Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol
Comments
-
Yep, Martinelli. Just the person to give a balanced opinion.___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Giuseppe Martinelli:
"Accept the suspension, thinking of when he will return to race," Martinelli told Italy's La Gazzetta dello Sport. "He's the strongest, and will prove it again."
Before Contador, Martinelli won five Grand Tours as a director, including the victories of Marco Pantani at the 1998 Giro d'Italia and Tour de France. He keeps his faith in Contador, but says the fight is not worth the cost.
"I want to clarify to avoid any misunderstanding: I believe Alberto. He's clean. And knowing full well what effort we had to make to win the Tour, you can imagine what it costs to lose," continued Martinelli.
"There are times when you make a choice: either a bang your head against the rubber wall and have it bounce back, or find the courage to leave. Alberto has to do what is best for him, without being influenced by too many people around them. And not make the same mistake as Marco Pantani in 1999."
Pantani was kicked out of the 1999 Giro d'Italia while leading the race for having a hematocrit value higher than the allowed limit of 50. He suffered from the result and never reached his best again, eventually committing suicide in 2004.
"After the exclusion from the Giro at Madonna di Campiglio, Pantani was supposed to start the Tour, but I could not convince him. With the experience of the last 11 years, I am sure that now I am able to... Going back to the Alberto situation, I'm sure he has not done anything illegal, but as it is, it is not easy to prove. In cycling, the burden of proof is reversed.
"Alberto can start thinking about when to return. A one-year stop that ends in August, think about it, you don't miss that much."
Grabbing at straws here aren't we?0 -
Do you ever say anything of interest or worthwhile? What a sad way to be, I pity those who have to deal with such a bore day in day out.
Branch out, engage your brain and drop some intelligence.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Cycling is still riddled with dopers and cheats.
Contador is most definitely one.
Until permanent bans are handed out the sport will never be clean.0 -
dommccabe17 wrote:Cycling is still riddled with dopers and cheats.
Contador is most definitely one.
Until permanent bans are handed out the sport will never be clean.
And I was silly enough to think it was just God that was Omnipotent :shock:0 -
Cyclnig should be regulated in the same way people want ro regulate banks.
Bankers gamble excessively for large returns.
Dopers gamble they won't get caught for large returns.
Defer their pay!!!!0 -
From cyclingnews.com a couple of days ago...
Former teammate hits out at Tour winner’s silence over previous doping affairs
* Former Euskaltel, ONCE and Liberty Seguros rider David Etxebarria has slammed his ex-team-mate Alberto Contador, effectively accusing the three-time Tour de France winner of hypocrisy. A series of five posts on his Twitter page concluded with two-time Tour stage-winner Etxebarria telling Contador “don’t shout out when previously you stayed silent”.
This came after Etxebarria suggested that Contador, who is expected to appeal against his one-year ban after testing positive for clenbuterol, had not made any fuss when former team-mates had been caught up in doping affairs.
The two riders were teammates at the Liberty Seguros team in 2005 and into 2006, when Astana took over the running of the team in the wake of the Operation Puerto blood doping investigation. Etxebarria was among the riders whose careers were ended by the Puerto affair.
Etxebarria’s Contador-related posts start with a comment that “on Friday after listening to Contador I will give my opinion on the case. It will surprise quite a few…”
After adding the following day that he needs time to think about the right words to use, Extebarria eventually tweets: “AC you shout about justice and when it is handed out you start shouting again that you don’t believe in it”.
He then adds: “When there were ex-team-mates who were asking for justice and weren’t given it you were silent.” A further tweet states: “You shout about the gutter press… When the majority has been easier on you that it has with anyone else in a similar case.”
Now well into his flow, Etxebarria’s fourth tweet says: “You shout about not believing in this anti-doping system when before it was because of it that you won the “Rasmussen” Tour and were silent.”
Extebarria then offers a bit of an olive branch before his final complaint, saying: “You’re the classiest guy that I have ever seen racing and I hope that you will be back on the bike tomorrow… But don’t SHOUT when before you were SILENT.” *Let's close our eyes and see what happens0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Do you ever say anything of interest or worthwhile? What a sad way to be, I pity those who have to deal with such a bore day in day out.
Branch out, engage your brain and drop some intelligence.
Your hypocrisy is laudable, if only for your apparent inability to realise it!Mañana0 -
all show no go quote.
Such silly comments. It is none of Contador's business to start shouting about others in doping. He does like most other riders. He is also naturally quiet natured. He was also young and unknown back then.
Interesting to note that many riders and people properly involved in the sport can only commend his racing.Contador is the Greatest0 -
frenchfighter wrote:all show no go quote.
Such silly comments. It is none of Contador's business to start shouting about others in doping. He does like most other riders. He is also naturally quiet natured. He was also young and unknown back then.
Interesting to note that many riders and people properly involved in the sport can only commend his racing.
Agree with your first comment, sounds like sour grapes eminating from a disgruntled former team-mate.
Regarding your second paragraph; He's a very talented rider that also got caught cheating. Not many riders actually comment on positives...0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Blah blah...
Branch out, engage your brain and drop some intelligence.
Just out of interest Frenchy... how much intelligence would one have to drop to get down to your level?0 -
ratsbeyfus wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Blah blah...
Branch out, engage your brain and drop some intelligence.
Just out of interest Frenchy... how much intelligence would one have to drop to get down to your level?
excellent 0 -
ratsbeyfus wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Blah blah...
Branch out, engage your brain and drop some intelligence.
Just out of interest Frenchy... how much intelligence would one have to drop to get down to your level?
Post of the week0 -
Yeah, nice one. Should have used some proper english to get my point across more clearly.Contador is the Greatest0
-
How about a years ban to get some perspective ?0
-
So Sunday is another big day for this whole thing as its the last day for which he can hand in his appeal?. Any idea's of the appeal process? Has he already made his case to them and have no other evidence or is he going with the Gasquet Kiss theory?
Everything seems to have gone very quiet..
0 -
Here:
Contador's Defense lawyer: Andy Ramos.Disciplinary Sports Law is a “rara avis” within the national legal system, in that it follows some principles (and disregards others) that could be challenged in any court in a democracy. With the laudable intent of fighting against doping, the international authorities have created a legal system that has raised questions among lawyers and national courts for attempting to violate people’s basic rights.
One of the principles underlying disciplinary Sports Law is that of strict liability, by which an athlete can be sanctioned from the moment at which a substance banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is found in his body. The monitoring or sanctioning body does not have to prove how the substance came to be there, whether it enhanced his athletic performance, or whether there was intent to dope, but instead the burden of proof falls back on the athlete, who, according to the World Anti-Doping Code, is wholly responsible for everything that enters his body.
The Code, mindful of this inflexibility, provides for liability exclusion (and therefore exclusion from sanction) for those cases in which the athlete demonstrates that he lacked “fault or negligence” (article 10.5.1), by establishing how the banned substance entered his body, something completely impossible in many instances. Once again, aware of its rigor, both the Code and the jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) consider that in cases in which athletes want to claim this principle of liability exclusion, they must demonstrate by means of a balance of probabilities (article 3.1) that the motive which they allege was more likely to have occurred than some other. That is to say, for Contador’s case, that among the different explanations for the appearance of clenbuterol in his body (direct ingestion, microdosing, contaminated food, etc.), one predominates over the rest.
The Union Cycliste Internationale notified the Royal Spanish Cycling Federation (RFEC) that clenbuterol could have come into Alberto Contador’s body in four different ways. During the proceedings, we called upon experts from around the world to analyze one by one all the possibilities argued by the UCI, in order to prove Contador’s innocence. Both Spain’s State Anti-Doping Agency, asked by the RFEC, as well as various experts in toxicology, pharmacokinetics, chemistry, hematology, physiology, medicine, etc. scientifically ruled out each of the three other possibilities addressed by the UCI, all of them concluding that the only possible explanation was food contamination. No scientist consulted doubted their verdict.
Thus, applying that weighting of probabilities required by the World Anti-Doping Code, we have demonstrated that the theory of ingesting contaminated meat was the only one possible, therefore the exemption from responsibility which entails that the athlete should not be sanctioned in any way should be applied without fail, in the absence of fault or negligence during the involuntary and accidental ingestion of the prohibited substance. Furthermore, it must be remembered that both the UCI and the RFEC itself stress that the amount found could not at any moment have enhanced Contador’s athletic performance, therefore his victory in the last Tour de France was beyond all doubt.
About two years ago, the French tennis player Richard Gasquet tested positive in an anti-doping control when a minuscule quantity of a metabolite of cocaine was found in his urine, which he alleged came into his system after kissing a girl that he met in a disco in Miami. Considering that the amount detected was extremely low, during the proceedings the different ways of ingestion were analyzed, with both the French Tennis Federation and CAS concluding that the theory of the kiss, however unlikely it seems, was the most likely.
Gasquet was unaware that the woman he was kissing was a cocaine user and that her saliva triggered his positive in an anti-doping test. In the same way, Contador never could have imagined that, after consuming a piece of veal tenderloin, an illegal substance that had been used to fatten the calf appeared in his urine, sparking off the legal and media morass that he is forced to endure. As Contador has repeated on various occasions, the anti-doping system should exist in order to punish the guilty, and not to condemn the innocent. Or, as it has been put to CAS in the Gasquet case, “Is the intent of WADA’s Program or Code to reproach an athlete if he kisses a sexy stranger that he met that night?”
As Contador stated in his press conference on January 28, 2011, cases of this nature—involving minuscule amounts of clenbuterol—are appearing more frequently in recent months owing to the advance in and precision of systems in the laboratories for detecting banned substances. Although the case of cyclist Alessandro Colò has been the one that has had the most impact, others have come to light, such as those of German table tennis player Dimitrij Ovtcharov (75 pg/ml), the Chinese cyclist Li Fuyu (50 pg/ml), Phillip Nielsen of Denmark, and Dutch mountain biker Rudy Van Houts.
It is beyond dispute that WADA will have to set a margin of tolerance for substances that can be found in common foods, as is the case with clenbuterol. Until that occurs, the World Anti-Doping Code has already made provision for the exoneration of athletes who, due to circumstances out of the ordinary in which there was no manner of fault or negligence, have inadvertently ingested a prohibited substance.
We have confidence in the independence and professionalism of the RFEC’s Committee for Competition and Sports Discipline, and we’re sure that they will apply the anti-doping rules properly so that Alberto Contador is able to continue to bring happiness to the sport and, over all, so that the misapplication of the rules does not become an unjust guillotine of champions.Contador is the Greatest0 -
I don't care about Gasquet. Everything else should be sufficient.Contador is the Greatest0
-
frenchfighter wrote:I don't care about Gasquet. Everything else should be sufficient.
You should care about Gasquet, his precedent is Contador's only line of defence at this stage. He has nothing else.Twitter: @RichN950 -
His lawyer can bleat all he likes about the unfairness of it all, but Contador had previously agreed to the rules that he's now challenging.
If they are so onerous, how come he's not been lobbying hard, as one of the most influential riders in the sport, to change the rules?0 -
Haha, what rubbish.
"The Union Cycliste Internationale notified the Royal Spanish Cycling Federation (RFEC) that clenbuterol could have come into Alberto Contador’s body in four different ways. During the proceedings, we called upon experts from around the world to analyze one by one all the possibilities argued by the UCI, in order to prove Contador’s innocence. Both Spain’s State Anti-Doping Agency, asked by the RFEC, as well as various experts in toxicology, pharmacokinetics, chemistry, hematology, physiology, medicine, etc. scientifically ruled out each of the three other possibilities addressed by the UCI, all of them concluding that the only possible explanation was food contamination. No scientist consulted doubted their verdict. "
So, they said "here's 4 ways you can get clen in your body which do you think Contador fell victim of?"
1. Aliens did it
2. Tyler's twin climbed up his backside and planted it there
3. He injested it after inhaling Andy Schleck's doped up farts
4. Contaminated food
Any scientist is likely to say 'I think it was #4'.
I propose a fifth and more likely version of events.
5. Injection0 -
Furthermore, it must be remembered that both the UCI and the RFEC itself stress that the amount found could not at any moment have enhanced Contador’s athletic performance, therefore his victory in the last Tour de France was beyond all doubt.
These are two completely separate issues. I doubt that even his most ardent detractor would argue that the clen level as detected would give any enhancement. However, the administration of a bag of blood from which the clen came would have had a very significant effect.
Plus phrasing that statement to make it appear that both the UCI and REFC are supporting the claim that "his victory in the last Tour de France was beyond all doubt" is disingenuous, to say the least. But then again, obfuscation is the stock in trade of defense lawyers in such situations'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
LangerDan wrote:These are two completely separate issues. I doubt that even his most ardent detractor would argue that the clen level as detected would give any enhancement. However, the administration of a bag of blood from which the clen came would have had a very significant effect.
I do not lay claim to being Bert's most ardent detractor but I would argue it could, based on the comments of the lady from the WADA Montreal lab reported in Bonnie Ford's story - that athletes are using it in small doses to minimise side-effects. Nonetheless it is irrelevant whether the amount found is benficial or not - it is a banned substance, end of story.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
the way I read the statement is that eating contaminated beef is the 'least implausible' route into the system. it is by no means the 'only possible' way.
given that there seems to be no evidence made public that a significant percentage of spanish cows are contaminated with clen, then there are several more plausible means to get the drug into your body.
but, even if this is the way it happened, the rules state a ban. bertie agreed to the rules, until they were applied to him, and now he's crying like a spoilt child.--
Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails0 -
After reading your posts in reply to my posts:
Contador is the Greatest0 -
Twitter: @RichN950
-
Out of curiosity. Would the Biological passport not have picked up on his Clen use somehow earlier then the day he was tested in the tour?0
-
The biological passport mainly checks blood values, it doesn't test for performance enhancing drugs like clenbuterol.0
-
Anybody worried that Rugby players get away with doping? Why not cyclists? Check out the Telegraph story from the other day0
