash from Vrijman to come out of this looking good - after all, this is the UCI directly at fault, not some mysterious third party leaking info. This has all been observed - and some of it reported on at the time.
I believe it takes about 15 - 20 minutes to do enough to evade a test - think this was made quite clear during the infamous 'Showergate' incident0 -
iainf72 wrote:
"we have never had a positive test on this team!"
"you mean aside from Vino & Kash?"
"different team!"
0 -
The last 48 hours have been another milestone of misery.
One of it's worst kept secrets gets officially reported.
Now, all we have to do is wait for the UCI's official cover-up.
The sport's so, so seedy underbelly pops out of the sewers, once again.
It's almost like a film noir of the 40's and 50's."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:The last 48 hours have been another milestone of misery.
One of it's worst kept secrets gets officially reported.
Now, all we have to do is wait for the UCI's official cover-up.
The sport's so, so seedy underbelly pops out of the sewers, once again.
It's almost like a film noir of the 40's and 50's.
Leads to an interesting question: if no positive results come out of this re-testing, are we happy because we think those 40 riders were all clean? Or are we upset because we think some of them were actually guilty but the UCI have covered it up?0 -
Is anyone really surprised by these 'revelations'? The UCI has been in Armstrong's pocket for years...0
-
Pokerface wrote:Leads to an interesting question: if no positive results come out of this re-testing, are we happy because we think those 40 riders were all clean? Or are we upset because we think some of them were actually guilty but the UCI have covered it up?
Are you talking about the 08 CERA re-tests? I believe that the national federations are re-testing those, not the UCI.0 -
johnfinch wrote:Pokerface wrote:Leads to an interesting question: if no positive results come out of this re-testing, are we happy because we think those 40 riders were all clean? Or are we upset because we think some of them were actually guilty but the UCI have covered it up?
Are you talking about the 08 CERA re-tests? I believe that the national federations are re-testing those, not the UCI.
AFLD is doing the retesting.0 -
Pokerface wrote:johnfinch wrote:Pokerface wrote:Leads to an interesting question: if no positive results come out of this re-testing, are we happy because we think those 40 riders were all clean? Or are we upset because we think some of them were actually guilty but the UCI have covered it up?
Are you talking about the 08 CERA re-tests? I believe that the national federations are re-testing those, not the UCI.
AFLD is doing the retesting.
Yeah, sorry that's what I meant - AFLD in France, and aren't the Italians doing the Giro 08 ones as well?0 -
___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
This just in - mafia boss's wife says 'my husband is a legitimate businessman'.
Who got to Ann Gipper? And what is this one issue that was discussed when the AFLD raises numerous questions about the quality of the testing aside from the preferential treatment. Why the need to report on any of it if the 'issue' had been resolved?0 -
The UCI's blanket denial is a little bit suspicious. Is every point in the AFLD report wrong?
But perhaps the AFLD has got it totally wrong, from the tip offs to the handling errors? Perhaps no photo journalist was present when a rider was having a test?
But if one sample was stored inside a car boot at the wrong temperature or the testers were giving advance notice or even seeing the news of testing leak by accident then there's some explaining to do.
We'll see if Verbruggen gets his mate Vrijmanon the case to produce another world class document that upholds the UCI's reputation.0 -
Contador is the Greatest0
-
calvjones wrote:
As I expected. It didn't take them long.
What else are they going to say?
At the end of the day, it'll just add up to more bad press for the UCI.
Something they are accustomed to."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
If true, this is yet more very bad news for cycling... but who is going to set the UCI straight? Who do the UCI answer to?
Could this lead to pressure from the IOC or WADA? and will that make a blind bit of difference?
Lots of questions... if there is just another UCI whitewash that would be very depressing0 -
the other teams want to get onto the uci and ask whats going on....
why arent they getting the same protection as Astana? As pro tour licence holders surely they have all paid enough protection money!0
