Oscar Dodges A Bullet (and other stories)

by Rant on January 25, 2007 · 2 comments

in Doping in Sports, Floyd Landis, Oscar Pereiro, Patrick Lefevere, Tour de France

As I expected, Oscar Pereiro dodged a bullet today when the AFLD cleared him of any suspicions of doping at the 2006 Tour de France and then dropped its case against him.

Announcing the decision, Pierre Bordry, president of the AFLD, said:

“After a thorough examination of the documentation, the agency’s doctors concluded that the dossiers conform. The agency regrets that it took so long to obtain these.”

Bordry was highly critical of the UCI, adding:

“The examination of therapeutic documents could have been done under better conditions by the agency if it had obtained the elements from the UCI. Unless these documents were not actually in their possession.”

Oscar Pereiro, the second place finisher in the 2006 Tour, had this to say about today’s announcement:

“The whole thing was pathetic,” Pereiro told the Spanish television station Antena 3. “I want them to apologise for the mistake and try to rectify the damage they have done.

“It makes me even more determined to be declared the winner of the Tour if it is taken away from (Floyd) Landis.”

Well Oscar, old chap, I suspect that the closest you’ll get to an apology is Bordry’s statement expressing regret that the process took so long. It probably wasn’t too bright a move to ignore their little missives requesting your documentation for the last few months. So you, yourself, are partly to blame for all of this.

But really, what damage has been done to you, Oscar? This whole dust-up lasted a week. Your friend Floyd on the other hand has endured 6 months of trial and tribulation since his results were leaked to the press. You still have your job. Floyd doesn’t. Your name is still pretty well thought of. Floyd’s name evokes strong reactions — both positive and negative. In many places more negative than positive. You’ll get to ride next summer’s Tour. Unless the whole arbitration process moves very quickly (highly unlikely give how it’s been up to now), Floyd won’t be riding in the next Tour.

And if, by some chance, Floyd loses in arbitration and at the CAS, you’ll be the official winner of the Tour. Winner due to the generosity of one Mr. Landis, whose team allowed you to get back into contention by not chasing your sorry ass down when they had the chance. And then you and your team underestimated Floyd’s abilities on Stage 17 to Morzine, which directly led to your losing the Tour.

But here’s the thing, old sport: That was your one best chance to win. Come next summer, you’ll be hard pressed to be in position to compete for any podium spot on the final day. You may get a stage win here or there, but that will be as good as it gets.

And do you honestly want to be declared the winner of the Tour at this point? Your name will forever have an asterisk by it in the record books which will read: Only won due to a controversial ruling of the CAS. But then again, even at this late date, being declared the winner will line your pockets with gold. Maybe not as much as if you’d won the Tour outright, but more than you’re entitled to.

And think of your friend in California, Oscar. By the time everything is settled, if Floyd Landis prevails, it is unlikely that he’ll ever reap the benefits that he deserved for standing atop the podium in Paris last July.

So quit whining about expecting apologies and get back to being a bike racer. And somewhere, somehow, try to find that humility you displayed shortly after the whole Landis scandal erupted. It’s much more becoming.

Unholy Alliances

In a comment over at Trust But Verify, Marc gives us this tidbit from Agence France Presse:

Pat McQuaid, Irish president of the UCI, announced Thursday that a new anti-doping plan would be in place by the beginning of ProTour 2007. The president of the UCI, who met with Dick Pound, president of the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA) Wednesday. declared to AFP that this would be “a global system in the battle against doping, stronger and more radical.”

“There are still a number of details to straighten out. We’re working now on what costs to assume and how to share them,” McQuaid added, interviewed at the World Cyclo-cross Championships in Hooglede-Gits, Belgium.

Given Mr. Pound’s recent pronouncements regarding greater flexibility for doping sanctions, this alliance between the UCI and WADA to create a “stronger and more radical” system should strike fear into the hearts of all cyclists. Moderation is what’s needed, not further radicalism. A more radical system is likely to as abusive or more abusive to athletes than what we currently have — and it’s likely to no more effective than what we currently have, either. Moderation is the key. What’s needed is a system that’s sane, not insane.

Lefevere Redux

Over at VeloNews is an exclusive interview with Maarten Michielssens, the reporter at Het Laatse Nieuws who broke the Lefevere story. In the interview, Michielssens states that he had more witnesses and sources for his story, but he only used the sources who were reliable. Seven of the sources were felt to maybe have revenge as a motive or some other personal agenda. Michielssens adds:

We have all sorts of claims and we have every single word that is published in our newspaper on tape or on a written declaration signed by witnesses. It was an enormous bomb in cycling. It’s a horrible thing. It is not a war against cycling. It’s a war against the hypocrisy against doping in sport. We had this white knight, Patrick Lefévère, but in fact there is this other side to him.

So that’s out in the open. There’s no war on cycling behind the Lefevere allegations. It’s a war on hypocrisy related to doping in sports. Michielssens discusses why 8 of his 9 sources wished to remain anonymous, and he goes into considerable detail about Patrick Lefevere preventing Johan Museeuw from admitting to doping two years ago. And he drops this bombshell:

VN: You have also used information from a source that reportedly is a current member of the Quick Step team. Explain what he has told you.

MM: Yes, another thing we have is a cyclist from Quick Step who says that the doping system that was used at Mapei is still active today in the team of Quick Step. It’s the team doctor, Ivan Van Mol, who gives these products and programs to riders. You pay 20,000 euros a year and Van Mol provides you with everything – products included. These drugs are EPO, IGF and human growth hormone. There are also real drugs like ecstasy, cocaine and speed. The top cyclists of Quick Step are on these drugs and Ivan Van Mol is aware of this. For that reason he has to call a friend of his at the UCI, and the guy at the UCI tells him in this week or that week there will be some doping controls in Belgium. Then Ivan Van Mol can say to his cyclists you can’t take any ecstasy of whatever. Then [the anonymous rider on Quick Step] says that Ivan Van Mol has to pay 10,000 euros for the information from this one guy at the UCI.

Let’s go back to that last bit again. Michielssens is telling us that Van Mol had a mole at the UCI who, for a bribe or 10,000 euros, would tip off the Quick Step doctor so that his riders would test clean, if they were subjected to doping control.

Michielssens addresses why he thinks these people came forward at this time:

Well, Ivan Basso said Patrick Lefévère was a hypocrite. Floyd Landis used the same words because Patrick Lefévère said that Floyd Landis was a criminal and should be kicked out forever. So Patrick Lefévère has made some enemies and even the people who are very close to him are not supporting him anymore when he says there are no drugs in our team and everyone else is dirty. Even his own people thought he should watch himself instead of kicking at others all the time. That’s why some people were willing to talk. Even this guy from Mapei, the doctor, he called me himself.

And among the other interesting things to come out is the fact that Michielssen spoke to Lefevere before the article came out, and that Lefevere knew some type of article was in the works. Michielssens comes across as a man who’s confident in his sources and believes he’s gotten the story right. Patrick Lefevere will no doubt go on the attack, with a news conference perhaps as early as Friday afternoon. Michielssens expects to be one of Lefevere’s targets. Het Laatse Nieuws will stand by their reporter.

No doubt there will be some very interesting and sensational twists and turns before this story is finished. Take the time to read the interview. It’s a fascinating look at the process of putting the story together, as well as the people who are behind the allegations.

VeloNews also has a story detailing the reactions of various Quick Step riders to the allegations against their manager. That story, too, is worth a look.

marc January 26, 2007 at 2:49 am

A little addendum, Rant. When Bordry made this comment that you cite: “The examination of therapeutic documents could have been done under better conditions by the agency if it had obtained the elements from the UCI. Unless these documents were not actually in their possession” he was doing so after stating that the “therapeutic documents” AFLD received were dated Jan. 18, 2007. That is, he was seemingly implying that UCI couldn’t send AFLD the docs when they’d been requested since the docs hadn’t existed at the time. Or, in other words, he was implying that, even though Pereiro legitimately qualified for a TUE, the UCI had given him his without any evidence.

will January 27, 2007 at 8:20 am

As I recall, it wasn’t too long ago that Pat McQuaid was saying that Dick Pound and/or WADA was destroying professional cycling. Now Mr. McQuaid seems to be working to give WADA even more power over professional cycling.

Why would Mr. McQuaid do such a thing?

I listened a while back to Dick Pound give an interview over the web to a reporter not willing to back off the tough questions. Mr. Pound came across as brilliant and charismatic. He handled the tough questions with ease. He came across as very convincing.

I guess that’s why.

Previous post:

Next post: