There’s so much to think about here. Alberto can appeal, firstly. Or he can cop it sweet and have another rest year. Or he could just retire. It also opens up a spot for an unemployed rider or 2 in Bjarne‘s team. And it presumably moves Andy Schleck up a place into the winner’s spot of the 2010 Tour. He’ll really want to win this year to prove himself. And with no Contador it opens up the 2011 season once again. All very bizarre.
It’s a tough enough sport anyway without this constant revisionism. Whilst a level playing field is ideal – as a rider myself the concept of “fairplay” makes a lot of sense – this is terrible price to pay for what I described earlier as a homeopathic dose of a drug that may in fact do very little. Sadly there also remains a chance that Contador took it unknowingly, as much as we may like to think we’ve just brought down another cheat. Either way, rules are rules.
SBS: Cycling Central : Contador one-year ban is offiicial
“Alberto Contador has received today a notification of one year ban proposal by the Competition Committee of the Spanish Federation,” said the spokesperson.
“Therefore, together with Bjarne Riis (director of his team Saxo Bank), a Press Conference will be held next Friday, January 28, at 16:00 hours (2am AEDT, Saturday), at the Hotel Son Net in Palma de Mallorca, to express their opinion about this case.”
Contador To Receive One-year Ban For Clenbuterol Positive | Cyclingnews.com
Contador tested positive for a low level of the banned substance Clenbuterol during the 2010 Tour de France’s second rest day in Pau. He claimed the adverse finding was the result of contaminated meat. He was provisionally suspended by the UCI in September after the announcement of the test results was made.
No-one really expected Tasmanian Richie Porte to go Top-10 in his first Grand Tour, let alone collect best young rider along the way. No-one really expected him to wear the leader’s jersey, either. Not in his first GT, let alone first Giro. But he did. And I’m betting he signed up with Team Saxo Bank for a relative pittance. Whilst I’m sure he got some bonuses out of his performances in 2010 and Riis is certainly right – there is a contract and it was Riis who took the initial risk, and that matters too – it’s no surprise the guy wants a bit more now, is it?
This sort of public response by Riis is understandable but doesn’t foster loyalty and team cohesion, does it? Ahhh, but there’s right and wrong on both sides… and as the cliche goes, time will tell.
Bjarne Riis puts foot down: Richie Porte stays
“It’s a huge problem in the sport, and this year it has gone berserk. The agents are running around and shop with all sorts or teams, and it’s not just us who have these problems. It must stop now, it’s unacceptable. The agents bring ideas into the minds of young riders by putting figures in their minds that are completely unrealistic.”
Filed under Porte, Riis by Rob.
No-one really expected Tasmanian Richie Porte to go Top-10 in his first Grand Tour, let alone collect best young rider along the way. No-one really expected him to wear the leader’s jersey, either. Not in his first GT, let alone first Giro. But he did. And I’m betting he signed up with Team Saxo Bank for a relative pittance. Whilst I’m sure he got some bonuses out of his performances in 2010 and Riis is certainly right – there is a contract and it was Riis who took the initial risk, and that matters too – it’s no surprise the guy wants a bit more now, is it?
This sort of public response by Riis is understandable but doesn’t foster loyalty and team cohesion, does it? Ahhh, but there’s right and wrong on both sides… and as the cliche goes, time will tell.
Bjarne Riis puts foot down: Richie Porte stays
“It’s a huge problem in the sport, and this year it has gone berserk. The agents are running around and shop with all sorts or teams, and it’s not just us who have these problems. It must stop now, it’s unacceptable. The agents bring ideas into the minds of young riders by putting figures in their minds that are completely unrealistic.”
Filed under Porte, Riis by Rob.
Seems a bit farcical, pro bike riders – adults at that – have a quiet drink and are back a bit later than you’d expect for athletes participating in a major stage race. Yes, they must have known they were breaking team rules, but it’s their swansong with the team and things are a bit more casual than in the recent past. Crucially they bump into their boss at another bar whilst coming back to their digs. With Andy I can understand it – young, out for a laugh with no real pressure on him in this race – and with one eye on 2011 and his new team – but it’s hard to imagine a seasoned pro like O’Grady breaking team rules, especially during a Grand Tour… it’s a bit, umm, rebellious? Has Riis simply had enough from these admitted defectors?
Vuelta A España: Stage 10, Route Maps & Results | Cyclingnews.com
The major news on the start line was Bjarne Riis’ decision to send Andy Schleck and Stuart O’Grady home from the Vuelta for breaking team rules by drinking alcohol after dinner the previous night. Once the racing the started, however, the remainder of the peloton showed no signs of a post-rest day hangover as it covered 47 kilometres in a hyperactive first hour of racing.
UPDATED Andy Schleck, O’Grady Removed From Vuelta | Cyclingnews.com
“I acknowledge that I have broken a rule on the team by going out for a drink after dinner and for that reason Bjarne has decided to send myself and Stuart O’Grady home.
“I’m responsible for my actions and even though I think it is too harsh a decision, I respect that Bjarne is the boss and he needs to do what he thinks is the best.
“I was getting back into shape and I would really have liked to stay at the Vuelta and help Frank and the rest of Team Saxo Bank.”
UPDATED Andy Schleck, O’Grady Removed From Vuelta | Cyclingnews.com
Both Schleck brothers are leaving the Danish team at the end of this season, to join a new Luxembourg team being organised by Brian Nygaard and Kim Andersen. O’Grady is also leaving Saxo Bank and is said to be joining the new team.
PezCycling News – What’s Cool In Pro Cycling
Over the Cat 1 Rat Penat climb, which hit the riders at 142km and averaged 12.5 %, all the usual GC suspects were there except for Andy Schleck, who along with Stuart O’Grady was sent home from the Vuelta for getting caught going out for a drink after dinner last night. Odd to think Bjarne would be so harsh on these two, but we suppose rules are rules. But….really? So Frank was alone with the other climbers. The climb had taken its toll on everyone, and also everyone in the break, but that group reformed over the top.
Saxo Bank drops Stuart O’Grady and Andy Schleck from Tour of Spain | The Australian
“Mate, we stepped out of the team hotel at 10pm and stopped for a couple of beers at a bar in the local piazza,” O’Grady said.
“We had two beers, that’s all. Some members of the European press over here have made us sound like we were on the drink all night.
“That’s simply not true.
“We had just ridden our guts out in the team time trial. I don’t want to sound like I’m whinging, but the decision to pull us out of the race was harsh,” the South Australian added.
“The decision has cost me two weeks of hard racing preparing for the worlds in Geelong.
“ I guess it means that I can bring the family home a little earlier than expected.
“It also means I’ve ridden my last race for Saxo Bank. This is not the way I would have wanted my career racing for Bjarne Riis to end. I’ve ridden my guts out on the front for the team for the last six seasons.”
O’Grady has been linked to a move riding alongside the Schleck brothers at Team Luxembourg next season to be run by former Riis staffers Brian Nygaard and Kim Andersen.
“I’ll make an announcement where I’m going next year in a week,” he added.
Andy Schleck and Stuart O’Grady out of Vuelta for ‘violation of team’s rules’
Schleck was contacted by Sporten.dk, and said that the reason they were excluded was due to going for drinks yesterday night.
“The fact is that on the rest day yesterday, we chose to go out after eating late dinner, which people do in Spain,” he said. “We had no more than two beers each, then we went home at 1 o’clock and met Bjarne who was sitting at another bar.”
Seems a bit farcical, pro bike riders – adults at that – have a quiet drink and are back a bit later than you’d expect for athletes participating in a major stage race. Yes, they must have known they were breaking team rules, but it’s their swansong with the team and things are a bit more casual than in the recent past. Crucially they bump into their boss at another bar whilst coming back to their digs. With Andy I can understand it – young, out for a laugh with no real pressure on him in this race – and with one eye on 2011 and his new team – but it’s hard to imagine a seasoned pro like O’Grady breaking team rules, especially during a Grand Tour… it’s a bit, umm, rebellious? Has Riis simply had enough from these admitted defectors?
Vuelta A España: Stage 10, Route Maps & Results | Cyclingnews.com
The major news on the start line was Bjarne Riis’ decision to send Andy Schleck and Stuart O’Grady home from the Vuelta for breaking team rules by drinking alcohol after dinner the previous night. Once the racing the started, however, the remainder of the peloton showed no signs of a post-rest day hangover as it covered 47 kilometres in a hyperactive first hour of racing.
UPDATED Andy Schleck, O’Grady Removed From Vuelta | Cyclingnews.com
“I acknowledge that I have broken a rule on the team by going out for a drink after dinner and for that reason Bjarne has decided to send myself and Stuart O’Grady home.
“I’m responsible for my actions and even though I think it is too harsh a decision, I respect that Bjarne is the boss and he needs to do what he thinks is the best.
“I was getting back into shape and I would really have liked to stay at the Vuelta and help Frank and the rest of Team Saxo Bank.”
UPDATED Andy Schleck, O’Grady Removed From Vuelta | Cyclingnews.com
Both Schleck brothers are leaving the Danish team at the end of this season, to join a new Luxembourg team being organised by Brian Nygaard and Kim Andersen. O’Grady is also leaving Saxo Bank and is said to be joining the new team.
PezCycling News – What’s Cool In Pro Cycling
Over the Cat 1 Rat Penat climb, which hit the riders at 142km and averaged 12.5 %, all the usual GC suspects were there except for Andy Schleck, who along with Stuart O’Grady was sent home from the Vuelta for getting caught going out for a drink after dinner last night. Odd to think Bjarne would be so harsh on these two, but we suppose rules are rules. But….really? So Frank was alone with the other climbers. The climb had taken its toll on everyone, and also everyone in the break, but that group reformed over the top.
Saxo Bank drops Stuart O’Grady and Andy Schleck from Tour of Spain | The Australian
“Mate, we stepped out of the team hotel at 10pm and stopped for a couple of beers at a bar in the local piazza,” O’Grady said.
“We had two beers, that’s all. Some members of the European press over here have made us sound like we were on the drink all night.
“That’s simply not true.
“We had just ridden our guts out in the team time trial. I don’t want to sound like I’m whinging, but the decision to pull us out of the race was harsh,” the South Australian added.
“The decision has cost me two weeks of hard racing preparing for the worlds in Geelong.
“ I guess it means that I can bring the family home a little earlier than expected.
“It also means I’ve ridden my last race for Saxo Bank. This is not the way I would have wanted my career racing for Bjarne Riis to end. I’ve ridden my guts out on the front for the team for the last six seasons.”
O’Grady has been linked to a move riding alongside the Schleck brothers at Team Luxembourg next season to be run by former Riis staffers Brian Nygaard and Kim Andersen.
“I’ll make an announcement where I’m going next year in a week,” he added.
Andy Schleck and Stuart O’Grady out of Vuelta for ‘violation of team’s rules’
Schleck was contacted by Sporten.dk, and said that the reason they were excluded was due to going for drinks yesterday night.
“The fact is that on the rest day yesterday, we chose to go out after eating late dinner, which people do in Spain,” he said. “We had no more than two beers each, then we went home at 1 o’clock and met Bjarne who was sitting at another bar.”
Riis is a bit biased in this, and he does make a good point about the timing of Cancellara’s attack – but what was Boonen to do? He had already attacked on the cobbles to thin the lead bunch out, and he had softened a few legs. But he had to rest at some point, regather his energy, have a bite to eat. Cancellara had only to follow his wheel, match his attacks and wait for the moment. Which he did.
And when the break was made, Boonen was down the back of an elite bunch. He would have expected someone else to chase Cancellara, but of course they didn’t. Not with commitment anyway. And why should they tow sprinters like Hushovd and Boonen to the line, anyway? So there you have it – Boonen needed a rest after doing a lot of legwork, and noone was going to tow the others back to Cancellara. So Boonen was trapped. Had he been more alert and closer to Cancellara he may well have responded and brought him back, but he had already done too much.
And if he’d done nothing?
Riis Reveals The Secret Of Cancellara’s Roubaix Attack | Cyclingnews.com
“Boonen is strong but Cancellara is better. He’s great,” he said with total admiration.
“Boonen made mistakes during the race. How many? Two can be too many. I think if you want to win this race you have to stay calm, relaxed and not stressed. Then go when you have to go.
“The problem for the others is that Fabian goes fast, even on his own. We know that and it’s a bonus to have. We know he can go from far away, too, so we use this as part of our strategy. Not many riders can do that.”
Riis is a bit biased in this, and he does make a good point about the timing of Cancellara’s attack – but what was Boonen to do? He had already attacked on the cobbles to thin the lead bunch out, and he had softened a few legs. But he had to rest at some point, regather his energy, have a bite to eat. Cancellara had only to follow his wheel, match his attacks and wait for the moment. Which he did.
And when the break was made, Boonen was down the back of an elite bunch. He would have expected someone else to chase Cancellara, but of course they didn’t. Not with commitment anyway. And why should they tow sprinters like Hushovd and Boonen to the line, anyway? So there you have it – Boonen needed a rest after doing a lot of legwork, and noone was going to tow the others back to Cancellara. So Boonen was trapped. Had he been more alert and closer to Cancellara he may well have responded and brought him back, but he had already done too much.
And if he’d done nothing?
Riis Reveals The Secret Of Cancellara’s Roubaix Attack | Cyclingnews.com
“Boonen is strong but Cancellara is better. He’s great,” he said with total admiration.
“Boonen made mistakes during the race. How many? Two can be too many. I think if you want to win this race you have to stay calm, relaxed and not stressed. Then go when you have to go.
“The problem for the others is that Fabian goes fast, even on his own. We know that and it’s a bonus to have. We know he can go from far away, too, so we use this as part of our strategy. Not many riders can do that.”
Andy is worried about bad press: “I am frightened that we will not be presented in the press in the same light as before,” he said, noting that two months ago it was rumoured that five CSC riders had tested positive during the Tour de France. Those rumours have been laid to rest, but “there have never been any apologies for the reports,” Schleck told sportwereld.nl.
OK Andy, I’m sorry I even mentioned the rumours. Hang on, the rumours weren’t really about Andy, they were fairly broad-brush affairs that tainted just about anyone who rode out of their skin, or pulled out of the Worlds. And the Schlecks themselves came into it because of father Schleck’s car being searched during Le Tour – which was just one of those things that starts people thinking and talking, but was discounted quickly as random. Then we had Frank and Andy doing so well in Le Tour itself, which also sets tongues wagging in a normal fashion, but not necessarily in a bad way. But then we had Frank admitting that he paid a doctor he didn’t even know for some training advice he didn’t really need. Well that was sloppy, and we can’t really not talk about it, can we? That was brought about by brother Frank himself.
Now if Frank hadn’t been so sloppy we may not have even thought about the car search again (and nothing was found, let me add). And if Frank’s riding hadn’t been so good, when he previously wasn’t so flash, maybe we wouldn’t have thought any more about it. And if they weren’t brothers, and Riis wasn’t a Tour winner and admitted doper maybe – just maybe – we wouldn’t have even wondered about any of this. But Riis will always have a cloud over his head – just as surely as he gets a huge dose of respect, both for his riding and management as well as his courage in admitting the truth.
In any event it appears that we have caught all of the dopers we are going to get from the 2008 Tour, and that case is closed. So the riders who rode under the cloud of suspicion, and those who pulled out of subsequent races like the Worlds, are indeed presumed innocent. If they truly are innocent, as we think or hope they are, then they also have to be innocent – or naive – to think that riding for Riis is going to be plain sailing. That cloud is there, the topic has been raised and it’s out there forever. It’s a shame, but it’s human to look at the dark side and imagine the abyss, to expect the worst.
We shouldn’t apologise for being human, for speculating and wondering; but we should also accept the truth as we know it. For now, Frank is in doubt and has to do some explaining; for the rest of them, they have no known case to answer. But they can’t expect us not to wonder.
Andy is worried about bad press: “I am frightened that we will not be presented in the press in the same light as before,” he said, noting that two months ago it was rumoured that five CSC riders had tested positive during the Tour de France. Those rumours have been laid to rest, but “there have never been any apologies for the reports,” Schleck told sportwereld.nl.
OK Andy, I’m sorry I even mentioned the rumours. Hang on, the rumours weren’t really about Andy, they were fairly broad-brush affairs that tainted just about anyone who rode out of their skin, or pulled out of the Worlds. And the Schlecks themselves came into it because of father Schleck’s car being searched during Le Tour – which was just one of those things that starts people thinking and talking, but was discounted quickly as random. Then we had Frank and Andy doing so well in Le Tour itself, which also sets tongues wagging in a normal fashion, but not necessarily in a bad way. But then we had Frank admitting that he paid a doctor he didn’t even know for some training advice he didn’t really need. Well that was sloppy, and we can’t really not talk about it, can we? That was brought about by brother Frank himself.
Now if Frank hadn’t been so sloppy we may not have even thought about the car search again (and nothing was found, let me add). And if Frank’s riding hadn’t been so good, when he previously wasn’t so flash, maybe we wouldn’t have thought any more about it. And if they weren’t brothers, and Riis wasn’t a Tour winner and admitted doper maybe – just maybe – we wouldn’t have even wondered about any of this. But Riis will always have a cloud over his head – just as surely as he gets a huge dose of respect, both for his riding and management as well as his courage in admitting the truth.
In any event it appears that we have caught all of the dopers we are going to get from the 2008 Tour, and that case is closed. So the riders who rode under the cloud of suspicion, and those who pulled out of subsequent races like the Worlds, are indeed presumed innocent. If they truly are innocent, as we think or hope they are, then they also have to be innocent – or naive – to think that riding for Riis is going to be plain sailing. That cloud is there, the topic has been raised and it’s out there forever. It’s a shame, but it’s human to look at the dark side and imagine the abyss, to expect the worst.
We shouldn’t apologise for being human, for speculating and wondering; but we should also accept the truth as we know it. For now, Frank is in doubt and has to do some explaining; for the rest of them, they have no known case to answer. But they can’t expect us not to wonder.
It’s easy. Struggle a bit in your races, maybe no more than any other neo-pro, but have a kindly dealer handy to tempt you to ‘try this’. When you take the pills and they seem to work, well, it’s a done deal. I mean if they didn’t work you’d stay clean, yes? But they do work and you go faster. Jorg confirms this theory: Jörg Jaksche was 19 years old and not performing at all well in his first pro year, when he got a suggestion as to how to save his career. “The team manager came into my room and said: Listen; in cycling you take drugs like this, and either you accept or you leave the sport,” Jaksche told the anti-doping conference “Play the Game” in Iceland.
Of course you could say it was weakness that sucked him in. There are times when you have to choose between good and bad, and it’s your decision and your personal responsibility. Bjarne Riis appears to believe in that: “Furthermore, that this is supposed to have been a threat is definitely insulting and tells me that Jaksche either has a very bad sense of memory or deliberately chooses to twist the truth. It is correct that I told him about how difficult it would be to come back, and I was speaking from experience here, since I had been through the same only a short time before. That Jaksche still blames all sorts of other people for the mistakes he made himself is just so trivial. It is necessary that the problems in cycling are taken care of, and that’s what I stand for.”
Filed under Jaksche, Riis by Rob.
It’s easy. Struggle a bit in your races, maybe no more than any other neo-pro, but have a kindly dealer handy to tempt you to ‘try this’. When you take the pills and they seem to work, well, it’s a done deal. I mean if they didn’t work you’d stay clean, yes? But they do work and you go faster. Jorg confirms this theory: Jörg Jaksche was 19 years old and not performing at all well in his first pro year, when he got a suggestion as to how to save his career. “The team manager came into my room and said: Listen; in cycling you take drugs like this, and either you accept or you leave the sport,” Jaksche told the anti-doping conference “Play the Game” in Iceland.
Of course you could say it was weakness that sucked him in. There are times when you have to choose between good and bad, and it’s your decision and your personal responsibility. Bjarne Riis appears to believe in that: “Furthermore, that this is supposed to have been a threat is definitely insulting and tells me that Jaksche either has a very bad sense of memory or deliberately chooses to twist the truth. It is correct that I told him about how difficult it would be to come back, and I was speaking from experience here, since I had been through the same only a short time before. That Jaksche still blames all sorts of other people for the mistakes he made himself is just so trivial. It is necessary that the problems in cycling are taken care of, and that’s what I stand for.”
Filed under Jaksche, Riis by Rob.
OK, no-one is seriously surprised that Riis doped in ’96 to win the Tour, are they? He didn’t have to come clean, but he – like Zabel and Aldag – at least have the decency to admit their mistakes. The problem now is who should be declared winner of ’96? Ullrich was 2nd, and although he hasn’t admitted anything it would be a brave TdF organisation that would declare Ullrich the winner, surely.
OK, no-one is seriously surprised that Riis doped in ’96 to win the Tour, are they? He didn’t have to come clean, but he – like Zabel and Aldag – at least have the decency to admit their mistakes. The problem now is who should be declared winner of ’96? Ullrich was 2nd, and although he hasn’t admitted anything it would be a brave TdF organisation that would declare Ullrich the winner, surely.
Interesting report in Cyclingnews today…about Bjarne Riis and allegations about EPO and other drug use in 1996… now I won’t say what I don’t know but Riis did do very well that year (especially in Le Tour) and held his young lieutenant (Ullrich) back in 2nd place. Riis was 7th the following year (Ullrich 1st) and retired shortly thereafter, I recall, having never reached the top step again; although his more recent days as team CSC boss has brought some vicarious podium glory. Riis had a string of high placings previously, including back in the Indurain days.
Anyway, here’s the piece from CN… can you tell me what he (reportedly) didn’t say?
Riis responds to doping allegations
Team CSC boss Bjarne Riis has brushed off allegations from former Team Telekom soigneur Jef D’hondt that he used EPO and other doping products to win the 1996 Tour de France. The allegations were made on Belgian TV program Panorama on Sunday evening and claimed, among other things, that “Riis had a hematocrit of 64 at one time during the Tour,” caused by the use of EPO.
“I have never had a particularly close relation with Jef D’hondt and he has no validation for the allegations he is making,” said Riis in a statement released on Monday evening. “There will always be someone out there trying to make money by talking about the past and in my opinion that is probably what he is trying to do here.
“This is probably not the first nor the last time these kinds of stories surface,” he continued. “To me, it’s all in the past and I do not wish to be held accountable every time someone finds it interesting to bring up some ten-year-old story. I truly believe the future is much more important than the past. I want to be judged on the work I’m doing with my team today, and the results we achieve – that is what’s important to me.”
Interesting report in Cyclingnews today…about Bjarne Riis and allegations about EPO and other drug use in 1996… now I won’t say what I don’t know but Riis did do very well that year (especially in Le Tour) and held his young lieutenant (Ullrich) back in 2nd place. Riis was 7th the following year (Ullrich 1st) and retired shortly thereafter, I recall, having never reached the top step again; although his more recent days as team CSC boss has brought some vicarious podium glory. Riis had a string of high placings previously, including back in the Indurain days.
Anyway, here’s the piece from CN… can you tell me what he (reportedly) didn’t say?
Riis responds to doping allegations
Team CSC boss Bjarne Riis has brushed off allegations from former Team Telekom soigneur Jef D’hondt that he used EPO and other doping products to win the 1996 Tour de France. The allegations were made on Belgian TV program Panorama on Sunday evening and claimed, among other things, that “Riis had a hematocrit of 64 at one time during the Tour,” caused by the use of EPO.
“I have never had a particularly close relation with Jef D’hondt and he has no validation for the allegations he is making,” said Riis in a statement released on Monday evening. “There will always be someone out there trying to make money by talking about the past and in my opinion that is probably what he is trying to do here.
“This is probably not the first nor the last time these kinds of stories surface,” he continued. “To me, it’s all in the past and I do not wish to be held accountable every time someone finds it interesting to bring up some ten-year-old story. I truly believe the future is much more important than the past. I want to be judged on the work I’m doing with my team today, and the results we achieve – that is what’s important to me.”
|
|
