tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post338661854961112462..comments2023-10-06T03:21:26.130-07:00Comments on trust but verify: Thursday RoundupDBrowerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-45738414974235934642007-07-05T20:44:00.000-07:002007-07-05T20:44:00.000-07:00Anyone find it strange that all 189 riders were cl...Anyone find it strange that all 189 riders were cleared by the UCI to start the Tour on Sat. I'm assuming that all the riders showed up in London around Wed. or Thursday to begin medical exams and meetings with the media. How come we found out 4/5 days after the Tour about Landis' supposed positive test, yet somehow, the UCI can complete 189 tests in two days.<BR/><BR/>Makes me think...WTF???? Especially considering all the mistakes the LNDD technicians made during Landis' testing. I can only imagine how 'overworked' the techs must have been the last two days.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05043995499810157859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-30232884046862857792007-07-05T18:40:00.000-07:002007-07-05T18:40:00.000-07:00That the arbs would make changes to their proceedi...That the arbs would make changes to their proceeding, including changing their timetable to appease the ASO would be yet more evidence the fix is in. <BR/><BR/>Christian Prudhomme's comment is telling as well: "It already wasn't very logical that a positive sample from last July was only juristically dealt with in May this year in the United States." After all, the ASO clearly knew FL was guilty when LNDD reported the A sample results. What's the delay for, anyway?<BR/><BR/>Of course, if ASO had selected a lab that did actual science, maybe this wouldn't be an issue for them.Eightzerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02326301095221867947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-33542678773688004882007-07-05T14:21:00.000-07:002007-07-05T14:21:00.000-07:00Perhaps the Dutch are speculating a decision tomor...Perhaps the Dutch are speculating a decision tomorrow because this would allow the TdF to declare an official winner in time for the start this coming Sunday. I know that either way the decision goes, an appeal is at least possible. Still, an official decision would give ASO some cover to declare "OK, ______ is the winner." If an appeal reverses the arbs result, things can always be changed.wscharthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14580006249706915137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-28670002936518914352007-07-05T13:28:00.000-07:002007-07-05T13:28:00.000-07:00TbV, not a big deal, but I think you misread Still...TbV, not a big deal, but I think you misread Still Walking Backward's blog post. She was looking at a rider's list, thinking it was this year's list, and saw Floyd's name. She thought "How can that be?" Then she realized it was last year's list.<BR/><BR/>syiMike Solberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11784753552166129987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-86653564191860068582007-07-05T13:16:00.000-07:002007-07-05T13:16:00.000-07:00I posted awhile ago but I dumped the response beca...I posted awhile ago but I dumped the response because i found the answer.<BR/>Here it is:<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>The Dutch article gave no reason, either a source or a citation to the Arbitration Rules to explain their assertion that the decision would come down tomorrow. I had to try to figure out how they came up with the information based on the interpretation of the Rules as best I can to explain their view. <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>R-43. Time of Award <BR/><BR/>The award shall be made promptly by the arbitrator and, unless otherwise agreed by the parties or specified by law, no later than 10 days from the date of closing the hearing, or, if oral hearings have been waived, from the date of the AAA's transmittal of the final statements and proofs to the arbitrator. The 30 day period given to the arbitrator under rule 43 of the Commercial Arbitration Rules for rendering an award shall be reduced to 10 days.<BR/><BR/>BillLaura Challoner, DVMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00606828463436614790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-49716614446382281232007-07-05T12:56:00.000-07:002007-07-05T12:56:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Laura Challoner, DVMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00606828463436614790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-12739671222756739882007-07-05T12:39:00.000-07:002007-07-05T12:39:00.000-07:00Okay, I am now confused. Don't the arbitors have ...Okay, I am now confused. Don't the arbitors have 30 days from the close of the hearing to give their award, unless the hearing is reopened. I thought the 10 day rule only kicked in if the hearing was reopened.N.B.O.L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05942658868724918725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-48681320374965248492007-07-05T08:24:00.000-07:002007-07-05T08:24:00.000-07:00str:I got the updates from Lancaster. I'm glad to ...str:<BR/>I got the updates from Lancaster. I'm glad to hear you had a happy anniversary as well. Congratulations!<BR/>BillLaura Challoner, DVMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00606828463436614790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-6493528462323655042007-07-05T08:18:00.000-07:002007-07-05T08:18:00.000-07:00Good points Bill, BTW did you get my Lancaster Rep...Good points Bill, BTW did you get my Lancaster Reports? I am not sure I sent them to the right email addy. Let me know...<BR/><BR/>strstrbukhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00814462555882571936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-54321041201832798242007-07-05T07:56:00.000-07:002007-07-05T07:56:00.000-07:00The transcripts were prepared in final form on Jun...The transcripts were prepared in final form on June 11 and the parties received two weeks from that date, June 25, to prepare and submit proposed findings of Facts/Conclusions of Law/Order.<BR/><BR/>The Panel would use those important documents to prepare their Order. Under R-34 (B), the parties may respond to each other's submissions:<BR/><BR/>"If the parties agree, if any party requests and the arbitrator agrees, or if the arbitrator directs that documents or other evidence be submitted to the arbitrator after the hearing, the documents or other evidence shall be filed with the AAA for transmission to the arbitrator. All parties shall be afforded an opportunity to examine and respond to such documents or other evidence"<BR/><BR/>These Rules are also important:<BR/><BR/>R-37. Closing of Hearing <BR/><BR/>The arbitrator shall specifically inquire of all parties whether they have any further proofs to offer or witnesses to be heard. Upon receiving negative replies or if satisfied that the record is complete, the arbitrator shall declare the hearing closed. If briefs are to be filed, the hearing shall be declared closed as of the final date set by the arbitrator for the receipt of briefs. If documents are to be filed as provided in Section R-34 and the date set for their receipt is later than that set for the receipt of briefs, the later date shall be the closing date of the hearing. The time limit within which the arbitrator is required to make the award shall commence, in the absence of other agreements by the parties, upon the closing of the hearing. <BR/><BR/><BR/>R-38. Reopening of Hearing <BR/><BR/>The hearing may be reopened on the arbitrator's initiative, or upon application of a party, at any time before the award is made. If reopening the hearing would prevent the making of the award within the specific time agreed on by the parties in the contract(s) out of which the controversy has arisen, the matter may not be reopened unless the parties agree on an extension of time. When no specific date is fixed in the contract, the arbitrator may reopen the hearing and shall have 10 days from the closing of the reopened hearing within which to make an award. The 30 day period for re-opening a hearing [under rule 38 of the Commercial Arbitration Rules] shall be reduced to 10 days. <BR/><BR/><BR/> Assuming the Panel closed the hearing as of June 25th (we don't know that), under R-38, they have only 10 days, tomorrow, to make an award.<BR/><BR/>I think the dutch article writer did the math correctly but the writer made two assumptions:<BR/><BR/>1)The arbitrators did not allow replys under R-34 (b);<BR/>2) The arbitrators closed the hearing on june 25th.<BR/><BR/>The reason the arbitrators did not close the hearing in May, was to allow transcripts to be prepared and the parties to offer further submissions. The formal "closing" of proceedings starts the 10 day clock ticking.<BR/><BR/>However, the Rules do not compel when the Panel chooses to close the hearing, so any date they set would seem to allow them more time to make a decision.<BR/><BR/>Thus, while the article appears to be correct as to its math, there is still an issue as th whether the Panel has closed the hearing and whether it did so on June 25th.<BR/>BillLaura Challoner, DVMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00606828463436614790noreply@blogger.com