Login to VeloClub|Not a member?  Sign up now.
  • awesometown

    How embarrassing. Why does the code need so many loop holes and obvious exits built into it? This exactly why sponsors want so little to do with the sport.

  • Moneyfire

    Seems like a load of BS meant to protect a big name/money team. The suspension provision references dates of notification for the two positives not the sample dates. Both of the notices were provided after the new team suspension rule took effect.

    • Dave

      A big money team with very close connections to the power behind the throne at the UCI.

  • Joe Crawford

    The UCI is embarrassing themselves over this and Astana. Both teams need to be disciplined and not left off the hook. The UCI is letting teams foster an environment of doping where if a rider gets a caught, it does not impact the team at all, and even if the team is not assisting these riders, they are not taking it seriously enough because there is no infraction against them when the riders are caught. This is a very frustrating situation for fans of the sport and continues to renew the tired debate of, “is he clean or not” and makes every win look illegitimate.

  • sps

    This makes sense to me. The idea behind the rule is to allow teams to revisit their antidoping policies etc. before returning to racing. 2 episodes of doping 3 years apart does not indicate the same sort of problem 2 episodes 2 months apart does.

    Also if Caruso had been on a different team when the actual doping happened but the testing (a few years later) happened when he was on a new team, should his new team be punished for his past offense by having to sit out?

    • Derek Maher

      Agree sps.These crusades can get out of hand at times.

      • minalfergerson

        < –my unsettle’s relative makes 60$ an hour on the web…..despite the way that Diane `s remark is stunning, on thursday I got Ariel Atom from winning 8428$ this last month and to some degree more than 10,000$ last-month . it’s unmistakably the best-work Ive ever had . I really started four months/past and straight away made no under 80$, per-hour . take a gander at this site- >
        ???? Tinyurl.com/Start3cJoinCareers1ci



    • sps

      I am very happy about the retroactive testing as riders who think they are safe as the drug program they are on can’t be detected may think a little harder if there is any chance it may be detected 5+ years down the road.

  • rory

    Its a pretty basic concept of justice, if an offence and penalty for the team wasn’t in the rules in 2012, then you shouldn’t be liable in the same for an offence committed in 2012.

    • rory

      oops I meant “same way”

    • jules

      pretty obvious isn’t it? surprised how some struggle to see it

  • Kenneth Sanders

    So, Katusha is found to have Two positives, Astana is also guilty of two positives and are both allowed to continue in the UCI Pro Tour. Why do you think that is? Could it be the each team is sponsored by their governments? Because they have unlimited amounts of money? Why aren’t the other teams getting upset about this? Why isn’t Velon doing anything about this? It makes you really wonder why sponsors are running from this sport like roaches when you turn on a light.

    Again, I say the UCI can solve this problem very easily. Lifetime ban for any doping infraction and make not only the individual pay with their ban but the teams should pay in the way of a $1 million dollar fine for each offense. that will put an end to it or they will find another drug that is undetectable.

    Just thinking outlaid here.

    • Dave

      The answer is not government sponsorship or money, it’s that the UCI’s “two ADRVs in 12 months” rule is new for 2015 and cannot be retrospectively applied to 2012 (Katusha) and 2014 (Astana) cases. There’s no point even trying because the sanctions would certainly be overturned on appeal.

      The new rule does work when applied to new ADRVs, as we’ve seen with Androni which is currently suspended and is probably unlikely to be heard of again. It’s a huge step forward, because now there is a real rule, where previously there were just a set of poorly defined “ethical criteria” that were unenforceable.

      Katusha haven’t been let off completely, they still have 11 months before the Paolini positive “expires” without earning them an automatic suspension. The same applies to Cannondale-Garmin, but with even greater consequences as they are dependent on private sector sponsorship and a month on the bench would spell the end of the team.

      The UCI has, for once, got something right with this rule. The responsibility is now for the teams (whether they are Velon members or not) to clean up their houses and stop doping.


Pin It on Pinterest

April 30, 2017
April 29, 2017
April 28, 2017
April 27, 2017