Forum menu
Not great news IMO. Tainted meat, yeah right.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/confirmed-alberto-contador-cleared-of-clenbuterol-charges
So that's how you make a mockery of justice in sport. You learn something every day.
Blimey. You'd think if they were serious about it they'd make it strict liabilty or thereabouts.
That's just the Spanish federation. Can't the UCI still ban him?
Unbelievable!
Surely the UCI will appeal?
They have 30days to appeal...
I think it was the right decision.
wow, it's official;
cheating pays, winners take drugs.
this will be appealed ......UCI warned spanish auth's not to let him off !!
Im glad as i think it was a fix up, he passed every test in the tour .
I also think that there is not many top riders who are 100% drug free .
A lot of roadies will tell you that Greg Lemond was most likely the last clean rider to win.
If a clear chain of evidence can be produced linking AC with a supplier of contaminated meat then he should've been cleared. Without that evidence he should receive the 2 year ban. He is responsible for what he puts in his body. He is a professional sportsman with years of experience at the highest level, he knows the rules. He knows where the responsibility lies.
As far as I've seen there is no evidence beyond AC's say so, if this really is the case then he should be serving day one of a 2 year ban right now. If evidence does exists AC would be wise to make it public at the first opportunity, as without that evidence I think a lot of people will consider him a cheat and any future wins tainted.
Hold on hold on hold on, you lot.
Although Contador and his legal team were unable to produce a sample of the meat that they have claimed was tainted with the clenbuterol that resulted in the positive test, the fact that it could not be shown conclusively that Contador had deliberately taken the product worked in his favour.
Wasn't the amount found in his blood a tiny tiny amount? IE, no way would it have had any 'performance enhancing' effects?
So, it is actually possible he's telling the truth?
Or is that just a bit too boring?
Im glad as i think it was a fix up, he passed every test in the tour .
I also think that there is not many top riders who are 100% drug free .A lot of roadies will tell you that Greg Lemond was most likely the last clean rider to win.
Passed every test apart for the one that has found clenbuterol in a tour sample.(why else would we be discussing it)
Lemond was a class act and one of the best cyclists ever (check his palmares, its ridic)
Argument that Sastre was clean but I take your point.
Clenbuterol is strict liability ....performance enhancing doesnt come into it (argument over small amount as a result from it being present in recently tranfused blood and not taken at the time)
Fair point elf but what about the plastcisers? As I understand the results from that test have not been considered as the test itself wont be valid till this year i.e. 2011. None the less, the results do indicate quite stronlgy that AC had been doping.
I would say those results in conjunction with the Clenbuterol results point towards doping..
I think hes very lucky.
I would love to have all Lance,s old tour samples re tested to the same test as AC has been 😀
Good stuff, I was looking forwarded to seeing contador and schleck slug it out this year. I'm sure they will both be suitably 'prepared' for the season, so should be good.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/astana-have-receipt-for-contadors-steak-says-cook
read this without laughing
He's guilty! Cycling knows it & he knows it.
His Lawyers got him off on a technicality - speaks volumes.
Cheating scum.
theboatman - Member
Good stuff, I was looking forwarded to seeing contador and schleck slug it out this year. I'm sure they will both be suitably 'prepared' for the season, so should be good.
how dare you suggest either of the Schlecks would consider anything of the sort.
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/frank-schleck-admits-fuentes-payment-18842
🙂
"He asked me if I needed anything and I asked him if he could bring some 'steak' [b]*WINK WINK*[/b] because the 'meat' in France is not the same."
lot of roadies will tell you that Greg Lemond was most likely the last clean rider to win
Wasn't he full of lead after the hunting incident?
Oh dear, what a lot of hot air over something none of us ACTULLY know the full details of. Still: nothing new there then eh??
😯 play with your tally whackers, you'll be less stressed trust me, AAHH that's better!
Oh dear, what a lot of hot air over something none of us ACTULLY know the full details of. Still: nothing new there then eh??
Its called having an opinion & the problem with that is what exactly?
mrl...nothing at all. But just now and then it would be really nice for the opinions to be based on something approximating facts.
Note to self: try and lighten up....and learn to type/spell!!!
I quess what worries me most about all this is that a lot of this the extra test of AC tour sample is because the UCI Preident Pat McQuaid would like his friends son Andy Schleck to win the tour.
I know that that might sound daft but there is a lot of things what look very bad when you look in to the UCI and hopefully it will all come out into the open and proved one way all the other.
For fans of road racing try to get a copy of last years Giro it was far better than the tour.
Note to self: try and lighten up....and learn to type/spell!!!
Very chilled thanks you boring pedant.
He actually had trace levels of Clenbuterol in his system for 4 consecutive days during the Tour including the tested level climbing again on the 4th day...
It was indeed very small trace amounts but the issue is the rules need to be the same for all participants. He's been let off by the Spanish Fed to avoid backlash from the Spanish public.
I cannot believe that the UCI will not appeal & subsequently award a ban of 2yrs. The initial 1yr proposal from the Spanish Fed was already a shorter ban than most.
I will say one thing, physically where does AC get his power and endurance from? He's too bloody quick to have such stamina.
Sorry.
now and then it would be really nice for the opinions to be based on something approximating facts
Well I'm basing my opinion (not given it yet - wait a minute) on the totally undisputed facts as given:
1) Contador's sample tested +ve for clenbuterol.
2) The level was lower than other labs could test for, but [b]any[/b] amount of clenbuterol is a drug test fail.
3) There is a rule of strict liability for drugs.
4) The only exception to the above allowed is "an athlete can be exonerated if they prove that they had inadvertently ingested a banned product through no fault or negligence on their part".
5) Contador and his team have failed to provide any sample of clenbuterol contaminated meat to prove it was inadvertent.
6) Contador's case rests on the fact the prosecution team can't prove that he took the drug deliberately, but see points 3, 4 and 5, that's not the way it works. No proof of innocence from his side, hence under the rule of strict liability he's guilty.
Actually given that string of undisputed facts, I'll let you have a guess at my opinion.
wow, it's official;
cheating pays, winners take drugs.
Well he's in good company, since 1903!
Common sense has prevailed, based on the info available it can not be proven that the Clembuterol was taken to boost his performance, therefore he can not be banned. Simples.
mrlebowski...the note to self was exactly that; a note to me to lighten up. I didn't expect quite such a vituperative response.
Not having steak again, all those nasty chemicals they put in it nowadays! 😆
Did he just say
🙄vituperative
Surely to goodness that isn't how the rule works! He comes up with a basically implausible, half-assed theory for how the illegal performance enhancing substance came to be in his body, and because no-one can prove that a long-digested and possibly mythical steak [i]didn't[/i] mysteriously contain performance enhancing drugs he can't be banned.
I'm feeling another bout of serious indifference to all this coming on. 😐
end of the day there all at it.... It was nothing that will boost performance so let it slide..
Assuming it wasn't ingested innocently, presumably the low level is the result of a prior course to build muscle mass during training i.e. it's taken to boost performance during training not competition. No?
Well allegedly Lance tested positive at the 1999 tour but it was brushed under the carpet. The whole drugs thing is a nightmare IMO as the UCI are so corrupt! Has anyone else read Landis' interview with Paul Kimmage recently? Okay I take what he says with a pinch of salt as why did he fight for so many years claiming he was innocent (including taking people's money to fight it and write a book) to them "come clean" mmm I think he's in it to take LA down as he's bitter however it still makes interesting reading.
It can be found here:
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage
I would love to think that there are some top pro's out there that don't dope but I dont' think in my heart there are unfortuatnely. I think Chris Boardman didn't do as well as he could've becuase he didn't dope, but that's again just MO with no face behind it.
Corruptin in th UCI that Landis is so bitter about is aimed at the last President that stepped down in 2005. There was some funny goings on that the UCI can not explain.
Like big payments from top riders...
Like i said there all at it. SOme are clever. Some are stupid like the recent case of DIY doping.
The 3 main grand tours require super human effort to put the body through that level of torture. There all at it..
I ride road and accept it goes on... It is not just cycling either, if you think that your nieve
All of our great cycling heros have bent the rules in years gone by. Some more than others granted. But it's foolish to think that's its any different now. It's just to a lesser extent now I think.
I could take all the EPO in the world and I'll still be sh*t! 😉
Common sense has prevailed, based on the info available it can not be proven that the Clembuterol was taken to boost his performance, therefore he can not be banned. Simples
Read what I wrote. That's not how it's supposed to work. There is strict liability for drugs - it's up to him to prove his innocence, not anybody else to prove he took the drugs to boost performance. Otherwise it would be pretty much impossible to find anybody guilty of drug taking.
BIGMAN you referring to the muppet that is Ricco!? Who would've thought it! Both him and his Mrs are done for doping, he gets done AGAIN then tries his own DIY doping and ends up in hospital whta a d*** he should be banned from ALL sports for life.
Friend met an ex commonwealth long distance medal winner recently, they had an interesting conversation abuot doping in that he stated all long distance runners were at it! Maybe that's Paula Radcliffe's problem she isn't doping enough .. or actually no ... she's just a quitter.
[b]Aracer[/b]: - Read what I wrote. That's not how it's supposed to work. There is strict liability for drugs - it's up to him to prove his innocence, not anybody else to prove he took the drugs to boost performance. Otherwise it would be pretty much impossible to find anybody guilty of drug taking
Indeed...similarly the police don't need to see you drinking beer. A breath or blood test will secure a convinction for drunk driving - I ate some spanish beef before driving through the red lights is not yet something the courts will take heed of.
vi·tu·per·a·tive/v??t(y)o?op??r?tiv/
Adjective: Bitter and abusive
STW is becoming elitist at last!
Ban them! Ban them all!