Armstrong/UCI

[itisaboutthebike]

Mmmmmm...........this one passed me by in sands of time.........

I read in this weeks comic that Armstrong 'donated' $25,000 to the UCI anti-doping cause.

Is this a conflict of interest or what ?

Just shows what a shower of sh*t the UCI and McQuaid is. It just beggars belief.

 

[Skip Madness]

It is hard to say exactly how much this constitutes a conflict of interest - one would like the UCI to be as independent as possible and in theory it should not affect that, but this is the UCI we are talking about. Armstrong can say it is him willingly aiding the fight against doping, but I do not think it plays well for him.

Does anyone know exactly (or even roughly) what USD 25,000 can buy in anti-doping measures? The more it is, the more suspicious it looks, but on the other hand the UCI would say the more it is the harder it is to turn down.

 

[Chuffy]

It is hard to say exactly how much this constitutes a conflict of interest - one would like the UCI to be as independent as possible and in theory it should not affect that, but this is the UCI we are talking about. Armstrong can say it is him willingly aiding the fight against doping, but I do not think it plays well for him.

Does anyone know exactly (or even roughly) what USD 25,000 can buy in anti-doping measures? The more it is, the more suspicious it looks, but on the other hand the UCI would say the more it is the harder it is to turn down.

As the sport's ruling body, a 'donation' from one of the leading proponents of that sport should surely come under the heading of 'thanks but no thanks'?
Accepting it just smells...

 

[Skip Madness]

As the sport's ruling body, a 'donation' from one of the leading proponents of that sport should surely come under the heading of 'thanks but no thanks'?
Accepting it just smells...

Well I think so, yes - especially now. But I thought I remember reading about this a couple of years ago, unless this is another donation. If it was made while he was retired, it would be hard to say no really (depending on, as I said before, exactly what USD 25,000 gets you) especially as ASO and the UCI drifted further apart. Given the problems Garmin have been having regarding their internal testing, I would not be surprised if the UCI is scraping the barrel trying to pay for the testing procedures. But if this donation has been made recently (ie. as soon as his comeback was in question) then it is very improper.

 

[andy_wrx]

Perhaps he's paying them to come round and test him lots of times, then that cr*p he keeps coming-out with, about being 'the most drug tested rider in history' might actually have some semblance of truth to it ?

 

[Dave5N]

These are scientists doing these tests. Not scheming Macchiavellian politicians. I don't know how you could possibly carry out the conspiracy you all hint at.

Occam's Razor?

 

[itisaboutthebike]

Still all smoke and mirrors............

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Armstrong_Still_no_drugtesting_program_article_273035.html

He's pathetic.......

 

[yello]

Catlin has admitted that he hasn't yet tested Armstrong.

I don't get it. I thought he had to have 6 months worth of results just to take part in the TdU??

 

[Haitch]

Catlin is in addition to the normal testing procedures. As it says in the aricle:

Armstrong has so far [since he announced his come-back] been tested seven times by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) and Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) officials

 

[andy_wrx]

Incidentally, when was this Armstrong donation to UCI ?
Velonews was reporting it back in 2006 as
"According to a report by Eurosport, Armstrong gave the UCI a “fair amount of money” several years ago to help discover new anti-doping methods"
- i.e. presumably when he was still competing...
http://velonews.com/article/7914

 

[itisaboutthebike]

The UCI 'waived' thier 6 month testing rule for Ponce A. What a suprise.

I wouldn't be suprised to see Ponce A's face emerging from McQuaids backside....................or vice versa............

 

[Skip Madness]

Incidentally, when was this Armstrong donation to UCI ?
Velonews was reporting it back in 2006 as
"According to a report by Eurosport, Armstrong gave the UCI a “fair amount of money” several years ago to help discover new anti-doping methods"
- i.e. presumably when he was still competing...
http://velonews.com/article/7914

This week's Cycling Weekly says it was early 2000s.

 

[itisaboutthebike]

Yes I seem to remember that it said 2001/2002 when Ponce A made the 'donation'

The UCI are a bunch of shiesters...............I wouldn't give McQuaid the steam off my p*ss.

As I've said all along: the testing/banning shoudl be done by a completely independent world wide body.

What incentive is there fir the UCI to catch cheats ? Little. Why ? Becuase if they do then it's likely that the team sponsor will pull out- which ultimately means less money for the UCI coffers.

Interesting to note that Scumacher and Kohl were found psotive on team that was already folding (altho I acceot that they caught Sella - but he's the only one and I think they had to have a scapegoat - and he was easy meat - otheriwse people would be questioning the UCI's passport programme even further. That they haven't found others yet - well.need I say more).

Strange that they didn't catch Ricco/Peopli at the Giro.

 

[itisaboutthebike]

Interesting to note that Scumacher and Kohl were found psotive on team that was already folding (altho I acceot that they caught Sella - but he's the only one and I think they had to have a scapegoat - and he was easy meat - otheriwse people would be questioning the UCI's passport programme even further. That they haven't found others yet - well.need I say more).

Sorry forgot that it wasn't the UCI whcih found these but due to French testing.........

 

[andy_wrx]

And McQuaid has engineered Patrice Clerc out of ASO because he was being too effective in chasing dopers.

Let alone the war between McQuaid and Dick Pound of WADA (WADA of course belonging to the Olympic organisation, not being part of UCI)

UCI - and Armstrong - have covered-up doping for so long. It's bad news, it affects the public's perception of cycling and that in-turn puts of sponsors, so let's hide it, pretend it isn't happening, pretend that we've got it beaten.

McQuaid - and his Dutch puppetmaster - are part of the problem, not the solution.

ASO recognised that doping was damaging the Tour, but realised that trying to hide it wasn't working so squared-up against it and took it on.
AFLD caught more dopers than UCI did all year, despite not having access to the blood profiling system.