Weird things going on at Europcar?

[Andrew Steer]

Two riders with low cortisol levels in the last year? Seems very fishy to me...

 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/rolland-stopped-by-french-health-test

 

Thoughts?

[jcza]

Could be indication of cortizone doping but generally its a "health" check and riders must be withdrawn. However, Europcar continued the Dauphine and now they should withdraw from next race, which is of course TdF in term of MPCC.

 

Similar thing happened at AG2R prior to Dauphine and they withdrew.

Edited June 11, 2013 by jcza

[jcza]

More here

 

Yesterday’s news from L’Equipe.fr that Pierre Rolland should not have started the final stage of the Dauphiné has caused an obvious fuss for French cycling featuring a big name, being weeks from the Tour de France and, like it or not, bringing the suspicion of dopage.

 

The first thing to note is that this is not an anti-doping measure. Instead it is for health reasons and if Rolland is not enjoying the headlines the silver lining is that he’s now able to rest and recover from a potential health scare.

[jcza]

The MPCC is the movement for Credible Cycling and teams will withdraw themselves from races when riders are positve.

 

EDIT: From the 'rules'

 

A team will suspend itself from racing following two positive anti-doping tests. The rules on this get complicated but the principal of “self-suspension” and collective punishment are there.

 

And this is why Europcar is in trouble now. They are claiming the MPCC doctor said Rolland is ok but the doctor denies this.

Edited June 11, 2013 by jcza

[Brett]

interesting. I dont know enough about this sort of thing so its good reading. shot

[jcza]

Here is more from Inner Ring

 

Joining a club is the easy bit but adhering to the rules is the hard bit. The MPCC is a voluntary club, a village cycling club can apply for membership. But the test of a voluntary code is not signing up to it, it is sticking to it when the going gets tough.

 

For starters the self-suspension idea sounds good but it’s inherently unfair. Imagine you ride for a team and are just coming peak form when you learn three of your team mates have been caught doping. You never knew what they were doing but now you’re stopped from racing, punished for their mistakes and forced to idle whilst in peak condition. This can damage the careers of innocent riders.

 

But that example is hypothetical. My main concern is practical: if a team is caught out, will they sign up to to the rules and stop themselves from racing? When faced with a cheap rider on the jobs market coming back after a ban will they all reject the temptation to sign him? Take Frank Schleck. He’s banned for a year now meaning he cannot sign for a member team for two years. Will a team respect this code? We can speculate but let’s look at examples from the past…

 

The Basso Precedents

 

In the wake of the Puerto scandal, in October 2006 the AIGCP group of teams agreed not to sign riders who’d been been caught in the Puerto scandal. A month later the Discovery team announced it was signing Ivan Basso. The deal was premature as Basso was busted for working with Fuentes. But after other disagreements, the Discovery team left the AIGCP grouping.

 

Upon his return Basso was signed by the Liquigas team which again broke the AIGCP code. The team manager, now at Cannondale told La Gazzetta Dello Sport “I broke the agreement because a person was showing and has shown their credibility as a man and as a champion. Basso was a unique and exceptional case” which, however you put, it is a weasel-excuse to break the rules.

 

The Lampre Precedent

 

The UCI tried a new rule that said if a team had three anti-doping offences in one year then it should be suspended. It sounded right, after all three problems in one season sounds like a problem. Only in 2010 Lampre had three cases… but did not stop racing. Once again a rule that sounded good was not upheld when tested.

[jcza]

And some more

 

Nazi grammatique

 

Finally a quick word on linguistics. The French slogan is “Le Dopage, ça suffit!” which literally translates as “Doping, That’s Enough!” and the MPCC has adopted this literal sense for its wristbands and logos. It’s slightly ambiguous and you need the comma otherwise it sounds like “Doping That’s Enough… to win a grand tour” etc.

 

Conclusion

A better grip on communications, whether ambiguous slogans or ideas of Armstrong lawsuits would help but the risks are more fundamental. The MPCC could prove to be a paper tiger that gets shredded by dissent amongst the teams. There’s precedent too as the Basso and Lampre cases show, it’s one thing to have rules but another to make teams hold to them when things go wrong.

 

A voluntary code of conduct is only as good as its weakest member and history suggests the MPCC’s peloton of teams can fragment when the road gets rough. You can don a blue wristband when it helps but discard it when it’s inconvenient. Still this is where the likes of ASO and RCS come in. They’ve signed up to support the MPCC and could give it the structural backbone needed where they’d reject teams that fall fowl of the MPCC rules. But that’s a step away and would require the UCI to approve and the UCI wants to set its own rules. So for now the MPCC can only lobby and hope the UCI, as ever, plays catch-up.

 

So wonky PR aside this is a noble idea and the MPCC has helped as a forum to achieve real change in the sport. It didn’t get the no-needles policy but it was the catalyst. You wonder why the likes of Omega Pharma-Quickstep, BMC or Sky have yet to sign to up? It doesn’t cost much.

[jcza]

The MPCC bracelet (easy to put on, easy to remove)

Edited June 11, 2013 by jcza

[DIPSLICK]

got a bit of time on your hands today OOM

[DIPSLICK]

not AS COOL AS MY LIVESTRONG :whistling: :devil:

[jcza]

got a bit of time on your hands today OOM

 

Errrrr............not really but International Cycling interests me

[jcza]

not AS COOL AS MY LIVESTRONG :whistling: :devil:

[DIPSLICK]

BWHAAAAA

[Andrew Steer]

What also really worries me is the different versions on the timing between the Team manager and the guy heading up the controls for the French Cycling federation... points to questionable ethics from a team manager, which always scares me.

 

Also agree 100% on the teams signing riders who were busted - sends out completely the wrong message. I always make a mental note where the dopers go after their bans

[jcza]

MPCC doctor calls team manager a liar. There was more than enough time. Test was at 6:45 and race started at 10:30. More to come I'm sure.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Surely the only question is "Why are his cortisol levels low" .?

 

Getting THAT answer will point to a way forward regarding all the other issues of should he ride, what the doctor said etc, to me anyway the chase is "WHY".