Friday Roundup
News
The CyclingNews reports that Manolo Saiz, despite being arrested for his role in OP, plans an eventual return to cycling, and feels that the "constitutional rights" of cyclists are not respected. In a PM update CN notes the power struggle within WADA, and the Danilo DiLuca suspension and appeal.
USAToday reviews another bad year for the sport of cycling.
Sportingo wonders if John Fahey, the now heir apparent to Dick Pound at WADA, has the backbone to resurrect the agency and prevent situations like the nearly disastrous "loophole" in the Landis case: Ensuring that all test methods are beyond reproach and making sure no room is left for clever lawyers to find and take advantage of loopholes such as those which nearly wrecked the Floyd Landis case.
Clever lawyers nearly "wrecked" the Landis case? Forget the possibility that Floyd Landis may actually be innocent, apparently no thought will be given to what has proven to be unfair tactics from WADA. Anything even the abandonment of due process, goes when you're trying to get the drug cheats. Further down the piece mentions that the labs must perform better testing when it comes to the DNA "blood passports", it's almost as an afterthought.
The Bowdoin Orient feels sympathy for those, Marion Jones and Floyd Landis included, who have been caught doping and are exposed publicly. The author speculates at this point that if asked if he would do it all again,whether he doped or not, Floyd Landis would answer "no".
Blogs
Le Grimpeur revisits Floyd Landis' "epic" stage 17 ride from the 2006 Tour de France with details of how the ride unfolded, and some speculation of what was really accomplished:
And what of that group that witnessed the ‘incroyable’ ride by Landis, party to an epic slice of Tour history. Well, they either saw one of the most remarkable rides in years from a most unheralded rider. Or, they saw the strongest rider in the peloton doing exactly what he had done in training. Or, they saw the results of a carefully-orchestrated doping programme.
Some of them are still rubbing their eyes, wondering.
Frank and Michelle's Blog gives new meaning to the initials "UCI" and now that DiLuca has been removed as leader of the pro tour, that championship title will be as meaningless as Oscar Pereiro's "win" of the 2006 TdF.
Phantom Reflections is convinced that it's Floyd Landis who represents the lone individual fighting for the truth vs. the establishment who wants to shut him down:
...Floyd grew up here in America—land of the free, home of the brave—a place that we still (man I hope) believe that integrity, freedom, and courage stand for something. We believe that dreams can come true if you only work hard enough. We celebrate the individual, the maverick, the rebel—someone who stands up to city hall no matter what, because it’s what he believes is right and just. Floyd knows he is innocent and will spend all his energy and all his money in defending his honor.
Davis Bike Club Juniors Blog notes doping DQ's are 3 for 3 in the 2006 Grand Tours, and snarks 1-1/2 for 3 in the 2007's.
Triple Crankset seems baffled by Floyd Landis' decision to appeal his case to the CAS. Perhaps Floyd should catch up on his Kafka.
2 comments:
DiLuca intends to appeal via CAS. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/oct07/oct19news2
Not sure his line of reasoning is going to be of help?
DiLuca's sanction from CONI was for his "association" with a "doping doctor", not for failing any doping controls, not for admitting to using banned substances, and without any evidence that he had used banned substances.
From where I sit, he'd need to attack the basis of CONI sanction. The UCI rule, lame as it is, requires DiLuca to be removed (at the 11th hour) from the ProTour standings. DiLuca's wins, however, stand. Makes the season long championship a joke, but the 2008 calendar does that too.
Like the Majority Award in Floyd's hearing, the threshold of proof is very low and racing to the bottom.....
The removal of Diluca, along with the many other odd circumstances which have resulted in the removal or disqualification of riders over the past several years raises a question in my mind whether we are seeing over-zealous anti-doping enforcement or race rigging. I wonder who the race organizers and the anti-doping establishment folks have been betting on. As they say "follow the money".
Post a Comment