So whats gonna happen then??

Art Vandelay

Google translate is quicker but not, as I've learnt, as accurate as reading it yourself!

Doobz

Art Vandelay wrote:

So Ephraim Barak, the Israeli judge on the 3 man CAS panel has been dismissed! Maybe Becca's remarks had some basis in truth!

I thought what it said (in translation) is they have dismissed any comments and rumours saying Ephraim Barak may have been influenced by the Visit to Israel..

Art Vandelay

Yes it does. I stupidly read the translated article rather than reading it...

sherer

interesting case this one as it seems at first the UCI tried to cover it up and deal with it behind closed doors until it was leaked to the press. Maybe they just wanted another LA type pay off

Now after trying to keep it under wraps the UCI have appealled the original decision by the RCEF so no idea what they want really.

Love to see him ride and attack so on this side I want him to still be at the Tour

TheBigBean

No ban.

I think CAS will find in favour of Contador because WADA's position on minute amounts of clenbuterol is unclear i.e. WADA cannot comprehensively demonstrate that Contador was either negligent or intentional doping. As a result WADA will introduce a maximum amount of clenbuterol allowed in the system. Just my prediction.

The UCI is only appealing because it feels it should. It would be more than happy with the no ban verdict as it would mean that the star cyclist can continue to ride and with a clear name.

andyp

TheBigBean wrote:

No ban.

I think CAS will find in favour of Contador because WADA's position on minute amounts of clenbuterol is unclear i.e. WADA cannot comprehensively demonstrate that Contador was either negligent or intentional doping. As a result WADA will introduce a maximum amount of clenbuterol allowed in the system. Just my prediction.

I don't think you understand the concept of strict liability. The onus is on Contador to explain how the clenbuterol got into his system, not on WADA to demonstrate negligence or intentional doping.

CAS have been lenient in the past when athletes have tested positive for clenbuterol when competing in countries where it is heavily used in agriculture, such as Mexico and China. Whether they'll apply that leniency in this case, where clenbuterol is banned in the EU, is the crux of the matter.

calvjones

Ashenden excluded by judges:

http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/Cyc ... e-20120111

emadden

Possible delay ..... again....


http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/01/ ... ing_203070

EDIT: Oops.. didnt see earlier post.

shinyhelmut

He'll have retired by the time they decide what to do with him.

Which suits him down to the ground.

salsiccia1

I think they're going to clear him. They're talking about making the judgement air-tight to negate any potential appeals, so I think they're looking at a UCI/WADA appeal in Swiss civil courts. I think if they were looking at a Contador appeal, they wouldn't be overly concerned as that is what anyone in his position would do; facing WADA in a court is a lot different to facing Bertie.

Doobz

Out of all the latest news, especially the article on CN I find that the CAS really are only interested in the Clen Charge...

The Charge against bertie was the traces of Clen. WADA wanted to muddy the waters with the Plasticisers but the CAS told them to stick it in their ring piece. When the wada lawyers were denied to submit the Plasticisers theory as part of the prosecution, they thought about walking.

Good on the CAS..

Still, I reckon 2 year ban!! HA

iainf72

I think Bert is going for "ooh, it could've only got there via food" and WADA are offering an alternate explanation with a bit of evidence behind it.

andyp

If anyone was 'muddying the waters' it was Contador's defence team, not WADA.

nweststeyn

So we're saying he got it from drinking muddy contaminated water now?

josame

nweststeyn wrote:

So we're saying he got it from drinking muddy contaminated water now?

If it offers a glimmer of hope.. yep

frenchfighter

andyp wrote:

If anyone was 'muddying the waters' it was Contador's defence team, not WADA.

Keep 'em coming. You crack me up with your continual (read over 1 year) exactly thew same tune. Even now.

Let me find a photo

josame

frenchfighter wrote:

andyp wrote:

If anyone was 'muddying the waters' it was Contador's defence team, not WADA.

Keep 'em coming. You crack me up with your continual (read over 1 year) exactly thew same tune. Even now.

Let me find a photo

Yay! FF's here - leading the charge for an even handed point of view!!

Doobz

loving the witty banter, but in all seriousness.. The "Wada almost walking out on the case" is quite significant..

andyp

frenchfighter wrote:

Keep 'em coming. You crack me up with your continual (read over 1 year) exactly thew same tune. Even now.

Let me find a photo

Let's be clear on the facts here. Contador failed a test for a banned substance and, by the rules he'd signed up to, should have been banned for two years by his national federation. He then should have had the right to appeal, citing his food contamination defence. That appeal would have probably been refused based on the lack of evidence that clenbuterol contamination is common in the EU.

Instead we're in this farcical situation where over 18 months after the failed test, he's still able to ride.

The reason I'm singing the same tune is because the lack of adherence to the rules, by Contador, the FCS and the UCI is doing long term damage to the credibility of the sport.

TheBigBean

andyp wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

No ban.

I think CAS will find in favour of Contador because WADA's position on minute amounts of clenbuterol is unclear i.e. WADA cannot comprehensively demonstrate that Contador was either negligent or intentional doping. As a result WADA will introduce a maximum amount of clenbuterol allowed in the system. Just my prediction.

I don't think you understand the concept of strict liability. The onus is on Contador to explain how the clenbuterol got into his system, not on WADA to demonstrate negligence or intentional doping.

I was just stating my opinion of what is likely to happen. I do understand strict liability, but I also think that on this issue WADA has appeared confused and inconsistent. If it appeared the same in front of CAS then I find it hard to believe the original decision will be overturned.

dougzz

andyp wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Keep 'em coming. You crack me up with your continual (read over 1 year) exactly thew same tune. Even now.

Let me find a photo

Let's be clear on the facts here. Contador failed a test for a banned substance and, by the rules he'd signed up to, should have been banned for two years by his national federation. He then should have had the right to appeal, citing his food contamination defence. That appeal would have probably been refused based on the lack of evidence that clenbuterol contamination is common in the EU.

Instead we're in this farcical situation where over 18 months after the failed test, he's still able to ride.

The reason I'm singing the same tune is because the lack of adherence to the rules, by Contador, the FCS and the UCI is doing long term damage to the credibility of the sport.

I have to agree with Andy, except I think the credibility of the sport went a while ago. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy it though. The sport will be poorer for this episode.

nweststeyn

Also in agreement with Andy there... It's making a mockery of the very system they are trying to show is 'cleaning up' the sport.

I wish there was more racing going on at the moment, I'd rather be eagerly awaiting the result of a good race than cynically awaiting the result of a farcical doping case.

LeicesterLad

I also agree with Andy to a point, however i'd say it was WADA/CAS/UCI making a mockery of the sport, not Contador, its them who have taken 18 months to get to the current state of affairs, Contador and his Legal team have made appeals, and applications etc etc because that is their right as a defence team, its upto WADA/CAS to bring preceedings to a close, not Contador.

andyp

LeicesterLad wrote:

I also agree with Andy to a point, however i'd say it was WADA/CAS/UCI making a mockery of the sport, not Contador, its them who have taken 18 months to get to the current state of affairs, Contador and his Legal team have made appeals, and applications etc etc because that is their right as a defence team, its upto WADA/CAS to bring preceedings to a close, not Contador.

I'd agree with to a point. WADA have only really been involved in the latter stages, the initial delays were caused by the UCI who, lest we forget, sat on this for two months before it was leaked, and the FCS who made a decision to ban Contador for a year, told everyone this is what they planned to do, then performed a U turn after pressure from the Spanish Government.

What a farce, I keep expecting Brian Rix to appear at any moment.

sherer

andyp wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

I also agree with Andy to a point, however i'd say it was WADA/CAS/UCI making a mockery of the sport, not Contador, its them who have taken 18 months to get to the current state of affairs, Contador and his Legal team have made appeals, and applications etc etc because that is their right as a defence team, its upto WADA/CAS to bring preceedings to a close, not Contador.

I'd agree with to a point. WADA have only really been involved in the latter stages, the initial delays were caused by the UCI who, lest we forget, sat on this for two months before it was leaked, and the FCS who made a decision to ban Contador for a year, told everyone this is what they planned to do, then performed a U turn after pressure from the Spanish Government.

What a farce, I keep expecting Brian Rix to appear at any moment.

I think the UCI thing is the most damming. I get a feeling they wanted to brush this under the carpet and it was only when the lab leaked this to the press they had to take some action. Makes you wonder what else they didn't bother to tell us about

LeicesterLad

sherer wrote:

andyp wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

I also agree with Andy to a point, however i'd say it was WADA/CAS/UCI making a mockery of the sport, not Contador, its them who have taken 18 months to get to the current state of affairs, Contador and his Legal team have made appeals, and applications etc etc because that is their right as a defence team, its upto WADA/CAS to bring preceedings to a close, not Contador.

I'd agree with to a point. WADA have only really been involved in the latter stages, the initial delays were caused by the UCI who, lest we forget, sat on this for two months before it was leaked, and the FCS who made a decision to ban Contador for a year, told everyone this is what they planned to do, then performed a U turn after pressure from the Spanish Government.

What a farce, I keep expecting Brian Rix to appear at any moment.

I think the UCI thing is the most damming. I get a feeling they wanted to brush this under the carpet and it was only when the lab leaked this to the press they had to take some action. Makes you wonder what else they didn't bother to tell us about

Lots and lots and lots and lots of things about LA probably.

Doobz

Nothing Exiting!! :roll:

http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/wada- ... le-on-cas/

WADA has noticed the article written by the Associated Press on January 11, and wants to clarify that during the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) hearing into the case of Alberto Contador at no stage did WADA challenge any member of the panel for a lack of independence.

WADA is now awaiting the decision to be rendered by CAS.

As with all cases, and following the approach adopted throughout this case, in order to maintain the integrity of the legal process WADA will make no further comment.

cajun_cyclist

I just think if cyclists were suspended for similar charges as has happened, there should be equitable treatment for all. There are conflicting stories, if only I were in Switzerland.

Doobz

Looks like today might be the day we hear some news..

josame

Doobz wrote:

Looks like today might be the day we hear some news..

Where'd ya hear that??