Rasmussen Drug Investigation!

[laurence]

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.]

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]

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]

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.]

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]

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]

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.]

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]

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]

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]

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

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

 

[vorsprung]

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]

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]

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]

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.