The CyclingNews reports some confusion over possible team notifications of the 23 riders alleged to have been found "suspicious" under the UCI's bio passport program. Pat McQuaid is seemingly back pedaling on not only the notifications, but also the reasons for it:
McQuaid continued, "Several tests have been done on all riders since the biological passport was set up. For these 23 riders, we found results which deviated from the normal results. That does not mean that they are suspicious. It is possible that there is a natural cause. That is why we have the biological passport, so that such things can be cleared up."
Sounds like it's time for the UCI to get its "ducks in a row".
In more CyclingNews it appears that the "blame" for the bungling of the Alessandro Petacchi case will go to CONI for pursuing it when other riders under other sanctioning bodies with exactly the same infraction have gone with no penalties. Does this let the CAS off the hook for its paradoxical decision? And there is yet more fallout from the "non-announcement announcement" of the 23 riders who may or may not be under suspicion for doping under the UCI's bio passport program.
WADAWatch looks at the new French Criminal Doping Law, and turns up some unsurprising political and financial motivations.
September 07: Hearing Award
October 07: Hue's Hearing Appraisal
November 07: Major document Release
January 08: Larry's Curb Your Anticipation
Friday, May 09, 2008