No worldwide ban for Valverde

frenchfighter

CAS will not be imposing a ban.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/2765/ ... e-ban.aspx

frenchfighter

He had a brilliant year in 2009 despite the problems. 2010 should be great for him now he is free of this.

Hopefully he kicks off with wrapping up the TDU.

teagar

Didn't procycling say somewhere that they recon he rode 2009 clean? Or at least, thathe was riding clean 'now' ?

pedro118118

Consenus of opinion is that he's been riding clean for some time.

The real accusation is that he has a very murky past (esp Puerto) and has managed to escape sactions, whilst the likes of Basso have been held to accound and taken their punishment/bans.

That's why CONI (and the Italians generally) have been gunning for him, big time.

For me, there's still a big cloud over him, as he seems to have wriggled out of a proper investigation on the basis of the Spanish authorities' profligacy and various legal loopholes, which have tied the hands of WADA, CONI, UCI, CAS.

I bet Ivan Basso is SEETHING!

iainf72

Did the Italians open a criminal case against him? I can't remember.

If they did, they might be ok. If they didn't, Valverde will have to be cleared.

calvjones

frenchfighter wrote:

He had a brilliant year in 2009 despite the problems. 2010 should be great for him now he is free of this.

Hopefully he kicks off with wrapping up the TDU.

I'd rather a French rider on a French team won it rather than Valv or say Armstrong. After all, one escaped doper is the same as the next.

dougzz

calvjones wrote:

I'd rather a French rider on a French team won it rather than Valv or say Armstrong. After all, one escaped doper is the same as the next.

Amen to that. Bang them all up.

pedro118118 wrote:

Consenus of opinion is that he's been riding clean for some time.

The real accusation is that he has a very murky past (esp Puerto) and has managed to escape sactions, whilst the likes of Basso have been held to accound and taken their punishment/bans.

That's why CONI (and the Italians generally) have been gunning for him, big time.

For me, there's still a big cloud over him, as he seems to have wriggled out of a proper investigation on the basis of the Spanish authorities' profligacy and various legal loopholes, which have tied the hands of WADA, CONI, UCI, CAS.

I bet Ivan Basso is SEETHING!

Until there is a consistent and equal approach to all things doping the problem will remain. I can understand Basso and Italians being angry that Valve has essentially walked away from something that Basso was punished for, but that misses the point that Basso cheated, or intended to cheat depending on what you believe.

I had to laugh watching Mark McGwire the baseball player admit steriod use, he said "I'm so sorry", typical that he didn't make it clear whether he was sorry he did it, or sorry he had to apologise for it. The (possible) apology is worthless given he's only done so because
A) He knows that with a new job in baseball he has to talk to the press and can't continually duck the issue as he has done up to now.
His HOF vote was so pathetically low he may as well go for the apology as keep quiet.

pedro118118

Don't get me wrong, I'm not posting Basso up as a victim. He cheated (or thought about cheating, whichever way you look at it), get caught, got punished and is now free to make a fresh start - hopefully clean.

What is resolutely unfair is that Valverde appears (?!) to have escaped any sactions for his (alleged) involvement in Puerto, due to a legal technicality. He has never once stated his intention to clear his name, his 'defence' is purely based upon hiding behid procedural grey areas.

It would appear any evidence CONI have (ie blood matched to puerto) has been dismissed on the basis that established rules prohibit it's use.

What a mess/farce.

dennisn

pedro118118 wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not posting Basso up as a victim. He cheated (or thought about cheating, whichever way you look at it), get caught, got punished and is now free to make a fresh start - hopefully clean.

What is resolutely unfair is that Valverde appears (?!) to have escaped any sactions for his (alleged) involvement in Puerto, due to a legal technicality. He has never once stated his intention to clear his name, his 'defence' is purely based upon hiding behid procedural grey areas.

It would appear any evidence CONI have (ie blood matched to puerto) has been dismissed on the basis that established rules prohibit it's use.

What a mess/farce.

It's called the law or the rules. As I seem to recall many similar "laws and rules" also govern how authorities treat you.

eh

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it. Plenty of athletes have got off on technicalities before e.g. Delgado, so this is nothing new and won't be the last either.

TheHelpfulDevil

He has always been a very talented bike rider. I believe that by not coming out and saying he is clean, thus not defending himself, is rather telling. I agree with pedro and could take it further that if he did miss 2 year, like basso, he would probably not won the tour of Spain.

However Tomas Dekkar was found guilty not that long ago after retesting 2007 blood. I recon he was clean 2008 and 2009 due to his massive drop of form. So you could argue that val has been clean all along and not changed ability that much. Doubt it though and he should be banged up for ruining the sport!

dennisn

eh wrote:

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it.

Take this guys advise. It's simple, very well put, right to the point, and most of all, absolutely correct.
An added bonus to "getting over it" is that you won't get an ulcer worrying about whether
someone doped or didn't. It's not worth it.

pedro118118

That's as may be, but to my mind, "laws" and "rules" should be consistent and equally applied to all. Isn't this the cornerstone of the application of justice in a civilised society. Why should sport or cycling be any different?

Put in rather more basic terms, Valverde appears to have 'got away with it', when others have been properly investigated and sactioned (or cleared as the case may be).

And dressing it up with a resigned "he's not the first and won't be the last" is hardly compelling.

dougzz

pedro118118 wrote:

That's as may be, but to my mind, "laws" and "rules" should be consistent and equally applied to all. Isn't this the cornerstone of the application of justice in a civilised society. Why should sport or cycling be any different?

Put in rather more basic terms, Valverde appears to have 'got away with it', when others have been properly investigated and sactioned (or cleared as the case may be).

And dressing it up with a resigned "he's not the first and won't be the last" is hardly compelling.

Too right.

It's good to be angry at this crap, it won't give me an ulcer but it won't change my view either. Justice isn't fair or evenly applied in any walk of life, but to resign yourself to that is to accept that as OK, and it's not OK, it's wrong. I don't care what Valverde is or isn't taking now, he's dirty. As for this he's clean now stuff - why? If the Spanish authorities didn't want to push when they had evidence, why would they bother with appropriate action when he's leading/winning their GT? Something about peeing on your own doorstep.....

dougzz

TheHelpfulDevil wrote:

However Tomas Dekkar was found guilty not that long ago after retesting 2007 blood. I recon he was clean 2008 and 2009 due to his massive drop of form. So you could argue that val has been clean all along and not changed ability that much. Doubt it though and he should be banged up for ruining the sport!

Or on a performance basis you could argue he's dirtier now as he's actually won a GT...

blazing_saddles

Not all good news for Piti:

" This does mean, however, that the UCI and WADA cannot take action of their own against Valverde in due course."

Less good for Valverde is the news that the CAS has also indicated that the CONI is competent to rule on a sanction for alleged doping.

Speaking in Lausanne on Tuesday, CONI prosecutor Ettore Torri was blunt in his assessment of Vuelta winner Valverde: "Valverde is a doper. Even the intention to use the contents of the blood bag is against the code laid down by WADA… The law must be equal towards everyone. [Spanish] Judge [Antonio] Serrano sent us all the documentation in order to take action against [Ivan] Basso and [Michele] Scarponi, but then refused to do it in Valverde's case."

calvjones

dennisn wrote:

eh wrote:

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it.

Take this guys advise. It's simple, very well put, right to the point, and most of all, absolutely correct.
An added bonus to "getting over it" is that you won't get an ulcer worrying about whether
someone doped or didn't. It's not worth it.

Sorry, dennis, but if forums are not there to give vent to your opinion, what are they for?

dennisn

calvjones wrote:

dennisn wrote:

eh wrote:

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it.

Take this guys advise. It's simple, very well put, right to the point, and most of all, absolutely correct.
An added bonus to "getting over it" is that you won't get an ulcer worrying about whether
someone doped or didn't. It's not worth it.

Sorry, dennis, but if forums are not there to give vent to your opinion, what are they for?

Vent all you like. Just offering my opinion of letting this kind of thing bother you. Strangely enough it bothers me that it bothers you. I just don't understand why it bothers you OR
why it bothers me that it bothers you.
Whoa, what the h*ll did I just say????? :? :? :?

iainf72

eh wrote:

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it. Plenty of athletes have got off on technicalities before e.g. Delgado, so this is nothing new and won't be the last either.

Que? Perico didn't test positive for anything banned in cycling.

camerone

iainf72 wrote:

eh wrote:

What is resolutely unfair

Life isn't fair get over it. Plenty of athletes have got off on technicalities before e.g. Delgado, so this is nothing new and won't be the last either.

Que? Perico didn't test positive for anything banned in cycling.

iirc wasnt it a masking agent on the olympic banned list and due on the uci list a matter of weeks after the Tour?

Dgh

I wasn't aware of any consensus that Valverde has been clean for some time.

The problem is that Coni used evidence against Valverde that a Spanish court had said they couldn't. One can argue about whether Coni should be punished for that, but not to address the substance of the question of whethe or not Valverde doped is hardly calculated to help the sport's reputation.

That said, as a lawyer I can understand his legal team focussing on the technicalities of whether it was lawful to use the evidene against gim.

Interesting that this concerns a Spanish rider. I spend alot of time in Spain, and I get the impression that the Spanish cycling establishment just doesn't "get it" about doping. When Maribel Moreno tested positive before the Olympics, there were articles in magazines defending her, criticising a govt. minister for asking her to "name names".

Spanish cycling seems to me to need a Philippe Gilbert, a rider who's not only clean but doesn't bitch about testing.

dougzz

Doesn't Mr Nadal have big biceps :twisted:

eh

Que? Perico didn't test positive for anything banned in cycling.

Yeah I know, but it was banned on lists elsewhere and in cycling shortly afterwards. OK maybe it wasn't exactly a technicality but it feels like it to me.

Spanish cycling seems to me to need a Philippe Gilbert, a rider who's not only clean but doesn't ***** about testing.

Oh yeah 'cos Gilbert is clean honest, pah believe that and you'd believe anything. I mean he is at Lotto FFS :roll:

le_patron

dennisn wrote:

Vent all you like. Just offering my opinion of letting this kind of thing bother you. Strangely enough it bothers me that it bothers you. I just don't understand why it bothers you OR
why it bothers me that it bothers you.
Whoa, what the h*ll did I just say????? :? :? :?

Dunno, but a forum in your world would quickly get very boring, there would be nothing to discuss.

paulcuthbert

Do you think he'll be a major contender for the Tour??

dennisn

le patron wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Vent all you like. Just offering my opinion of letting this kind of thing bother you. Strangely enough it bothers me that it bothers you. I just don't understand why it bothers you OR
why it bothers me that it bothers you.
Whoa, what the h*ll did I just say????? :? :? :?

Dunno, but a forum in your world would quickly get very boring, there would be nothing to discuss.

I'll admit to living in my own little world at times. Anyway, that we BOTH are BOTHERED
in some way by the subject is what keeps things moving, I guess.

le_patron

Progress.

I am going to quote you on that next time you join a thread on a cycling forum querying why anyone would be discussing cycling or cycling related matters.

I mean this in good spirits, I like your cycling input, it's just the constant existentialist questioning why anyone is discussing anything they have nothing to do with or can affect that I find a bit tiresome....after the zillionth time.

calvjones

eh wrote:

Que? Perico didn't test positive for anything banned in cycling.

Yeah I know, but it was banned on lists elsewhere and in cycling shortly afterwards. OK maybe it wasn't exactly a technicality but it feels like it to me.

Spanish cycling seems to me to need a Philippe Gilbert, a rider who's not only clean but doesn't ***** about testing.

Oh yeah 'cos Gilbert is clean honest, pah believe that and you'd believe anything. I mean he is at Lotto FFS :roll:

I was initially worried about Gilbert moving to Lotto, but comfort myself with the fact they're way too incompetent to run a systematic team wide doping programme. If they tried it, half of their riders would be dead, but the other half immunised against distemper for life.

dennisn

le patron wrote:

Progress.

I am going to quote you on that next time you join a thread on a cycling forum querying why anyone would be discussing cycling or cycling related matters.

I mean this in good spirits, I like your cycling input, it's just the constant existentialist questioning why anyone is discussing anything they have nothing to do with or can affect that I find a bit tiresome....after the zillionth time.

I'll grant you that I can be tiring. I think my wife has even said so a few times. But for whatever reason I don't seem to be able to stop asking the questions. I've probably even got a few answers along the way but didn't listen all that well or didn't like the answer.
You know, I was being an *sshole. :oops: :oops:

ultimobici

calvjones wrote:

eh wrote:

Que? Perico didn't test positive for anything banned in cycling.

Yeah I know, but it was banned on lists elsewhere and in cycling shortly afterwards. OK maybe it wasn't exactly a technicality but it feels like it to me.

Spanish cycling seems to me to need a Philippe Gilbert, a rider who's not only clean but doesn't ***** about testing.

Oh yeah 'cos Gilbert is clean honest, pah believe that and you'd believe anything. I mean he is at Lotto FFS :roll:

I was initially worried about Gilbert moving to Lotto, but comfort myself with the fact they're way too incompetent to run a systematic team wide doping programme. If they tried it, half of their riders would be dead, but the other half immunised against distemper for life.

LOL!!

frenchfighter

Day two of the Alejandro Valverde CAS appeal in Lausanne saw the rider deny all suggestions of using banned substances, while former Kelme team-mate Jesus Manzano contradicted this when he confirmed that a systematic doping programme was in existence.

Valverde is currently preparing for the Tour Down Under in Australia and gave his testimony via telephone. He rejected talk of any prior working relationship with doping doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, saying that he was solely the brother of his own doctor, claimed never to have had a dog called Piti, and rejected any suggestions that he had doped during his career.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/2776/ ... xists.aspx