Contador Cleared... for now at least.

[doctorSpoc]

But if you want to use his comment as a credible argument, you have to say that it (McQuaid's comment) refers to job Spanish commission did before prime minister's suggestion. It's one year ban that he's considering "top knotch".

WRONG!!!

you can listen to McQuaid praise the job of the spanish federation AFTER the decision to clear Contador and AFTER "the political pressure" in the video below "in context".. relevant part is at about 2min into the video, but watch the whole thing.. the press was even obviously trying to goad him into being critical of the spanish federation.. " at the end of the day i don't think we can't blame the spanish federation on anything... the've done a good job.. the've done the work... and we've been please with the work that the've done".. but listen for yourself.. he's quite clear that he AND the UCI as a whole has been pleased with their job.. how do you square that against the spanish federation making an obvious and fundamental mistake if what you claim is correct? i think you are mistaken in you assessment of the case is the obvious answer..

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/video-mcquaids-reaction-to-contador-decision

 

[Andrija]

Now your stance is clear. I respect it.
I'm for every validated test or method, no matter how sensitive it is, it just has to be validated. The problem is when test is valid, and it's in use to show irregularities, but those irregularities, itself, aren't validly defined. I think that's the case with clenbuterol. You mustn't have it, but under certain circumstances you can. And in interpretation of circumstances you can go very far from the original principle regarding incriminated substance.
In this case, I think, the bottom line and the way out of problem is zero tolerance. That's the rule for clenbuterol defined long before this test has showed up.

 

[Andrija]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .



WRONG!!!

you can listen to McQuaid praise the job of the spanish federation AFTER the decision to clear Contador and AFTER "the political pressure" in the video below "in context".. relevant part is at about 2min into the video, but watch the whole thing.. the press was even obviously trying to goad him into being critical of the spanish federation.. " at the end of the day i don't think we can't blame the spanish federation on anything... the've done a good job.. the've done the work... and we've been please with the work that the've done".. but listen for yourself.. he's quite clear that he AND the UCI as a whole has been pleased with their job.. how do you square that against the spanish federation making an obvious and fundamental mistake if what you claim is correct? i think you are mistaken in you assessment of the case is the obvious answer..

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/video-mcquaids-reaction-to-contador-decision

Please stop.
He said it was good job when reporter asked him whether it is good principle to give cases to national federations. He was defending principle. Also, he was clearly referring to investigation not to verdict which he didn't want to comment then, but with this appeal he expressed his opinion.

 

[slovakguy]

as for contador's protestations of innocence, i have to tip the argument to andrija. while i agree that the level of clenbuterol in ac's blood was quite low, what we cannot determine from what we have available to us is the timeline for degredation to achieve that level in the blood. It is well within the realm of possibility that ac transfused before the difficult stage (remember the bits about plasticisers in the blood revealed in a test which is as yet unvalidated) with a sample drawn at a training time when the clenbuterol use would have been virtually undetectable based on prior experimentation and during a period in which he wasn't tested. this is equally as valid an explanation as contador's tainted meat alibi. what surprises me is how contador has moved the issue from the one shop which his friend patronised for the beef to, what, now three possible shops? additionally, given that the first shop named by contador's defence came up clean both in samples available and through a search of its records (back to the ranches which supplied the shop), contador can be seen as casting about for a vendor who can be portrayed as suspect. starts to resemble the ever changing landis alibis.

if there is to be anything more absurd in this whole affair, it will come from pat's mouth. any man who can stand there and bemoan that the delays were caused, in part, because the spanish federation delivered their verdict in spanish and that necessitated a translation which caused the delay should, perhaps, keep his mouth shut. really, pat, the rotters. delivering their verdict in their own language and it caught you off guard.

 

[doctorSpoc]

a few correction slovakguy...

a) we do know the degredation for the clenbuterol.. AC tested clean in the two day preceding the positives.. so we know for a fact that he only ever had a tiny concentration of clenbuterol in his system.. we know that only a tiny amount of clenbuterol entered his body..

b) the shop in question has not changed.. the shop in fact has 3 suppliers of meat.. one of the three has a record of using clenbuterol in the past..

 

[slovakguy]

okay. i will concede the point on the question of the butcher's shop. although the link of one supplier to having used clenbuterol in the past does not preclude the possibility of the supplier mending his way.

but the point on degradation rate of clenbuterol is thoroughly suspect. you consider that contador used clenbuterol only after the two clean positives and only during the tour. what i argue is that he may very well have used clenbuterol in the early training season and allowed for the drug to degrade to a level which was then believed to be undetectable before he had a pint pulled for later use. then, after several clean tests and during a rest day and before some difficult mountain stages contador put the blood back in. uci tests contador at this point (either through suspicion or just chance) and sends his samples to a lab which can test for minute levels of many substances. lo and behold, traces of clenbuterol and plasticisers in his blood. while i won't hold my breath on the issue, the uci could very easily turn the opinion quite quickly if we were to learn about the presence or absence of plasticisers in his samples from the earlier testing. quite similar to how the retesting of landis' earlier "clean" samples, when subjected to closer examination, revealed the same exogenous testosterone.

but ultimately i believe that pat, the uci and the tour would like this to go away so that they don't suffer the embarrassment of having a second tour's winner vacated because of a doping bust.

 

[aleajactaesst]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

a few correction slovakguy...

a) we do know the degredation for the clenbuterol.. AC tested clean in the two day preceding the positives.. so we know for a fact that he only ever had a tiny concentration of clenbuterol in his system.. we know that only a tiny amount of clenbuterol entered his body..

b) the shop in question has not changed.. the shop in fact has 3 suppliers of meat.. one of the three has a record of using clenbuterol in the past..

It's not relevant that the butcher shop had tainted beef in the past, in order for that to clear AC, he'd have to show that this was the shop this time and that there is tainted beef there at the time of ingestion. He can't do that. So, it remains an interesting theory. One the spanish federation decided to allow but one that I think the CAS can not allow. They have to rely on facts and right now the only facts regarding the Clen is that it was found and no evidence of the inadvertent use has been provided beyond the theory.

AJE

 

[Andrija]

WADA will appeal too.
Independently from UCI.

To me, situation doesn't look too promising for El Rata.
They're really roasting him on quiet fire. But he started first. Spaniards were first who were dragging this case and made suspicious decision.

Unless he receives two years ban, he won't loose anything from racing. Only titles.
So, at the end, his cycling won't be effected, just incomes and reputation.

 

[slovakguy]

will someone please get ricco a job in a shoe factory or maybe the fiat warehouse? can anyone think of a person more detached from reality?