Steeling Parakeets ?

You really couldn’t make this up.

There must be an Opera out there that has a similar script.. 😆

Cyclistm, oooh that’s interesting…..which of the favourites did under perform?!

Surely the question should be who saw that from the UCI and didn’t use a motor at the world championships?

Is the intention to catch the cheats or to clean up the sport? Both of course; but it’s like speed cameras – you need them to work so they catch the offenders but you also paint them bright yellow so they force motorists to slow down in dangerous areas and so avoid accidents.

If they keep quiet about their new motorspotting app, whatever it is, and catch a substantial number of cheats then OK, you’ve caught some cheats but the sport’s reputation is damaged in the process. If you let everyone know that if they use a motor they will be spotted, maybe it forces everyone to not use them in the first place.

You’ll always get someone who’ll take the risk, but that’s easier for the sport to defend than if they’d kept quiet and subsequently had to admit that 30% of the field was cheating (*totally made up number – don’t sue me)

Good summary of it from Inner Ring:
http://inrng.com/2016/02/motors-vs-doping-thoughts/

So they said in December that they’d be testing at that particular race and yet she still tried to use her motor

I’m not sure she did actually try to use the motor’d bike, there seems to be various reports that it was ridden, wasn’t ridden, “just happened to be there” and so on.

Key thing is, if she’s used it in the past (as everyone seems to suspect about Koppenberg Cross), she knows full well there’s a motor in it cos she’ll have been the one turning it on and off at the right times.

There’s far more to this yet to come, it’s almost better than the whole Lance thing.

Dad Peter, doping-suspended son Niels, and a friend were caught on camera stealing two expensive parakeets from a shop

[url=http://road.cc/content/news/174402-video-mac-awww-michele-scarponi-goes-riding-parrot-his-shoulder]Astana rider Scarponi implicated[/url] 🙂

The whole story is so ridiculous – I’m guessing there is no motor, mechanical doping is a complete fabrication and the story has been entirely made up by the family and the UCI.

The UCI gain through increase revenues/tv rights/sponsorship.
The family gain with a huge film deal.

🙂

Good summary of it from Inner Ring:
http://inrng.com/2016/02/motors-vs-doping-thoughts/

Very persuasive on doping being a greater menace, but the conclusion strikes me as a bit of a cop-out.

Haven’t seen any mention of a predetermined penalty in UCI’s rules. I assume they have the power to impose whatever they like, but have to be wary of what may be overturned at arbritration?

crazy-legs – Member

Key thing is, if she’s used it in the past (as everyone seems to suspect about Koppenberg Cross), she knows full well there’s a motor in it cos she’ll have been the one turning it on and off at the right times.

That’s where it gets messy isn’t it. There’s been some contradictions, so I don’t know whether this has been established or not, but was there a functioning motor? Ie complete with charged battery, controls etc, usable on the day? Obviously having a motor is against the rules but there’s a big differerence there.

Astana rider Scarponi implicated

Performance Enhancing Parrots!!!

Being implicated in the press, by certain other riders on the same course as Femke back in the Kopp’ race, means that not only did one rider notice (and make a point of commenting on it, too late but comment she did) that other riders must have noticed and passed comment too. Comments to other Team members perhaps or other Riders, family maybe friends.. Surely at some point you now have to ask if once vocal comment was made, then where are the rest? This can’t be the view of just one riders observing another and keeping quiet? Can it?

Omerta anyone?

I’m finding it difficult to comprehend that, certainly in light of “we’re all doping clean now”

We’ve all been in racing situations where fellow riders have out performed themselves, ridden beyond their own capabilities and yet thought “ahh, had a good day yeah?” Maybe observed them again in the next race meet, or 5 down the line. But if this observation is made and shared then you have to question why it wasn’t broadcast a lot earlier, sooner than this incident, and have to question on why such a big stage did the UCI choose to impose this action on one rider alone.. Theres no comment from them stating “we chose 20 random riders and teams to check and Femke was one of those” We have had nothing of the sort from the UCI on that point.. So, so was she singled out I wonder.. If so the UCI knew something beforehand, failed to take it offline and deal with it and instead place the incident in full face of the Worlds Press.

You could argue on the UCI side that this was exactly the scenario they chose, knowing that said rider would be caught. Caught and shown up in front of all as a scapegoat. I still question the morals of this tactic by the UCI, for they know the outcome before they acted. The fallout for rider and team in the backlash of the incident is potentially the biggest thing in this girls life to date. For making the decision to out the girl in this open environment I question the UCI and challenge their morals.

Of course, conversely if Femke really did know about this machine in her pits, then of course there should be some recourse of action by the UCI. However based on the evidence to date it’s moot she did.

Shakespeare would have a field day with this one.

If so the UCI knew something beforehand, failed to take it offline and deal with it and instead place the incident in full face of the Worlds Press.

Are you suggesting the UCI should have hushed it up?

That’s not really worked out so well for them in the past.

Interesting point, I don’t think it’s one we’ve discussed. I’m sure it will all come out eventually, and not sure of the benefit of speculating, but just supposing it isn’t fully functional, that would lend credence to the friend story (unlike some I’ve not completely dismissed that, we don’t have enough facts to know, though certain basic stuff which the UCI know and we don’t should make it a lot clearer). If the friend story really is true, then she is still guilty, but could be handed a 6 month (off season) ban and her career wouldn’t be finished. If…

Re: Penalty…

The UCI added a new clause covering “technological fraud” to its regulations last January 30, which pertains to bikes that do not comply with Article 1.3.010 of the regulations handbook. The penalty includes race disqualification, suspension for a minimum of six months and a fine of between 20,000 and 200,000 Swiss Francs.

Theres no comment from them stating “we chose 20 random riders and teams to check and Femke was one of those” We have had nothing of the sort from the UCI on that point.. So, so was she singled out I wonder..

They were checking all the bikes in the pits with their fancy scanner, not the odd one or two.

If so the UCI knew something beforehand, failed to take it offline and deal with it and instead place the incident in full face of the Worlds Press.

Quite possibly multiple people had a quiet word with UCI post Koppenberg. In order impose sanctions for cheating in this way, you have to catch them with the motorised bike in the pits at an event. The link above suggests that the tech to test for the presence of the motor/battery was just ready in time for the Worlds, so, by the sounds of it, that would be the earliest point at which they could take decisive action.

For making the decision to out the girl in this open environment I question the UCI and challenge their morals.

She had plenty of warning, the UCI said months ago that they’d be looking for motors at the Worlds CX championships, they even said that they’d be starting with the women (see my earlier post).

LS – Member
They were checking all the bikes in the pits with their fancy scanner, not the odd one or two.

Ahh, in that case I’ll stand corrected.

Also I know the UCI issued a tentative warning about being checked, you are right they could have been tipped off hence the appetite for the checks.. Still fail to see why this wasn’t taken offline beforehand if they knew. The information could have still come out, which the UCI should broadcast, but not in this way.
If, I say IF, the UCI knew nothing about it beforehand and this was just a random check (I doubt very much it was) then fair play to them.

I’m not saying the UCI shouldn’t have checked, just the manner in which they did.

Alberto Contador is at it now as well!! 😯

According to Wikipedia:

He has a fascination for birds, keeping personally bred canaries and goldfinches at home.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Contador

Any idea when the results of the UCI findings will be public? Personally it all sounds way to fishy. Cheating and got busted by the looks of it, and if that is the case no idea why any one is dishing out sympathy whether a young 19 yr old girl or whoever. Should be severe enough penalties that it makes all in the sport think twice. Should be penalties for coaches, and teams, and sponsors….as well.

Should be severe enough penalties that it makes all in the sport think twice

I suspect the reason that the penalties are never complete bans is that what they really want is more info. on the people up the chain – the whistleblower thing again. Saying it is an automatic lifetime ban would probably mean there is no incentive for people to talk

Really, NO idea why anyone has sympathy for a 19yr old girl who cheated in a manner in which it is inconceivable she did alone?

Did you ever make a mistake as a teenager? Think you should be punished for it for life?

Not suggesting she is an innocent victim, but should she lose her entire career? The biggest tragedy will be her becoming a pariah and those behind it getting away Scot free.

Should be penalties for coaches, and teams, and sponsors….as well.

Why do you think there should be penalties for sponsors?

but should she lose her entire career

She should have thought of that before doing it. If a doctor, accountant or legal professional commits malpractice there is a chance they will be barred from that profession. That said, if we’re doing it for mechanical doping, we should do it for normal doping too.

It’s got to be proportional to doping really, hasn’t it?

Especially when you take into account that doping is often a decision taken exclusively by the athlete, whereas it’s likely the motor was a group effort.

Hard to see how a greater penalty can be justified, and that’s without the personal safety issue raised by inrrng.

that doping is often a decision taken exclusively by the athlete

Did the EPO years pass you by? Did you miss the revelations of Telekom, USPS, ONCE, Festina etc…?

Did the EPO years pass you by? Did you miss the revelations of Telekom, USPS, ONCE, Festina etc…?

Do you know the difference between the present and past tense? (since we’re being patronising berks)

I was goingb to say, Doping done individually?

Where have you been? How do you know there are doing it Solo now.

Apart from the team that begins with A, which do you suspect have organised doping programs then?

We done this one yet…?

http://road.cc/content/news/177831-video-new-motor-doping-speculation-after-izagirre-time-trial-crash

Wheel is spinning when he comes to a halt and stops as soon as it touches the ground. Only a mistery if you’ve rarely seen someone come off a bike.

It’s more that it appears to start spinning when he drops it from a standstill right at the end that caught my eye. Rubbish video though so difficult to tell.

19 years old is old enough to know you are doing wrong and accept whatever the punishment is. Claiming she is some naive little angel isn’t the point. She will have been training and competing for a long time and will know what cheating is. In my opinion even if she didn’t know she was doing wrong (unlikely) that is no defence to cheating.

As for sponsors having some form of penalty, they provide the money to the sport, some negative publicity will mean they should be careful in vetting athletes they sign up.

i do agree that doping should have the same penalties whether mechanical or bio.

Are the mechanics at the worlds trade team or people from various trade teams roped into the national team for the odd weekend?

19 years old is old enough to know you are doing wrong and accept whatever the punishment is. Claiming she is some naive little angel isn’t the point.

I suspect many of us are capable of seeing life other than in binary terms. In other words, she’s unlikely to be a) an angel or b) the devil incarnate.

Are the mechanics at the worlds trade team or people from various trade teams roped into the national team for the odd weekend?

It’ll be her usual pit crew. Pit crew are so important in top level cross she wouldn’t be borrowing one she doesn’t know Its a pretty small field in the u23 so I would be surprised everyones usual trade crew couldn’t all squeeze in there.

I imagine that the main effect of putting responsibility onto sponsors would be to scare them away from the sport!

Quite.

she could murder someone and get less than life

I imagine that the main effect of putting responsibility onto sponsors would be to scare them away from the sport!

I would imagine its the only effect !! And how could any vetting predict that a young athlete with no record of cheating would do so in the future?

This is a video about the motor and the guy used it in a race, but its not in English.
If you read the comments, someone explains what is happening.
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqhX8-dazOo[/video]

EDIT:
This what the commenter says:

Let me give you a short resume.Amateur cyclist Luc Keim (blue/black body2bike outfit) took part in a local amateur cycling event with a bike that was fitted with a 150watt electric motor.His fellow cyclists had no clue and neither did the course director.A Belgian tv crew was in on it and filmed the whole thing.
After that you see him competing against Belgian cycling legend Johan Museeuw,first without and then with the motor.He was about 40seconds faster with the motor!
Johan says that people who don’t do sports will have a hard time pushing 150watts.
They say the motor is the best of it’s kind.A Austrian company has it patented.Bart (the bald guy) is the distributor for the Benelux.(Belgium,Holland and Luxembourg).He says the price of the motor including mounting is around 2700 Euro’s (2950 US Dollars).He says he mainly sells the motors to amateur cyclists but is offered money by professional cyclists that want one.
8:25,video of the Ronde Van Vlaanderen 2010.There were rumors that Fabian Cancellara was using a motor.At the beginning of a steep part he supposedly switched on his motor and left Tom Bonen behind him without seemingly little effort.Many times he swapped bikes which was suspicious they say.Following the rumors UCI put bikes through a scanner in the Tour De France but after that event these checks were hardly been carried out.
At the end of the video Luc tells the course director about his motor.He was not surprised.Luc didn’t compete for the victory so they didn’t make a big deal out of it.
The use of mechanical doping is all over the news now since Belgian top favorite cyclo-cross rider Femke Van den Driessche was cought using a motor at the Women’s U23 World Cup cyclo-cross event in Zolder 4 days ago.?