# Rasmussen Drug Investigation!



## gavintc (20 Jul 2007)

I note the following report is placed on the BBC website. It seems that the 'chicken' has chickened out of informing the Danish doping authorities where he was. The report reads like something about nothing, but it will place him under suspicion and is there no smoke without fire.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/6907568.stm


----------



## Tetedelacourse (20 Jul 2007)

gavintc said:


> I note the following report is placed on the BBC website. It seems that the 'chicken' has chickened out of informing the Danish doping authorities where he was. The report reads like something about nothing, but it will place him under suspicion and is there no smoke without fire.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/6907568.stm




 :?: 

So disappointed to hear about this, especially now. It's pretty clear that a lot of pro riders have little regard for the sport's image. Whether the chook is guilty of doping or not is irrelevant at this point, he would have known it would look bad. Then he goes and takes yellow and this information is released. Poor show. People should be doing their utmost to promote the clean side of the sport and not agreeing to tell someone where you are is ridiculous and damaging.


----------



## Tim Bennet. (20 Jul 2007)

Missing three, out of competition doping tests is considered to be a 'doping offence' and should result in the immediate suspension of the rider.

But once again we see cycling's premier event being less than consistent and strong minded in its bid to put its house in order. The Danish Cycle Union held its hearing over a month a go where Rasmussen had his right to reply and now they have concluded that a violation occurred. The TdF should throw him out and he should start his minimum 1 year suspension.

Out of competition testing is a contentious issue and everyone knows it is not applied consistently across the world. All sports have problems with people who choose to go and train in Ethiopia, some Caribbean countries, Kazakstan or in Rasmussen's case, Mexico, but here we have someone that the system has court, and the TdF is not doing its part in enforcing a key component of the world wide fight against doping.

But then the TdF can't even follow the basic dope testing procedures for in competition testing. WADA has again this year pointed out that the procedures in force for testing the top riders and random others is still woefully inadequate and poorly conducted. I know that procedures in this country at national level events in sports such as sailing and orienteering are much higher than ASO can be bothered to instigate at cycling's best known event.

Its pathetic.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (20 Jul 2007)

Well said Tim. I am in complete agreement and cannot understand why fans of the sport would think that this is nothing.

I should also point out that in the forum upgrade my "Mad" icon changed to a "hotlips" icon. Which I find quite amusing now.


----------



## Keith Oates (20 Jul 2007)

With the German TV stations stopping the broadcasts and hurting ASO profits is it now a case that ASO don't want even less revenue by bannning Rasmussen. Sometimes principles seem to waver!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## andyoxon (20 Jul 2007)

and from the look of the nose he's been neglecting his sunscreen...

Another controversy involving the front runners - just what the tour didn't need... 

Andy


----------



## Squaggles (20 Jul 2007)

So he's been training in Mexico and not informing the testers of his location . I'm afraid that sounds pretty serious to me . Why did this come out now ? Should he have even been allowed to start ?


----------



## Monty Dog (20 Jul 2007)

According to Eurosport, they say that the UCI only say he's missed one test - hardly a penalty offence. Big questions as to why Rasmussen was informed by the Federation a month ago, was allowed to ride the National champs and yet the news breaks during the tour? Sounds like a media witch-hunt rather than a genuine story - if he wasn't in yellow would we be bothered?


----------



## Tetedelacourse (20 Jul 2007)

Why is missing a test hardly a penalty offence? (Eurosport claims 2 tests were missed in any case).

And Rasmussen is a WAY big enough name to be bothered about. In fact any one of the tdf riders on today's stage appearing in this quagmire is damaging.


----------



## nickwill (20 Jul 2007)

I got the impression from ITV4 that he'd missed 4 tests!
Two from the UCI, and two from the Danish authorities.
I hope he gets hammered in the TT tomorrow!


----------



## nickwill (20 Jul 2007)

I wonder if he will be starting tomorrow!
http://www.velonews.com/tour2007/news/articles/12851.0.html


----------



## Tim Bennet. (20 Jul 2007)

When his national governing body (DCU) says he has behaved in a way that prohibits his inclusion in the national team, you know they feel they must be a very sure ground. Professional athletes sue at every opportunity, and if wronged will win millions of dollars. After the British Athletics case, no officials will go out on a limb. Therefore I'm convinced the DCU know more than they have let on at this stage.


----------



## Keith Oates (21 Jul 2007)

It's also caused another war of words between Rudehomme and McQuaid. More double standards by ASO I think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Steve Austin (21 Jul 2007)

interesting article here click me

So it appears he has missed four tests....

I can't help but think that the testing regime for out of race testing is a little flawed. 'IF' an athlete misses several tests its assumed they are guilty and i'm thinking this is a bit harsh. it could just be that they are dis-organised, or focued on being an athlete.

Missing four tests really does create some doubt, but at no point has he been found positive for anything. So are we safe to assume he is clean?


----------



## Squaggles (21 Jul 2007)

Assume he's clean ? Sorry but I'm afraid you can't assume any rider is clean , it's a sad state of affairs but there it is .
Rules are there , riders know the rules , it is their responsibility to ensure they comply . At the very least he is a fool , he must know that he is playing with more than just his career but also the whole sport .


----------



## Steve Austin (21 Jul 2007)

Squaggles said:


> Assume he's clean ? Sorry but I'm afraid you can't assume any rider is clean , it's a sad state of affairs but there it is .
> Rules are there , riders know the rules , it is their responsibility to ensure they comply . At the very least he is a fool , he must know that he is playing with more than just his career but also the whole sport .



So is the alternative is to assume they are all on the juice? 

This reminds me of tim don, the tri-athlete, who missed 3 out of competition tests by as he admitted being rubbish at timekeeping. He was banned for a year and then banned from the Olympics forever. His Olympic ban has been lifted. Now i believe Tim when he said he is absent minded and missed these tests due to being a terrible timekeeper. 

I am of the mind that Rasmussen is clean, and i know nothing else at this time. 
I could of course assume everyone is guilty, like you suggest, but that means i would have to imagine something i don't believe to be true


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

He is a professional athlete on a large well funded team packed with managers and support staff catering to his every need.

Keeping the authorities informed of your where abouts if a fundamental fact of life for these people, and has been for a long enough that it should be second nature. Saying 'I forgot' is no more plausible than pleading that 'I didn't know' a particular substance was banned. The anti-doping protocol is hammered into athletes so such an extent that to mess up three times is so suspicious it is deemed to be a 'positive test'.

The only people who fall foul of these requirements are those with something to hide. But once again we see that there is a lack of solidarity between the various bodies, and Rasmussen knows that he can sow enough doubt and confusions that weak willed bodies like ASO can be made to look fools and he can continue to cheat his way to loads of money.

The Danish Cycling Union wouldn't exclude their star rider from their own Olympic team out of spite or some personal vendetta. National bodies are usually the ones who drag their feet on these things as they are seen to be partisan towards their own athletes. So for them to say they consider him to be a cheat and therefore no longer eligible to ride for Denmark is a pretty clear indication they consider him 'unclean'. ASO should support them and kick him off the tour. 

Apparently their is no suspicious circumstances over the timing of the release of these findings by the DCU. They held their hearings in June, submitted their findings to the UCI and only released his name after this due process was completed. The fact he rode their National Championships in the mean time merely shows they weren't going to make any decisions until they had correctly followed the complete protocol. Therefore ASO's claim that somehow this has all been done to harm the TdF is just crap. It's time for them to walk their talk and do something in cycling's interest and not just for their own short term gain.


----------



## Squaggles (21 Jul 2007)

Steve , I think you are slightly naive if you think he missed the out of competition tests because he is a bit forgetful . It's his job , he is a professional . No doubt if you or I 'forgot' to do an important part of our job then we would face the consequences .
I stopped believing that all cyclists were clean when David Millar finally admitted use of EPO when he was caught with empty vials at his house after his previous denials .
Rasmussen has missed 4 tests . 1 might be forgetful , 2 is pretty careless and 3 means he should be banned .


----------



## Steve Austin (21 Jul 2007)

Nothing naive in believing what someone says. He may be lying, but as i will continue to believe until 'proven' otherwise, Rasmussen at this time is still a clean rider as he hasn't failed any tests.


----------



## gbyers (21 Jul 2007)

The guy has a comprehensive team and trainer set up so how does he forget just once? 

Then he plays the trust card and flushes out stories about previous blood doping.

I agree he is innocent until proven otherwise. There are explanations - some innocent, like he did forget; some malicious - what are the motives of the guy accusing him of using him as a mule? 

However, I hope he's got answers because the stakes for the sport are high.

Damn that "trust me" statement.


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

So if someone suspected of drunk driving refused to take a breathalyser you would be happy that this proved their innocence? I think you'll find that's why the people who refuse are treated as if they failed. The system is unworkable otherwise.

And this is exactly what has happened here. Because everyone knows that solely relying on 'in competition' testing is not the way to catch cheats, athletes have to make themselves available for random testing at anytime. To meet this requirement, they have to let the doping authorities know where they are at all times.

Rasmussen didn't. Clearly there was a long period of time when he didn't want to be tested. So he played the same game of brinkmanship that lots of athletes try, disappearing off to some out of the way warm weather training, 'forgetting' to tell people where he's gone and hoping his 'preparations' can be concluded before missing the third out of competition test. Well he's miscalculated and is now banking on there being enough confusion, in fighting between various bodies and naive sympathy amongst the public to get away with it.


----------



## Squaggles (21 Jul 2007)

I'm not sure how long you have been following cycling Steve but anybody who fails a test during a race is a fool and an incompetent one at that . Out of competition testing is much more important . He knew the rules . Saying he 'forgot' is frankly pathetic . If he missed 1 test I might have some sympathy , missing 4 tests ? No , not acceptable . His national federation don't think so either . They are hardly likely to drop their best rider from the national team without good reason .


----------



## Steve Austin (21 Jul 2007)

I don't want to be a part of the lynch mob guys. 
He hasn't failed a test.

If you read the article i linked to, comments by pat McQuaid, whom i respect more than both of you fwiw, states that he missed 2 uci tests and 2 Danish federation tests. As he is 'allowed' to miss 2 before he gets suspended, he has either 'played' the system or been lucky to have not missed the third.

You guys are all for a hanging anyway, so carry on.

Why let an unproved guilty verdict get in the way, eh?


----------



## cq20 (21 Jul 2007)

The only things that Rasmussen is guilty of, so far, are stupidity and arrogance and as a result of this he has done the sport of cycling no favours but he is not a doper until he tests positive. (He is, however a *dope* .)


----------



## andrew_s (21 Jul 2007)

It's not "forgot the test", like with an appointment, you know.

Does anyone know what the whereabouts notification regime is for these out of competition tests?
There's a world of difference between "tell us where, and phone this number if you are going anywhere different", and "fill in this form saying where you are going to be at all times next month, and you are for the high jump if you change your plans"
If it's anything like the latter, I doubt that anyone here could comply for more than a month or two, and it would be easy in an office job.

It wouldn't at all surprise me if the system was set up for the convenience of the testers.


----------



## Dayvo (21 Jul 2007)

Rio Ferdinand (that well-known cyclist, er, footballer) 'missed' a drugs' test when he was out shopping! Innocent or not, he copped (unsure how long) a lengthy ban, even though a later test proved negative.
If the sport of cycling is SERIOUS about eliminating drug-taking (aka dangerous cheating) then it must act accordingly. 
Drug taker or not, Rasmussen has to be banned so as to give a reminder to other cyclists about not missing a test, and that they (the authorities) are dealing with this major problem.


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

The notification process is not too onerous. In fact every other professional cyclist, athlete, sailor, rugby player, etc, etc, with very few exceptions finds it's a process they can comply with. The key is that if you are wanted for out of competition testing, then the testers can find you without too much hassle. 

It's a process that isn't done for the testers convenience, but one that is fair, equitable and has sufficient slack built in to it to allow you to make two human errors each year, but not a third. That is the cut off where you are considered to have moved from being 'forgetful' to being deliberately obstructive. The penalty for this is that you are then considered to have failed the drugs test you deliberately missed. Without this sanction, dopers would play hind and seek with the testers and no out of competition testing would be possible. 

Rasmussen should be punished because he has failed to comply with this fundamental element of the battle to make sport fair and equal for all. It's a rule of the sport like any other, and if you contravene it, you should be prepared to suffer the consequences. Without rules, there is no sport. To say he has not been caught doping is irrelevant. No one is accusing him of that. It's no more relevant than saying he hasn't been caught taking a lift during a stage in the team bus. That's also against the rules, but again is irrelevant.

And it's no lynch mop:
1. The rules have been around for years.
2. Rasmussen knew the rules because he has complied with them at all other times in his career.
3. He was sent letters warning him that he was in breach.
4. The DCU held hearings at which Rasmussen gave his excuses.
5. The DCU felt his excuses were insufficient to excuse his actions.
6. The DCU informed the UCI of their decision.
7. The UCI reviewed the case and agreed with the DCU
8. The DCU announced it's sanction, that being Rasmussen is ineligible for international competition within it's direct control. (The National Team for World Championships and Olympics)

All anyone asks is that ASO support the stance taken by the DCU and UCI and exclude someone from the TdF who has transgressed the anti doping legislation common to most sports worldwide.


----------



## laurence (21 Jul 2007)

didn't Vino and team mates miss tests last year as they decided to leave their hotel just before the testers arrived?

Rio Ferdinand was informed the testers were waiting... then 'forgot'. slightly different.

the main problem with this seems to be the two/four tests missed. if the UCI and danish ones are the same, then it's 2 tests. still not brilliant, but not illegal.

seems odd the danish federation has known about this a while and now acts. could there be part sour grapes as the chicken has never ridden for the national team anyway?

L


----------



## Dayvo (21 Jul 2007)

laurence said:


> seems odd the danish federation has known about this a while and now acts. could there be part sour grapes as the chicken has never ridden for the national team anyway?
> 
> L



Not in the light of Bjarne Riis' confessions of late. In my opinion, the Danish Cycling Federation will want to be distancing itself as far away as possible from anything slightly embarrassing, harmful or controversial!


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

The DCU announced their decision as soon as it has been ratified by the UCI - nothing odd there. Just due process being done.

Rasmussen has ridden for the DCU, he was World Mountain Bike Champion in 1999, the discipline he wanted to be considered for the 2008 Olympics.

The contradictory reports about how many of each test were missed is odd. However the DCU must be petty sure they have followed all the procedures to the letter and that their case against him is watertight, as all these national governing bodies still reel from the memory of athletics in Britain being sued to bankruptcy because they got one of these cases wrong.


----------



## laurence (21 Jul 2007)

ok, didn't realise he was going for the Olympics. he hasn't ridden in the worlds though, i think.

i just think if the UCI and DCU are going to cause a stink as to how many tests have been missed, then they ought to get their numbers right. if he has missed two, then there is no case to answer.

L


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

> if he has missed two, then there is no case to answer.



If that's the case then he will be able to successfully sue them for millions. 

The DCU and UCI clearly think he has broken the rules. 

These arguments about 'poor cyclists' being the victimised pawns in some larger, inter sport war had a shred of plausibility when the accuser was WADA. Here all sorts of agendas were advanced about why they might have a grudge against cycling. All were pretty preposterous, but now the antagonists are a national, and the international cycling body. It's pretty far fetched that they would embark on a contrived witch hunt to harm the image of cycling.


----------



## laurence (21 Jul 2007)

this from cyclingnews - reporting on the TdF press conference..

"In light of the fact that the Danish federation has kicked current yellow jersey, Michael Rasmussen, out of the national team, Tour director Christian Prudhomme called an impromptu press conference in Montpellier at 10:30 this morning. The start of the meeting with the media got delayed for more than 45 minutes and didn't get underway until 11:20.

Prudhomme informed the press that the Danish federation was unable to find Michael Rasmussen for doping tests on May 8 and June 28, 2007, despite a program in place where riders need to always let the national federations know if they travel and where they can be reached.

Prudhomme continued that on June 29, Anne Gripper, the anti-doping director of the UCI, informed Michael Rasmussen that if he missed a third test it would be considered a non-negative test."


----------



## laurence (21 Jul 2007)

more quotes... this time from the UCI..

... McQuaid also spoke about the out of competition tests missed by Michael Ramussen, saying that the rider has missed four in all.

“He has got a Monaco licence, he is with a Dutch team, he lives in Italy, his wife is from Mexico and he spends quite a bit of time there at her place. So he moves around and is hard to track down. He missed two UCI out of competition tests in the month of June and has also missed two of the Danish National agency tests as well.”

Current rules stipulate that three missed tests qualify as a doping case. However there is a proviso that the same body has to attempt to carry out these tests. “The rules are that if you missed three you get suspended, but the rules don't state that you can join together the agencies or whatever,” he explained.

“When he [Rasmussen] missed the UCI tests in June, we sent him a letter and told them that he is now on his final chance. It explained that he had missed two tests and that if he misses a third test, that he would be declared a positive case and that proceedings will open up against him. He would then be suspended until such time as those proceedings are finished.

“He did do an out of competition control after that, in late June, and did the blood tests prior to the Tour de France. The results of those are negative.”

Rasmussen has also done several urine tests during the Tour de France. McQuaid said that he wasn’t sure exactly when the results were due back for these, but added that he could say that, “at this time, the UCI has no open procedures against any rider on the Tour de France.” 


.... i'd say that means he's in the clear then.

L


----------



## Tim Bennet. (21 Jul 2007)

In the clear indeed. And no doubt will be able to march off to court and sue all and sundry, including his national authority, for besmirching his untarnished name.

And we will all be able to cheer and applaud a worthy champion because he has proved his innocence, albeit by a loophole that means missing two tests and then another two tests, does not in fact add up to more than 3 missed tests after all and is therefore innocent on all counts.

Ummm. I wonder if the rest of the world will be cheering as loud. Or will they just think 'Bloody Cyclists - bunch of druggies' ? And our sport takes another stumbling step towards oblivion.


----------



## laurence (21 Jul 2007)

i think all sports are full of druggies... at least cycling tests for them. i know that's no consolation, but hey!

if he's clear within the rules, then he's clear.

L


----------



## andrew_s (22 Jul 2007)

Tim Bennet. said:


> The notification process is not too onerous. In fact every other professional cyclist, athlete, sailor, rugby player, etc, etc, with very few exceptions finds it's a process they can comply with. The key is that if you are wanted for out of competition testing, then the testers can find you without too much hassle.


According to David Millar, the riders have to submit their whereabouts in 3 month chunks, by snail mail. The UCI don't acknowledge receipt unless you chase them up about it, and to make an adjustment you have to submit the whole lot again.



> Bottom line: The UCI needs to get a system in place that works in the real world and gives the riders no excuses for not using it.
> The current system is not realistic and has bred an air of contempt because of its unsuited design with regards to the life of a professional cyclist. The 'Rasmussen Affair ' is perhaps a good thing as it sheds light on a system in need of change.


(David Millar)

The UK System is online, and can be updated at any time, even by SMS


----------



## Tim Bennet. (23 Jul 2007)

Well, whatever the short comings of the systems may be (and perhaps the UCI ones are worse than the athletics ones with which I am familiar) complying with them are still an critical part of his professional working life that has monumental implications should he not deal with it.

We all have red tape and paper work we have to get done in our working life. Most of it appears deliberately obtuse and some bits do get 'deferred', but only a fool would neglect VAT and Tax returns, for example. Or you pay someone else to do it for them, an option that is certainly available to the top riders.

The reality is that most people deal with the reporting okay, and usually those who brush up against the limit of 'no shows' have less honourable reasons for doing so than merely 'forgetfulness'.


----------



## Monty Dog (23 Jul 2007)

I found the Millar article enlightening - particularly as it sounds like a general failure to maintain their own records means that there's no surprise that sometimes the 'vampires' fail to meet their victims. Until the UCI/Federation can prove that they were deliberately given 'false' or misleading info, then I still think it's no case proven.


----------



## Squaggles (23 Jul 2007)

I wonder how other riders mange to comply with the system if it doesn't work ? If Rasmussen is clean he really needs to take the out of competition testing a bit more seriously .


----------



## Tetedelacourse (23 Jul 2007)

Here's another enlightening comment from Millar on the subject:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/23072007/3/cyclist-millar-hits-rasmussen-report.html


----------



## vorsprung (23 Jul 2007)

*McQuaid can stick it where the sun doesn't shine*

"From an image point of view, it would be better if it was not Rasmussen but one of the youngest riders winning the Tour.

But he has not broken any rule"

OR MAYBE IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THE HAM FISTED MCQUAID JUST QUIT NOW
(strictly from an image point of view of course. Perhaps a younger, more photogenic director of the UCI could be found)


----------



## Squaggles (23 Jul 2007)

In an interview with French newspaper L'Equipe, Millar said: "It is unacceptable that Rasmussen did not manage to give notice of his whereabouts. It is understandable he had problems communicating his address from Mexico, but it is up to him to make sure his federation receives notification.

"He started the race knowing what would happen but did nothing to rectify the situation and now we are all screwed, and the Tour is in the shoot. He took no notice of warnings from the UCI (cycling's world governing body) though he deserved to be punished.

"He has either been unprofessional or has used the system."


----------



## monnet (23 Jul 2007)

The Sunday Times shed some light on it this week, annoying though the paper is with its dogged determination to show cycling as the only sport with a drug problem.

It seems the reason it has all come out now is that Rasmussen lived in the States as an MTBer and when he moved back to Europe he got his old flatmate to bring his 'favourite shoes' over. The rider (Whitney Richards, an MTBer who's left the sport) couldn't fit the box in his luggage so opened it to transport the shoes individually. What he found was not sidi's but artificial blood. He poured it away much to Rasmussen's annoyance.

Richards then felt he was holding a guilty secret (partly out of loyalty to Rasmussen's wife, who's best friends with Richards' girlfriend). When Rasmussen said 'you can trust me' to a danish journo after a Tour stage Richards felt he had to say something. Hence the situation we're in now. 

I'm not trying to defend Rasmussen and the circumstantial evidence looks pretty damning but so far he's not been caught doing anything illegal. Missing two tests is fine from an athlete's point of view and it is regarded as standard practice (unfortunately) in all sports - I've heard of similar in swimming. It also seems to me that this Whitney Richards is jealous of Rasmussen now (else why not mention it in previous years with him on the podium in the polka dot jersey etc.?). 

I think another point that gets forgotten at times is how hard cycling is and who the people that do it are. Millar is intelligent, articulate and from a well off family that have been able to offer him financial support. He was stupid, admitted it and I believe he is genuine. In the past riders have often said 'It might be hard riding a bike for 6 hours a day but it beats working in the fields of Flanders/ Northern France etc for 6 hours a day and the pay's better.' In this Times article Rasmussen defended himself to Richards by saying Richards had a degree and a future outside cycling, whereas he (Ras) had no education and needed to do all he could to ensure he succeeded. 

Oh and I heard on Eurosport today that French customs have raided the Rabobank, Discovery, Astana and CSC team buses.


----------



## Smokin Joe (23 Jul 2007)

If what Richards says is true, he should have gone to the authotities in 2002 with the evidence he claims was in his possession. Instead, he waits five years during which rasmussen has won two polka dot jerseys and stays silent, then when the Dane is on course to win the tour he suddenly gets a attack of conscience. I would like to know how much money he was paid for his story which came out with the protection of America's almost non-existant libel laws, and why he waited till now (when such allegations carry much more value).

True or false, he should have put up at the time or shut up.


----------



## gavintc (23 Jul 2007)

Whatever the outcome, it will leave a bad taste well after the Tour is over. I had high hopes for this tour and hoped it was past the worst of the drug suspicion. I think it might be better for the overall Tour, if Rasmussen was not the winner in Paris. I have sympathy for Millar's comments - oh well time to cheer for Contador ot Evans.


----------



## Chris James (24 Jul 2007)

To be honest, I am a bit bored of the Rasmussen innuendo. On a separate website (sorry can't post the link as I have forgotten where I have read it, it may have been the Millar Diaries on Biycling.com) David Millar was sympathising to a degree with Rasmussen saying that the UCI method of filling in the whereabouts form is archaic. You have to post it by mail and you get no confirmation that they have received it. Millar said hat he had been told off for not notifying them when he had and that now he phones to ask if they have received the form. He suggested that the UCI follow the British 'best practice' otherwise arguments about missing tests will be inevitable.

As far as the blood bags accusation is concerned, it is so old now that we can never know what actually happened. In any case, at that point it seems that most fo the peleton were on the juice. Rasmussen has been tested a fair bit recently and nothing has come up. Until he fails a test then he must be assumed innocent.

On a separate note, ignroing the drug stuff, I would quite like Rasmussen to win the Tour. It is high time that a pure climber won and his performances so far in the Alps, Pyrenees and the time trial have been worthy of the yellow jersey.


----------



## Haitch (24 Jul 2007)

Speaking on Dutch TV last night, Pat McQuaid said Rasmussen had missed two out-of-competition tests, had been sent a cautionary letter and warned that missing a third test would "lead to a procedure" (whatever that might mean). As far as McQuaid was concerned, Rasmussen had done nothing wrong, broken no rules and the regulations allowed him to enter any race he wanted to. He also said Rasmussen had been tested out of competition since being cautioned and tested several times during the Tour. All tests were negative.

On another note, the Rabobank manager said in a newspaper interview that Rasmussen rode under a Mexican licence (his wife is Mexican and he lives and trains in the country for part of the year) and was therefore ineligible to ride for the Danish team anyway. Linking the missed tests to being dropped from the national team, said the manager, was a complete red herring.


----------



## Blonde (24 Jul 2007)

Chris James said:


> To be honest, I am a bit bored of the Rasmussen innuendo... David Millar was sympathising to a degree with Rasmussen saying that the UCI method of filling in the whereabouts form is archaic. You have to post it by mail and you get no confirmation that they have received it.



Yes, he said something along those lines on ITV4s' coverage of the tour.

As you say, until proved guilty... with being the yellow jersey holder he is currently being dope tested every day.

This whole thing reminds me of politics - only when someone becomes a politician does what they may or may not have done in the past (that may not even be relevant to what they are doing now) become publically scrutinised. IMO Rasmussen is being publically shamed for something he may have done ages ago and that doesn't really have any relevance to what he is doing on the tour at the moment.


----------



## gillan (24 Jul 2007)

the american boy has gone public twice with the story but off the record

once to velo news...not long after it happened and once again to Walsh

it was only after the 'trust me' bit that he went fully public

Rasmussen went mental at him due to the costs and he was hacked off at the time due to a number of tgheings (you can read the article on the velonews website)

This is not rocket science

these guys have agents and team managers...Festina happened in 1998, journos have been snooping in bins for years and the current tour champion is eh....not the tour champion...or is he???

in this environment if you are going to be a contender do you not think that you might send your whereabouts recored delivery (or danish/mexican equivalent)...if you're going to get banned because they have no record of it and lose your pay and get a 2 year ban (+ 2 on Pro Tour)...do you not think that is as important as getting the miles in

Everyone knows that the time to knock back the 'goods' is not during races but in your training periods...out of competition tests are if anything more important than in competition tests

at least with the grief he's (Rasmussen) getting the tide appears to be turning.....


----------



## gillan (24 Jul 2007)

blonde

testing at race is irrelevant

you make sure whatever you are doing is either non-detactable, you mask it or you microdose, or you know the testers are corrupt

you should not be getting caught...

everyone knows winners get tested..its the double bluff

nobody as festina got caught...do you onow how much these guys were taking??? and how many races they won??

catching them in the pyranees, mexico or Soputh America is the best way to get them


----------



## Blonde (24 Jul 2007)

Yes, but what happened to innocent unless proved guilty? We can only go on results, and if there aren't any for a particular time period, I can't see the point in speculating. Assuming that everyone is using drugs unless proved innocent may of course be true, but assuming that is not very scientific and damages the reputations of those who are not using them. If we assume that every one is using drugs than what is the point in anyone bothering to be 'clean'?


----------



## Monty Dog (24 Jul 2007)

Seems everyone's baying for Rasmussens's blood (no pun intended!) and yet the second placed rider, formerly of Liberty Seguros, potentially implicated in OP and former protege of Manolo Saiz is squeaky clean? By the same standards - the Astana boys are tarred with the same brush and seen as villains of the piece? I'm getting tired of the English-language press' boring vendetta. This is the first time in years I've actually been bothered about watching the Tour into the third week, because normally it's been a boring procession for the last seven years. If you guys want to speculate imponderables about what has probably been the best tour to watch in years - go ahead, but I'm firmly in the 'innocent 'til proven guilty camp' on this one.


----------



## gillan (24 Jul 2007)

monty/blone

the current procedures are a bit like clothing blood checks for axe murderers...if you're a successful axe murderer you are going to be covered in blood...if you know that you are going to be inspected for blood on your clothes it would be in your interest to make sure it wasn't there and clean up asap

one way to try and circumvent this from the testers would be be to arrive unannounced and catch the axe murderer fresh from the kill

one way to try and circumvent this by the axe murderer would be to make sure they didn't know where you were and so couldn't

and here we are with Rasmussen

4 tests 2 from UCI 2 from Danish...so technically he's off the hook until the next one but we all know that the arbitrary limit of 3 has been breached but because its two seperate testing organisations he's 'clean'

link that with his bulls blood history...et voila

the tour could do without it


----------



## Squaggles (24 Jul 2007)

It's pretty simple really , if Rasmussen had followed the correct procedures nobody would now be speculating about it . He has brought all this onto himself .


----------



## Blonde (24 Jul 2007)

But if there was a known problem then he should not have been allowed to ride the tour. It's that simple. If there is no problem (which there obvisouly isn't, or he would not have been allowed to ride) then this situation should not have been made into a big issue. It's all this fuss over "nothing" (nothing that can be proved either way, in which case, it _is_ nothing) that I find most irritating. If nothing was done about his going AWOL at the time it was known, then he should be left alone now. 

IMO The UCI and Danish Fed made a mistake in not following correct procedure at the time, but hopefully they will learn from this so we don't get a repeat performance, saving a lot of red faces all round.


----------



## Haitch (24 Jul 2007)

I can't help thinking that if Rasmussen were French none of these stories would have made the press. There have been lots of comments here in recent days from riders of various nationalities who think missing an out-of-season test is an everyday event. Rasmussen was actually one of four, I think, Rabobank riders who received a similar caution from the UCI this year.


----------



## Chuffy (24 Jul 2007)

Alan H said:


> Rasmussen was actually one of four, I think, Rabobank riders who received a similar caution from the UCI this year


Somehow that doesn't make it feel any better...

But, like Blonde, I can't help but think that this is as big and bad as the press chose to make it. The current climate is pretty grim, with everyone terrified of the next scandal, but that's not a good enough excuse to spit-roast the Chicken without following due process, which does not allow for throwing him off the Tour.


----------



## vbc (24 Jul 2007)

In an way I'm glad that riders in the TdF are still being caught, sorry it's Vino but surely it's no big surprise to anyone. It can only be good news that people who are trying to cheat the system, their fellow riders and us, are being found out and shamed. Just watch the race and we all know that there are plenty of them juiced up out there. Somehow, I don't think that Vino will be the last one this year and as far as I'm concerned, let's see some more getting done.


----------

