Just Go . . .

by R Mc on May 11, 2009 12:03 PM EDT

Away.

That's my reaction to the unsurprising news of Alejandro Valverde's suspension. Here's CN's brief report, of which more will certainly follow: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may11news3

People can (and will, that's mostly what this post is for) debate the various issues related to this. I want to make my position clear: after going through the Hamilton and Landis imbroglios and deducing the following take-away message--suck it up, they doped and the tests worked and were administered efficiently enough, I have little patience for the sorts of 'tranquillo" defenses proffered by Valverde. (It doesn't help matters that Arne Baker's "defense" of Landis is rife with red-herring arguments AND that he was responsible for planting false information about AFLD).

Granted much of the evidence against Valverde is circumstantial--but it is worth mentioning that he has been pointed out as tainted ever since Jesus Manzano first went public about the systematic doping program at Kelme. Subsequent events have done nothing but corroborate the basic outlines and, in many cases, the particulars of Manzano's allegations.

So . . . as more information appears, we'll be sure to add it in, but my initial position is clear: Valverde's suspension is LONG over-due.

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Isn't there already a thready on the front page on this?

or did i dream that?

by Jen See on May 11, 2009 12:02 PM EDT reply actions

rearranging things

I don’t mind a second editorial piece, though I’m going to move up the Giro stuff.

CQRanking.com, you complete me.

by Chris Fontecchio on May 11, 2009 12:04 PM EDT reply actions

wanted to hold off until the giro stage

was completed, Chris got his up first.

I’ve been thinking about why I dislike Valverde so much. Since his ‘03 season w/Kelme he’s raced like Rebellin, except that Rebellin attacked more. And, in fact, it’s in large part Valverde’s fault that Schumacher won Amstel.

Still his stage win in the ’03 (that long ago???) Vuelta on the Pandera climb was an amazing moment.

by R Mc on May 11, 2009 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Ah, the court of public opinion

Looks like Valverde has a very reasonable case with CAS/regular court appeals, with the Italian authorities preumably having ignored Spanish law, regulations and court orders in the process of gathering evidence. If that is true, Valverde should be fully reinstated and CONI severely punished. I hope it turns out that way but won’t hold my breath. Gah, I hate witch hunts.

by tedvdw on May 11, 2009 12:08 PM EDT reply actions

If the UCI suspends him internationally

he’ll have to take it to the CAS. If he loses their his only recourse is to the Swiss Federal Tribunal. They only hear appeals on limited grounds but this probably fits that.

by mysterion on May 11, 2009 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions

What's this "ignored Spanish law"

they put in a standard request for the evidence and the Spanish supplied it to them. Now the lawyers here may be able to correct me, but I don’t think that international law and treaties recognise the concept of “Oops, we didn’t mean to send that.”

by Monty. on May 11, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm just buying into the CdE spin

because I have a crush on Valverde.

by tedvdw on May 11, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions

lol, now the truth comes out ;-)

by Jen See on May 11, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Girl-crush, man-crush

Whatevah!

by tedvdw on May 11, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Contador and Fränk fans should not say that

We should rather fear what else slips out

by OctaBech on May 11, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions

exactly, interesting how comments about AFLD, CONI, WADA, UCI varies depending on which team/rider is targeted

watch out boys girls, your favorite rider might be next.

by lyne on May 11, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Wouldn't worry about those two myself

Valverde was an easy mark because there was EPO in his Fuentes baggie. (Q: Is there any EPO in an “Amigo de Birillo” bag?)

Contador’s alleged program was small potatoes. The millenial stuff, but no blood doping. Schelck has been cleared by his home federation. I don’t think there’s a lot of appetite to go after them, even at CONI.

by Softie on May 11, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Depends on your definition of "small potatoes"

Allegedly, Contador

“took insulin, HMG-Lepori, a hormone to stimulate the secretion of testosterone and also a product for asthma called TGN – in brief I have before my eyes a protocol for doping”—Werner Franke

If the documentary evidence really is there, that would certainly merit a suspension to me.

There are other candidates who might be “Amigo di Birillo” besides Frank Schleck (including Mazzoleni, who was engaged at the time to Basso’s sister). But if Schleck doped as well, yeah, a suspension is in order.

by majope on May 11, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions

To answer your question, these are the blood bags that were found to contain EPO

Spanish investigators have put code names to the eight bags of blood seized in Operación Puerto which have been tested positive for excess for EPO, according to El Mundo. The bags were identified as belonging to the code names “Klaus”, “Sevillian” or number five, “Gemma”, “Mari”, “Falla” and “Valv. Piti” (number 18).

—cyclingnews

by majope on May 11, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions

O dear god, not the nicknames again

My OP—nick is Kamprado by the way.

by Jens on May 12, 2009 2:11 AM EDT up reply actions

Hmm

Tend to think Schleck or Contador could be next in line at CONI, actually. There are money transfers between Schlecky and Fuentes – that could be a problem for him. I thought there was also an amigo blood bag, but I could be wrong about that. The details of this case tend to swim around in my mind and get all mixed up like.

There are a couple other former CSC riders that I worry about, but eh, we wait and see. I don’t think CONI is done with this case by any means. They reportedly have a bunch of evidence there in Rome.

by Jen See on May 11, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions

I doubt Schleck somehow

Presumably they went after valv.piti because he was so flaming obvious and the spanish refused to. The conclusions may be half-assed but the luxies have followed up on FS at least. So unless CONI have hard blood-evidence on FS I doubt they will double-investigate him and step on the luxies’ toes.

by Jens on May 12, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm still wondering

what sort of due process Al-Val got at the CONI hearing. He must have received an invitation to present a defense (even if it was to show a broken chain of evidence from the blood bags), but I haven’t heard anything about it.. Although I have little doubt he’s guilty, I don’t like to see a suspension w/o some level of due process.

by pigilito on May 11, 2009 12:47 PM EDT reply actions

Well since he never showed up b/c he was so busy with the appeal...

you don’t really know.

by Vlaanderen90 on May 11, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Same as any other doping proceeding

There is an initial hearing, in which the head CONI attorney presents the charges. The rider then has ten days (think that’s right anyway) to submit a brief in defense. There is then a subsequent hearing.

And yes, Valverde’s lawyer did submit a brief to CONI.

by Jen See on May 11, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions

According to press reports, he also had representation at today's hearing

including his lawyer, Federico Cecconi.

by majope on May 11, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Yes, Cecconi

has been at all the hearings. He’s an old hand at these doping cases, actually. He defended the Giro raids riders from 2002, and a number of others. I believe he is also Rebellin’s lawyer at the moment.

by Jen See on May 11, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions

He also defended David Mills

(estranged-ish) husband of British Minister Tessa Jowell. The Italian Howard Jacobs. You’ll lose the case eventually, but this way you spend all your money on appeals too.

by Monty. on May 11, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Thanks, Gavia, Majope, and Monty

Sounds like the attorney will be billing many hours over the next several months.

by pigilito on May 11, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Adios Alejandro, we miss you already

by Jens on May 11, 2009 3:08 PM EDT reply actions

I do hope

that that’s not on your bookmarks

by Monty. on May 11, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions

What can I say? The yellow suits speak to me.

by Jens on May 11, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Yes...just go indeed

I don’t care if it was a witchunt or not, nor do I care of there was proper due process in place. If the Spaniards wouldn’t have been so damn oblivious to the situation and actually tried to find their cheats, instead of protecting them because they were winning, then this wouldn’t have had to happen this way. He was caught cheating, he deserves to get the same punishment as those other riders who have been caught. And yes, I would have the same reaction if Bert, or another one of my favorite riders would have been in this same position.

In Chauncey we trust!

by Phil H. on May 11, 2009 3:32 PM EDT reply actions