Pledging Away the Problem

by Chris Fontecchio on Jun 20, 2007 2:49 PM EDT in News

The UCI's big meeting yesterday was notable for a few things: the pledge, of course, and the fact that teams can finalize their Tour squads with some confidence. I thought I'd run through what it all means, or at least kick off the debate. First, the text of the Pledge has been released:

"I do solemnly declare, to my team, my colleagues, the UCI, the cycling movement and the public that I am not involved in the Puerto affair nor in any other doping case and that I will not commit any infringement to the UCI anti-doping rules. As proof of my commitment, I accept, if it should happen that I violate the rules and am granted a standard sanction of a two-year suspension or more, in the Puerto affair or in any other anti-doping proceedings, to pay the UCI, in addition to the standard sanctions, an amount equal to my annual salary for 2007 as a contribution to the fight against doping.

"At the same time, I declare to the Spanish Law, that my DNA is at its disposal, so that it can be compared with the blood samples seized in the Puerto affair. I appeal to the Spanish Law to organize this tests as soon as possible or allow the UCI to organize it."

This is just... weird. Up-front punishment determinations? DNA samples by Tour fiat? Are riders supposed to hang on to their salary and not spend it? WTF?? I'm still unclear what all the various organizations around the sport are for, but if you were still wondering if the riders had anything resembling a working union, this is your rather blunt, negative answer.

Lots of loopholes there too; maybe this is its saving grace. "If I violate" and am suspended... Landis would argue that he may be suspended (assuming that happens) but he didn't violate, so forget seeing a penny from me. Also, what's "salary"? I know what it means to me, but aren't riders paid in bonuses too? Contracts can be easily structured to take the punch out of this pledge. So, while the Tour has a right to ask people to meet prerequisites like the pledge before they can race, the riders have a right to make a mockery of it (though hopefully not by doping).

Sheesh. Anyway, the other matter of business is that the UCI went out of its way to say that Alejandro Valverde, Koldo Gil, Allan Davis, and Aitor Osa are all untainted by Operacion Puerto, for now anyway. Valverde is cleared to ride the Tour. According to CN this brought "heated reactions" from certain German, Dutch and French teams. I don't think the UCI can unilaterally declare Valverde's case over, and we may even see a reaction from ASO if there's something in those dossiers we keep hearing about. But there really needed to be some call on Valverde's status, so there you have it. Far cry from the mass exclusions we were nervously waiting for.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Its an ugly shade of whitewash...

But I'm not certain this particular fight is over.

First, Manzano offers eyewitness accounts of Valv. wearing a testosterone patch to dinner during the 2002 Vuelta and tearing it off after an hour. (Forgetting that step can lead to ALL sorts of unpleasantness.) He also notes that Fuentes made an EPO delivery to the team (Kelme) that Vuelta, and offers mucho cynicism re: Aldag and Riis.

Second, the "unprofessional behavior" from the German, French, and Dutch teams that lead to Discovery's withdrawal from the AIGCP may be better received by the ASO than by the other teams.

But yeah, this particular loyalty oath is no better than a clear wrist band. Much less so, since it not only continues blame the riders solely for the problems, but it is used to make the complete refusal to look into the Puerto evidence more palatable.

The DNA pledge appears like the same bait and switch we were offered in the past. I.e., the riders agree to offer DNA samples if and only if the samples are guaranteed not to be compared w/ the Fuentes bags. In this incarnation, the UCI agrees to whitewash Puerto for this edition of the tour, but if public opinion and the courts demand comparison w/ the seized blood, the riders are strung out to dry.

I am 100% for the riders DNA being tested against the seized samples, but this is a gutless compromise by the UCI that gives them the profit of a tour with stars riding and puts all of the risk on the riders.

At this point I'm so frustrated I'm HOPING the ASO goes back to the pre-Paris-Nice idea of scrapping UCI backing and running the Tour under the aegis of the French national federation. That would blow up the current pro structure and likely dis-invite the three strongest teams (Astana, CdE, Discovery); but at least it would end the farce. Racing would be much more regional in nature and there would be less money for teams and contracts, but I just don't think the current corrupt structure can heal itself. Time for radical surgery.

Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste

by Koppenberg on Jun 20, 2007 3:14 PM EDT reply actions

Oops

forgot Manzano link: http://www.stern.de/sport-motor/sportwelt/:Doping-Wer/591440.html

Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste

by Koppenberg on Jun 20, 2007 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions

This line kills me

"I do solemnly declare, to my team, my colleagues, the UCI, the cycling movement..."

Viva la revolution!!!!

by Hons on Jun 20, 2007 4:02 PM EDT reply actions

Thank God we have the UCI

to save us from all the ridiculous nonsense that threaten to turn our favourite sport into a joke.

by Jens on Jun 20, 2007 4:39 PM EDT reply actions

This is just absurd...

what a complete shell game. The teams are the guilty parties more so than the riders. Where's the consequences for them?

America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, badass speed. -Eleanor Roosevelt

by ELVISGOAT on Jun 20, 2007 6:02 PM EDT reply actions

UCI vs Pro Tours

man, did the pro tours demolish the UCI's will to live in its big showdown or what? They've got the UCI writing loyalty oaths. Pretty soon it's genuflecting at the sign-in.

Got a problem? Va fa Napoli!

by Chris Fontecchio on Jun 20, 2007 6:10 PM EDT reply actions

The UCI has outdone itself again

Skateboarding last week and then this. What will those funny guys think of next!

McQuaid: "The UCI will not tolerate any individual or organization that causes damage to our sport..."

The irony is just too delicious!

by ghisallo on Jun 20, 2007 7:45 PM EDT reply actions

Jaksche/Hamilton vs. Valverde/Davis

How can the UCI or the Pro-tour ban certain rides based on innuendo and hearsay while clearing others when no charges are filed against either.

I really feel for Jaksche because he probably never got a big money contract nor endorsements like Hamilton. I realize that he is still riding, but it looks like he may be out of the sport soon.

If the riders are doping, file charges against them and get their licenses pulled. For goodness sake, this thing has been with us for over a year. Dragging it out so the fans, the papers, and the internet continues to speculate about who is involved in this affair only creates more negative hysteria.

I would love to see the sport get cleaned up, but I think the slow progress and unequal treatment hurt the sport as well.

by John.. on Jun 20, 2007 8:39 PM EDT reply actions