Lizzie

dinyull

dish_dash wrote:

So, CAS ruled and the position therefore is that she has only missed two tests.

We don't know precisely how many OOC tests she has taken. 0-9 seems to be the range over a 6 month period.

She clearly takes responsibility in that interview with Orla.

No one mentioned PFP's botox injections yet... legal under WADA apparently...

Correct, BUT she didn't know CAS would clear the first miss. To miss 2 further tests is dicing with death.

dinyull

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

Its seems as far as most are concerned a missed test equals a failed test which is very much not the case.

Is that right? Most of what I've read suggests that folk can accept 1 missed test, but 3 and a load of "shaggy dog" stories is harder to take.

Worth bearing in mind CAS held up that the 1st missed test doesn't count because UKAD didn't do it properly, so she's not actually missed 3.

Agreed, o/wise she'd be banned! Whilst CAS cleared her, there is an element of the "shaggy dog" story about why she was cleared on the last test, which won't sit well with everyone.

I thought they only cleared the 1st, not the 3rd???

jscl

Dinyull wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

So, CAS ruled and the position therefore is that she has only missed two tests.

We don't know precisely how many OOC tests she has taken. 0-9 seems to be the range over a 6 month period.

She clearly takes responsibility in that interview with Orla.

No one mentioned PFP's botox injections yet... legal under WADA apparently...

Correct, BUT she didn't know CAS would clear the first miss. To miss 2 further tests is dicing with death.

Have people actually taken the time to read her statement?

CAS will be made aware of MORE information than is publicly visible in order to come to the correct conclusion. Why is it anybodies business to need to know more about her family emergency? It just isn't.

The third one, was a failure in the system. Simon @ BC left without informing Lizzie and whilst she was still reporting to him her whereabouts, he wasn't around to update ADAMS. I know well that the BC compliance team has been going through some tough staffing issues recently with Simon (who's been there for years) leaving, Neil leaving and a new member of staff passing away unexpectedly. So they're been relying on part-time shoe-in's from other departments too.

Lizzie was more than aware of the potential implications of a third issue, hence the meeting with UKAD and BC collectively to work a solution to ensure it didn't happen. That system failed, it happens. Ultimately only the first has been cleared and now she needs to continue to be careful. It's not her fault and she shouldn't be being trolled for it either.

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

Richmond Racer 2

Dinyull wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

So, CAS ruled and the position therefore is that she has only missed two tests.

We don't know precisely how many OOC tests she has taken. 0-9 seems to be the range over a 6 month period.

She clearly takes responsibility in that interview with Orla.

No one mentioned PFP's botox injections yet... legal under WADA apparently...

Correct, BUT she didn't know CAS would clear the first miss. To miss 2 further tests is dicing with death.

Yes, we get it :-)

Richmond Racer 2

dish_dash wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Even the most successful female riders aren't tested anything like as frequently as successful male riders

60-70 in a year for someone like Cav vs 16 for the women's World Champ

Ja, but remember it is 16 tests over 7 months (she says 16 tests in 2016). Also, Armitstead had 22 race days thus far in 2016 vs Cavendish's 53 race days. So fewer opportunities for in-competition testing for a start.

JaJa, but fact remains that there is still far less testing amongst the women's peloton

bobmcstuff

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Richmond Racer 2

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

So, CAS ruled and the position therefore is that she has only missed two tests.

We don't know precisely how many OOC tests she has taken. 0-9 seems to be the range over a 6 month period.

She clearly takes responsibility in that interview with Orla.

No one mentioned PFP's botox injections yet... legal under WADA apparently...

Correct, BUT she didn't know CAS would clear the first miss. To miss 2 further tests is dicing with death.

Have people actually taken the time to read her statement?

CAS will be made aware of MORE information than is publicly visible in order to come to the correct conclusion. Why is it anybodies business to need to know more about her family emergency? It just isn't.

The third one, was a failure in the system. Simon @ BC left without informing Lizzie and whilst she was still reporting to him her whereabouts, he wasn't around to update ADAMS. I know well that the BC compliance team has been going through some tough staffing issues recently with Simon (who's been there for years) leaving, Neil leaving and a new member of staff passing away unexpectedly. So they're been relying on part-time shoe-in's from other departments too.

Lizzie was more than aware of the potential implications of a third issue, hence the meeting with UKAD and BC collectively to work a solution to ensure it didn't happen. That system failed, it happens. Ultimately only the first has been cleared and now she needs to continue to be careful. It's not her fault and she shouldn't be being trolled for it either.

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

That is as daft a comment as Lizzie telling people to go and ride their bikes.

Clearly a number of us have opinions on this matter, and more to discuss as more information has emerged day by day.

If ongoing discussion makes you frustrated, perhaps other threads might make you less so

jscl

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

wallace_and_gromit

Dinyull wrote:

I thought they only cleared the 1st, not the 3rd???

Correct. My mistake. Thanks.

dinyull

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

So, CAS ruled and the position therefore is that she has only missed two tests.

We don't know precisely how many OOC tests she has taken. 0-9 seems to be the range over a 6 month period.

She clearly takes responsibility in that interview with Orla.

No one mentioned PFP's botox injections yet... legal under WADA apparently...

Correct, BUT she didn't know CAS would clear the first miss. To miss 2 further tests is dicing with death.

Have people actually taken the time to read her statement?

CAS will be made aware of MORE information than is publicly visible in order to come to the correct conclusion. Why is it anybodies business to need to know more about her family emergency? It just isn't.

The third one, was a failure in the system. Simon @ BC left without informing Lizzie and whilst she was still reporting to him her whereabouts, he wasn't around to update ADAMS. I know well that the BC compliance team has been going through some tough staffing issues recently with Simon (who's been there for years) leaving, Neil leaving and a new member of staff passing away unexpectedly. So they're been relying on part-time shoe-in's from other departments too.

Lizzie was more than aware of the potential implications of a third issue, hence the meeting with UKAD and BC collectively to work a solution to ensure it didn't happen. That system failed, it happens. Ultimately only the first has been cleared and now she needs to continue to be careful. It's not her fault and she shouldn't be being trolled for it either.

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

I was under the impression that 1st miss was in Sweden, 2nd Admin error (Simon?!) and 3rd family emergency? Have I got the last 2 mixed up?

I don't care about the emergency, don't need or want to know what happened.

The_Boy

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Even the most successful female riders aren't tested anything like as frequently as successful male riders

60-70 in a year for someone like Cav vs 16 for the women's World Champ

Significantly fewer race days, aren't there? That'll have an effect.

dinyull

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

bobmcstuff

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

Most of us aren't trying to convince ourselves she's guilty of anything, apart from administrative failings.

The last couple of pages have partly been about how various posters think she won't be able to win in Rio with all this going on (i.e., directly about the racing)

jscl

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

Again, please explain to me where her idiocy is?

1 - UKAD Failure
2 - Family Emergency
3 - BC Failed her

DeVlaeminck

Can I just check - when JCSL said the second strike was effectively BCs fault - is that accepted fact ? In other words BC had told her that she could report her whereabouts to person x and then nobody told her that had changed (I'm ignoring arguments that the ultimate responsibility is hers to make sure whatever system she had in place was reliable ) ?

dish_dash

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

Again, please explain to me where her idiocy is?

1 - UKAD Failure
2 - Family Emergency
3 - BC Failed her

I thought 3 was the family emergency compounded by Simon leaving. 2 she says was a goof up on her part...

jscl

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Can I just check - when JCSL said the second strike was effectively BCs fault - is that accepted fact ? In other words BC had told her that she could report her whereabouts to person x and then nobody told her that had changed (I'm ignoring arguments that the ultimate responsibility is hers to make sure whatever system she had in place was reliable ) ?

100%

It was agreed with UKAD and BC Compliance that after two issues, to avoid a third strike, that she would report bi-weekly in to BC Compliance team. Simon left BC (the guy she was reporting to) and nobody informed her, so no action was being taken.

jscl

dish_dash wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

Again, please explain to me where her idiocy is?

1 - UKAD Failure
2 - Family Emergency
3 - BC Failed her

I thought 3 was the family emergency compounded by Simon leaving. 2 she says was a goof up on her part...

Sorry, yes, you're right.

2nd was a filing failure.

bobmcstuff

Dinyull wrote:

I don't care about the emergency, don't need or want to know what happened.

The issue is as soon as you put that one out there as an excuse you are inviting questions.

As it stands only the first one (UKAD error) has been cleared anyway, so she'd maybe have been better off to not give it as an excuse, or to say "there was a family emergency and I forgot to update ADAMS - my bad" rather than going into more detail about how her and UKAD disagreed on the severity of the emergency.

dinyull

dish_dash wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

Again, please explain to me where her idiocy is?

1 - UKAD Failure
2 - Family Emergency
3 - BC Failed her

I thought 3 was the family emergency compounded by Simon leaving. 2 she says was a goof up on her part...

This is what I understand.

The idiocy is in not updating the system when you're already on 2 strikes.

jscl

Dinyull wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Ultimately, if CAS are satisfied, then so should everyone else. I can't believe it's taken this many pages of going over the same matters.

It's an internet forum - and also a lot of the discussion has been tangentially related at best...

Well aware of that.

But aren't most people here because you're fans of the sport? Act like it. Age old saying 'Innocent until proven guilty' and that should be heeded in this case too. It seems like people will go to no end to convince themselves (and others) that someone MUST be guilty of something.

But her idiocy has dragged the sport we're fans of through the mud.

Again, please explain to me where her idiocy is?

1 - UKAD Failure
2 - Family Emergency
3 - BC Failed her

I thought 3 was the family emergency compounded by Simon leaving. 2 she says was a goof up on her part...

This is what I understand.

The idiocy is in not updating the system when you're already on 2 strikes.

I'm just going to repeat myself, again.

After being on two strikes, a system was put in to place and she was reporting, the system just wasn't getting updated. (BC's fault).

neonriver

JSCL wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Can I just check - when JCSL said the second strike was effectively BCs fault - is that accepted fact ? In other words BC had told her that she could report her whereabouts to person x and then nobody told her that had changed (I'm ignoring arguments that the ultimate responsibility is hers to make sure whatever system she had in place was reliable ) ?

100%

It was agreed with UKAD and BC Compliance that after two issues, to avoid a third strike, that she would report bi-weekly in to BC Compliance team. Simon left BC (the guy she was reporting to) and nobody informed her, so no action was being taken.

I though reporting to BC was only a back up and she was still doing her on form and Simon was only checking that everything was right. And according to her statement she had managed to change the overnight accommodation but not the 1 hour window for the next day.

Edit From her statement

"Unfortunately this system fell apart on the 9th of June when UKAD tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be. Simon Thornton had left BC 3 weeks prior to my strike without anybody informing me. We worked under a policy of 'no news was good news' as outlined in my support plan with UKAD. If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented. My over night accommodation ( the bed in which I was sleeping the morning of the test) was correct, but I had failed to change the one hour testing slot, it was clearly impossible to be in both locations."

kingstongraham

CAS didn't rule on the third test, only the first one. So having more information about the circumstances around the third one is irrelevant.

The problem is that if you start giving people a free pass because they seem nice, that's a dangerous road.

What we know is that there are 3 occasions when tests could have been done that they weren't, and one of those three wasn't down to a failing on her side.

jscl

neonriver wrote:

JSCL wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Can I just check - when JCSL said the second strike was effectively BCs fault - is that accepted fact ? In other words BC had told her that she could report her whereabouts to person x and then nobody told her that had changed (I'm ignoring arguments that the ultimate responsibility is hers to make sure whatever system she had in place was reliable ) ?

100%

It was agreed with UKAD and BC Compliance that after two issues, to avoid a third strike, that she would report bi-weekly in to BC Compliance team. Simon left BC (the guy she was reporting to) and nobody informed her, so no action was being taken.

I though reporting to BC was only a back up and she was still doing her on form and Simon was only checking that everything was right. And according to her statement she had managed to change the overnight accommodation but not the 1 hour window for the next day.

Maybe you're right, that's certainly not how it's been explained to me by someone still at BC.

neonriver

JSCL wrote:

neonriver wrote:

JSCL wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Can I just check - when JCSL said the second strike was effectively BCs fault - is that accepted fact ? In other words BC had told her that she could report her whereabouts to person x and then nobody told her that had changed (I'm ignoring arguments that the ultimate responsibility is hers to make sure whatever system she had in place was reliable ) ?

100%

It was agreed with UKAD and BC Compliance that after two issues, to avoid a third strike, that she would report bi-weekly in to BC Compliance team. Simon left BC (the guy she was reporting to) and nobody informed her, so no action was being taken.

I though reporting to BC was only a back up and she was still doing her on form and Simon was only checking that everything was right. And according to her statement she had managed to change the overnight accommodation but not the 1 hour window for the next day.

Maybe you're right, that's certainly not how it's been explained to me by someone still at BC.

I'm only going by how I read her statement which I added in as an edit.

Pross

With regards to the family emergency, I don't know or care what it was (the statement on that part is very muddled though, giving little bits of information whereas she could have just left it as 'it was a family emergency which I'm not prepared to discuss for privacy reasons!) but I'm not convinced this prevented her updating the information.

A few years back I received a call in work from my wife to inform me she was at the doctor with my daughter and they suspected a brain tumour. I immediately got ready to leave work but still shut my computer down, updated my boss on where I was on my projects and gave him my login details so they could check my emails. That isn't because I'm an uncaring sociopath but I knew 5 minutes wasn't going to make a difference and it seemed to be the professional thing to do. I wouldn't have got sacked if I hadn't done it and everyone would have understood. On the drive to the hospital I put in calls to people letting them know what was going on and arranging for my other daughter to be picked up from school and looked after. I'm not even a very organised person. Obviously I don't know how ADAMs works but if as some say it's a simple update via your phone surely it was possible or even a call to BC to get her contact to make the necessary changes whereupon she'd have become aware that he'd left and someone else could have sorted things out. I do have some sympathy but life as a pro cyclist is difficult and ultimately if that is your career you need to fulfill all your requirements both on and off the bike.

dinyull

I'm just going to repeat myself, again.

After being on two strikes, a system was put in to place and she was reporting, the system just wasn't getting updated. (BC's fault).

Ok.

She hold up her hands for the 2nd, which puts her on her last chance

And I'd like to think that if my career and reputation depended on it I'd be checking in with whoever I was sending info to, to make sure they've received it and had acted upon it.

Even so, without knowing the full details, the family emergency probably would have meant updating her whereabouts which she can do up to a minute before the 1 hour window opens.

slowbike

bobmcstuff wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

I don't care about the emergency, don't need or want to know what happened.

The issue is as soon as you put that one out there as an excuse you are inviting questions.

Indeed - but WE, the public don't need to know what happened - that is personal - and up to her and the family if she wishes to tell us.

I would expect that she will or has already divulged that information to BC, UKAD and CAS.

dinyull

Pross wrote:

With regards to the family emergency, I don't know or care what it was (the statement on that part is very muddled though, giving little bits of information whereas she could have just left it as 'it was a family emergency which I'm not prepared to discuss for privacy reasons!) but I'm not convinced this prevented her updating the information.

A few years back I received a call in work from my wife to inform me she was at the doctor with my daughter and they suspected a brain tumour. I immediately got ready to leave work but still shut my computer down, updated my boss on where I was on my projects and gave him my login details so they could check my emails. That isn't because I'm an uncaring sociopath but I knew 5 minutes wasn't going to make a difference and it seemed to be the professional thing to do. I wouldn't have got sacked if I hadn't done it and everyone would have understood. On the drive to the hospital I put in calls to people letting them know what was going on and arranging for my other daughter to be picked up from school and looked after. I'm not even a very organised person. Obviously I don't know how ADAMs works but if as some say it's a simple update via your phone surely it was possible or even a call to BC to get her contact to make the necessary changes whereupon she'd have become aware that he'd left and someone else could have sorted things out. I do have some sympathy but life as a pro cyclist is difficult and ultimately if that is your career you need to fulfill all your requirements both on and off the bike.

Spot on.

DeVlaeminck

Dinyull wrote:

Possibly....is football under WADA?

Comment was based on Rio Ferdinand missing a test and receiving a 8 month ban, that was almost 15 years ago now mind.

If I recollect correctly Ferdinand knew the testers were there waiting for him and deliberately avoided them - that would be like Lizzie getting a call from reception saying the testers are here, saying yeah I'll be down in a minute then leaving via the window.