Where is Michael Rasmussen? - Page 2

lol timebomb Rasmussen.

hahahaaahha

I doubt Boogerd was doing bus gas, and bovine hemaglobin. I assume Rass stuck everything in his veins on the stages and tts that mattered.

Boogy got some blood from the same proprietor as Rass, thats all. So did Mench.

Read the PDF file of the UCI letter to Rasmussen and read it very carefully. There is a contradictory between the rules in the letter and the warning that follows...

The UCI letter is below the story.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Heroes you mean 4 warnings. 2 more than he is allowed?

OR do you mean he was telling them he was in Mexico when he was in Italy, I don't think you meant that because we knew all that.

Do you mean that it is strange that a recorded warning was given for he first offence i.e. not being available between 4th - 12th June, but then when he lied again about his whereabouts by stating he would be in Mexico until the 28th but being in Italy on the 26th nothing further was done?

it was all contradictory. I do not know why they let him pass in the first instance. Just a case of dope til ya drop son, we will give you the Tommy Simpson life insurance sponsorship which pays costs on death for the helicopter to the morgue and the burial.

They wrote that he would be punished by a next offense. Before that they wrote down the rules. If you count the offenses and the one of the letter he already had to much offenses.

The Vogelzang report is pretty crappy (its also as PDF file with the original CH article). The report could be right about the fact that the UCI already should have banned Ras.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Well actually they didn't say this.

What they said is that 'you are responsible ....' and 'the situation is critical ....'

I still feel under the rules he should have been allowed to start the Tour and complete it. The Danish federation tests were always garbage, he didn't live there and hadn't raced for a while for them. His focus was the Tour and certainly not riding for Denmark.

I think the ones that were important were from UCI and he had not received sufficient written warnings to warrant a ban. Also it doesn't really matter what they could have done they didn't do it. Rabobank & Rasmussen at the time of the Tour were still officially allowed to start. For this reason I can understand Prudholmes view that UCI were trying to destroy the Tour and I feel UCI's incompetance needs to be punished and sanctioned just as much as Rasmussen's faults need to be addressed.

By the way CH do you think that Ras may at some point bring libel charges against Whitley Richards?

Maybe if you are going by the number of missed tests, but his lying about his whereabouts only came to light during the Tour. That was what killed him.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

There is a "special" rules for Tour de France, a missed test or a warning during the (2 ?) month before Tour de France is Tour de France ban for that rider so Ras was de facto not allowed to start, a second warning wasn't necessary.

Actually they did say this but somehow the second page of the letter is not online. I will fix it in the next hour...

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

Is this a UCI rule? It sounds like an ASO rule. Which would understandably make Prudhomme unhappy as he is reliant on UCI informing him if a rider missed a test in the two months prior.

I don't think UCI can be blamed for deliberately engineering a fracas. The focus and pressure only went on Ras cause he kept the yellow jersey through the first time trial. Nobody foresaw that. And it only exploded because the lie was exposed by Cassani. Nobody could foresee that.

Seems to me that Rabobank are the ones most responsible to me. They should have been the ones who withdrew Ras knowing the two month rule was contravened... and they should have been the ones who prevented the lie even happening... given that they were communicating with Ras knowing he was not where he was supposed to be.

__________________

Its not an ASO rule, its an UCI rule. Yes Rabo is as responsible as the UCI but they probebly didn't think that they had to take the 'public' rules serious this time. They still thought those rules were only for the public and they could do business as usual.

__________________
Cycling pictures


www.cyclingheroes-pictures.com

the elephant in the room is why were Rabobank so equanimous or actually indifferent, with Rass misreporting?

Why not ask the bank's head?

So why was this rule infraction not made public at the time (it may have been but I didn't hear about it)? Sounds to me like UCI trying to smokescreen and cover their ass.

Instead we had Prudhomme remonstrating that the UCI hadn't taken action that they should have... but the UCI saying that it was only two warnings which technically didn't make it a breach. If there was this UCI rule that you weren't allowed to miss a test in the two months prior to the Tour de France... or you would be disqualified... then why wasn't that discussed earlier in the media?

I think its like you say CH. UCI knew about the breach. Rabo knew. And they both played it down, thinking that he would be only a KOM contender and not wanting to hurt the sponsor or the race or cycling... let it pass.

Then Ras's sudden yellow jersey likelihood was going to make some major egg stick to faces. If Ras had won... and it was found out that UCI failed to enforce their own rule and have him be a non-starter... imagine the hell to pay.

As it is... how can UCI be killing careers for doping transgressions... when they are not even accountable for themselves following their own rules. It was their responsibility to bar him from the race. It would have been seen as harsh... but a lot better than him winning something and then people finding out later that UCI had bent their own rules.

So we have the farce of Ras losing his career over him misreporting his whereabouts... and a couple of Rabo guys sacked... So who is getting sacked at the UCI for creating this whole mess by not enforcing Ras's rules breach and letting him ride?

__________________

Quis costodiet ipsos custodies? Absolutely no-one. The UCI cannot enforce anything. Their conflict of interest is like a leaden weight. Until they are dragged kicking and screaming by the force of the media (bloodsuckers that they are) or the police, the UCI will be as useless as tits on a bull.