So that means all riders should be gone................Originally Posted by limerickman .
This is the issue : if one rider is banned, then the other rider should be banned also.
So that means all riders should be gone................Originally Posted by limerickman .
This is the issue : if one rider is banned, then the other rider should be banned also.
Your comprehension still hasn't improved, I see.Originally Posted by Tim Lamkin .
So that means all riders should be gone................
A life ban is fine for clear cut offences, word if he'll get off.Originally Posted by whuppingboy .
Time and time again it really gets me how these people continue to use illegal substances. Actually it pisses me off. Athletes that do this need to be banned for life.
They take part in an event with an unfair advantage over everyone else and will take the glory and the prize money even though they know that they are cheating..
It brings the whole sport down and makes the tour look a shambles.
I know doping is a very complicated issue and opens a whole can of worms every time its discussed, but i say ban them for life.
A deterrent and zero tolerance to this kind of thing would eventually clean the sport up.
Sorry for the rant but i needed to say it...
Whupp.
Originally Posted by steve .
A life ban is fine for clear cut offences, word if he'll get off.
Originally Posted by Andrija .
For me, presence of diethylhexyl is stronger evidence of doping than almost undetectable amount of clenbuterol.
Lack of test validation for the plastic means Contador will probably avoid punishment (again). However, it's strong warning for all riders.
While I agree with a fair chunk of what is said in that article, especially if there are compounds in the sample that can be linked to transfusions, this I have an issue with:Originally Posted by gtm .
then again.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5846/German-journalist-claims-UCI-denied-Alberto-Contador-positive-test-says-rider-may-have-received-transfusions.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+velonation_pro_cycling+%28Cycling+News+%26+Race+Results+%7C+VeloNation.com%29#ixzz112qJ3g6h
Having a small amount of Clembuterol in his blood from rogue steak is one thing but plastic..............
"Seppelt felt that the governing body was deliberately stalling. “The UCI has had many problems with credibility in the last few years, like in the case of Lance Armstrong. [In Contador's case] the A and B sample were already taken, the procedure was done and still the public wasn't informed. It appears they want to keep this case under the covers or give Alberto Contador the opportunity to find arguments for his innocence. This should not happen. To me it appears to be a cartel from those who want to conceal.â€"
They don't really have to believe the "steak story" - there's Clem in his test and it's a banned substance, regardless of the stupidly small amounts involved. They're quite in their rights to say "Sorry pal, we really don't want to hear your arguements but we will because we want to appear fair but in all honesty, you're f*#ked."Originally Posted by tambourlain .
My first impression was that the food contamination story was true. It was a little convinient that someone brought steak from Spain and that Vino didn't eat any. But given the circumstances, it seemed plausible. Contador tested positive on the one day. Not before and not after. That means that if he took it on the second rest day that he would have had to take a tiny amount that would do absolutely nothing for him. But the finding of blood bag chemicals in his blood stream changes everything, including the clembuterol situation. Contador did little after last year's Tour. Maybe he came into the 2010 season with a little extra weight that he was having a hard time shedding. So he reached for the clem. Later in the season, he needed blood for the Tour. He probably thought that it had been long enough for all the clem to clear his system. But clem lasts a long time. If he is transfusing blood, then he is using a doctor. It's even possible that the doctor checked for clem and didn't find any. Apparently, the instruments that were used to test the Tour samples were hyper sensitive. 400 times more than they needed to be. Contador's doctor's instruments may just not have been all that senstitive. So the doctor gave Contador the all clear on his blood, and Contador, being in a tight position at the second rest day, goes for it. Along with his own blood, he gets a tiny amount of clem taken much earlier in the season. The doctor got beat by two pieces of technology - a hypersensitive test for clem, and a new test for blood bag residue.
The blood bag residue test cannot be used against Contador directly, as it has not yet been approved. But that doesn't mean that the people making the decision about his clem findings are going to forget that information. They will feel fairly sure that Contador blood doped, even if the evidence cannot be used. And that will play into the subjective decision that they make regarding the acceptance of Contador's clem story. All that they have to do is say, "you had clem in your blood, it is illegal, you are out". They don't have to take the steak story into account. And the blood bag findings will likely mean that they will dismiss the steak story in their own minds - even if they never say so directly.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.