Kreuziger out of Tour. Bio irregularities.

andyp

I'm sure he decided to back track, and that the team were not involved in that statement at all.

joelsim

Interesting piece here

http://inrng.com/2014/06/roman-kreuzige ... more-21057

frenchfighter

He is racing Tour of Poland and if shows sufficient form he will likely ride the Vuelta.

No new info from UCI etc so no real reason Tinkoff can bench him.

dish_dash

er what? So why bench him for the tour only? Bizarre...

frenchfighter

http://m.cyclingnews.com/news/kreuziger ... sport-case

Seems a bit odd to me but maybe they were worried about a sanction during the Tour.

andyp

Probably getting their moneys worth before his inevitable ban.

mulletmaster

Saxo in not giving a fig about potential doping non shocker! I hope he goes and cleans up with massive big ring solo attacks up the climbs, that would raise a chuckle.

jimmythecuckoo

I never cease to be amazed by Riis and his attitude. Get him out.

Dorset_Boy

A complete contrast to Sky's attitude, yet who takes all the flak?

Riis really is very dirty isn't he.

The_Boy

It's possible they are doing it to put pressure on the UCI to deal with the case faster than they are. I don't want to cut them too much slack - what with their history, and their obviously being dicks - but it does seem a bit odd to drop him from the Tour team, only to bring him back in three/four weeks later. Especially since the case relates to his time on another team.

RichN95.

The_Boy wrote:

It's possible they are doing it to put pressure on the UCI to deal with the case faster than they are. I don't want to cut them too much slack - what with their history, and their obviously being dicks - but it does seem a bit odd to drop him from the Tour team, only to bring him back in three/four weeks later. Especially since the case relates to his time on another team.

There may be something in this. I remember how many times Ballan was voluntarily banned before he was actually charged. Until Kreuziger is actually charged and a case has not been opened (as I believe the current situation is), I don't see why he shouldn't keep riding.

thomthom

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kreuzig ... sport-case

"It's true that Roman is on the roster. He was on it before, and we spoke to him and he said that he’s not had any new information from the UCI in terms of the sanctions so we feel, like we said before, that it’s not up to us to stop him from racing without there being solid concrete evidence," Feltrin told Cyclingnews.

"There's going to be a trial I suppose, or may be not, but as a team we have to apply the contract and that's based on the model created by the UCI and I couldn't see a clause in there that says that we have to suspend him. We have to allow him to race as long as the UCI don’t suspend him.

"We felt that it wasn't appropriate to race him at the Tour due to the timing. There's been a month and he’s had a chance to get organised. If you look at from the legal standpoint he’s innocent until proven guilty."

"If the situation doesn't change he could well do the Vuelta. He has a defence to organise but if he can concentrate on racing and had piece of mind then we'll consider him."

salsiccia1

ThomThom wrote:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kreuziger-to-ride-tour-of-poland-despite-passport-case

"It's true that Roman is on the roster. He was on it before, and we spoke to him and he said that he’s not had any new information from the UCI in terms of the sanctions so we feel, like we said before, that it’s not up to us to stop him from racing without there being solid concrete evidence," Feltrin told Cyclingnews.

"There's going to be a trial I suppose, or may be not, but as a team we have to apply the contract and that's based on the model created by the UCI and I couldn't see a clause in there that says that we have to suspend him. We have to allow him to race as long as the UCI don’t suspend him.

"We felt that it wasn't appropriate to race him at the Tour due to the timing. There's been a month and he’s had a chance to get organised. If you look at from the legal standpoint he’s innocent until proven guilty."

"If the situation doesn't change he could well do the Vuelta. He has a defence to organise but if he can concentrate on racing and had piece of mind then we'll consider him."

I don't think that's unreasonable.

dish_dash

True, innocent until proven guilty etc etc. Though don't think we've had an acquittal on a biopassport case yet.

But how about some consistency by the team. It was the team that went public and pulled him from the tour. I don't understand why they feel that it wasn't appropriate to race him at the Tour but it is at the Vuelta or Tour of Poland? Surely the hearing could start at any time...

Presumably they wanted to avoid Kreuziger potentially tainting a Contador Tour victory. But now that Bert's crocked Kreuziger is back in...

dish_dash

Gregor Brown now suggesting on twitter that Kreuziger may not start Poland...

mm1

Oleg on twitter threatening to sue the UCI for not disclosing bio-passport concerns before the team signed Kreuziger. This is about to get very interesting.

frenchfighter

Interesting one that...

@olegtinkov · 1h
We'll sue #UCI for non-disclosure that @Roman86_K had bio passport violations in 09/10 when we signed him in 2012.They knew, and hide this?
@olegtinkov · 1h
I lost millions of euro for not knowing this issue once the contract was cleared by UCI. Now, they have to pay us big bucks for this.

The_Boy

mm1 wrote:

Oleg on twitter threatening to sue the UCI for not disclosing bio-passport concerns before the team signed Kreuziger. This is about to get very interesting.

I expect he would have more luck suing Kreuziger. Not that he's going to do anything anyway, the oxygen thieving dullard.

The_Boy

If only their was some way around this. Like, I dunno, a clause in the rider's contract that would allow the said contract to be made void in the event of something like this happening.

r0bh

The_Boy wrote:

If only their was some way around this. Like, I dunno, a clause in the rider's contract that would allow the said contract to be made void in the event of something like this happening.

Or, perhaps, doing some due diligence and having their own people look at his bio-passport.

frenchfighter

Presumably Oleg/Tinkoff have had news of Kreuziger's sanction? Or that UCI have told him Kreuziger cannot race?

Otherwise what is Oleg on about losing millions (even if an exaggeration).

The_Boy

frenchfighter wrote:

what is Oleg on about

A fair question at the best of times.

The_Boy

r0bh wrote:

The_Boy wrote:

If only their was some way around this. Like, I dunno, a clause in the rider's contract that would allow the said contract to be made void in the event of something like this happening.

Or, perhaps, doing some due diligence and having their own people look at his bio-passport.

I was going to suggest this also but given the bio-passport processes, I expect it would be possible for something to be missed. If however the team are doling out multi-million pound contracts without anti-doping clauses then they only have themselves to blame.

Pross

I don't understand how this is costing Oleg millions. Kreuziger has ridden and assisted the team in getting publicity and as soon as any wrong doing is discovered no doubt he'll be sacked. Makes no sense.

Crampeur

Apparently he's been provisionally suspended by the UCI?

Pokerface

Crampeur wrote:

Apparently he's been provisionally suspended by the UCI?

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDe ... LangId%3D1

frenchfighter

The UCI are still not fit for purpose. Do something properly and get on with it or lay off completely. I guess they would have stayed quiet if Oleg hadn't tweeted what he had.

mm1

Lets see, rider told that there is a case to answer (which as we have seen, may have taken months or years to build) and is invited to put forward his expert evidence as to why there is no case to answer. Team temporarily withdraw him from racing, fearing adverse publicity during the one month of the year when global media is paying attention to cycling. Team then calls governing body's bluff by putting rider back into action, forcing this rather messy suspension before the final outcome of the investigation is known (although we all know what this will be). Of course the team knew this was coming while Kreuziger was helping Alberto to win Tireno. Maybe the UCI should just suspend the team and have done?

Pokerface

I'm out of the loop here.

I know this is an 'old' case, but is the delay down to the UCI or the rider? I thought the UCI gave him the chance to present his case (which he did) and when they didn't buy it, he was given more time to get another expert witness?

And now we are waiting for the case to proceed further?

Is that about it?

tailwindhome

UCI statement on Roman Kreuziger

02.08.2014

The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) has imposed a provisional suspension with immediate effect on Tinkoff-Saxo’s rider Roman Kreuziger (Czech Republic) in connection with the recent assertion of an anti-doping rule violation based on his athlete biological passport. The decision was taken following confirmation received on August 1st, 2014 that Roman Kreuziger intended to participate in the upcoming Tour of Poland and Vuelta a España. At this stage of the procedure, the UCI will not comment any further.

So withdraw from races and you avoid a doping linked suspension?