Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Wednesday Roundup

AP/FoxSports/MSN reports a claim by Fahey that WADA has a good HGH test just in time for the Beijing Olympics. How conveeenient. It's said to be good, and capable of standing up to litigation challenge -- we assume, at least under the WADA Code in the setting of arbitration. The timing of the announcement is no doubt for deterrence value, and we won't know how good the claims are until a case arises. We have advanced pity for the person with the first contested positive. It's blood plasma based, and Catlin continues to chase a urine test. The NFL and MLB will not accept blood draws. (Tip from 5-iron in a comment)

FoxSports/O'Connor seems to be letting Landis off the hook, thanks to Roger Clemens:

In the long history of sports stars gone bad, only Pete Rose was this drop-dead dumb in defense of his legacy and name.

Not even a mention of Floyd! The times, they are a changin'

The CyclingNews reports on the continuing dispute between the UCI and the ASO with International Association of Professional Cycling Teams (AIGCP) president Eric Boyer looking for some consensus among AIGCP members. At this time Boyer indicates teams once again may side with the ASO forcing the UCI into the uncomfortable choice of sanctioning teams which participate in ASO events, or backing down on its threats. In further escalation of hostilities, the ASO has placed the AFLD in charge of doping control at Paris-Nice which the UCI says will make the race merely a private competition with no international status whatsoever:
No longer, it seems, is the agency simply viewing itself in the role of a UCI contractor, implementing doping controls deemed appropriate by cycling's international governing body. Speaking before Monday's announcement by the UCI which denounced the "insubordination of ASO and it allies," AFLD president Pierre Bordry said. "The first thing we had to consider was our strategy. The UCI's approach seemed too systematic to us. They test only the stage winners and the overall race leader. To avoid being tested it is sufficient to simply finish down the field. There needs to be more random testing.

"Under French law the AFLD can test nails, hair and even skin samples and Bordry has said that it may be necessary for his organisation to undertake testing outside of France in the run-up to the Tour, if indeed they are charged with running the Grand Tour's anti-doping programme. However, the possibility that the AFLD will take on such a role also throws into question the future of the biological passport programme instigated by the UCI.

There are also further developments in the trial of Bjorn Leukemans. And in more CyclingNews it looks like the relationship between Michael Ball and Mario Cipollini may be on the rocks. Also The Association of Professional Cyclists (CPA) reminds the participants in the ASO/UCI dustup that the needs of the "exhausted" riders should come first. That will be the day.

The VeloNews says it's a done deal. The Pro Teams have voted against the UCI and will go to Paris-Nice, or anywhere else they darn well please apparently.

More VeloNews writes that in the wake of rumored doping scandals and the exclusion from the ToC of three of its riders, Rock Racing is developing its own internal anti-doping program. No details were provided at this time. Attorney Maurice Suh is vetting anti-doping consultants to oversee the program's implementation.

And CONI has advised a two year ban of Danilo DiLuca for "abnormal hormone readings" which may indicate, but not prove, use of PEDs.

ESPN reports WADA is appealing the LaTasha Jenkins case to the CAS:
"We just appealed against the Jenkins decision," (David) Howman said. "She was exonerated on grounds that, once we looked at it, we considered not sustainable

Landis and Suh were around the Rock Racing bus at Stage 7 of the ToC. Floyd is under the 'C', and Maurice has the tail of the 'G' going into his head. (Photo: Rock Racing)

Rant writes about those pesky rules which to some extent support each side in the UCI/ASO throwdown.

WADAwatch looks back at the 2001 Tour de France and ahead to today's media symposium with WADA head John Fahey. Ww has his questions prepared, and we await the answers.

It appears that Fatty needs an intervention after all. Mrs. TBV enjoyed the comments as well. I only have three bikes of my own, swear, average age 17 years. Plus her three, plus the five for the four kids...


zoeart said...

CONI demand two-year ban for Di Luca

Eightzero said...

Someone correct me, but if UCI wants to go execute the Nuclear Option, don't all they have to do is put UCI point events (and maybe assign BIG UCI points to them) on at the same time as the ASO events? Let the team choose if they want Paris-Nice or to compete for World Championships?

Anything in the supposed rules to prevent that? Can someone comment on the national federations role in selecting Olympic athletes? Does UCI have any say in that, or is it left to the several national federations?

Larry said...

8-0, I'm struggling to figure this out. You can venture over to Rant Your Head Off, where Mr. Rant has a few posts on this subject, including his current post.

My assumption is that if UCI wants to go to extremes, it can suspend or terminate the Pro Tour licenses of any team that participates in Paris-Nice. THAT could force teams to choose between, say, the Tour de France or the Giro. I assume that no team can race in the Worlds without a UCI license of some sort.

My assumption is that any rider who gets on the bad side of UCI is potentially out of the Olympics. UCI is the official cycling organization recognized by the IOC.

But we're still trying to puzzle this out. The UCI regulations are complicated, and I assume that the terms of the Pro Tour licenses also provide relevant terms and conditions.

Unknown said...

Who cares about the UCI/ASO argument any longer. UCI says all ASO is interested in is $$. I personally think the UCI is in it for the money also - hence the Pro Tour fees to be in the Pro Tour.

As far as I care, scrap the PT and get back to ranking the teams and allowing the Race Organizers to decide who they want to invite. It would make things so much easier.

The UCI should concentrate on making sure rules are followed including cleaning up the sport, but not in running races.

I bet the PT doesn't exist next year.


bobble said...

Everybody say it with me!!

Respect my authoritayyy!!!

Unknown said...


"Respect my authoritayyy!!!"

Cartman wielded that baton with considerable skill and enthusiasm. He beat the crap out of Randy.

I’m trying to figure out who Cartman is in this scenario. Is Cartman UCI or ASO? Hard to tell. UCI and ASO both have sticks, but ASO seems more willing and able to use it.

My sympathies are with the riders.

Eightzero said...

Thanks, Larry. I think you're right - the UCI is the IOC delegate for operating the cycling events at the Games. But then comes the next question - the athletes chosen to attend the Games are selected by the several national organizational bodies, such as USAC or FFC (France.)

So what power would UCI have to restrict federation approved athletes from participating in the Games?

Unknown said...

If FFC sanctions the race, and does so in contravention of UCI rules (National event held with ProTour and Pro Continental teams), the UCI can sanction the FFC. That hypothetical sanction may/may not include de-certifying the FFC from naming an Olympic Team for cycling from France?

How much does the FFC care about the risk of being de-certified? How much do the riders care about competing in the Olympics? Road professionals are, at best, divided in their opinion regarding the value of Olympic participation. Some, like Bettini, get a charge out of it. Many, like Floyd, have declined to compete in the Olympics.

French Track and BMX riders won't be too thrilled with the FFC if their chance to ride in the Olympics is made impossible by actions related to a feud in professional road riding. I think French track riders value Olympic participation that their road counterparts?

Unknown said...

My previous post, last sentence should read, "I think French track riders value Olympic participation more than their road counterparts?"

Additionally, CAS seems to be the way this specific dispute should be decided. Why does neither side (UCI/ASO) mention CAS for resolving this particular conflict? Sounds like a potential road map to the larger problem.

5-iron said...

Fox sports has an article saying WADA has a new and improved test to detect HGH. I liked this part:

"We all know these things end up in court more often than not," he said. "It's got to withstand the legal challenge as well."

Really? Because it seems like you can muck it up with sloppy lab work and throw your ambiguous rules at it without any legal ramifications, so .... ?

Sorry, if this has been posted before, just delete me!


Mike Solberg said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.