A few brief items tonight. One related to Stefan Schumacher and the other two, Paris-Nice.
UCI Accepts AFLD’s 2-Year Ban on Stefan Schumacher
According to a brief report on the CyclingNews.com web site, the International Cycling Union has accepted the tw0-year ban imposed on German cyclist Stefan Schumacher by France’s national anti-doping agency, AFLD.
The UCI has accepted the arguments of the AFLD and confirmed the sentence against the German, according to radsportnews.com, which cites reliable sources. This will extend Schumacher’s race ban from French soil to a world-wide exclusion of UCI races.
CyclingNews.com’s report suggested that Pat McQuaid would be holding a press conference to announce the ban. So far, I haven’t found any reports of McQuaid’s comments on Schumacher. But he did say something else today that raised a few hackles.
Biological Passport Fee Strong-Arm Tactics
According to another report on the CyclingNews.com site, Pat McQuaid is threatening to prevent five ProTour teams from starting Paris-Nice this weekend unless they pay money into the UCI’s biological passport program.
“If the teams do not pay by the close of business today, they will not be able to take part in the UCI’s World Calendar races,” McQuaid said. The teams’ contribution to the biological passport programme is 120,000 Euro. Half is due by March 5, and the second half due by the end of June. Some teams have already paid the full amount, and other teams have paid only the required first-half. McQuaid did not indicate whether the five teams have paid nothing or have paid less than the required amount.
In a footnote, CyclingNews.com says that all five teams have now paid. Now, of course a few folks weren’t too terribly happy with Patty McQ’s tactics. Patrick Lefévère being among them.
“I don’t like this kind of blackmail from the UCI and Pat McQuaid. I don’t accept blackmail from anyone, McQuaid, ASO, not even Osama bin Laden!” Lefevere told Cyclingnews.
…
“The UCI’s tone is completely wrong in these circumstances. We’ve already paid 30,000 euros and proposed that we pay outstanding amount in installments. The next one being on April 1st and then another in July. What business pays for something in advance like this?”
…
“I have no problems with taking this to the courts to seek damages if we’re not allowed to race tomorrow [sic]. The UCI can’t turn around two days before the race and blackmail us like this, not with all the delays and problems they’ve had with the biological passport in the past. We’ll be turning up for the race tomorrow, you can count on that.”
And there were those who predicted, correctly, that an 11th-hour solution would be found.
“I’m confident that the five teams listed by the UCI are completely supportive in spirit and in finance of the biological passport. They all take part in the program, all have had their athletes tested multiple times, and all are fully invested in the total execution of the biological passport[,” Jonathan Vaughters, current head of the AIGCP, told CyclingNews.]
“I am also 100% sure their financial situations with the UCI will be resolved by the start of Paris-Nice.”
Apparently so. But there’s one more bit about Paris-Nice in the world of cycling news today…
Who’s Left Out?
This year’s Astana appears to be the Fuji-Servetto cycling team. The Court of Arbitration for Sport announced a preliminary decision today that allows the Fuji team to race in Tirreno-Adriatico and Milano-San Remo, while upholding ASO’s refusal to accept the team’s participation at Paris-Nice.
ASO’s reason for excluding the squad was that the team’s participation could have a negative impact on the image of the competition. RCS, the promoter of the other two races, reasoned that they had the discretionary authority to choose who would and wouldn’t participate in their UCI ProTour events. According to the CAS press release, today’s decision on the two Italian races is not final. Although it indicated the same thing for Paris-Nice, because of when the event begins, the CAS has effectively made a final decision on that case.
Now, why, you may ask, would the Fuji team’s participation in Paris-Nice have a negative impact on the race? Simple. Fuji-Servetto is the new incarnation of the Saunier-Duval team from years past. As in, the former employer of Ricardo Riccò and Leonardo Piepoli. Remember the ruckus that those two caused in the middle of the 2008 Tour de France? So it appears that the ASO have found their whipping boy for 2009, punishing the new team for the sins of the old. What do you bet that the team will be excluded from all ASO events this year? I’m guessing that this is already a foregone conclusion.
Seems consistent with how they handled Team Astana in 2008 for the sins of previous members in 2007. Then again, consider the embarrassment that a certain Chicken Incident caused that same year. Rabobank, Michael Rasmussen (a/k/a Kyllingen or “The Chicken”)’s team in 2007, managed to somehow avoid the Astana/Fuji fate and race various ASO events last year. Still can’t quite figure that one out.
Depending on the CAS’ final ruling in the case, it could be possible that RCS would prevail and that Fuji would be banned from Tirreno-Adriatico and Milano-San Remo. Regardless of which way the CAS rules, ASO’s ban on the Fuji team’s participation at Paris-Nice next week is guaranteed to exact a certain toll. And if ASO wins that part of the case, expect that they will extend the ban to all events they put on throughout the year.
Just like in 2008, for at least one UCI ProTour team, that expensive license seems to be worth less than the paper this blog is printed on. Oh, wait, this blog isn’t printed on paper.
& once again, we have zero, absolute zero, due process for Schumacher. I honestly don’t care if he’s guilty or not any longer. You absolutely, positively MUST assume innocence before guilt. Another wonderful example of Cartman-esque “Au Thor I TAY!”
“Then again, consider the embarrassment that a certain Chicken Incident caused that same year. Rabobank, Michael Rasmussen (a/k/a Kyllingen or “The Chicken”)’s team in 2007, managed to somehow avoid the Astana/Fuji fate and race various ASO events last year. Still can’t quite figure that one out.” (Rant)
Oh, Rant. Are you teasing? A DEAL WAS MADE DURING THE 2007 TOUR between ASO & Rabobank. The ASO desperately wanted Chicken OUT OF THE RACE but had no legal reason to pull him as he hadn’t tested positive. So, they tell the RobberBarrons (er, “Rabobank”) that if THEY can cook up a valid reason to pull him themselves, the ASO would guarantee their team’s entry into the ASO races in future years, including the TDF.
I do not care if all parties involved swear on their mothers that no such deal took place. Whether additional monies exchanged hands is the only area up for conjecture.
That Astana was barred from last year’s Tour while Rabobank rode & ex-DOPER RIIS’s team won, along with the constant fighting between ASO & UCI, & the completely INCONSISTENT way doping is handled led me last year to start HATING a sport I’ve loved since 1984.
Does ANYone really believe Riis knew nothing about his golden boys’ doping? Oh, please. And why, WHY is Frank SCHIT (er, “Schleck”) STILL racing after the evidence uncovered last year? Of course, Valverde was allowed to race in 2006, 2007, 2008 when the evidence against him in OP seemed as strong as any of the others whose careers were irrevocably damaged if not ruined. WHY? The Spanish handling of OP is a joke. The UCI is a joke – it has NO POWER. And why the hell is the AFLD barring ANYone? How do they have that right? I trust those power-hungry paper pushers as much as I trust the ASO, which means NOT AT ALL. They seemed to do a serviceable job doing the dope-testing in last year’s Tour DURING the Tour, but from the little I’ve read about cycling the last 5 months, it seems they have done an even WORSE job than the UCI when dealing with the aftermath. Doesn’t surprise me at all – these jerks are the ones who annouced Floyd was banned for two years in France before his 1st Hearing even took place AND said they didn’t care what the Hearing revealed anyway. These guys are WORSE than WADA, the UCI, & the ASO combined.
But, I for one, (or probably more accurately, for “millions”) don’t give a rat’s ass anymore. I’ll watch some races, root for some chosen faves & let all the usual pathetic idiocy continue without me losing any sleep anymore. And from what I’ve been reading, the economic situation in Europe is actually much worse than it is here. If Lance had not announced his Comeback, it’s probable that many more sponsors would have pulled backing from teams & races. And that it is Lance that is the SAVIOR of this sport must have his haters in apoplexy. Which makes me laugh EVERY DAMN DAY.
Just like I laugh now every time I hear that All-American Reject song; as I imagine Lance responding to all the Paul Kimmages of the world –
‘When you see my face
HOPE IT GIVES YOU HELL
HOPE IT GIVES YOU HELL’
Every piece I’ve read lately says Lance is now “mellow” in the peloton. Well, fine, be mellow now, Lance, as long as you GIVE ‘EM HELL when it counts! And don’t forget – ANGER IS A GIFT! If you’re not angry enough, go read some financial website messageboards. The anger there could fuel a novice on a tricycle up Alpe d’Huez in record time.
R Wharton,
You have done a zero argue, an absolute zero… you seems to have forgot a lot of facts and how society have to protect honest people, and dishonet people.
Schumacher like thieves or criminals has been under watch because of anormal OoC testing results prior TDF.
Like Ricco, Sella,.. he was caught with CERA found in 2 different samples of his own blood.
The testings were performed by an swiss WADA lab for a french race. The test able to detect CERA inside blood was set up by a collaboration between a WADA lab and a private and world leader pharma company ROCHE.
Schumacher’ case has followed the other doping case: notification, hearing… and Schumacher can appeal to french court or CAS…
We are very far of an absolute zero due process.
R Warton is not disputing Schumacher’s innocence or guilt.
He is saying there has been no due process afforded Schumacher. I think he is correct. Schumacher’s guilt has been declared. The machine will seek to make sure the declaration sticks. Transparency and due process are quaint and ridiculous notions reserved for silly/naive yanks and their ilk.
Jean C does not seem to be able to distinguish between the two. That makes it difficult to debate positions related to the facts.
The WADA system is stacked well against the riders in general. It offers something of a show of due process, sithout affording actual due process. AFLD’s WADA franchise is a special breed (WADA on steroids?) However it may be more honest? AFLD largely dispenses with the pretense of affording due process to the athletes.
Again, innocent or guilty (we may never know?), Schumacher knowingly entered a race that was irrgularly sanctioned and under the full control of ASO and AFLD. He accepted the biased terms of entry. He finds himself up against a convoluted anti-doping machine that holds nearly all the cards, but will show the accused very few of them. Having knowingly entered into such a system, I have a hard time feeling sorry for the situation he finds himself in. He got what he bargained for.
That said, should Schumacher even approach the transparancy Floyd showed, thus exposing many of the system’s warts, then good for him. Reports are that he has posted some documents on his website. Let’s see it all, then decide.
Susie B,
What, moi teasing? That would never happen, would it? Only comment I have in response to yours is this: AFLD, being France’s anti-doping agency, has some authority to issue sanctions/bans for doping offenses in France. Elsewhere, not so much. Interesting that the UCI accepted their findings and sanction. I haven’t seen any articles as to what action Germany’s anti-doping agency has taken against Schumacher, if any. And by the usual WADA/UCI process, it would/should be Germany’s anti-doping agency that’s responsible for prosecuting and sanctioning Schumacher. But the 2008 TdF was hardly usual circumstances, eh? And under those conditions, holding the TdF under the French cycling federation’s authority, AFLD became the enforcer of doping regulations.
On a slightly different note, eventually, the games being played in high places gets to be too much. Your approach to cycling this year makes a whole lot of sense. Watch the riders and races you like, root for them, and enjoy whatever racing you can.
BTW, sorry it took a bit to get your comment posted. My apologies.
Jeff,
Agreed. It would go a long way to corroborating his own version of events were Schumacher to actually be as open as Floyd was. Once all the information is out there, then we can see who’s telling the truth and who isn’t.
“Once all the information is out there, then we can see who’s telling the truth and who isn’t.”
Only if all agree on whatever “information” is put out there. Floyd put a lot of info out but not everyone accepted it; certainly the 2 arbitration panels did not accept all of it. And any number of posters here, at TBV, DP, etc. did not.
William,
Point taken. With the information we can see, we can make our own determinations. Not everyone will agree with a given conclusion, however. Floyd’s case is an excellent example of that. Despite all the information that was published, two divergent interpretations of the information still remain.
There were at least two factions wrt Floyd’s case.
The primary faction that enthusiastically accepted the eventual judgement trusted the “science”, the lab work, the reporting of that work, the way those who sat in judgement were chosen, the qualifications of those who sat in judgement, and had few complaints with the incestious nature of the club of those who judged. And that’s just the short list.
Those who do not accept the legitamcy of the eventual judgement had serious questions about those same issues, a general lack of transpaency on the part of the alphabet soup, and a lack of due process inherent in the system. And that’s just the short list.
Still others knew little to nothing about the case, but like Mister Mackey of South Park fame, figure “drugs are bad mkay”, he must be guilty because they said he was, and he must be guilty because they all dope. Pick any or all of the above.
Floyd posted an enormous amont of information. Much was posted before he could have possibly known if it would be in his favor or not.
LNDD (AFLD) destroyed the key evidence (testing data-mass spec) that would allow some of us skeptics to see if he was guilty, if his samples were contaminated, or if they even knew what they were actually testing for. My initial bias was that he was innocent. That vote of innocent was only amplified by the conduct of LNDD (AFLD) and entrenched positions of the various alphabet soup. FWIW.