Tumbleweed Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Someone probably already tested positive, just going to take another 6 month before its made public. I asked the question earlier about the timing of the announcement. Does the CSA actually have a policy on when the announce test returns? Because there seems to be very little consistency.
Mntboy Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Agree with you, we need to create a society where cheating is out of the question. Not going to be easy but its a dream and anything's possible! But I believe having a proactive discussion on this matter is much better than keeping quiet for a start. Regarding notifying SAIDS about suspicious athletes: thats been done in many cases but unfortunately just being tested and returning a negative doesn't mean your clean... These guys are clever, ask Lance. But their opportunities are getting fewer really fast with the Biological passport system so there is hope!Matthys if you don't mind me asking but I'd like to know how often does SAIDS test you guys? And how easy is it for those Saffa's that want to cheat to do so? I figure that SAIDS might not necessarily have the funds to test as regularly as one would want especially the guys who've turned in suspicious performances on regular basis. And what has helped you deal with the moral and ethical dilemma you face with the choice to dope or not to dope? Basically how did you come to your decision of "I won't dope." Your answers could give clarity to the doping situation here in South Africa that you guys as professional athletes face.
jcza Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Look forward to the inevitable hand-wringing on SuperCycling. Cycling is ****** and the UCI is not fit to sort it out.
Mntboy Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 I asked the question earlier about the timing of the announcement. Does the CSA actually have a policy on when the announce test returns? Because there seems to be very little consistency.I think the timing is partly based on whether the athlete wants his/her B sample tested as well. Only once that result is available can they go ahead to announce the positive test and any action that is to happen, whether it's a suspension with a hearing or an out right banning of the athlete depending on what the sport's rules say. There may be other factors so please don't take my word as gospel but the above is my understanding concerning the testing procedure ito a positive result.
haasbroek Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 On a different note, by when will we know if his bust will cost another rider his spot in Rio? Apparently he can (will) get stripped of his points, causing SA to drop down from 11th to 15th ( not sure of exact position) which means we loose a rider slot.
Tumbleweed Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 I think the timing is partly based on whether the athlete wants his/her B sample tested as well. Only once that result is available can they go ahead to announce the positive test and any action that is to happen, whether it's a suspension with a hearing or an out right banning of the athlete depending on what the sport's rules say. There may be other factors so please take my word as gospel but the above is my understanding concerning the testing procedure ito a positive result. Yeah, I get that, and I spoke to some people over the weekend who had similar thoughts. But a positive dope result - or that adverse thingie - leads to an automatic provisional suspension. That's why I want to know if there is a policy, and where it can be read? And if it is always followed?
Mntboy Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Yeah, I get that, and I spoke to some people over the weekend who had similar thoughts. But a positive dope result - or that adverse thingie - leads to an automatic provisional suspension. That's why I want to know if there is a policy, and where it can be read? And if it is always followed?CSA should have a copy of their policy regarding doping which should also contain the procedure for testing and announcements regarding the results on their website. As should SAIDS. However I wouldn't be too surprised that these rules haven't always been properly followed by either CSA or SAIDS.
Guest Lancesball Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 CSA has nothing to do with the announcments as such. Its SAIDS who then falls under WADA code. You may not announce a positive after A sample as it was in the past. You now have to have A and B sample then allow the athlete to go through a process of defend etc and then once that is up announce it. CSA however are informed during this whole process but it is not directly their job to announce it. CSA in this whole case / process have F-up to monumental proportions which I would like to see how they spin this. Some people should look for new jobs in CSA after this mess.
milky4130 Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Ok so I was off the hub for a while & possibly missed this, can anyone please enlighten me how,why & when did CSA eff this one up? Thanks
Thor Buttox Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Ok so I was off the hub for a while & possibly missed this, can anyone please enlighten me how,why & when did CSA eff this one up? ThanksThey cleared him for having small syringes, a blood testing kit, etc, at the World Cup which is against WADA (?) in competition rules. He said it was for lancing saddle sores. Bit of a farce.
Tumbleweed Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Ok so I was off the hub for a while & possibly missed this, can anyone please enlighten me how,why & when did CSA eff this one up? Thanks In short: RC got caught with needles in his possession. He used them for bike maintenance/saddle sores. I think the CSA stuffed up by applying the rules regarding medical paraphernalia or something...
Guest Lancesball Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 In short: RC got caught with needles in his possession. He used them for bike maintenance/saddle sores. I think the CSA stuffed up by applying the rules regarding medical paraphernalia or something... A lot deeper than this.
Mntboy Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 CSA has nothing to do with the announcments as such. Its SAIDS who then falls under WADA code. You may not announce a positive after A sample as it was in the past. You now have to have A and B sample then allow the athlete to go through a process of defend etc and then once that is up announce it. CSA however are informed during this whole process but it is not directly their job to announce it. CSA in this whole case / process have F-up to monumental proportions which I would like to see how they spin this. Some people should look for new jobs in CSA after this mess.My understanding is that CSA requests that SAIDS test the athletes that are licensed by them for doping infractions and only from then on is CSA a spectator to the process. However wrt policy concerning doping and doping controls both should have very similar reading policy. The point of difference being that CSA should state in theirs that SAIDS is to take responsibility for testing and administration of the doping policy. We also shouldn't forget that SAIDS is also hamstrung by the speed and efficiency of the testing lab so that could've had an influence on the time it took for the announcement to take place. Another would be for the required role players to be informed which would also include the athlete.
Tumbleweed Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 A lot deeper than this. I did say: "in short"...
milky4130 Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 They cleared him for having small syringes, a blood testing kit, etc, at the World Cup which is against WADA (?) in competition rules. He said it was for lancing saddle sores. Bit of a farce. In short: RC got caught with needles in his possession. He used them for bike maintenance/saddle sores. I think the CSA stuffed up by applying the rules regarding medical paraphernalia or something... A lot deeper than this.Oh dear what a disaster.
tombeej Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 There is a more concerning question for the authorities to answer re. the timing and how CSA has handled it.... RC got bust for separate issues around the same time: Possession of needles & syringes just before the World Champs at the end of August. Bust for EPO at the same time (but news only came out now). So let's see those timelines again: End of August #1: SAIDS authorises its Spanish counterparts to conduct drug testing on the SA team training for the World Champs in Andorra. Croeser’s sample was found to contain Recombinant EPO. End of August #2: Just before these same World MTB Championships, Croeser was found to be in possession of needles & syringes after an apparent tip-off (I’d love to know who – a fellow teammate?) 8 October: Croeser is placed under provisional suspension for the EPO bust, but no public announcement made, as per protocol. 3 November: In the mean time CSA (and now with full knowledge of the yet-to-be-announced EPO bust) find him not guilty of contravening UCI Medical Rule for the needles & syringes. The CSA reasoning for the needles & syringes let-off: “In case a violation of article 13.3.052 occurs at a race, whereas the needle discovery was days before the race while the rider was training”. So they made this not guilty ruling, based on a tenuous technicality at best, knowing full well he’d already been pinned for EPO. The spotlight is on CSA right now.
.thumb.png.75d6381975d6e967f7f244707be5c209.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.