Disco/Active Bay excluded from IPCT meeting..

Discussion in 'Professional Cycling' started by Dead Star, Dec 8, 2006.

  1. Dead Star

    Dead Star New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, it's not like they didn't see it coming.
     
    Tags:


  2. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115
    Looks like the battle lines are being drawn, DS.

    Peloton can be an unforgiving place - and they will mete out their own justice to
    DC/Active Bay.
    As you say, they can't say that they weren't warned.
     
  3. Bro Deal

    Bro Deal New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't think we have to worry about Active Bay. As I posted a while ago, the smartest way for the ProTour to handle them is to let the clock run out. When Saiz cannot come up with the financial guarantees, his license will be stripped.

    Disco is the more interesting situation. I will laugh my ass off if the ASO does not invite them to the Tour. After the debacle with Landis this year, the Tour will be taking a huge risk if they allow Basso to race. What if he wins and the Fuentes trial or Fuentes himself confirms that Basso was blood doping? The Tour risks being turned into a running farce that will have severe financial consequences in the future.

    I think the ASO should ban the whole DIsco team. There needs to be a clear, unequivicable signal sent that nothing less than a total commitment to the fight against doping is acceptable.
     
  4. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is a meaningless action. Discovery still can race a ProTour event..... The TDF will invite Basso/JU. and others back with open arrms.
     
  5. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    And what happens if the trial does not show Basso/Ju to be guilty? But there are others who are? There are at least 50 riders who are guilty. If the TDF opens the TDF to them, and not to the stars........

    The action tioday is a pouty situation amoung the teams. They want everyone to think they ride clean. But there sure was a lot of blood...... Usually actions such as these turn around and bite them in the ass.. Discovery is American based. The money they bring to the TDF is enormous in media and logo sales....

    The ProTour cannot deny a starting spot in any race to Discovery. They can however deny CSC and Telecom and others. Discovery did not have a rider implicated at the time. The ProTour with this action has admitted they think CSC and Telecom had organized doping going on.

    ProTour Cycling is in deep trouble. Other countries can operate without them. As cycling expands into these countries, the base in which the good ole boy system operates is breaking down.......
     
  6. foxvi

    foxvi New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    As usual inconsistancy - nothing against Giampaolo Caruso but he was implicated in OPuerto and has signed for Lampre. Why are Lampre not excluded?

    Also what has happened to Olaf Ludwig's pro licence? I dont think he transferred it to TMO.
     
  7. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115
    I think that the IPCT is a reasonable bellweather to guage the attitude of the peloton and the directeur sportif's of teams.

    DC seem to have adopted the view that they can go there own way in the aftermath of the fallout from Puerto.
    It's a view which they will rue.
     
  8. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115
    The action may be pouty - and it may be posturing.
    But I think DC have backed themselves in to a corner following OP.
    They've isolated themselves in terms of the rest of the peloton.
    And that's a pretty stupid move on their part.
    You know that when you race you need co-operation and the same goes with administration and running the sport.
    DC, for whatever reason, assume that they can go there own way.
    They can't.

    Europe was and will remain the home of cycling - money or no money.
    The critical mass of the other sponsors far outweigh anything that DC can, or will, bring to the sport in terms of money/sponsorship vis-a-vis other sponsors.



    I agree the Pro-Tour is in difficulty.
    But by signing a rider who hasn't been exonerated, DC have placed themselves in that compromise.

    The UCI's view is that OP brought disrepute to the sport.
    One can argue the veracity of the UCI's stance.
    But having pressured CSC to drop Basso - the UCI's not going to standby and let Basso compete on another team while he's still under the same cloud.

    (I am not saying the UCI's correct in their stance on OP : I'm just relaying the facts as they are).

    The only way out of all of this is for the UCI to state unequivocally that the OP riders were clean.
    The UCI cannot do that - for a number of reasons.
     
  9. poulidor

    poulidor New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Disco again in disarray? :rolleyes:
     
  10. musette

    musette New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Caisse has not long been a part of that group in a while. And they have the potential Tour winner, if Landis' title is removed.
     
  11. Leafer

    Leafer New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    0
    Caruso agreed as part of his contract to submit a DNA sample, no conditions.

    from procycling: "The former Liberty Seguros-Wurth rider has a one year deal and has agreed to make his DNA available for testing, in accordance with the wishes of the ProTeams"

    If Basso had been willing to do the same, this wouldn't be an issue.
     
  12. musette

    musette New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unless the ProTour is completely shelved, ASO has to accept all ProTour teams, which includes DC. Also, ASO won't get the support of the Giro in an attempts to exclude DC.

    If the ProTour is shelved, presumably the old method of allocating TdF spots comes into play again?
     
  13. poulidor

    poulidor New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    With their decisions all cycling PT teams agree there is some serious doubts against Basso and Active Bay!
    In this state I couldn't see ASO disapprouving "cycling" then ASO is fighting doping.
    Now it's easier for ASO to refuse at least Basso and/or DC team.

    Giro can make his own choice about DC case, it' doesn't interact with UCI/ProTour war!

    The pressure is on DC and Basso, and ASO can wait until April or May.
     
  14. Bro Deal

    Bro Deal New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    2
    No, it does not. The ASO had an agreement with the ProTour to invite all the ProTour teams. That agreement was made with an understanding that the ProTour would negotiate and change aspects of the ProTour. That agreement was for the ProTour's first year. The UCI delayed talks about rule changes unil after the 2005 season and then McQuaid started making statements to the press that the current rules had been decided on and could not be changed for three or four years. Essentially the UCI reneged on the deal, and McQuaid pissed in the faces of the GTs.

    Since the breakdown took place at the end of the 2005 season and the beginning of the 2006 season, the GTs were put into a tight position. If they pulled out of the ProTour they could have faced potential legal action from teams and sponsors who were expecting a Tour invite because the GTs working with the ProTour, even if they were not completely on board.

    The agreement between the GTs and the ProTour is now dead. The GTs have made it clear to everyone that they are not part of the ProTour, and no team can think that membership in the ProTour will give them an automatic invite to a GT. There is nothing stopping the ASO from not inviting Disco. With the ProTour giving Disco the cold shoulder, it makes it easier for the ASO to do so. One has to wonder how hard the ProTour/UCI will fight for Disco if they are left out, especialy since Disco is now seen as intentionally doing damage to the anti-doping campaign being pushed by the UCI/ProTour, the sponsors, and the other teams.

    Disco chose a bad time to go against the powers that be. A lot of organizations look anxious to exert their power and Disco is a convenient pawn.
     
  15. Serafino

    Serafino New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its seems that they are not yet excluded and that a decision will be made at the next meeting on Jan. 11th, 2007. Lefevere is starting to backpedal with talk of "radicals" and "moderates" amongst the teams wanting DC to act one way or another re: Basso.

    Meanwhile, Lampre, Euskatel, etc., are let off the hook? I'd venture that the threat of legal action will dissuade any such "exclusions".

    Cycling is sadly in complete disarray when someone like Lefevere (patron and defender of riders convicted of doping while in his employ) tries to market himself as Mr. Clean.
     
  16. cyclingheroes

    cyclingheroes New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    3,463
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry Lim, the IPCT are a bunch of hypocrites: Galdeano was signed as a DS for Euskatel two months ago. He was on the Puerto-list as well. Now Euskatel say, that's different from basso because the Galdeano notes from Fuentes were from 2005 and therefore it is time-barred. Caruso was signed by Lampre last month, Koldo Gil was signed by Saunier-Duval last month. Not to speak about Lefevere who signed Johan Musseeuw as a PR man during his suspension. His PR man was leading a team tacktick meeting, I saw it with my own eyes. Not to speak about Liquigas were Luca Paolini is under investigation by the Italian police (he still is) but nobody said anything when Paolini started at the Tour Of Lombardy.

    Besides I don't like the idea that if a disciplinary committee decide not to take action because they don't have enough evidence that the teams are becoming there own judges. There are rules and the rules are to be followed. For a rider this means, he is not allowed to dope. For the IPCT this means if the disciplinary committee does not convict a rider he is free to ride. Everything else will lead to injustice and chaos. We need tougher rules, tougher sanctions with clear roles for all parties. We don't need an IPCT with double standards.
     
  17. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115

    CH - I wan't making the case that ICPT were "honest brokers".
    The point which I was trying to make was that as an organisation, their stance regarding DC is a indicative of the collective attitude that the peloton has toward DC in the aftermath of OP.

    And I agree, Lefevere doesn't come to this saga with "clean hands" as they say.
    His signing of the Lion of Flanders as PR man is a case in point.

    But its also saying something when the likes of the ICPT decide that DC is out of order, given as you correctly point out, some of the double standards that pertain.

    The past 8 years have been a joke.
     
  18. cyclingheroes

    cyclingheroes New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    3,463
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it is time that the sport is being governt again. I think it is dangerous if people who have dirt on their hands themselves are starting to play prosecuter, judge etc. That the IPCT went this far, is the complete bankrupcy of the UCI.



     
  19. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is not indicative of the peloton. The peloton has not said anything about this. Thuis is the view of a few team owners and the their buisness.



    If the last 8 years is a joke, so is the prevous 30 years. Lance Armstrong did nothing that the other TDF winners did not do...... The difference is that LA won 7 TDF's and that sticks in many Europeans throats. Your statement makes the entire professional world a joke.

    Remember I said this ....... The biggest cycling doping scandal in the 2007 season will not be Basso/JU. Just wait and see how Patrick Lefevere gets his ass handed to him..... Many of the peloton [riders] view QS as the poster child of doping.....
     
  20. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115
    It's the view of the peloton, Wolf.

    The membership of the IPCT is made up of the DS's and their owners.
    The DS's call the tune in the peloton from race to race : ICPT are cold shouldering DC.


    The last 8 years has been a joke.
    July 1998 is the signpost for this era : that was the fork in the road.
    No GT winner since 1998 has been found to have won a title riding clean : Armstrong, Heras, Simoni, Landis : all have been shown to have doped.

    As for the time preceeding 1998 - who knows, who cares.
    The fact is that the sport had it's chance to clean up it's act following Festina in July 1998.

    The sport chose not to clean up it's act and as supporters we have had to put up with cheats standing on podiums of GT's lying through their collective teeth proclaiming that what they won was down to riding clean.
    They didn't ride clean. They cheated.

    I haven't heard anyone raise any issue to QS :I'll take it that your statement is your view of QS.
     
Loading...
Loading...