Email
PrintComments
I don't get the rationale behind the decision.
They are saying he is guilty and committed an anti-doping violation, but he doesn’t need to serve a suspension because the substance was medically indicated?
Did he have a TUE? If not, I didn’t think the rules allowed for bans to be dropped below a year.
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
Short version
Kolobnev tested positive for a “Specified Substance”. According to the rules, if the athlete can show how such a substance entered the body, he or she can get away with a warning. Kolobnev said “Oh, I can do that” and explained that it came from a medicine. Russian anti-doping fed responded “Sounds legit”, and slapped his fingers. The Kraken UCI woke up and shouted “No, no, no! Can’t do that, to the CAS we go!”. CAS answered “Really, UCI, again? What do you want this time? OK, let’s see, nope he’s correct, Kolobnev can ride again. This was the last time, right?” UCI: “Haha, yeah, right. we’ll be back later with someone else. TTFN.”
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
also
the athlete has to show “that such Specified Substance was not intended to enhance his or her sport performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance.”
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Feb 29, 2012 12:22 PM EST up reply actions
Yep, I just figured it out too
I guess supplements are different because supplements are meant to improve performance. Hence why one gets a 1 yr ban for tainted supplements.
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
Kolobnev was using that thing - " Protector" since 2009.
And was caught only in 2011. Nice testing procedures we have! Very reliable!
In loving memory of the HTC- Highroad
.
He got the prescription in 2009
But this time he used a different brand. He bought the medicine in Ufa during the Russian champs, he wanted his normal brand but since it was out of stock he bought and used another.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Feb 29, 2012 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
maybe...............
I’m missing something but having read the CN post and other stuff, I don’t have a problem with it. CAS have been pretty consistent and to absolve Kolobnev they must have been convinced that he used the product legitimately.
After all he’s stuffed now………..out of work with a lot of riders looking for a spot that isn’t there.
Rafa's on peds
At least, he doesn’t have to pay 5 years salary back to Katusha. As per their policy.
In loving memory of the HTC- Highroad
.
Worst Case scenario would probably be Team Type1-Sanofi as they have entrance into LBL, and the Giro (I think).
I’m sure Vassili Davidenko has been probably talking to him also.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
NetApp is the nontraditional wildcard at the Giro
You’re correct about Liège (also Flèche Wallonne).
To me, this is far more upsetting then any actual real doping offence.
This guy just got his reputation, career, and potentially entire life disrupted; or possibly destroyed over what should have been a simple meeting with the UCI/WADA/Russian Cycling Fed. to clarify what should be well documented in his file with all these governing bodies.
I mean, it was medication he was authorized to use!
Just because it was a different brand should not have caused such a publicly drawn out soap opera that destroyed the second half of last year, probably most of this year, definitely his earning potential for this year and possibly the future.
Oh, and this all took 8 months to figure out?
I hope he can channel some of his frustration into something big this year.
It might sooth the ache from all that has occurred.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
Well said!
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
It's not that easy
Because it’s never that easy. I’ve said it’s a medicine. But it’s only a sort of medicine. They call it a “biologically active food supplement”, and he use it to treat a medical condition. I’m not sure to what extent he was authorized, or in that case, who authorized it. Sure, it was prescribed to him, but it’s a long way from there to the anti-doping orgs. He didn’t mention it on the doping control form, which he perhaps should have (Kolobnev says he didn’t need to, but UCI disagrees and CAS seem to do the same), and he didn’t have a TUE for the substance that he tested positive for. It doesn’t sound like there was anything in his usual brand that he needed a TUE for, and the brand he bought this time was contaminated with HCT.
The fact is that he sent all his medicines and supplements to a lab in the UK to see where the HCT came from, which means that he didn’t know it himself. So we can’t blame other people for not knowing.
There are also a whole bunch of circumstances to take into consideration regarding in what extent Kolobnev was at fault and should’ve been banned. UCI said he was at fault, the other sides said the opposite, and it’s not obvious from the beginning who has the best case (CAS lists pros and cons).
In short, there are too much things going on in this case to not make it drawn out soap opera (not that it has been that much of a soap opera anyway).
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Mar 1, 2012 5:16 AM EST up reply actions
Right
The interesting part is the CAS and the Russian Federation both found him at fault. He committed an anti-doping offense. No doubt about it.
The case hinged on whether the circumstances qualified him for a reprimand only (along with disqualification of results) instead of a ban.
"Oh man, it’s going to take days to kill all these people!"
No it should be that easy
The facts as you point out are all true – it is complicated perhaps. But the guy still got slammed for doing something he could. That means the system is screwed. The whole drug testing set up is looking more and more a mess. Injecting all these legalities is destroying the justice in cases both ways. It may not be easy but it should have been quick. Why should it take more than a few weeks max for this to have been done?
But he should be "slammed" to one extent
Because he tested positive for a banned substance in a race, and for that his results were removed plus received a warning. He didn’t receive a ban since they thought he wasn’t at fault, not beccause he did something he could. He’s still not allowed to use HCT.
I can’t see how the system is screwed based on this case.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Mar 1, 2012 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
Forger about this case. But in general, do you agree that system is screwed?
In loving memory of the HTC- Highroad
.
Not really
There are things that need to be fixed for sure. Like the role of the national federations, a lot of cases takes too much time (especially if there are appeals) and there’s a lack of transparency from the anti-doping orgs side. But I don’t think any of these problems are easy to solve.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Mar 2, 2012 2:40 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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
