VeloClub is CyclingTips’ membership program which brings us closer to our members, and connects likeminded cycling enthusiasts.
by Shane Stokes
February 2, 2018
Valverde takes emotional victory on stage 2 of Volta a la Comunitat Valenciana; Carnage in the crosswinds: How a chaotic stage 1 of the Sun Tour unfolded; Laporte seizes stage 2 victory at Etoile de Besseges over embarrassed Coquard; Report: Froome case moves next step towards judgement; Giro race director calls on UCI to clarify Froome situation; New sea-level world record for Glaetzer at Australian track nationals; Brodie Chapman’s journey from unknown rider to Herald Sun Tour champ; Quintana and Henao spearhead Movistar and Sky teams in new Colombian race; LeMond takes up special roles with Velodrome Development Foundation and World Cycling League; Atlantic City set to host 2018 USA Crits series finals; Time Alpe d’Huez climbing bike unveiled; SRAM launches its first direct-mount rim brake, the S-900; Analysing the Strava/secret military instalments fiasco; Video: Netherlands builds highway for bikes
It’s a month a half since the news emerged of Chris Froome’s salbutamol case but, despite suggestions it could take up to a year to resolve, it now seems to be moving somewhat closer to a decision. According to La Gazzetta dello Sport, the UCI’s Legal Anti-Doping Services (LADS) has passed on the case to the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal, thus moving it to the next step.
On December 13 The Guardian and Le Monde revealed that a urine sample provided by Froome after stage 18 contained twice the maximum permitted level of salbutamol. He could face a lengthy ban plus the loss of his Vuelta a Espana title.
Five days after that news, the UCI clarified the anti-doping process in a statement which appeared to be intended – in part at least – to lay out how things could proceed in relation to Froome’s case. It said in that statement that the LADS is a specialised unit independent from UCI Management, and that it conducts a summary analysis of the documentation accompanying the Adverse Analytical Finding.
Once that is done its role sees it notifying the rider, his/her national federation plus their national anti-doping organisation, as well as WADA and the UCI.
“Upon notification, the rider can ask for his/her B sample to be analysed,” wrote the UCI in that statement. “If the B sample analysis confirms the result of the A sample, or if the rider does not request the opening of the B sample, the LADS gives the rider the opportunity to provide an explanation for the Adverse Analytical Finding.
“The LADS will then open disciplinary proceedings and offer the rider an “Acceptance of Consequences” taking into account the rider’s explanations, if any. If the rider refuses the Acceptance of Consequences, the matter is referred to the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal for adjudication.”
Click through to read the full story on CyclingTips.