@ilnuovociclismo
ilnuovociclismo
27-08-2012, 06:02 PM
Luciano visto che sei il piu informato ho rivolto la domanda a te..perché secondo te armstrong sapendo di essersi dopato e' voluto tornare sulla scena?
Non sei registrato o connesso al forum.
Effettua la registrazione gratuita o il login per poter sfruttare tutte le funzionalità del forum e rimuovere ogni forma di pubblicità invasiva.
Effettua la registrazione gratuita o il login per poter sfruttare tutte le funzionalità del forum e rimuovere ogni forma di pubblicità invasiva.
|
Condividi:
Caso Armstrong - L'UCI cancella tutti i titoli di Armstrong dal '98 in poi
|
![[+]](https://www.ilnuovociclismo.com/forum/images/square/collapse_collapsed.png)
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
27-08-2012, 06:16 PM
27-08-2012, 06:49 PM
Ciao Luca, scusa se posto, non volermene ma clicca qua, leggitelo bene, capisci quando si usa e metti in atto quanto imparerai.
Non è un messaggio provocatorio, né allo scopo di umiliare o altro, solo che non ne posso più di vedere verbi avere senza quella benedetta e bellissima "h" che viene spesso omessa.
Scusate il messaggio.
Non è un messaggio provocatorio, né allo scopo di umiliare o altro, solo che non ne posso più di vedere verbi avere senza quella benedetta e bellissima "h" che viene spesso omessa.
Scusate il messaggio.
27-08-2012, 06:54 PM
A ragione Max. Non se ne può davvero più... 
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
27-08-2012, 11:30 PM
Kimmage: UCI needs root and branch surgery
Rough Ride author on cycling’s future in the wake of Armstrong case
Even now, Lance Armstrong probably still thinks it was all about him. In declining to contest the US Anti-Doping Agency’s charges of doping and conspiracy on Thursday, Armstrong decried the process as an “unconstitutional witch hunt,” continuing with the same rhetoric that has seen him spend the past thirteen years branding his accusers as trolls.
Such delusions may satisfy Armstrong’s ego and his self-perpetuating sense of martyrdom, and it may even inspire his biographer to pen a risible attack on USADA for the Washington Post, but he may be disappointed to find in the weeks and months to come that the so-called trolls always had bigger, over-arching targets in mind.
Author of the seminal Rough Ride, the former professional rider and journalist Paul Kimmage was a man in demand over the weekend, as radio station after radio station sought the opinion of one of Armstrong’s most forthright critics during his years of excess. But time and again, Kimmage looked to move the discussion forward from the fallen Armstrong to an assessment of the rotten system that allowed him to prosper. “This couldn’t have happened in a vacuum,” he stressed.
A little under a century ago, a fellow Dubliner wrote that “History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake,” and Kimmage can surely identify with the sentiment. USADA’s Armstrong case may feel like a seminal moment, but after would-be watersheds like Festina (1998), San Remo (2001), Puerto (2006) and Rasmussen (2007) failed to bring about any tangible change, it’s not easy to be optimistic.
“Nothing has changed. Another cheat has been confined to history but in terms of the future of the sport, it means absolutely nothing unless there’s some form of accountability here and someone is held to account for how this happened,” Kimmage tells Cyclingnews.
Rough Ride, though a poignant human story in its own right, is also a detailed invective beseeching cycling’s governing body to take decisive action against doping in the sport. When Kimmage wrote the book in 1990, Hein Verbruggen was president of the UCI. In 2012, Verbruggen’s acolyte Pat McQuaid performs the ceremonial duties. In the intervening period, blood doping spread through the professional peloton like wildfire, but at the top table, things have remained largely unchanged.
“It needs root and branch surgery,” Kimmage says of the UCI. “Hopefully if there’s one positive to come out of this Armstrong thing it’s that there’ll be some accountability and changes at the top. McQuaid needs to resign and Verbruggen needs to be removed from the sport. Until that happens, until there’s someone put in there who takes a look at the sport from top to bottom and just literally has an absolute clean out, then nothing will change.
“It will have to be radical and the bottom line is this – unless riders believe that the rules apply to everybody, that doping will not be tolerated in any form and speaking out against doping does not come with a penalty, then there’s no way you can change.”
If Kimmage has one nagging regret about Armstrong’s decision not to contest the USADA charges, it’s that some of the evidence accumulated might not now make its way into the public domain and so it may prove difficult to truly assess the level to which the UCI was complicit in the American’s story. Nonetheless, he feels that the UCI’s heavy-handed attempts to seize jurisdiction of the Armstrong case from USADA in the past month were a stark indictment of its mindset over the past decade and beyond.
“Even by their own miserable standards, the UCI have absolutely disgraced themselves this last month – they had that statement from McQuaid during the Tour saying that they were going to leave it totally up to USADA and then the very next day they’re sending off letters trying to wrest jurisdiction of the process,” Kimmage says. “I mean, my God, come on! Come on!”
Earlier this year, the UCI moved to sue Kimmage for defamation, in response to an interview with Floyd Landis first published in the Sunday Times in January 2011, where Landis detailed the intimidation he suffered at the hands of the UCI and alleged the body’s collusion in covering up an Armstrong positive test in 2001. Kimmage subsequently published the full transcript of the seven hour-long interview on nyvelocity.com and believes there is no better account of the sport’s problems than Landis’ own words.
“There have been so many questions about what’s going on now, but I’d really go back to that interview I did with Floyd,” he says. “If you read that transcript, you understand why the sport is in the mess it’s in now. It opened my eyes to it. It gave me a deeper understanding of what had happened from the time that I had spent out of it and that basically nothing had changed. The truth is in there, and the way out of it is in that interview that Floyd gave. All of the problems are there.”
Clean out
The solution for Kimmage would be to weed out the nefarious figures from all levels of the sport, the kind of independent audit that he freely admits “is pie in the sky because the UCI seem to be accountable to nobody. I mean, God knows what they’re going to do with this Armstrong thing and the stripping of the titles.”
Even so, in an ideal world, Kimmage has firm ideas on who he would expel from the sport and who he would like to continue trying to move cycling in the right direction. After spending the 2008 Tour de France embedded with the Garmin team, Kimmage has been a firm supporter of Jonathan Vaughters’ project, which features figures who themselves raced and doped at US Postal.
“Vaughters and the Garmin team have been caught up in this before and doped themselves but they have really shown a great attitude in terms of taking the sport forward and learning from those lessons,” Kimmage says.
And yet in the past two years, Vaughters has also contributed to one of the more discouraging examples of cycling’s failure to awake from the nightmares of its past. In seeking to form a breakaway league operating outside the UCI’s sphere, Vaughters aligned himself with his former US Postal manager Johan Bruyneel, even while the federal investigator Jeff Novitzky and later USADA were amassing evidence on his activities.
“I agree with you,” Kimmage concedes. “I’ve singled Vaughters out as someone I would keep in the sport but I do have reservations about him. I had reservations about him hiring [Thomas] Dekker, I had reservations about him trying to hire Contador. I thought that was the wrong thing to do.
“But on the whole, I think he has been very positive for the sport and I think were he not working within the constraints of the governing body as it is now under McQuaid and Verbruggen, we could see some real difference there. But I agree, if he was talking about this breakaway league and associating with Bruyneel, that’s a serious black mark against him in my view, definitely.”
ASO
The UCI, of course, are not the sole powerbrokers in the sport. Amaury Sport Organisation [ASO] owns cycling’s golden goose, the Tour de France, but little comment has emanated from Issy-les-Moulineaux in recent days. It wasn’t always thus – in the interregnum between Armstrong’s retirement in 2005 and his comeback in 2009, the ASO took an aggressive stance in its dealings with the UCI.
One product of the stand-off with the UCI was that the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) carried out a hugely successful targeted testing programme at the 2008 Tour, with Riccardo Riccò, Bernhard Kohl and Stefan Schumacher among those to fall foul of a new test for CERA. That autumn, however, Armstrong announced his return to cycling: within weeks, progressive ASO president Patrice Clerc had been removed from his post and a rapprochement between the UCI and the ASO began in earnest.
“One of the most devastating things that happened for me was when they welcomed Armstrong back with open arms in 2009 – talk about raising the white flag on doping and any respect for the race,” Kimmage says sadly. “Well, to welcome him back with open arms, knowing that he had cheated told me a lot about where they were going.
“I remember how animated and upset Patrice Clerc was in Pau in 2007 when Vinokourov tested positive. That was in the day when the ASO called press conferences and told journalists, ‘this is what is happening, we’re not happy with the UCI.’ I remember that being quite impressive and really having a sense that they were deeply upset at how doping was destroying their race, but I’ve had no sense of that since then. So that’s very discouraging.”
Omerta
One of the key problems Kimmage identified in Rough Ride was the culture of silence, the omerta that surrounded cycling’s doping problem. Twenty-two years on, it seems that little has changed. At the time of writing, the highest-ranked to openly applaud USADA’s work has been Gustav Erik Larsson of Vacansoleil-DCM. The Swede lies 156th in the WorldTour standings.
“Obviously, you’ve got cranks like me ranting and railing over the past couple of days but in terms of the riders who are leaders of the sport – the Bradley Wiggins, the Froomes, the Contadors – has there been one strong, coherent statement about this?” Kimmage asks. “Has there been one positive statement where somebody actually applauds an anti-doping agency for doing its work, for exposing a cheat? Has there been any statement from any of these guys about this? Not one.
“What does that tell you? What it tells me is that omerta, the problem that existed in my time when I left the sport in 1989 is still there. For me, it’s not reflective of the fact that these guys are all cheating, even if you could be forgiven for assuming that. My own belief is that the real problem is the fear of speaking out. When there are repercussions for speaking out against doping, it means that nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. For me that’s the real problem there.”
While pressure from the sport’s top table may contribute to the silence – “If you speak out against it, you are deemed to be critical of the leaders and your punishment can come in many shapes and many forms” – Kimmage notes that everyone involved in cycling has a responsibility to facilitate the breaking of the omerta. In particular, the onus is on the media to be more courageous in its approach.
Reminded of Sky’s first rest day press conference at this year’s Tour, when reporters were curtly informed that doping questions would be cut off immediately, Kimmage maintains that journalists present in such situations have no excuses.
“This is your problem. This is where the journalists are complicit in what happens,” he says. “When they come in and say that ‘we’re not talking about doping’ it’s paramount that every journalist in that room gets up and walks out and says ‘we’re not talking to you. If you’re not interested in treating us like journalists, then we’re not going to talk to you.’”
On that point, Kimmage notes that the media has failed to hold Sky to account for the hiring of former Rabobank doctor Gert Leinders, who worked at Rabobank in a period when doping was tolerated on the team, thus rowing back on its original commitment to employ only doctors from the United Kingdom with no previous connection to professional cycling.
“Has nobody gone back to Brailsford about this investigation into Leinders? What’s happened to that?” Kimmage asked. “Is Brailford too busy now teaching Philip Hindes to fall off his bike properly? Is that what he’s been up to?”
Lessons from history
Those seven Tour wins may not ultimately be airbrushed from the record books, and regardless, Lance Armstrong will never lose an entrenched constituency of believers, but for Kimmage, the key point is that cycling – finally – learns from the mistakes of its past. The environment in which Armstrong thrived needs to be cleaned out.
Yet for now, the lie of the land remains strikingly similar to how it appeared in 1999. Back then, the UCI, ASO and large swathes of the press were lauding Armstrong as the saviour of cycling as he opened up the hitherto largely untapped American market.
Fast forward thirteen years and Bradley Wiggins’ Tour victory is bringing cycling centre stage in another new market, Great Britain. The general euphoria was summed up by a British tabloid printing cut-out Wiggins sideburns for fans to wear on the roadside, but on the eve of the Olympics, McQuaid himself went so far as to tell The Associated Press that he was hoping for more British success at the Games.
“It would be great if it happened because it's another edition to this fairy-tale story," McQuaid said. "It would be great for cycling and great for the Olympic Games."
On its launch in 2010, Sky was widely lauded for its proudly stated commitment to clean cycling, but in spite of its current status as the sport’s flagship team, Sky has shown no willingness to break the pervasive silence on the Armstrong affair and its possible repercussions for the future governance of cycling.
“Let’s make no bones about it – this Wiggins victory is huge for the UCI,” Kimmage says. “Britain is a big market with bike sales going through the roof, massive interest there. It’s Big Pat’s back garden and he’s very obviously thrilled by it because every time you look at him, he’s got his arm around Brailsford. So is it a coincidence that something like this happens and we don’t hear a word from any of them? Not Brailsford, not Wiggins, not any of them.
“Is that a coincidence? Because that will upset Pat and we can’t upset Pat. Brailsford understands how the system works and every decision he makes is based upon ‘what does the UCI want? What does McQuaid want me to do here?’”
In an opinion piece on the Armstrong case for the Observer on Sunday, Kimmage asked, “Do we have any reason to believe that the people running the sport really want to fix it?” [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/26/cycling-clean-up?newsfeed=true]
Twenty-two years after first asking the question, Kimmage can be forgiven for not holding his breath on a straight answer at this point.
Cyclingnews.com
Rough Ride author on cycling’s future in the wake of Armstrong case
Even now, Lance Armstrong probably still thinks it was all about him. In declining to contest the US Anti-Doping Agency’s charges of doping and conspiracy on Thursday, Armstrong decried the process as an “unconstitutional witch hunt,” continuing with the same rhetoric that has seen him spend the past thirteen years branding his accusers as trolls.
Such delusions may satisfy Armstrong’s ego and his self-perpetuating sense of martyrdom, and it may even inspire his biographer to pen a risible attack on USADA for the Washington Post, but he may be disappointed to find in the weeks and months to come that the so-called trolls always had bigger, over-arching targets in mind.
Author of the seminal Rough Ride, the former professional rider and journalist Paul Kimmage was a man in demand over the weekend, as radio station after radio station sought the opinion of one of Armstrong’s most forthright critics during his years of excess. But time and again, Kimmage looked to move the discussion forward from the fallen Armstrong to an assessment of the rotten system that allowed him to prosper. “This couldn’t have happened in a vacuum,” he stressed.
A little under a century ago, a fellow Dubliner wrote that “History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake,” and Kimmage can surely identify with the sentiment. USADA’s Armstrong case may feel like a seminal moment, but after would-be watersheds like Festina (1998), San Remo (2001), Puerto (2006) and Rasmussen (2007) failed to bring about any tangible change, it’s not easy to be optimistic.
“Nothing has changed. Another cheat has been confined to history but in terms of the future of the sport, it means absolutely nothing unless there’s some form of accountability here and someone is held to account for how this happened,” Kimmage tells Cyclingnews.
Rough Ride, though a poignant human story in its own right, is also a detailed invective beseeching cycling’s governing body to take decisive action against doping in the sport. When Kimmage wrote the book in 1990, Hein Verbruggen was president of the UCI. In 2012, Verbruggen’s acolyte Pat McQuaid performs the ceremonial duties. In the intervening period, blood doping spread through the professional peloton like wildfire, but at the top table, things have remained largely unchanged.
“It needs root and branch surgery,” Kimmage says of the UCI. “Hopefully if there’s one positive to come out of this Armstrong thing it’s that there’ll be some accountability and changes at the top. McQuaid needs to resign and Verbruggen needs to be removed from the sport. Until that happens, until there’s someone put in there who takes a look at the sport from top to bottom and just literally has an absolute clean out, then nothing will change.
“It will have to be radical and the bottom line is this – unless riders believe that the rules apply to everybody, that doping will not be tolerated in any form and speaking out against doping does not come with a penalty, then there’s no way you can change.”
If Kimmage has one nagging regret about Armstrong’s decision not to contest the USADA charges, it’s that some of the evidence accumulated might not now make its way into the public domain and so it may prove difficult to truly assess the level to which the UCI was complicit in the American’s story. Nonetheless, he feels that the UCI’s heavy-handed attempts to seize jurisdiction of the Armstrong case from USADA in the past month were a stark indictment of its mindset over the past decade and beyond.
“Even by their own miserable standards, the UCI have absolutely disgraced themselves this last month – they had that statement from McQuaid during the Tour saying that they were going to leave it totally up to USADA and then the very next day they’re sending off letters trying to wrest jurisdiction of the process,” Kimmage says. “I mean, my God, come on! Come on!”
Earlier this year, the UCI moved to sue Kimmage for defamation, in response to an interview with Floyd Landis first published in the Sunday Times in January 2011, where Landis detailed the intimidation he suffered at the hands of the UCI and alleged the body’s collusion in covering up an Armstrong positive test in 2001. Kimmage subsequently published the full transcript of the seven hour-long interview on nyvelocity.com and believes there is no better account of the sport’s problems than Landis’ own words.
“There have been so many questions about what’s going on now, but I’d really go back to that interview I did with Floyd,” he says. “If you read that transcript, you understand why the sport is in the mess it’s in now. It opened my eyes to it. It gave me a deeper understanding of what had happened from the time that I had spent out of it and that basically nothing had changed. The truth is in there, and the way out of it is in that interview that Floyd gave. All of the problems are there.”
Clean out
The solution for Kimmage would be to weed out the nefarious figures from all levels of the sport, the kind of independent audit that he freely admits “is pie in the sky because the UCI seem to be accountable to nobody. I mean, God knows what they’re going to do with this Armstrong thing and the stripping of the titles.”
Even so, in an ideal world, Kimmage has firm ideas on who he would expel from the sport and who he would like to continue trying to move cycling in the right direction. After spending the 2008 Tour de France embedded with the Garmin team, Kimmage has been a firm supporter of Jonathan Vaughters’ project, which features figures who themselves raced and doped at US Postal.
“Vaughters and the Garmin team have been caught up in this before and doped themselves but they have really shown a great attitude in terms of taking the sport forward and learning from those lessons,” Kimmage says.
And yet in the past two years, Vaughters has also contributed to one of the more discouraging examples of cycling’s failure to awake from the nightmares of its past. In seeking to form a breakaway league operating outside the UCI’s sphere, Vaughters aligned himself with his former US Postal manager Johan Bruyneel, even while the federal investigator Jeff Novitzky and later USADA were amassing evidence on his activities.
“I agree with you,” Kimmage concedes. “I’ve singled Vaughters out as someone I would keep in the sport but I do have reservations about him. I had reservations about him hiring [Thomas] Dekker, I had reservations about him trying to hire Contador. I thought that was the wrong thing to do.
“But on the whole, I think he has been very positive for the sport and I think were he not working within the constraints of the governing body as it is now under McQuaid and Verbruggen, we could see some real difference there. But I agree, if he was talking about this breakaway league and associating with Bruyneel, that’s a serious black mark against him in my view, definitely.”
ASO
The UCI, of course, are not the sole powerbrokers in the sport. Amaury Sport Organisation [ASO] owns cycling’s golden goose, the Tour de France, but little comment has emanated from Issy-les-Moulineaux in recent days. It wasn’t always thus – in the interregnum between Armstrong’s retirement in 2005 and his comeback in 2009, the ASO took an aggressive stance in its dealings with the UCI.
One product of the stand-off with the UCI was that the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) carried out a hugely successful targeted testing programme at the 2008 Tour, with Riccardo Riccò, Bernhard Kohl and Stefan Schumacher among those to fall foul of a new test for CERA. That autumn, however, Armstrong announced his return to cycling: within weeks, progressive ASO president Patrice Clerc had been removed from his post and a rapprochement between the UCI and the ASO began in earnest.
“One of the most devastating things that happened for me was when they welcomed Armstrong back with open arms in 2009 – talk about raising the white flag on doping and any respect for the race,” Kimmage says sadly. “Well, to welcome him back with open arms, knowing that he had cheated told me a lot about where they were going.
“I remember how animated and upset Patrice Clerc was in Pau in 2007 when Vinokourov tested positive. That was in the day when the ASO called press conferences and told journalists, ‘this is what is happening, we’re not happy with the UCI.’ I remember that being quite impressive and really having a sense that they were deeply upset at how doping was destroying their race, but I’ve had no sense of that since then. So that’s very discouraging.”
Omerta
One of the key problems Kimmage identified in Rough Ride was the culture of silence, the omerta that surrounded cycling’s doping problem. Twenty-two years on, it seems that little has changed. At the time of writing, the highest-ranked to openly applaud USADA’s work has been Gustav Erik Larsson of Vacansoleil-DCM. The Swede lies 156th in the WorldTour standings.
“Obviously, you’ve got cranks like me ranting and railing over the past couple of days but in terms of the riders who are leaders of the sport – the Bradley Wiggins, the Froomes, the Contadors – has there been one strong, coherent statement about this?” Kimmage asks. “Has there been one positive statement where somebody actually applauds an anti-doping agency for doing its work, for exposing a cheat? Has there been any statement from any of these guys about this? Not one.
“What does that tell you? What it tells me is that omerta, the problem that existed in my time when I left the sport in 1989 is still there. For me, it’s not reflective of the fact that these guys are all cheating, even if you could be forgiven for assuming that. My own belief is that the real problem is the fear of speaking out. When there are repercussions for speaking out against doping, it means that nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. For me that’s the real problem there.”
While pressure from the sport’s top table may contribute to the silence – “If you speak out against it, you are deemed to be critical of the leaders and your punishment can come in many shapes and many forms” – Kimmage notes that everyone involved in cycling has a responsibility to facilitate the breaking of the omerta. In particular, the onus is on the media to be more courageous in its approach.
Reminded of Sky’s first rest day press conference at this year’s Tour, when reporters were curtly informed that doping questions would be cut off immediately, Kimmage maintains that journalists present in such situations have no excuses.
“This is your problem. This is where the journalists are complicit in what happens,” he says. “When they come in and say that ‘we’re not talking about doping’ it’s paramount that every journalist in that room gets up and walks out and says ‘we’re not talking to you. If you’re not interested in treating us like journalists, then we’re not going to talk to you.’”
On that point, Kimmage notes that the media has failed to hold Sky to account for the hiring of former Rabobank doctor Gert Leinders, who worked at Rabobank in a period when doping was tolerated on the team, thus rowing back on its original commitment to employ only doctors from the United Kingdom with no previous connection to professional cycling.
“Has nobody gone back to Brailsford about this investigation into Leinders? What’s happened to that?” Kimmage asked. “Is Brailford too busy now teaching Philip Hindes to fall off his bike properly? Is that what he’s been up to?”
Lessons from history
Those seven Tour wins may not ultimately be airbrushed from the record books, and regardless, Lance Armstrong will never lose an entrenched constituency of believers, but for Kimmage, the key point is that cycling – finally – learns from the mistakes of its past. The environment in which Armstrong thrived needs to be cleaned out.
Yet for now, the lie of the land remains strikingly similar to how it appeared in 1999. Back then, the UCI, ASO and large swathes of the press were lauding Armstrong as the saviour of cycling as he opened up the hitherto largely untapped American market.
Fast forward thirteen years and Bradley Wiggins’ Tour victory is bringing cycling centre stage in another new market, Great Britain. The general euphoria was summed up by a British tabloid printing cut-out Wiggins sideburns for fans to wear on the roadside, but on the eve of the Olympics, McQuaid himself went so far as to tell The Associated Press that he was hoping for more British success at the Games.
“It would be great if it happened because it's another edition to this fairy-tale story," McQuaid said. "It would be great for cycling and great for the Olympic Games."
On its launch in 2010, Sky was widely lauded for its proudly stated commitment to clean cycling, but in spite of its current status as the sport’s flagship team, Sky has shown no willingness to break the pervasive silence on the Armstrong affair and its possible repercussions for the future governance of cycling.
“Let’s make no bones about it – this Wiggins victory is huge for the UCI,” Kimmage says. “Britain is a big market with bike sales going through the roof, massive interest there. It’s Big Pat’s back garden and he’s very obviously thrilled by it because every time you look at him, he’s got his arm around Brailsford. So is it a coincidence that something like this happens and we don’t hear a word from any of them? Not Brailsford, not Wiggins, not any of them.
“Is that a coincidence? Because that will upset Pat and we can’t upset Pat. Brailsford understands how the system works and every decision he makes is based upon ‘what does the UCI want? What does McQuaid want me to do here?’”
In an opinion piece on the Armstrong case for the Observer on Sunday, Kimmage asked, “Do we have any reason to believe that the people running the sport really want to fix it?” [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/26/cycling-clean-up?newsfeed=true]
Twenty-two years after first asking the question, Kimmage can be forgiven for not holding his breath on a straight answer at this point.
Cyclingnews.com
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
28-08-2012, 12:24 PM
Pound calls for 'truth and reconciliation' for cycling
The former president of the World Anti-Doping Agency Dick Pound today said USADA's lifetime ban of Lance Armstrong "is not a witch hunt, it's a duty", and called for the sport's governing body, the UCI, to engage in a "truth and reconciliation exercise" in order to rid the sport of doping and move forward.
USADA moved ahead last week with the lifetime ban and the disqualification of Armstrong's results dating back to August 1, 1998, a move which will strip him of all seven Tour de France titles, after a late appeal by Armstrong's legal team to block USADA's procedure was dismissed by a district court in Texas.
Pound, an attorney, former vice president of the International Olympic Committee and current IOC member for Canada, has been keeping a close eye on USADA's case against Armstrong and his attempts to block it from moving forward to arbitration where all the evidence would be heard in public.
"I thought frankly it was rather desperate," Pound said of the district court filing. "Any well informed lawyer would have been able to tell him it was not going to prevail."
Armstrong decided not to seek arbitration, he instead refused to acknowledge USADA's right to punish him for doping offenses and stepped away from the spotlight.
"It's not an untypical tactic. [Armstrong] was very careful about what he said. The fact of the matter is he fought tooth and nail to keep this from going to arbitration, and the court said 'no, sorry that's the route you have to go'. He [effectively] said, 'well, in that case I'm not going to fight anymore'. All of a sudden he turns from the world's toughest fighter to not even contesting it? Decide what you like."
Pound says that the process is not over, that the evidence, or at least some of it, will come out.
"It's like if someone sues you for money you owe them, and you don't file a defence. That doesn't mean that the process stops. The person you owe money to can carry on and get a judgement by default, and that's what's going to happen here. USADA, don't forget, is not going to want to look like it's been mean or petty and it has trumped up any evidence - notwithstanding all the purple prose Lance and his team gave us. They're going to show this was a very careful, deliberate process in which they investigated, got evidence, weighed the evidence, and decided whether or not they had enough to make it stick, even though some of it goes back a long time.
"All of those elements will go in, I assume the final report will make all that clear. Personally, as a lawyer, I think the public at large would be more satisfied if there was the full blown process where Armstrong could make his case, and if the arbitrators believed him he would win and that would be the end of it. But he's chosen not to do that."
Political implications?
Pound has a history of being outspoken on the problems of doping in cycling. He came into the position with the newly formed agency the year after the Festina scandal rocked the sport, and during the year of Armstrong's first Tour victory in 1999. There is no shortage of quotes from the next eight years in which he is critical of the UCI's efforts, or lack thereof, to combat the problem.
The UCI even filed a lawsuit against Pound for defamation after his tenure, the statements were so strong, but the case ended in an agreement after it was decided that Pound was tasked with pointing out flaws in the anti-doping programs of federations, even if he might have been a bit vehement in his public criticism.
WADA came under fire again in recent weeks, with the current president, Pat McQuaid accusing the agency of having a "political campaign against cycling".
"Both McQuaid and [former UCI president Hein] Verbruggen have made some very unfortunate statements along those lines," Pound told Cyclingnews. "The fact is that their sport has been inundated with doping for years. It's part of the culture and practically part of the DNA.
"I think what they have to do at some point, it may be so bad, they're going to have to do a truth and reconciliation exercise and say 'let's get it all on the table so everyone knows how bad it was and let's now turn the corner and if anybody from now on is using any of these things they're out, period'. Until that happens and they acknowledge there has been a problem and the problem continues, there's almost no hope for a cure."
Should the reports that Armstrong was warned of impending doping controls and had positive tests covered up by the sport's governing body prove to be true, Pound says that, "If there is substance to the speculation it could have a serious impact on the sport and its credibility".
"The IOC is firm on its zero tolerance policy [for doping]. It may very well say this is not good for the Olympic movement to have this kind of situation. Maybe it will be one of the sports that will be removed [from the Olympic programme]. I sincerely hope not, it's such an exciting sport I would rather see it be cleaned up and remain on the program than suspended. That's for the IOC to decide.
Told you so?
Pound was in charge of WADA in 2005 when Damien Ressiot, a reporter from the French newspaper L'Equipe, managed to get a hold of both the research results of an EPO test study which used samples from the 1999 Tour de France and the anti-doping control forms from the race, and in doing so matched up the control numbers of six EPO positives to forms signed by Lance Armstrong.
When he suggested Armstrong might have to answer to the results, Pound experienced first hand the onslaught of anger hurled at anyone who dare try to taint Armstrong's legacy.
"I had said, listen, I don't know, but if the forms were Lance's and the sample numbers are right, you might have a case to answer. That's all I said. That led to screaming and yelling about what a dreadful person I was and I should be kicked out of the IOC."
The UCI buried the case under an "independent report" which concluded that there was not enough evidence to prove that Armstrong used EPO. That was not good enough for Pound, who continued to call for action from the UCI until his term as president expired in 2007.
All through his eight-year term as WADA's first president, Pound insisted that dopers were adapting quicker than the testers, and only a small percentage of the cheaters were being caught - it's a view he maintains to this day.
"Here we are a few years later, Landis imploded in front of everyone's eyes - from the great hero to someone who clearly cheated and clearly lied about it, and spent a lot of other people's money on a useless defence - a double defence, he went to USADA and to CAS, to the point he's going to have to raise money to pay back the people who supported his defence fund.
"Marion Jones could look you in the eyes and say I've never taken anything, and repeat that on cue until her time came up, and yes, she had taken it all along. It's a shame, but it's the way it worked out.
"It's across all sports, swimming, rowing, track and field, cycling. I don't think there's any sport that's immune."
As for Armstrong's fans, Pound said, "A lot of people bought into the image and to see that crumbling away over the last two or three years, and now smashed into pieces, it's unsettling [for them]. They feel badly for him, about him and about themselves for having bought it."
Cyclingnews.com
The former president of the World Anti-Doping Agency Dick Pound today said USADA's lifetime ban of Lance Armstrong "is not a witch hunt, it's a duty", and called for the sport's governing body, the UCI, to engage in a "truth and reconciliation exercise" in order to rid the sport of doping and move forward.
USADA moved ahead last week with the lifetime ban and the disqualification of Armstrong's results dating back to August 1, 1998, a move which will strip him of all seven Tour de France titles, after a late appeal by Armstrong's legal team to block USADA's procedure was dismissed by a district court in Texas.
Pound, an attorney, former vice president of the International Olympic Committee and current IOC member for Canada, has been keeping a close eye on USADA's case against Armstrong and his attempts to block it from moving forward to arbitration where all the evidence would be heard in public.
"I thought frankly it was rather desperate," Pound said of the district court filing. "Any well informed lawyer would have been able to tell him it was not going to prevail."
Armstrong decided not to seek arbitration, he instead refused to acknowledge USADA's right to punish him for doping offenses and stepped away from the spotlight.
"It's not an untypical tactic. [Armstrong] was very careful about what he said. The fact of the matter is he fought tooth and nail to keep this from going to arbitration, and the court said 'no, sorry that's the route you have to go'. He [effectively] said, 'well, in that case I'm not going to fight anymore'. All of a sudden he turns from the world's toughest fighter to not even contesting it? Decide what you like."
Pound says that the process is not over, that the evidence, or at least some of it, will come out.
"It's like if someone sues you for money you owe them, and you don't file a defence. That doesn't mean that the process stops. The person you owe money to can carry on and get a judgement by default, and that's what's going to happen here. USADA, don't forget, is not going to want to look like it's been mean or petty and it has trumped up any evidence - notwithstanding all the purple prose Lance and his team gave us. They're going to show this was a very careful, deliberate process in which they investigated, got evidence, weighed the evidence, and decided whether or not they had enough to make it stick, even though some of it goes back a long time.
"All of those elements will go in, I assume the final report will make all that clear. Personally, as a lawyer, I think the public at large would be more satisfied if there was the full blown process where Armstrong could make his case, and if the arbitrators believed him he would win and that would be the end of it. But he's chosen not to do that."
Political implications?
Pound has a history of being outspoken on the problems of doping in cycling. He came into the position with the newly formed agency the year after the Festina scandal rocked the sport, and during the year of Armstrong's first Tour victory in 1999. There is no shortage of quotes from the next eight years in which he is critical of the UCI's efforts, or lack thereof, to combat the problem.
The UCI even filed a lawsuit against Pound for defamation after his tenure, the statements were so strong, but the case ended in an agreement after it was decided that Pound was tasked with pointing out flaws in the anti-doping programs of federations, even if he might have been a bit vehement in his public criticism.
WADA came under fire again in recent weeks, with the current president, Pat McQuaid accusing the agency of having a "political campaign against cycling".
"Both McQuaid and [former UCI president Hein] Verbruggen have made some very unfortunate statements along those lines," Pound told Cyclingnews. "The fact is that their sport has been inundated with doping for years. It's part of the culture and practically part of the DNA.
"I think what they have to do at some point, it may be so bad, they're going to have to do a truth and reconciliation exercise and say 'let's get it all on the table so everyone knows how bad it was and let's now turn the corner and if anybody from now on is using any of these things they're out, period'. Until that happens and they acknowledge there has been a problem and the problem continues, there's almost no hope for a cure."
Should the reports that Armstrong was warned of impending doping controls and had positive tests covered up by the sport's governing body prove to be true, Pound says that, "If there is substance to the speculation it could have a serious impact on the sport and its credibility".
"The IOC is firm on its zero tolerance policy [for doping]. It may very well say this is not good for the Olympic movement to have this kind of situation. Maybe it will be one of the sports that will be removed [from the Olympic programme]. I sincerely hope not, it's such an exciting sport I would rather see it be cleaned up and remain on the program than suspended. That's for the IOC to decide.
Told you so?
Pound was in charge of WADA in 2005 when Damien Ressiot, a reporter from the French newspaper L'Equipe, managed to get a hold of both the research results of an EPO test study which used samples from the 1999 Tour de France and the anti-doping control forms from the race, and in doing so matched up the control numbers of six EPO positives to forms signed by Lance Armstrong.
When he suggested Armstrong might have to answer to the results, Pound experienced first hand the onslaught of anger hurled at anyone who dare try to taint Armstrong's legacy.
"I had said, listen, I don't know, but if the forms were Lance's and the sample numbers are right, you might have a case to answer. That's all I said. That led to screaming and yelling about what a dreadful person I was and I should be kicked out of the IOC."
The UCI buried the case under an "independent report" which concluded that there was not enough evidence to prove that Armstrong used EPO. That was not good enough for Pound, who continued to call for action from the UCI until his term as president expired in 2007.
All through his eight-year term as WADA's first president, Pound insisted that dopers were adapting quicker than the testers, and only a small percentage of the cheaters were being caught - it's a view he maintains to this day.
"Here we are a few years later, Landis imploded in front of everyone's eyes - from the great hero to someone who clearly cheated and clearly lied about it, and spent a lot of other people's money on a useless defence - a double defence, he went to USADA and to CAS, to the point he's going to have to raise money to pay back the people who supported his defence fund.
"Marion Jones could look you in the eyes and say I've never taken anything, and repeat that on cue until her time came up, and yes, she had taken it all along. It's a shame, but it's the way it worked out.
"It's across all sports, swimming, rowing, track and field, cycling. I don't think there's any sport that's immune."
As for Armstrong's fans, Pound said, "A lot of people bought into the image and to see that crumbling away over the last two or three years, and now smashed into pieces, it's unsettling [for them]. They feel badly for him, about him and about themselves for having bought it."
Cyclingnews.com
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
28-08-2012, 12:34 PM
Bassons: Armstrong's illusion of control is paramount
Christophe Bassons was once ostracized for his comments regarding the performance of Lance Armstrong says he now feels "sorry" for the man that has been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles.
"And the worst part is that he is always so sure of himself, and is still not embarrassed to have cheated," said Bassons in an interview with Le Monde.
While riding the Tour de France in 1999, Bassons, riding for La Française des Jeux wrote about his experiences in a daily column for Le Parisien. In one such column, he announced he had been "shocked" by Armstrong's stage-win at Sestriere. The Frenchman was then confronted by Armstrong where he was told to either stop his line of commentary or leave the sport. Bassons retired from cycling two years later, aged 27.
Bassons said he was not surprised that Armstrong, explaining that he was tired of defending himself, chose not to fight USADA's allegations of doping and conspiracy
"The illusion of control is paramount," Bassons told Le Monde of Armstrong's statement. "Armstrong, through his financial resources and his political support can afford to behave like that. He lives only to put himself above mortals. I am more sorry for him than anything else. This need to feel superior, to crush the competition, certainly has its source in his past."
Many current members of the professional peloton and management have declined to comment on the latest developments in the long-running Armstrong saga, and as far as Bassons is concerned much of the silence is due to fear.
"Armstrong has always seen himself as the boss," said Bassons. "But I think he did not exercise the same authority as Bernard Hinault in his time. Many cyclists including the French thought and think like me. However, they reflect on their careers and know very well that it is very easy to lose as a cyclist. If you break the law of silence, you can assume that you will never win more than one race."
Christophe Bassons was once ostracized for his comments regarding the performance of Lance Armstrong says he now feels "sorry" for the man that has been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles.
"And the worst part is that he is always so sure of himself, and is still not embarrassed to have cheated," said Bassons in an interview with Le Monde.
While riding the Tour de France in 1999, Bassons, riding for La Française des Jeux wrote about his experiences in a daily column for Le Parisien. In one such column, he announced he had been "shocked" by Armstrong's stage-win at Sestriere. The Frenchman was then confronted by Armstrong where he was told to either stop his line of commentary or leave the sport. Bassons retired from cycling two years later, aged 27.
Bassons said he was not surprised that Armstrong, explaining that he was tired of defending himself, chose not to fight USADA's allegations of doping and conspiracy
"The illusion of control is paramount," Bassons told Le Monde of Armstrong's statement. "Armstrong, through his financial resources and his political support can afford to behave like that. He lives only to put himself above mortals. I am more sorry for him than anything else. This need to feel superior, to crush the competition, certainly has its source in his past."
Many current members of the professional peloton and management have declined to comment on the latest developments in the long-running Armstrong saga, and as far as Bassons is concerned much of the silence is due to fear.
"Armstrong has always seen himself as the boss," said Bassons. "But I think he did not exercise the same authority as Bernard Hinault in his time. Many cyclists including the French thought and think like me. However, they reflect on their careers and know very well that it is very easy to lose as a cyclist. If you break the law of silence, you can assume that you will never win more than one race."
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
28-08-2012, 12:46 PM
CASO ARMSTRONG. Anche la maratona di New York non lo vuole
Anche New York volta le spalle a Lance Armstrong. Mary Wittenberg, direttrice della Maratona di New York, ha contattato la Federazione Americana di Atletica Leggera per sapere se Lance Armstrong - che ha già partecipato alla maratona nel 2006 e 2007 - può prendere il via alla corsa nel prossimo mese di novembre.
E nei prossimi giorni la Wittenberg contatterà la Usada: «Ci uniformeremo alle loro regole, perché alla nostra corsa la Usada effettua dei test e quindi la maratona di New York cade sotto la loro giurisdizione».
Come dire ad Armstrong di restarsene a casa…
Tuttobiciweb.it
Anche New York volta le spalle a Lance Armstrong. Mary Wittenberg, direttrice della Maratona di New York, ha contattato la Federazione Americana di Atletica Leggera per sapere se Lance Armstrong - che ha già partecipato alla maratona nel 2006 e 2007 - può prendere il via alla corsa nel prossimo mese di novembre.
E nei prossimi giorni la Wittenberg contatterà la Usada: «Ci uniformeremo alle loro regole, perché alla nostra corsa la Usada effettua dei test e quindi la maratona di New York cade sotto la loro giurisdizione».
Come dire ad Armstrong di restarsene a casa…
Tuttobiciweb.it
29-08-2012, 12:16 PM
Ma scusa, come fai a essere convinto? Mi sembra un accanimento u po' banale, perché se poi pensi alle condizioni anni '90, ragionando così si farebbe prima a resettare tutto e cominciare da capo, altro che accanirsi con Armstrong.
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
29-08-2012, 12:24 PM
Io non mi accanisco contro Armstrong, al limite mi accanisco contro chi ha "creato" il fenomeno Armstrong cioè l'allegra combriccola di Hein Verbruggen e Pat McQuaid. Di Armstrong me ne frega fin lì, più o meno come a lui frega dei suoi sette Tour, dato che tanto è ricco, la Nike lo appoggia, l'associazione mondiale anticancro pure, piuttosto che mandare nelle merda gli amichetti dell'UCI meglio perdere i 7 Tour...
30-08-2012, 01:43 PM
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
31-08-2012, 07:22 PM
Tyler Hamilton(non proprio un tipo affidabile) ha detto che Armstrong gli diede dell' EPO anche prima del Tour del 99...
Il Nuovo Ciclismo Premium
Messaggi: 9.551
Discussioni: 41
Like ricevuti: 1.067 in 666 post
Like assegnati: 98
Registrato: Jul 2011
Reputazione: 21
Discussioni: 41
Like ricevuti: 1.067 in 666 post
Like assegnati: 98
Registrato: Jul 2011
Reputazione: 21
31-08-2012, 07:27 PM
Queste secondo me sono cazzate gigantesche...già il fatto che si dopasse davanti ai compagni di squadra non è credibile, figuriamoci se gli dava l'epo. Lance non è stupido, non si mette in condizione di farsi ricattare
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
31-08-2012, 07:31 PM
Ah comunque i sette Tour in teoria non verranno riassegnati...
Il Nuovo Ciclismo Premium
Messaggi: 14.054
Discussioni: 134
Like ricevuti: 1.671 in 1.119 post
Like assegnati: 1.753
Registrato: Jul 2012
Reputazione: 36
Discussioni: 134
Like ricevuti: 1.671 in 1.119 post
Like assegnati: 1.753
Registrato: Jul 2012
Reputazione: 36
31-08-2012, 08:39 PM
Non verranno riassegnati vuol dire che non saranno tolti ad Armstrong o che vengono tolti e il primo posto rimane vacante? Fonte?
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
31-08-2012, 08:41 PM
Vengono tolti ed il primo posto rimane vacante, fonte dichiarazioni ufficiali della FFC(Federazione ciclistica francese)...
Il Nuovo Ciclismo Premium
Messaggi: 14.054
Discussioni: 134
Like ricevuti: 1.671 in 1.119 post
Like assegnati: 1.753
Registrato: Jul 2012
Reputazione: 36
Discussioni: 134
Like ricevuti: 1.671 in 1.119 post
Like assegnati: 1.753
Registrato: Jul 2012
Reputazione: 36
31-08-2012, 08:49 PM
Bene così, anche se mi sembra strano decidano solo loro senza passare dall'UCI...
GIORNALISTA MALGIOGLIO
Messaggi: 51.313
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
Discussioni: 1.487
Like ricevuti: 8.607 in 4.963 post
Like assegnati: 5.450
Registrato: May 2011
Reputazione: 147
01-09-2012, 01:22 PM
CASO ARMSTRONG. Hamilton racconta tutto in un libro verità
A meno di due settimane dalla squalifica a vita da parte dell'Usada, Lance Armstrong si trova nuovamente nella bufera. Torna sotto i riflettori uno dei grandi accusatori del texano, l'ex compagno di squadra Tyler Hamilton, al quale è stata ufficialmente tolta la medaglia d'oro di Atene
2004 a cronometro dal Comitato olimpico internazionale all'inizio di
questo mese. Hamilton replicherà al fuoriclasse di Austin con un libro, che sarà lanciato il prossimo 5 settembre, ed è stato presentato dall'editore come un "tell-all" un vero e proprio sguardo sul mondo del ciclismo
professionistico. Si intitola «The Race Secret» e racconterà anche della battaglia affrontata da Hamilton per debellare la depressione e racconerà la storia della «sua complicata relazione
con Lance Armstrong».
Hamilton,
che ha corso con Armstrong nel team US Postal Service, ripropone in questo suo lavoro le accuse
già mosse al texano in una ormai famosa intervista dello scorso anno andata in onda nella trasmissione "Minutes 60”. «(Armstrong)
ha preso quello che abbiamo tutti preso ... c'era EPO (eritropoietina)
... testosterone ... una trasfusione di sangue», ha detto Hamilton in
quella intervista. «Ho
visto (EPO) nel suo frigorifero. Ho visto che iniettare più di una
volta, come abbiamo fatto tutti, come ho fatto molte, molte volte». Armstrong ha sempre negato di aver preso sostanze proibite, e ha dovuto in più di un'occasione respingere le accuse .
Tuttobiciweb.it
A meno di due settimane dalla squalifica a vita da parte dell'Usada, Lance Armstrong si trova nuovamente nella bufera. Torna sotto i riflettori uno dei grandi accusatori del texano, l'ex compagno di squadra Tyler Hamilton, al quale è stata ufficialmente tolta la medaglia d'oro di Atene
2004 a cronometro dal Comitato olimpico internazionale all'inizio di
questo mese. Hamilton replicherà al fuoriclasse di Austin con un libro, che sarà lanciato il prossimo 5 settembre, ed è stato presentato dall'editore come un "tell-all" un vero e proprio sguardo sul mondo del ciclismo
professionistico. Si intitola «The Race Secret» e racconterà anche della battaglia affrontata da Hamilton per debellare la depressione e racconerà la storia della «sua complicata relazione
con Lance Armstrong».
Hamilton,
che ha corso con Armstrong nel team US Postal Service, ripropone in questo suo lavoro le accuse
già mosse al texano in una ormai famosa intervista dello scorso anno andata in onda nella trasmissione "Minutes 60”. «(Armstrong)
ha preso quello che abbiamo tutti preso ... c'era EPO (eritropoietina)
... testosterone ... una trasfusione di sangue», ha detto Hamilton in
quella intervista. «Ho
visto (EPO) nel suo frigorifero. Ho visto che iniettare più di una
volta, come abbiamo fatto tutti, come ho fatto molte, molte volte». Armstrong ha sempre negato di aver preso sostanze proibite, e ha dovuto in più di un'occasione respingere le accuse .
Tuttobiciweb.it
01-09-2012, 02:19 PM
Le grandi verità, scritte in un libro che gli farà guadagnare milioni?
Chissà che verità saranno.
Chissà che verità saranno.
02-09-2012, 12:47 PM
CASO ARMSTRONG. Sheryl Crow “canta” e incastra Lance
L’hanno obbligata a cantare, ma questa volta Sheryl Crow ne avrebbe
fatto volentieri a meno, perché la sua testimonianza è andata ad
ingrossare il già voluminoso fascicolo che l’Agenzia Antidoping
statunitense (Usada) aveva aperto contro il suo ex, Lance Armstrong,
accusato di doping e per il quale si prospetta la revoca delle 7 storiche vittorie al Tour de France e la squalifica a vita, dopo la sua volontaria rinuncia a difendersi. Come riporta il Daily News,
a rivelare il coinvolgimento della cantante - fidanzata dal 2003 al
2006 con il campione di ciclismo, che per lei lasciò la moglie Kristin
– sarebbe stato Tyler Hamilton (ex compagno di squadra di Armstrong
nella Us Postal) in “The Secret Race”, libro scritto con Daniel Coyle
(già autore di “Lance Armstrong’s War” del 2005, nel quale si parlava
della presenza del medico italiano Michele Ferrari nell’entourage del
ciclista e delle preoccupazioni di quest’ultimo per la “distrazione”
causata dalla Crow alla sua preparazione).
IL VOLUME - Nel libro, uscito mercoledì scorso negli Usa,
vengono descritte le pratiche doping e il modo in cui venivano nascoste
e in una nota Hamilton riporta le confidenze di una non meglio
precisata «fonte vicina alle indagini», secondo la quale la Crow
sarebbe stata chiamata a testimoniare davanti ai federali alla fine
dell’anno scorso, ovvero non molte settimane prima che a febbraio
l’ufficio del procuratore di Los Angeles annunciasse la sospensione
dell’indagine contro Armstrong. Che però è rimasto nel mirino
dell’Usada, che infatti è convinta di avere prove schiaccianti
riguardanti l’uso sistematico a partire dal 1996 di sostanze proibite
(compresi Epo e steroidi) da parte del 40enne ciclista americano,
ritiratosi definitivamente dalle gare nel 2011. Non solo.
L'INCONTRO - A detta degli agenti dell’antidoping, oltre 10 ciclisti, fra cui i compagni di squadra Hamilton e Floyd Landis (che nel maggio del 2010 accusò Armstrong di averlo aiutato a doparsi in una serie di mail inviate all’Uci)
avrebbero aiutato a sostenere le tesi accusatorie, coinvolgendo
pesantemente l’ex campione nelle pratiche illegali, accuratamente
dettagliate durante gli interrogatori. Ovviamente, il contenuto
dell’incontro della Crow coi federali è top secret, anche se nè
l’agente speciale Jeff Novitzky della Food and Drug Administration né,
tantomeno, gli avvocati di Armstrong o della stessa cantante hanno
voluto confermare alla stampa che sia mai avvenuto. Nei tre anni della
loro relazione, la Crow ha soggiornato spesso nell’appartamento di
Armstrong a Girona, in Spagna, che gli ex compagni Hamilton e Landis
hanno definito una sorta «di centrale di distribuzione delle sostanze
dopanti», mentre i jet privati usati dalla coppia per gli spostamenti
avrebbero avuto – sempre secondo i due accusatori – «un ruolo chiave
nella strategia del doping». Malgrado nel 2005 lui le avesse chiesto di
sposarla, con tanto di romantica proposta a bordo di una barca su un
lago dell’Ohio, all’inizio del 2006 la Crow ed Armstrong si mollarono,
rimanendo però in ottimi rapporti (o almeno così recitano le riviste di
gossip): due settimane dopo la rottura, la cantante rivelò al mondo di
avere un cancro al seno, da cui è guarita grazie ad un’operazione e alla radioterapia,
mentre è dello scorso giugno la notizia del tumore al cervello (di
natura benigna), diagnosticatole dopo aver dimenticato le parole di una
delle sue canzoni durante un concerto in Florida.
da http://www.corriere.it a firma Simona Marchetti
L’hanno obbligata a cantare, ma questa volta Sheryl Crow ne avrebbe
fatto volentieri a meno, perché la sua testimonianza è andata ad
ingrossare il già voluminoso fascicolo che l’Agenzia Antidoping
statunitense (Usada) aveva aperto contro il suo ex, Lance Armstrong,
accusato di doping e per il quale si prospetta la revoca delle 7 storiche vittorie al Tour de France e la squalifica a vita, dopo la sua volontaria rinuncia a difendersi. Come riporta il Daily News,
a rivelare il coinvolgimento della cantante - fidanzata dal 2003 al
2006 con il campione di ciclismo, che per lei lasciò la moglie Kristin
– sarebbe stato Tyler Hamilton (ex compagno di squadra di Armstrong
nella Us Postal) in “The Secret Race”, libro scritto con Daniel Coyle
(già autore di “Lance Armstrong’s War” del 2005, nel quale si parlava
della presenza del medico italiano Michele Ferrari nell’entourage del
ciclista e delle preoccupazioni di quest’ultimo per la “distrazione”
causata dalla Crow alla sua preparazione).
IL VOLUME - Nel libro, uscito mercoledì scorso negli Usa,
vengono descritte le pratiche doping e il modo in cui venivano nascoste
e in una nota Hamilton riporta le confidenze di una non meglio
precisata «fonte vicina alle indagini», secondo la quale la Crow
sarebbe stata chiamata a testimoniare davanti ai federali alla fine
dell’anno scorso, ovvero non molte settimane prima che a febbraio
l’ufficio del procuratore di Los Angeles annunciasse la sospensione
dell’indagine contro Armstrong. Che però è rimasto nel mirino
dell’Usada, che infatti è convinta di avere prove schiaccianti
riguardanti l’uso sistematico a partire dal 1996 di sostanze proibite
(compresi Epo e steroidi) da parte del 40enne ciclista americano,
ritiratosi definitivamente dalle gare nel 2011. Non solo.
L'INCONTRO - A detta degli agenti dell’antidoping, oltre 10 ciclisti, fra cui i compagni di squadra Hamilton e Floyd Landis (che nel maggio del 2010 accusò Armstrong di averlo aiutato a doparsi in una serie di mail inviate all’Uci)
avrebbero aiutato a sostenere le tesi accusatorie, coinvolgendo
pesantemente l’ex campione nelle pratiche illegali, accuratamente
dettagliate durante gli interrogatori. Ovviamente, il contenuto
dell’incontro della Crow coi federali è top secret, anche se nè
l’agente speciale Jeff Novitzky della Food and Drug Administration né,
tantomeno, gli avvocati di Armstrong o della stessa cantante hanno
voluto confermare alla stampa che sia mai avvenuto. Nei tre anni della
loro relazione, la Crow ha soggiornato spesso nell’appartamento di
Armstrong a Girona, in Spagna, che gli ex compagni Hamilton e Landis
hanno definito una sorta «di centrale di distribuzione delle sostanze
dopanti», mentre i jet privati usati dalla coppia per gli spostamenti
avrebbero avuto – sempre secondo i due accusatori – «un ruolo chiave
nella strategia del doping». Malgrado nel 2005 lui le avesse chiesto di
sposarla, con tanto di romantica proposta a bordo di una barca su un
lago dell’Ohio, all’inizio del 2006 la Crow ed Armstrong si mollarono,
rimanendo però in ottimi rapporti (o almeno così recitano le riviste di
gossip): due settimane dopo la rottura, la cantante rivelò al mondo di
avere un cancro al seno, da cui è guarita grazie ad un’operazione e alla radioterapia,
mentre è dello scorso giugno la notizia del tumore al cervello (di
natura benigna), diagnosticatole dopo aver dimenticato le parole di una
delle sue canzoni durante un concerto in Florida.
da http://www.corriere.it a firma Simona Marchetti
Utente(i) che stanno guardando questa discussione: 1 Ospite(i)
