"Chris Froome says cycling's code of omerta has been broken"

[smutchin]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jun/22/chris-froome-cycling-code-omerta-broken

Hmmm. The bit that concerns me is this:
"It is clear that those guys were acting on their own."

I know what he means - that it wasn't a team-sponsored doping program à la USPS - but it's a very naive comment. Even if it's true that Vini Fantini and AG2R aren't systematically doping, they are clearly turning a blind eye to it and/or not carrying out adequate internal checks on their riders. Plus I doubt they're the only teams with this problem. And it's certainly not true that these riders are acting alone - they must be buying their drugs from someone...

I'm encouraged by Froome's attitude to being asked questions about doping but worried that he seems slightly too complacent about it.

If omertà really is a thing of the past, riders like Froome need to apply pressure from within the peloton to help the authorities weed out those who continue to cheat, not just assume they will be caught.

 

[DogTired]

I don't know where all of the anti-Froome stuff is coming from. There's another thread berating him because apparently he wants to compete in 7 TdFs.

"It is clear that those guys were acting on their own."

Really - whats wrong with this? In comparison with times past where doping was team organised, apparently all of the media knew what was going on (certainly when it became open knowledge they all revealed their knowledge and suspicions), the organisers knew, lots of people on the forums 'knew', the peloton 'knew' - really going by how everyone 'knew' - everyone was complicit in the big doping cover-up.

Seeing as how nobody in the media identified up-front a problem with doping with the guys in question, nor the teams, nor all the wise old men on the forums, isnt it reasonable that they were acting on their own? Also, by 'on their own' if you add the word 'initiative' after it makes more sense. So going by how may people 'knew' about these 3 compared to how everyone 'knew' and was a genius after the fact with regard to doping past, its not an unreasonable comment to say they were acting on their own.

With regard to where they buy their drugs from and acting alone, EPO can be got over the counter from pharmacies in Switzerland, so no big shakes. Heptaminol is widely available too, so its more a case of popping down to Boots rather than setting up an extensive drugs support network of speedboats and private planes.

With regard to Froome being complacent, no-one here knows what he, or any other riders, might be doing in private to keep the peloton clean. His response was an on the record response to an on the record question.

Mauro Santambrogio tested positive on the FIRST day of the giro - how was Froome to do anything about that? Without the facilities available to UCI testing labs, how are the teams supposed to detect all doping? Quote the team's testing regime, the analytical results compared to the UCI's approach and sensitivity and you might have a point.

Just pointing a finger and saying the teams missed it so are turning a blind eye doesnt stack up unless you back it up with the technical details of the testing regimes for all to see.

 

[Crackle]

I thought it was an OK interview. He's a rider, not a UCI official who needs to choose his words carefully.

It doesn't matter what he says though. The moon landing conspiracists and general loons will see it as further proof he's a cheat and the rest will see it as a perfectly normal response to questions which are pretty useless in telling us anything.

I think journalists need to move on from Kimmage like questions.

 

[smutchin]

I don't know where all of the anti-Froome stuff is coming from. There's another thread berating him because apparently he wants to compete in 7 TdFs.

I'm not anti-Froome, I'm a huge fan, I believe he's riding clean, and I like most of what he says in this interview. I know what he meant when he said they were acting alone, and I hope he's right. I'm just expressing a note of caution.

Seeing as how nobody in the media identified up-front a problem with doping with the guys in question, nor the teams, nor all the wise old men on the forums, isnt it reasonable that they were acting on their own?

Excuse me? The suspicions surrounding Santambrogio were discussed right here in this very forum prior to the Giro. It seems to have been pretty much an open secret that he was up to no good.

As for that clown Di Luca... it was barely even newsworthy when he was caught.

With regard to where they buy their drugs from and acting alone, EPO can be got over the counter from pharmacies in Switzerland, so no big shakes.

If they're acting alone, how come no one noticed them popping into the Swiss branch of Boots to buy their EPO?

I don't for one second believe they were entirely without accomplices.

With regard to Froome being complacent, no-one here knows what he, or any other riders, might be doing in private to keep the peloton clean. His response was an on the record response to an on the record question.

Fair point.

Just pointing a finger and saying the teams missed it so are turning a blind eye doesnt stack up unless you back it up with the technical details of the testing regimes for all to see.

When Houanard got busted last year, Vincent Lavenu talked about the team's strict internal checks. When Sylvain Georges got busted, he said exactly the same thing. What will he say next time an AG2R rider gets busted? How many will need to get busted before his words start to ring hollow with you?

As for Vini Fantini... I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specific but for two riders to get caught in such a short space of time (neither a surprise to anyone), plus the other rumours about avoiding tests, suggests something is very amiss in the team's organisation.

If Froome and others are already actively working within the peloton to help uncover suspicious behaviour, that's great, but I've seen too many false dawns in cycling to get too optimistic about Froome's comments.

And I don't believe those three were the only dopers at the Giro.

 

[VamP]

If they're acting alone, how come no one noticed them popping into the Swiss branch of Boots to buy their EPO?

I don't for one second believe they were entirely without accomplices.

Honestly, there is a plethora of ways to get anything you want, legal or illegal.

This took me a minute to find.

The scary thought is that I suspect that abuse in the amateur ranks is far wider than that within the pro peloton.

 

[Crackle]

Honestly, there is a plethora of ways to get anything you want, legal or illegal.

This took me a minute to find.

The scary thought is that I suspect that abuse in the amateur ranks is far wider than that within the pro peloton.

Why so long, did you lose your bookmark

 

[smutchin]

Honestly, there is a plethora of ways to get anything you want, legal or illegal.

This took me a minute to find.

Any pro cyclist who buys his doping products online is as stupid as he looks.

It would be interesting to know the specifics of how Di Luca and Santambrogio were caught. Clearly both were targeted because they were already regarded as suspicious. Di Luca's positive was pre-Giro, so it's possible he was only using it for training and if he really was acting entirely alone, that would explain why he was cack-handed enough with the dosing to get caught.

But Santambrogio tested positive after the first stage, so he must have had the stuff with him at least up to the day before the start, by which time he would have been with his team. When, where and how was it administered? Did none of his team-mates notice anything suspicious about his behaviour? Where was he hiding the stuff? Don't the team bosses check their riders' luggage? If they don't, they should.

Getting hold of the stuff is only part of the story.

 

[VamP]

Any pro cyclist who buys his doping products online is as stupid as he looks.

It would be interesting to know the specifics of how Di Luca and Santambrogio were caught. Clearly both were targeted because they were already regarded as suspicious. Di Luca's positive was pre-Giro, so it's possible he was only using it for training and if he really was acting entirely alone, that would explain why he was cack-handed enough with the dosing to get caught.

But Santambrogio tested positive after the first stage, so he must have had the stuff with him at least up to the day before the start, by which time he would have been with his team. When, where and how was it administered? Did none of his team-mates notice anything suspicious about his behaviour? Where was he hiding the stuff? Don't the team bosses check their riders' luggage? If they don't, they should.

Getting hold of the stuff is only part of the story.

I agree that dosage, timing and masking are a relatively complex area, but not really any more so than getting your training sorted out properly, and certainly not beyond the ken of a committed doper.

I am curious why you consider buying pharmaceuticals online as stupid? Provenance or traceability? Both are easy to resolve. Certainly no stupider than taking the stuff in the first place given the inherent dangers.

And finally, do you genuinely think that directeur sportifs should check their rider's luggage? How often? How thoroughly? If Will Self can shoot up on the prime minister's jet, then I'm sure a rider can find opportunity too.

I'm not defending the team, but I do think it's a stretch to say that they are turning a blind eye, based on the evidence.

 

[VamP]

Why so long, did you lose your bookmark

I've oohed and aahed about it, but in the end decided that was on the wrong side of funny. Sorry.

 

[Hont]

I'm not sure you can check your riders' luggage without a huge breakdown in trust and some agreement in place beforehand. Plus if your wife is carrying the stuff (Rumsas-style) it wouldn't help anyway. Storing and administering one phial of EPO should be easy enough to do on your own, or with your partner's/manager's/relative's assistance. If Bernard Kohl could perform blood transfusions without his team's knowledge, a couple of injections should be easy enough.

So it's plausible that they were "acting alone" - which I take to mean there was no team or Ferrari/Fuentes style organisation - but it's not proven either way.

 

[smutchin]

I am curious why you consider buying pharmaceuticals online as stupid? Provenance or traceability? Both are easy to resolve. Certainly no stupider than taking the stuff in the first place given the inherent dangers.

Too easy to trace, unless you have an accomplice. And if you have an accomplice, you're not acting alone (viz Rumsas).

And finally, do you genuinely think that directeur sportifs should check their rider's luggage?

Yep. Teams need to be held accountable for their riders' actions. If the teams received harsher punishments when their riders were caught, there would be greater incentive to enforce internal anti-doping procedures. Bag checks should be a minimum. The riders are there to do a job for their team, not sightseeing.

I'm not defending the team, but I do think it's a stretch to say that they are turning a blind eye, based on the evidence.

What I said in my OP was: "turning a blind eye and/or not carrying out adequate internal checks". If it's not one, it must be the other. If a team boss doesn't know one of his riders is doping, he has failed in his duty of care not only to that rider, but to the rest of the team and the sponsors as well.

Apparently, Vini Fantini riders are all required to sign a statement to the effect that they aren't doping. Brilliantly, that means they get to fire their riders if they're caught - ie it's to protect the team's financial interests, nothing to do with preventing cheating. Luca Scinto only came out and said he hadn't wanted Di Luca on the team after he was caught.

 

[smutchin]

I'm not sure you can check your riders' luggage without a huge breakdown in trust and some agreement in place beforehand.

The stakes are too high to rely on trust. Too many people's livelihoods are directly affected. This isn't a civil liberties issue, it's a professional contract issue.

 

[VamP]

Too easy to trace, unless you have an accomplice. And if you have an accomplice, you're not acting alone (viz Rumsas).




Yep. Teams need to be held accountable for their riders' actions. If the teams received harsher punishments when their riders were caught, there would be greater incentive to enforce internal anti-doping procedures. Bag checks should be a minimum. The riders are there to do a job for their team, not sightseeing.



What I said in my OP was: "turning a blind eye and/or not carrying out adequate internal checks". If it's not one, it must be the other. If a team boss doesn't know one of his riders is doping, he has failed in his duty of care not only to that rider, but to the rest of the team and the sponsors as well.

Apparently, Vini Fantini riders are all required to sign a statement to the effect that they aren't doping. Brilliantly, that means they get to fire their riders if they're caught - ie it's to protect the team's financial interests, nothing to do with preventing cheating. Luca Scinto only came out and said he hadn't wanted Di Luca on the team after he was caught.

I don't want to get into an argument over this, but people are notoriously good at deception when they put their mind to it. Introducing bag checks will just drive better hiding places. You seem to be assuming that bag checks are in place already - know of any teams where this is the case? Is Sean Yates rifling through Froomies undercrackers as we speak? Getting the latex gloves out? Where do you draw the line?

 

[Crackle]

I've oohed and aahed about it, but in the end decided that was on the wrong side of funny. Sorry.

The medium of the written word, sometimes makes a joke a risky thing. No offence meant.

 

[smutchin]

I don't want to get into an argument over this, but people are notoriously good at deception when they put their mind to it. Introducing bag checks will just drive better hiding places.

Sure, but let's make it as difficult for them as possible.

You seem to be assuming that bag checks are in place already - know of any teams where this is the case? Is Sean Yates rifling through Froomies undercrackers as we speak? Getting the latex gloves out? Where do you draw the line?

I have no idea if it's already in place or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if Sky for one already have bag checks as part of their rider contracts. That kind of thing is quite common in many other walks of life - eg if you work at M&S.