A Dirty Deal
Apologies if this has already been posted (I haven't read the doping threads) but some of you might find this article interesting, the behind the scenes story of Vladimir Gusev's return to the pro tour. It was forwarded to me by a current pro who said he found it "interesting", which I interpret as meaning there's some truth in all this.
about 2 years ago
clashbrad
42 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Thanks Brad... long but interesting read...
and instructive… if only I could retain all this data :)
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Glad you agree... it's actually so big, isn't it?
It’s always concerned me that whilst some are welcomed back, others are shunned. I know some here will say it’s about the apology…meh. I’m even starting to feel sorry for Rasmussen, which takes some work..
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Absolutely, it’s hard to know what to think sometimes. It would be so much easier if we could just generalise and not have to consider these complex moral issues. There are far too many shades of grey!
When a rider wins now who I know was previously dirty, should I be pleased or disgusted that he is still allowed to race? And what if he is Australian? What about a cherished rider who has been around forever and most probably dabbled in the juice, probably because that was how it was done then? Or seeing a rider struggle and probably have to quit the sport and knowing 100% that’s he’s always been clean, and has probably been beaten numerous times by dirty riders who have never been caught. All I come up with is a lot of probablies!
I know I probably err on the side of supporting them...
That said, you’d have to be a goose to dope these days. In some ways their idiocy now is what upsets me most..
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
We don't know this, do we?
We don’t know that you’d have to be a goose to dope these days. That is part of the problem. :)
'In my eyes' Holden, but you may well be right damnit.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
I'm always cynical about it... but I just stick my head in the sand. Call me Pollyanna..
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Excellent :)
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
It positively annoys the hell out of me
that so many journalists seem to think that Landis wrote that the TdS doping story was in 2002. It should be obvious to anyone who takes the time to read the mail twice that he is referring to something Lance told him in 2002 (about developments in EPO testing, LA’s unwillingness to follow the advice of Dr. Ferrari, the subsequent positive test at the TdS and the alleged corruption at the UCI which all took place in 2001). Frankly I think it says a lot about the people who try to exploit this misunderstanding/misread to discredit Landis. Yes, Pat, I am looking at you!
Pat appears to be immune... hubris is going to take someone down soon.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
This article is a mess
I hodgepodge of facts, (facts?) from anonymous sources and random speculation about possibly related issues. It’s really hard to which is which in all of it. Plus it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if that at least some of the anonymous stuff comes from Verner Möller, the guy who has written the book on how the Rasmussen-affair is a big legal mess. The themes are excact the same, the blacklist etc. .
ja
it is a mess. I think there was something odd in the way the Gusev case played out, but I’m not sure that this story quite explains it. There are too many things connected together here in ways that I’m not sure they belong.
If they had just tried to untangle the ins and outs of the particular case
instead of throwing all the conspiracy and possible connections stuff in there it might have made a more revealing story?
for sure
i got frustrated when Landis ended up in the middle of this thing. Focus on Gusev, if that’s the story you want to tell. I was left not really understanding what happened in the Gusev case, and unconvinced by much of the rest of it.
And I say that, completely convinced that Bruyneel is as crooked as they come.
+1, +10, +1000
For example, the International Cycling Union works actively at expanding the prohibition to the whole world which the Spanish rider Alejandro Valverde has recieved against riding in Italy….
UCI is not running any campaign against him [AC] nor are they pursuing Fränk Schleck from Bjarne Riis’ CSC Team although he also was in involved in Operacion Puerto…
From Michael Rasmussen’s case we also know that some riders who are have served their doping convictions are excluded for life while others are allowed to return.
…One, the Italian Ivan Basso – who in 2007 received a two year ban for his part in Operacion Puerto and apologised after having served his sentence – got a big contract and is riding excellently. The second, Alexander Vinokourov…
The truth is slowly coming out, and it’s not a good truth. Like I’ve said previously….Valverde is getting pwned, so has Rasmussen.
I’m haven’t been saying they (AV and the Chicken) aren’t guilty like everyone else, but I’m saying if they were someone else(s)…. they wouldn’t be guilty, and that’s what’s very very wrong.
that's what they get
for not buying the UCI new centrifuges ; )
"Ants don’t worry, they operate like a fantastic team, they accept obstacles and deal with them in a positive manner, they don’t complain and remain positive. An ant doesn’t work on emotion, is proactive and always chooses the ant role."
To add to that
I firmly believe, that had Valverde gone to a Bruyneel run team (Discovery reportedly was scouting him) when he left Comunitat Valenciana-Kelme vs Illes Baleres/Caisse D’Epargne, he likely would have more grand tours than just the 09 Vuelta.
Or, the same could be said for Basso….if he had signed with Disco about 6 months earlier than he did.
now there's an interesting angle to mine
How could Bruyneel NOT have known—given his connections to Saiz and his residence in Madrid (ok, that’s a stretch—but I’m thinking that that’s a warrant for assuming that Bruyneel had ways of finding out info. about certain sorts of gynecological appointments), about Basso’s involvement with Fuentes?
Was Bruyneel assuming that Puerto would get shut down before it did?
Or, did Saiz and Fuentes close Bruyneel out of their loop?
Oh I think Bruyneel knew all of it, and just did a risk assessment.
To me the DS side of cycling boils down to Riis vs Bruyneel. Their grooming of talent and securing winners is second to none and I think they know how to play the system.
and doctors it’s Cechini vs Ferrari.
Riis/Cecchini – Hamilton, Basso, Sastre, Schelcks, Cancellara and Porte. (CSC/Saxo)*
Bruyneel/Ferrari – Armstrong, Leipheimer, Contador, (USPS/Disco/Astana/Shack)*
The prodigal sons for Armstrong/Disco were: Basso, Valverde and Contador…I think Bruyneel went with the one that was clean, with the cleanest fingerprints or the one whose fingers he could clean the best. Riis was dumping Basso…me thinks, but Bruyneel was a little quick to jump on him. Bad info perhaps?
It is amazing how easily riders avoid trouble under Riis/Bruyneel compared to the rest of the peloton… and then when they aren’t with them, how quickly they fall (think Phonak.)
*This list of course by no way insinuates that all the names are dopers…or equal in anyway.
I dont believe either team is doping at this point
if they are, its not getting caught by the controls, and is at a legal sense. They’re both guilty of leading doping cultures, i dont think positives are needed to prove this point, but Riis brought in Damsgaard on his own, and so did Bruyneel. They made the attempt to clean up their images.
"From Michael Rasmussen’s case we also know...."
is complete BS in my opinion. We know nothing of the sort. What we know is that MR, a man who just like Landis has a completely warped image of the world, claims that he is being blocked by the powers that be (UCI?). An alternative explanation is that high level teams are reluctant to hire an older rider who comes with nothing but bucketloads of bad PR even if he were to win. While Basso is well liked MR inspires nothing but scorn among fans and media.
Also the UCI has never “run any campaign” against Valverde. They have tried to block him from one World Championship and they have spoken positively about CONI’s case after he was found guilty.
If something about the whole Rasmussen situation doesn't strike you as supremely odd
then we see things very differently, so let’s just keep it at that.
1. Rabo knew of his behavior.
2. He was winning the Tour with 5(?) days remaining and is fired
3. Rabo denies everything
4. Rasmussen cannot find a team higher than Miche upon return?
It’s certainly odd to me. He was 34 when his suspension ended, that’s hardly too old and it’s easy to say that people who are vocal “have completely warped images of the world.” It’s usually more that they just don’t want to play the game with “warped rules”
granted i don't have full knowledge of the ins and outs of the MR case
but i’ve chalked up most of that weirdness to sponsor pressure. i don’t doubt the team was in on it, but when the sponsor got word of the whole thing, they probably threatened to pull all funding from cycling if they didn’t get rid of MR.
as far as the finding a new team thing, i have no clue.
"Ants don’t worry, they operate like a fantastic team, they accept obstacles and deal with them in a positive manner, they don’t complain and remain positive. An ant doesn’t work on emotion, is proactive and always chooses the ant role."
Lot's of odd stuff with how Rabo managed to get off the hook so easily
and never had to answer for their involvement but that is not really the issue here. Point no.4 is almost completely based on Rasmussen’s own claims that he has been “close” to signing with several ProTour/ProConti teams and how they have been warned not to sign him . I tend to think there are other reasons they have not.
I wish some others who read the danish media would share their versions of how MR comes across but I can just say that personally I find that he has a very complex relationship with reality. His descriptions of events sometimes leave you scratching your head.
I agree
Although I don’t read the Danish media as much as you do. At the same time, I have a feeling that teams could have been “warned”. Like listening to rumours and getting information, not necessarily from UCI. But that have to do with stuff regarding Rasmussen that haven’t been fully uncovered. Like Human-Plasma and the dynepo test 2007. And I don’t believe that he has been close to signing with these teams in a normal sense of the word close.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 25, 2010 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
The man is a walking, fully loaded, unexploded PR shit-bomb
Like you say, I doubt any team-managers need the UCI’s help in pointing that out.
Why dont doping cases get resolved
these investigations like Human plasma, Freiburg, Puerto, have taken far too long, and have not reached real conclusions. I think a lot of cycling politics is at play in keeping local authorities from outing the sport after what happened with Puerto
I feel the finger pointing at me (smile)
so I should probably try to say something, but honestly I am tired, a fantastic Giro, a late night ToC and the doping ghost revived have taken their toll on this old lady.
Weekend avisen (the paper the story originated from) used to be a serious newspaper, what it is to day I do not know but guess that it tries to be serious. It is not a paper dabbling in the day to day stuff, they write deep articles and analysis about political and cultural stuff, not much sports (cycling) stuff in that paper. About once a year they have a big story about Bjarne Riis/cycling and that’s it.
Recently they had a big interview with Michal Rasmussen (that did not do him any good) and now they apparently try to explain the ins and outs about cycling politics to their readers.
About Michael Rasmussen and the media in general, well they are divided, just like the official cycling world in Denmark is divided, but he is always a good story if you have nothing ells to write about. The media is not so much divided from media to media, more from day to day :-)
Personally I feel sorry for him on a human level, and I feel that his story is a very complex story, no doubt that he cheated with his whereabouts, and probably other stuff also and I don’t condone that, but again I see him as a very complex personality and find it hard to judge him more than he already have been judged. When things went the good way for him, he was a very sincere and intelligent person to listen to in interviews and when things went bad he was very disturbed, so honestly I don’t know what to think.
by LittleOldLady on May 26, 2010 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions
So the idea is
that some people are tailor made scape goats, and those are the ones fed to the masses to keep the anti-doping facade. But, i can not imagine that this seriously is a foregone conclusion, as unfair as it seems, some people get caught, and some wont. I love me a good conspiracy, but this one i just dont think is overreaching.
Nah . . . I think not all dopers are equally likable
virtually no one could stand Rasmussen before his trouble.
Landis was . . . well . . . he would have fit better with the NASCAR crowd.
The one who would have done much better had he just owned up was Hamilton. If ever there was a guy who could have ridden the comeback trail . . . possibly with a cloned Tugboat.
Agreed about Hamilton
I never did understand why he didn’t just go the tearful confession route and get it over with. Bad advisors, sadly.
I don't get it
It seems to me that Damsgård is right, Gusev got away on a technicality. He was kicked off the team because the tests showed that he had been using EPO, then he got it overturned because the tests was not yet approved by the UCI, then later when they are sanctioned by UCI he successfully stop UCI from using Damsgårds tests to ban him. And in the end he gets all his money, and Pat gets him a job at Katusha.
Is this article supposed to portray Gusev as a victim?
Does “the dirty deal” refer to the deal PM got him at Katusha?
Yes I think it's the ability to pull strings
Why are whistleblowers like Jaschke and Sinkewitz in the cold while those who keep schtum back in the game? And how does the UCi have the power to control this? It reeks of corruption.
I don’t think there are too many who are naive enough to think that Gusev was riding on bread and water. I think the point is more than riders are relative pawns in the games of others – that was my take, in any event.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Podium Cafe
Related FanShots on Podium Cafe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Celebrate the Giro d'Italia at Podium Cafe!
Check our Giro Section for race updates, on-the-scene reports, and other hijinx.
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
