Contador Hearing Scheduled for August
by Jen See on May 31, 2011 1:22 PM EDT
in News
Email
Print
The Court of Arbitration of Sport (CAS-TAS) has announced today that it will hear the UCI and WADA cases against Alberto Contador on 1-3 August 2011. The timing will almost certainly allow Alberto Contador to ride the Tour de France, unless the race organizers attempt to exclude him. The original hearing was scheduled for June, but at the request of Contador's lawyers, the Court agreed to postpone it.
The UCI and WADA appealed to the arbitration court after the Spanish Cycling Federation, the RFEC, did not sanction Contador, who tested positive for Clenbuterol during the 2010 Tour de France. The small amount of the substance detected by the WADA laboratory in Belgium complicated the case, and led the RFEC to accept Contador's argument that he did not take the substance intentionally. Instead, he argued that he had eaten contaminated beef. The strict liability rules in the WADA code dictate that an athlete must be sanctioned regardless of intent, but the RFEC chose not to sanction Contador and so far, he has kept his 2010 Tour de France title.
In March, WADA and the UCI filed an appeal, and the arbitration court originally scheduled the hearing for June 2011. In response to a request from Contador's lawyers for more time to prepare, the court agreed to postpone the original hearing. The new hearing will take place in August. This decision allows Contador to race the Tour de France, unless the Tour de France organizers attempt to exclude him. He is not currently banned from racing. The Spanish rider, who races for Saxo Bank, recently won the Giro d'Italia by over six minutes.
Update! According to ESPN, Enrico Carpani has confirmed to the AP that the UCI will ask the Court to strip all of Contador's results back to the date of the positive tests. Should the Court find in the UCI's favor, Contador would lose his victory at the 2010 Tour de France, the 2011 Giro d'Italia and any results he receives at the 2011 Tour de France.
177 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
dunno, anything else would have been at least as ridiculous
and seen as wrong in a society built on justice.
We do not judge a person if there’s enough doubt about the evidence, something we usually are and should be proud of.
I guess I'm no longer convinced that this is coincidentally taking place
right after the tour. Call me a cynic.
I like tinkering with the boys.
- majope
If you're a cynic, you're not the only one.
Frustration has a way of releasing itself, rarely in a logical manner. -jsallee00
"You might say I'm a . . . cynic . . ."
hey wait, bloke, them’s ain’t the lyrics what I squibbed!!
But dude, you’re the one who wrote “All you need is liove” as a joke, so don’t be surprised . . .
Contador and lawyers were only allowed to postpone 5 days
more than those 5 days would have to be ratified by CAS, WADA and UCI.
And let’s not forget that WADA and the UCI were slow to call for the trial in the first place.
Even though we feel we know the truth we have to be fair.
Contador and lawyers were only allowed to postpone 5 days
more than those 5 days would have to be ratified by CAS, WADA and UCI.
And let’s not forget that WADA and the UCI were slow to call for the trial in the first place.
Even though we feel we know the truth we have to be fair.
Last I read there was no doubt as to the evidence.
He tested positive for Chlen. No threshold value, no tolerance. Positive is positive. The rest is a cute story made up to explain away the positive. The ridiculous factor is that someone thought that tainted meat with no evidence of said meat is sufficient to allow a rider with positive test to continue racing. This is not about justice, it’s about a fairy tale.
Anyone who has every thought a working Photojournalist has a glam job needs to rethink...
by Christopher See on May 31, 2011 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
this
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I just realized earlier this evening
that this means I can spend a lot more time in the sun or at the beach in July. Good for me. Less good for the ASO and their TV deals as I suspect I’m not alone.
Agree with your take. And I’m not much for fairytales.
Agree. I can go out and ride my bike much more....
Instead of spending my weekend mornings glued to the Espn TdF feed.
Personally
I am so watching this year’s Tour on German TV.
CAS
has exonerated athletes who tested positive for clen.
If it does so here, it would not be the first time.
But those cases didn't have the part
where Little Red Riding Hood climbed up Rapunzels hair to fetch the very special piece of mystery meat and then ran with it all the way through the forrest to grandmas house in France where Alberto ate it but none of the other little piggies had the same meat …..and so on and so on…..
Believe.
The truth is out there…
ººººº cue spooky music ºººº
Anyone who has every thought a working Photojournalist has a glam job needs to rethink...
by Christopher See on May 31, 2011 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the strict liability and zero threshold rules are not perfect
when there is a chance that it did indeed come from generally available contaminated food. If Contador’s lawyers are able to show that that is the case and thereby legitimately challenge those two rules, I think that will be a good outcome. Never mind my opinion on whether Contador is a dirty doper or not.
I can't remember
right at the moment how long TAS has to make their decision. We went through this with the Valverde case, so I feel like I should totally know it? But alas.
If anyone has it handy, I’ll add it to the story ;)
I don't recall there being a specific number there...
…but I could have missed it.
I know you're slow and all
but did you notice how that updates itself when the rest of the VDS results are entered? Amazing how that works.
Some ass took over the lead on Sunday from the other ass who was in the lead before.
If you read the forum thread that Jens linked to there, seems it came up...
…in a German paper, but seems to have been merely the repetition of the rumor as an explanation for the delay. CN forums, so take with large grain of salt.
It's the whole problem with German journalism on cycling.
They yell so damned loud and claim to have so much evidence but when the evidence is needed they get all numb. :( I still have a hard time forgiving that the evidence for Fränk having been seen in Spain with Fuentes and Riis went puff Not that Riis would have been dumb enough to be the direct link, we know that the riders were set up with another doctor who then could direct them to fuentes(after Puerto it looks to have been a DS instead).
I feel this has to be added
Being able to use plasticizers as evidence will be a great win for all endurance sports as it’ll be the long needed weapon to end blood doping(unless the good doctors notice the use jars).
But how easy will it be to enforce? We live in a society where plastic is used for everything, even drinking bottles. I want the rumours to be true but I just can’t get this picture out of my mind
Phthalates in toys had my country scared beyond belief and who can say chewing on a rubber ducky isn’t the preferred mean of relaxation after a hard stage?
Tracing is one thing, making it eligible as evidence in court of law is more complicated. But journalists do not need to consider this to make a good story with a catchy headline.
Neither of us is a chemist I suspect
I have no idea where this ends up and it certainly won’ play a role in the AC case but there has been mentioned that the test can distinguish certain types of plasticizer specifically used in med. equipment so all the talk of contamination from other sources would be moot.
I have no idea if this is true but it might be pointless to debate the merits of a test we know little about yet?
True and I do agree
but my inner non-chemist also knows that the plastic bags I get my marinated lamb in have similar(usage) values as the bags used when I donate blood. I’m not saying that it’s the same bags, but I do not see what would stop a new Fuentes from using such bags instead(perhaps for chicken instead of beef?).
All in all I’m just happy that it’s not my job to prove the validity of the test(we know how the hematocrit test got neutered) and bet the same goes for the journalists writing about it.
my guess is that a secret plasticizer test might have worked initially (and perhaps in this case) … but once the cheaters know of the test, they can switch to new or more standard types of plastics
moo
Or no plastic at all!
Silicone for example would work just fine as a substitute.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
Speaking of Plasticizers in things we'd least expect.
There currently is a huge uproar in Taiwan about the plasticizer DEHP being added to raw sugars to act as a way to thicken and cloud up drinks, fruit juices, & jellies,
This includes Sports Drinks sold in many other countries.
So far I have seen reports of DEHP in product sold in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Philippines, Canada, UK.
Philippines warns tainted drink could shrink testes.
- AFP
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
These people had better pull some amazing
David Copperfield-like surprise shit out of their asses at this hearing to merit this dragged out process. If it’s the same sad version of the defense as before it’s a fucking disgrace.
how about a unicorn?
I think pulling a unicorn out of their shorts would be pretty awesome.
by Jen See on May 31, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ah, the unicorn defense
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2011 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
No, Sui
I’m just happy to see you.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2011 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
it is
just don’t do it near minors.
"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."
And I hope that they don't take the time he sat out last winter into account when deciding any ban
otherwise two years could cover three winters and just one Giro and Tour.
" These people had better pull some amazing..."
Contador’s defense team will bring the sister of that now famous Clen Cow! Apparently that Cow was addicted to that staff, and even spent some time in the rehab in Basque Country!
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
Bluffy just won't go away...
wait! no! don’t do it! don’t post that…
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
At least we will get to see how many VDS points Contador COULD score riding two grand tours
… until the CAS yanks ’em away.
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
+1
In the opposite case. If he was sidelined and then found innocent he would sue for loss of income during the time he was suspended while innocent. Sure it’s not optimal but it’s something. This way, who pays when he is ultimately found guilty? Organizers, competitors, basically everyone but Contador.
Someone tweeted last night
That IAAF can issue a new provisional suspension if they appeal a decision, and it seem to be case:
If the Doping Review Board does so decide, it may at the same time re-impose, where appropriate, the athlete’s provisional suspension pending resolution of the appeal by CAS.
Rule 38.13 (pdf)
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that is wrong
My take: if the federation appeals, the athlete should continue to be able to compete freely. On the other hand, if the athlete appeals (against a ban, presumably) the federation should uphold the current ban.
I'm fine with that - He compeated during the period of time that the federation appealed...
BUT, now the athlete requested a delay in the appeal, so why does he get to compete during HIS requested delay.
I think it all goes back to who’s ball is in who’s court. Since THIS delay is the athlete’s choosing, he should sit during this delay. If the UCI requested the extension till post-Tour, then Bert should be free to ride.
by JustJoshinYa on May 31, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
well …. the latest delay affects their product directly …. and more than any other party the date change hits them
moo
mixing business interests with
justice is not a good idea.
They should instead have worked it into their contracts, which they do.
two very different things you are mixing up
2006 they had their right to deny Astana the right to participate because the team had too many positive doping cases in a year.
That is in no way the same as having the influence to deny a fair trial at the court!
I’m for ASO denying Contador to participate in TdF(which they have opted not to do) but in no way should they be allowed to force an early hearing which you are calling for.
were pulled by their respective teams
Still has nothing to do with the court of law procedings.
It really isn’t that hard to differ. :p
ASO should man up
they pay for the vast majority of the costs of the TdF testing programme. If they want it to better they simply have to pay more.
some culpability
on the part of the races who didn’t take a stand against a rider whose status was clouded. Don’t they still retain some powers there?
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2011 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
because he is not under any suspension
at the moment. As of now, he’s been found “innocent”. That can’t change until the appeal is done.
Yes, I agree
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not going to argue it because intellectually I think you're all right
Emotionally I would say that fair is the wrong word," legally correct "I would say. It would be fair if so many others didn’t have to pay a price for one man’s right to 100% due process.
Oh, I hear ya on that one.
Emotionally, I want to lie on the floor and kick and scream and tell the CAS-TAS-UCI-WADA-RFEC and whathaveyou to, well, vaffanculo.
And it really kills the races for me in terms of interest. Like, great, Contador just won, until TAS changes the results? Yeah, that’s a good image for the sport.
But I don’t see too many ways around it at this point. Since the RFEC did not sanction him, he’s free to ride until the UCI-WADA case comes before TAS. He’s legally innocent.
And it really kills the races for me in terms of interest.
It’s gotten to the point where there will be significant discussion of the difference in strategy of trying to beat Contador versus trying to lock second place behind him …. in anticipation of a victory after the CAS ruling
moo
"He's legally innocent"
Ish.
He’s been adjudged innocent, but its under appeal. No final decision as yet known. Decision is legally pending.
AC gets off too easy on that one, and all other cyclists before and after him. Other sports countenance suspension in similar circumstances, so it must be legal. Why not cycling?
He hasn't been sanctioned.
The reason I say he’s legally innocent is that he has not yet been sanctioned, and moreover, the RFEC, his national federation who has jurisdiction over him, has ruled that he’s innocent. Yes, the UCI and WADA have appealed to TAS, but until that appeal leads somewhere, like, you know, an actual sanction, there’s nada.
Sorry, but I don’t buy any of the arguments that there are grounds for excluding him from racing as the case currently stands. I wish I did, but I don’t.
I'm not really disagreeing with what you say
I’m arguing you can take it further legally if you wish to. Currently he’s failed a dope test for clen, won the first round of legal affairs and awaits the second round.
Why not wait suspend him until all rounds are done? It’s legal. It may be even be the fairest thing to do in the long run.
And I'm saying,
I don’t see grounds to take it further legally ;)
Lessee… So, you suspend Contador from racing until the appeals play out, which means he loses a year of racing and the likely prize money and bonuses that go with it. Then, TAS rules him innocent. Then, Contador sues the UCI, his team, his national federation, WADA, Bjarne Riis, Bjarne Riis’s mother, and whoever else he can find for the biggest sum in damages his lawyer can come up with. And! He’d probably win, in fact, I’d bet he wins that case easily.
You’re assuming, I think, that TAS will find him guilty. But we don’t know that yet. So, if TAS finds him innocent, and he’s been suspended from racing for a year, that’s one mofo of a lawsuit that’s going to happen. If you were the UCI would you take that gamble? I’m not sure I would.
Also, if he’s suspended by his team without a conviction in hand, there’s a problem with EU employment law, and likely, his contract would forbid that move anyway. So, Bjarne Riis would have to play Contador, but not race him. Riis, so not going to do that. In fact, I suspect the reason that Contador continues to race and none of the race orgs are doing anything to stop him is that Riis and his lawyers are sending them very very firm l€tt€rs.
And in principle...
…all of this is right. When and if they procure a conviction, they can punish his ass all they want. Until then, punishing would be extremely problematic. And yes, suspension from racing = punishment.
That said, this case = textbook example of why you want the most efficient justice system possible that still achieves some reasonable approximation of justice. B/c this current situation sucks bigtime.
You list all the reasons why it might be a bad idea :)
But it is possible to do it legally. The IAAF can and do – with no one having got their rule abolished as inherently unfair and a bunch of equally rich and litigious athletes remain bound by it.
In this context there is a lot to be made of the fact that most sportspeople practice their sport under a licence to compete.
The licensing body, as long as anyrule is not particularly absurd and within generally acceptable legal limits, remain free to set the conditions of the licence as they see fit.
Currently the UCI see no reason to change their rules accordingly. Their prerogative. But there is a fallout.
I’m not sure, but I do believe the EU Labor Laws supersede the UCI License to participate.
I’m pretty sure on that actually.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
But Labour laws only cover the deal between Contador and Riis
I don’t see how they can have any bearing on whether or not races invite him.
Nope
The UCI is a business that would fall under the jurisdiction of this as well.
The UCI makes the rules to their game.
If Pistolero follows those rules, even if you don’t like them, there is no way the UCI can stop him from as long as Riis chooses to allow it.
If the UCI tries to stop Don Contador without showing he broke some letter of the labor license he signed, they’d be making some really big paychecks in the future.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
the below is selective quoting in the extreme (is from a huge case in the racing industry several years ago)
“… also refers us to Puda v Sweden (1987) 20 DR 234 in which case it was recognised that where a person’s pursuit of an occupation is subject to a licensing scheme which regulates the conduct of the occupation, the withdrawal or revocation of a licence, in accordance with the conditions or other provisions to which it is subject under the scheme, will not constitute a deprivation because in such circumstances the right is a qualified right. The Licensee has no legitimate expectation other than that the scheme will be operated in accordance with its terms. Accordingly, activating the conditions to which the licence is subject, does not…. amount to interference”
That quote is by no means the be all and end all of the legal situation, but it is a much litigated point already.
In my sport I am a licenced person, work on a licenced property (stable), travel to work at other licenced properties (other stables and racecourse). I have to abide by all kinds of sets of rules at these various places, accept limits on what I can and cant do whilst at work, and these limits are all legal as far as I know.
A rule in the book, as long as fair and reasonably exercised, and that was there when you signed up at the start of the year for your licence can be, and often is, enforceable.
tis an interesting case :)
Not really debating it re Contador particularly. Just dont buy that it has to be this way etc etc and nothing can be done.
The rules could be changed, the very limited circumstances they would apply in dont seem so onerous that they would necessarily be struck down as inherently unfair. Whether they should be changed is another matter altogether.
A couple of points
1 – Contador’s licence is raken out with the Spanish Federation, so presumably he would have to sue them first. (snigger)
2 – A licence isn’t a two way contract and doesn’t give you the absolute right to be on the start line for a race.
3 – the UCI is based is Switzerland and probably covered by some of those very strange “whatever you do, it’s not corrupt” laws that we’ve been reading about in all the recent FIFA kerfuffle.
4 – the relevant question right now is not whether the UCI should be doing something (probably not a good idea as they are a party to the CAS appeal), but whether ASO could or should. And I doubt very much whether there’s any sort of contractual relationship between Contador and ASO.
O/T but at least FIFA
televise their Congress. (Bits of this morning’s session were quite amusing. “Zero tolerance” and the elections amongst other delights in store for this afternnoon)
If only the UCI did the same.
I'm not convinced that it's actually possible, really.
But that’s cool, I’m not going to argue it further.
Oh oh oh!
Just wanna tell that Riis do not like his mother and do not have contact with her nor was she invited to his wedding.
Had to be mentioned because I know how much of a sucker you are for this kind of drama. (:
Think about Zeke situation for a second.
RFEC didn’t even looked at his case yet, and when he raced last time?
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
Not quite analogous
Because the RFEC did rule in Contador’s case. And that ruling said that he had not committed a doping offense. No offense, no sanction, so he races.
Even worth!
It is like holding someone in jail, without bail, and refusing to even set a date to a bail hearing.
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
They did similarly to Stefan Shumacher
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Isn’t he raced just last month?
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
Yea, I hoped he was gone for good.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
I hope they're looking at it right now
Because UCI sent the case to them a few weeks ago.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Jun 1, 2011 2:58 AM EDT up reply actions
disagree
like that, in certain circumstances, the governing body could invoke a suspension. If there are presumed overriding and necessary reasons – why not?
Very limited corcumstances it apllies to – rider “wins” a Nat tribunal and you want to appeal to CAS.
There is a call for the race organiser to uninvite Contador from racing – as the rules currently allow. Why not add in a governing body right to do the same?
The governing body should be the only one of the two in possession of the full evidence against the rider after all.
disagree
like that, in certain circumstances, the governing body could invoke a suspension. If there are presumed overriding and necessary reasons – why not?
Very limited corcumstances it apllies to – rider “wins” a Nat tribunal and you want to appeal to CAS.
There is a call for the race organiser to uninvite Contador from racing – as the rules currently allow. Why not add in a governing body right to do the same?
The governing body should be the only one of the two in possession of the full evidence against the rider after all.
All the parties agreed to the postponement
“In a statement issued this afternoon, CAS suggests all parties concerned had agreed to the change. "Following the agreement between the Appellants and the Respondents, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has accepted to postpone the hearing in this matter in order to give to all parties concerned reasonable time to prepare for such hearing and to guarantee the participation in person of witnesses and experts. Accordingly, the CAS Panel has decided to cancel the hearing initially scheduled for 6-7-8 June 2011. New hearing dates will be fixed as soon as possible."
Further, the offense is clearly not “strict liability” – if it were there would be no defense. As other CAS determinations have shown, positive findings do not necessarily lead to sanctions. If the athlete can show that the ingestion was not intentional or negligent., he can be exonerated.
also if he can get a backdated TUE
"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."
So the 2010 AND 2011 Tour winner may change a week after the 2011 Tour ends
all hail cycling and the harm it does to itself!
(granted I’m looking forward to the rematch in July but this does really suck)
You can't spell epic without Giro
I'm hoping that the Tour block him anyway
then if he tries to take it to CAS, ASO can ask for more time to prepare their case.
From the upcoming Dauphiné, also run by ASO
Exclusion rules:
18.1. ASO respects the preservation of its image and reputation
ASO reserves the right to refuse participation in – or excluded from – the event, team or one of its members, whose presence would be likely to damage the image and / or ASO’s reputation and / or event.
18.2. In addition, ASO may disqualify or exclude from any team or one of its members, in the following cases:
violation of the rules of the event, including those concerning the internal discipline to the event (e.g. rules concerning accommodation );
serious breach of French law;
vandalism journing and in the race or outside of the race;
Indecent or inappropriate behavior;
Any other act or fact which would be likely to damage the image and / or reputation of ASO and / or event.
moo
Basically what kept Boonen out of the tour:
“In these circumstances and in order to preserve his reputation, his image and those of the Tour de France, the ASO group has decided not to accept the presence of Tom Boonen in its event.”
via Telegraph
by JustJoshinYa on May 31, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Boonen won that pissing contest, no?
And do ASO rules have any teeth in a WorldTour event, or do only the rules governing the WorldTour matter?
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
he didn't race - ASO even said they knew he could appeal the decision to CAS.
He sat out…And I think all parties in that case played it cool. Course, he has a lot less on the line then Bert this go round. My whole point was that the ASO has done this before. (all the Puerto folks too)
by JustJoshinYa on May 31, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
actually
that was ASO’s perfect result. Cave in a day or two before the race. Then you look, I dunno, measured? And the rider shows up off form. It’s lose-lose… a/k/a win!
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
if two loses make a win
i am one successful dude
"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."
oops, sorry.
Guess he was so bad I didn’t think he was there at all. Oh well.
by JustJoshinYa on May 31, 2011 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions
So basically we are talking about 1 year of process to determine
a sports doping case. Absurd.
not absurd considering the case
WADA has said it’s possible to be contaminated through meat and has let other people go due to this reason. It’s a very complex case and for that reason will and has to take time.
its already been a year
you work for the Federation or something?
Never said that
but by having the hearing after TdF it will have been a year since Contador was caught.
Oh and you replied to the wrong guy. :)
agreed
the testing is terribly complex and fraught with uncertainty. Also, we’re not talking about one year for one proceeding. This is the second (and last) tribunal. CAS isn’t to blame for the slippage as much as the Spanish Fed.
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
As I understand it
The testing itself is not in dispute.
The complication, such as it is, is the arguments that the contamination inadvertent and not negligent.
As stated before, this is in fact NOT a “strict liability” situation. Apparently, as accepted by CAS, if the athlete demonstrates under a balance of the probabliliteis standard, that the substance entered his system in a non-intentional, non-negligent manner, then the athlete can avoid sanction.
Was Contador’s case convincing? Not to meas described by the Spanish Federation decision, which is a complete mess. PErhaps Contador has a better case than is reflected in that decision. If he does not have one, he will lose I believe and suffer a sanction.
The details of that sanction will be interesting. While this post is correct that the UCI stated it will seek stripping of the results, the quote indicates that the request will be perfunctory and indeed, it seems that UCI wouldbe happier if their request is denied.
right
well, I refuse to engage in the details of this matter too much, for sanity’s sake. But as a lawyer, I generally sympathize with people who say they could use more time.
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2011 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Tend to disagree on the UCI
They did want Valverde’s results stripped back to 2004. TAS denied them.
That damned UCI
When I mark them as pure evil they do something good. When I then think they want the best for the sport I hear about bribes. When I’m wowed by their competence and courage for pushing the envelope they run and hide.
I do not know why, but my tiny brain always repeat the mistake of seeing groupings represented by names(political, cooperative, teams, …, religions even) as hives with unified mindsets. Perhaps it’s a defense against working the small grey too hard.
Ha ha, yeah
I hear ya. And yes, it’s useful to think of the UCI as factional. They do lots of contradictory things, it seems.
the people introducing new evidence would appear to be the UCI and/or WADA
or else why would the defence require more time?
The question to ask is why it wasn’t presented to the RFEC in the first place? The first court of record should have sufficient evidence to make a qualified decision, or else interminable delays may ensue.
Indeed
Additional fact finding in an APPEAL is a bad system imo.
you assume any effort was made
to put a full and frank case to the RFEC.
In normal legal circuits an appeal would be looking for errors of law as a reason to proceed onwards or evidence that wasn’t available at the time etc for an appeal. Doesn’t apply with CAS – where you can hold a new hearing.
So you can sit back, politicise the proceedings, present your evidence later, and moan that the delay is unfair, and the consequences are unfortunate. It all could have been avoided/
I make no assumptions
I describe a terrible system, I’ve railed about this system consistently here at PdC.
My putting words in your mouth
withdrawn unreservedly. (it remains a strict liability system however, you never totally avoid sanction)
I can see why AC wanted the delay
He hopes that the CAS won’t want to see yet another cycling champion stripped of his titles (perhaps 3 this time) and will decide to uphold the Spanish federation’s decision to clear him.
It’s a slim chance but he’s looking for anything at this point
[Pigilito has a] lifetime stupid statement pass [on PdC] -- Yeehoo
Doubt CAS will be influenced by Contadors win rate.
From what I understand Wada is in the process of doing a study on the broader contamination issue and have stated they need a few more months to finalize it. This maybe the reason why Wada accepted the delay proposal from Contador. Just guessing.
Doubt CAS will be influenced by Contadors win rate.
From what I understand Wada is in the process of doing a study on the broader contamination issue and have stated they need a few more months to finalize it. This maybe the reason why Wada accepted the delay proposal from Contador. Just guessing.
tears are flooding the streets in Luxembourg tonight
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
totally O/T - your signature cracks me up, perhaps even more then the picture you use on the right...
by JustJoshinYa on May 31, 2011 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions
not funny
do you know that the PdC Court sentenced popup to wearing this icon sewn on all of his bike clothes for the rest of the VDS season? We take our punishments very, very seriously.
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2011 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm a bad cycling fan
as much as I think it’s absurd that he can race without even knowing the results from last year’s race – a race with Bert and Andy is likely to be more fun than a race without Bert. Alhough if the TdF is another Bert-apolooza like the Giro was, I ‘ll wish he’d been banned.
FTR
I think Contador should decidehimself not to race in the TdF,innocentor guilty.
Either that or he should have insisted on the proceeding occurring prior to the TdF.
This is simply a bad result for everyone imo.
CAS Petacchi precedent
http://velonews.competitor.com/2008/05/road/cas-suspends-petacchi_75891
That case is identical procedurally to the current one. There, Pettachi RETAINED his results obtained between the time of the suspension and the start of the CAS hearing.
Not sure why the UCI is arguing that Contador’s results should be annulled. CAS has already ruled on this issue that the athlete does not lose his results in this type of case
you're welcome
I think the UCI knows based upon their statement that they are wasting everyone’s time with that request.
CAS also rejected this request with Valverde and never pursued it with Basso
Not necessarily that simple
Petacchi case here
In his case “fairness required otherwise”, the decision mentions the new rules about specified substances v prohibited ones, deems it fair to apply them even though not in force at the time of the offence, the panel deliberately points out they don’t think Petacchi is a cheat, that each case must be treated on its individual merits and that the case should not be used as a precedent.
Go to the Pechstein case. Deemed to fail on a set date, disqualified from the set date and declared ineligible, all results fall from that day onwards. Reasons for the UCI request aplenty. Pick another case and can argue a different position. The UCI request is not pointless.
Cases not similar at all
1. Pechstein was initially convicted, while Contador was acquitted
2. The athlete was the one to appeal in the Pechstein case
3. Her results that were annulled from the competition that she was found to be doping based upon her longitudinal profile. Again, this is not the case here with Contador
Based upon Pechstein, there is still no reason why Contador will not keep his results, except for the 2010 TDF
http://www.skitrax.com/pdf/CAS%20FINAL%20AWARD%20PECHSTEIN.pdf
based on Pechstein
the panel deemed a date to ban her based on the date of the test, and banned her thereafter. That could happen to AC too – the only point in mentioning the case. Never said they were the same – but it has an application.
Also said there are many other cases to quote. Valjavec appears to have only lost his results between set dates. Pellizotti got the book thrown at him and lost a lot of results. Each case is different.
Not really sure who is doing the appealing to CAS is that relevant particularly in grand scheme of things. Who asked them to look again at the case doesn’t alter the substantive issues before the CAS or the implications of any new decision issued if contrary to the previous one.
Pelizotti
Lost a lot of results because CAS found him to be blood doping through about a 6 month period.
Valverde kept his results as there was no evidence that he was doping during the time the UCI wanted his results stricken (not sure what logic that is, unless they convicted him of “attempting to dope”
ASO can't do anything to prevent him racing
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aso-can-not-stop-contador-racing-tour-de-france
You can't spell epic without Giro
Can’t and Won’t are two different things.
I think this actually falls into the ’won’t’ category.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
I think "potential costs"
ie, ginormous law suit is key there and another TAS case.
Can’t say I really hold it against them. It sucks, though.
I believe that was supposed to continue like so: “If their decision is published one month after the last VDS race or before.”
Yes, lost the rest of it. I believe the deadline is, what? one or two weeks after Lombardia?
I’m too lazy to search right now, but I’m sure it’s findable here on site.
Yes, one month was too much
Giro di Lombardia is Oct 15, so VDS results deadline for TAS/CAS should be Nov 1 at the very latest. I’ll inform them.
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
