Contador banned

[Alun]

Ironically Saxo have now won the 2010 TdF with Schleck as Bertie was riding for Astana at the time. Although perhaps understandably Schleck says he doesn't feel a sense of victory.

 

[yello]

Perhaps there is a difference between the story which they are punishing and the probable truth which they know they cannot prove.

That's kind of my take on it too. A kind of paradox; a hard line approach was adopted to what could be proven (the presence of clenb) because of what was more possibly the cause (a transfusion) and couldn't be proven.

My gut feel is that if it wasn't for the transfusion possibility then Contador would have received a lesser sentence, if not walked.

But I find the CAS statement curious....

"The Panel concluded that both the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion scenario were, in theory, possible explanations for the adverse analytical findings, but were however equally unlikely. In the Panel’s opinion, on the basis of the evidence adduced, the presence of clenbuterol was more likely caused by the ingestion of a contaminated food supplement."

So probably a contaminated food supplement.... but not meat? Poor Bertie, if only he'd picked the right food supplement, the one that CAS would have believed

 

[yello]

Pat McQuaid - "this is a sad day for our sport" says it all, what he should have said is "this is a great victory for our sport" and praised the work of anti doping agencies.

I thought it a curious statement too. And just to show how black a day it is for them, they'll push for the £2.5m fine. That must really hurt them to do that. But then nothing McQuaid says should surprise me.

 

[dragon72]

I don't really get it.
Okay, so he gets stripped of the title of the race he tested positive in. Good.
And he should serve a 2 year ban as a punishment. Also good.
But why is he also stripped of subsequent titles he won and tested negative in?
I reckon if he didn't test positive in races he contested while still riding, then he's as clean in those races as the rest of the peloton.
Let the 2 years start today.

 

[raindog]

As we thought, it's a very hollow victory for Andy. What a stupid mess this whole thing is.

" If now I am declared overall winner of the 2010 Tour de France it will not make me happy. I battled with Contador in that race and I lost. My goal is to win the Tour de France in a sportive way, being the best of all competitors, not in court. If I succeed this year, I will consider it as my first Tour victory.”

 

[Alun]

I don't really get it.
Okay, so he gets stripped of the title of the race he tested positive in. Good.
And he should serve a 2 year ban as a punishment. Also good.
But why is he also stripped of subsequent titles he won and tested negative in?
I reckon if he didn't test positive in races he contested while still riding, then he's as clean in those races as the rest of the peloton.
Let the 2 years start today.

It's a 2 year ban, it starts from Jan 2011 less the period already served (5 months odd).
I don't think many would agree to let him retain the Giro.
Following your logic why not allow him to keep all the stages where he has not tested positive?

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Right verdict, bizarrely baroque banning procedure...

 

[Hont]

That's kind of my take on it too. A kind of paradox; a hard line approach was adopted to what could be proven (the presence of clenb) because of what was more possibly the cause (a transfusion) and couldn't be proven.

That doesn't make any sense though, because they haven't proven he took contaminated supplements either. They don't have to. They could just as easily have said that the meat-case was unproven, the clenbuterol was there, so that's a ban, "it might have been a blood transfusion". I find it curious that they have hypothesized on a different source. But then without access to all the information they have had, it's only so much speculation and I doubt we will ever know the whole story.

 

[yello]

You're right... it is an odd statement! That was my point!

It would have been much simpler if they'd said "it's there and we don't care how it got there". But they seem to suggest there's a need for there to be a reason.

 

[dragon72]

Following your logic why not allow him to keep all the stages where he has not tested positive?

Sure, why not? You should only be punished for what you're proven to have done. Besides, you can't win a race if you're DQ'd a stage.

 

[yello]

It doesn't matter. Letter of the law, there's no lower limit. CAS didn't need to suggest a reason mattered.

Or am I missing your point?

 

[rich p]

The left-field, late entry of contaminated supplements is a curious addition to the dog-ate-my-homework excuses. I wonder if Bertie's lawyers had suggested it as excuse no.2?

 

[yello]

They're probably slapping there heads right now as we type about it!

"doh!" (or whatever the Spanish equivalent is) "why didn't we think of that?"!

 

[Erratic]

What happens to all the prize money he won during this time? Is it taken off him/the team and riders he rode with?

 

[Paulus]

What happens to all the prize money he won during this time? Is it taken off him/the team and riders he rode with?

Valid point Erratic. Does Andy Shleck now get paid out as well for winning?