Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.VT Biker
07-27-07, 12:55 PM
OK - so contrary to his official travel itinerary, he was in Italy, missed out of competition doping controls, did not revise his travel locations in the manner required, tried to cover it up, and rode the best TT of his life. That's still all smoke, and could be explained by him just being negligent, committing an administrative error, and riding the TT of his life, not necessarily him doping. The mountain stages he rode - we've seen him do that before.
I've still got to think (and I hope) that Rabobank has more info. than what has been issued for public consumption, and that the info includes him actually admitting to doping or failing some type of control. An administrative error does not equal doping.
All said, I believe Ras has been doping for years, but I dont think a fair burden of proof has been achieved in this circumstance.
MCcatV:
with all due respect, at some point, we cannot continue to let the riders use the "idiot" card when something suspcisious pops up. Yes, we do not have that magical photo of Rassy doping. But as Stapleton of T-Mobile has said, if doping controls are restricted to only absolute positive beyond a reasonable doubt evidence, kiss doping controls goodbye.
Here is a great analogy.
I am an auditor. As part of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct General Standards, I need to be Independent of my clients in both FACT and APPEARANCE. This restricts me in terms of investment options, insurance holding options, car loans you name it. Do I complain? No, it comes with my job. And guess what, if I do breach this, I will be punished. I cannot state that I was being stupid, and try to prove I was still independent. My firm as well as the AICPA will justly state that since they cannot prove one way or the other in FACT, the Appearance is still enough for either dismissal and being stripped of my license.
It seems to me this can apply to cyclists as well. In order for a cyclist to ride, they need to be clean in both FACT and APPEARANCE, for the slightest doubt as to someone's performance reduces the credibility of the sport. Why is this standard so difficult for cyclists, when many, many other people around the world are held to this same standard?
I've still got to think (and I hope) that Rabobank has more info. than what has been issued for public consumption, and that the info includes him actually admitting to doping or failing some type of control. An administrative error does not equal doping.
All said, I believe Ras has been doping for years, but I dont think a fair burden of proof has been achieved in this circumstance.
MCcatV:
with all due respect, at some point, we cannot continue to let the riders use the "idiot" card when something suspcisious pops up. Yes, we do not have that magical photo of Rassy doping. But as Stapleton of T-Mobile has said, if doping controls are restricted to only absolute positive beyond a reasonable doubt evidence, kiss doping controls goodbye.
Here is a great analogy.
I am an auditor. As part of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct General Standards, I need to be Independent of my clients in both FACT and APPEARANCE. This restricts me in terms of investment options, insurance holding options, car loans you name it. Do I complain? No, it comes with my job. And guess what, if I do breach this, I will be punished. I cannot state that I was being stupid, and try to prove I was still independent. My firm as well as the AICPA will justly state that since they cannot prove one way or the other in FACT, the Appearance is still enough for either dismissal and being stripped of my license.
It seems to me this can apply to cyclists as well. In order for a cyclist to ride, they need to be clean in both FACT and APPEARANCE, for the slightest doubt as to someone's performance reduces the credibility of the sport. Why is this standard so difficult for cyclists, when many, many other people around the world are held to this same standard?