I can't see how ASO can pull this off...  Keeping Unibet out of their events must have puffed them up, but I can't see them being able to pull this off without more legal standing to exclude the "so called" OP riders...  Hijo de Rudi, Brillo, Valv....? I'd say that you need more proof than that...

Of course, my VDS is riding on this, so I'm by no means impartial. :-)

Lie in Basso and Valverde being bounced...

is Richard Virenque's 'exclusion' and subsequent reinstatement in the '99 Tour.

I don't remember exactly how that played out, but I'm willing to bet that ASO does, and has had their lawyers scrambling to find a way to insulate ASO from any and all legal challenges Discovery and/or Basso will throw up about his exclusion.

Of course, if it turns out that "il Birillo"'s blood is Basso's and not VDB's italian dogs in those spanish bags . . . well . . . the news should be interesting in late June.

I didn't think of it before but that is probably ASO's strategy. It's win/win for them.

always made sure to point out that Valverde was not one of the riders they were able to link to bags or codenames. He's been real careful not to do or say anything to get dragged into the speculations .

many riders were implicated who have proven to be innocent.  Where is ASO's list of the guilty?  Are they going to use the same standards as last year?  Guilt by association.  

    The riders are in need of a real union again.

Shorter Prude: prove the negative! If L'Equipe thinks you might be doping, you're out!

Does anyone have a clue what the hell he's talking about? How can you negotiate with brainless idiots?

Here are some comments from the Milram DS. He's making as much sense as anyone in this affair.

"I have read and we have received I invite to participate it to a reunion next tuesday, to the eve of the Arrow-Walloon - it has said to tuttobiciweb the manager orobico -. What task of this taken of position of the French organizers? I answer simply therefore: the Aso does not want the runners been involved in affaire Puerto? That it takes position, but is not involved the squares. We have already given. I do not feel myself to take a decision of the sort, than he takes the Tour to it, than they expose themselves. The Italian magistracy, on the Low case, is already pronounced with a nonsuit and we what make? we continue ourselves to give of the large ones legnate on the zebedei. That turns out me all the runners been involved in this vicissitude have given their availability to make the examination of the Dna in case is a magistrate who glielo asks express: well, ahead make a magistrate, but we team of For Tour, for how much regards, we will not make to me just absolutely nothing ". And little luminosity is not the appeal that It bars turns the maximum world-wide organism of the sport."

that a race organiser is able to ban certain riders, especially when that same organiser has no problem having those same riders in other races. Just look at the startlist (which is already available on startlist.cyclingfever.com) for Flèche Wallonne and L-B-L.

The teams and UCI have to make a stand now, and send every alleged Puerto-rider they can find to the Tour, as ASO can't judge riders before any trial and they accept their presence in other races at the same time.
We call that "Measuring with two measures" in Holland. You've probably got a better way of saying that, i can't think of it at this time.

I don't know about you all, but i'm appalled with the ASO's conduct for some time now!

http://www.cycling4all.com/
I find it hard to believe however that RCS would ban their favourite son, especially this late.

(I also think we will see Basso on the starting line in London when all is said and done) but the one thing that could complicate things is the politics. The Big 3 need to keep up a united front in order to maintain a strong position against the UCI and ASO beeing the strongest of the three could pressure RCS if they are really serious on the matter.

For the Giro to exclude Basso means they would be saying they have no confidence in the Italian judicial system. Not that such an idea would be baseless... but I can't believe RCS would have the nuts to say it.