Top SA mountain biker tests positive for EPO

[Iwan Kemp]

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.

 

 

...Jeroen Swart has already comment on here that CSA's reasoning is nonsense.

[90 Inch]

CSA like most national federations don't have the will to clean it up. They know that other nations are either looking the other way, or as Russia did, actively helping the athletes. They know that we cant compete against nations that allow it. Some of the recent cases make one wonder if CSA are open not only to look the other way, but actively look for ways to cover up the result.  

 

As far as reporting doping goes, I have been there, I was told by an Ex world medallist that I would never get to his level unless I get with the program, he offered to introduce me to his Dr who was "looking after" a number of riders, explained how he never raced while he was doping, and as a Vet would never be tested out of comp. I reported to SAIDS and CSA, no reaction and the rider still pops up at nationals every now and then.

 

There are still too many loop holes, and the riders know how to use them.

 

1/ Riders are seldom subject to random testing outside their home country when on training camps, our riders go to Europe or the US, and European riders come to SA. As long as they don't race, they are not going to be tested as a rule. 

 

2/ Event organisers and not CSA are responsible for notifying and arranging dope control at events, and in many cases its not compulsory.

[jcza]

...Jeroen Swart has already comment on here that CSA's reasoning is nonsense.

 

Was it CSA or the SA Doping Control Commission? 

[Iwan Kemp]

Was it CSA or the SA Doping Control Commission? 

 

Have a look HERE and his answer to my question a little further down on the same page

[tombeej]

...Jeroen Swart has already comment on here that CSA's reasoning is nonsense.

 

Yes I know that, but that wasn't actually my point.

[Monark]

maybe the solution is to create a group that is allowed to use drugs? you can have group AA where anything goes....

 

That would be epic...

 

I would watch that...

[TheJ]

That your legacy comes down to this...

 

[raptor-22]

That already exists. Its called sub vets and Vets

[Pants Boy]

Just wondering (as always, and possibly stirring the teeniest bit):

What would be the difference if RC was found guilty of the needle thing VS the EPO use? Would being banned fro needles preclude him from being banned again for the EPO use? IE if he was banned for the needles they would not be able to ban him for the epo? As much as I agree with most that CSA is incompetent, could this offer an explanation?

[Gerry Hattrick]

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.  

SAIDS does the announcing and is constrained by processes required in terms of WADA regulations. These include whether the athlete wants to have his or her B sample tested and legal representations. Each case is inevitably different, hence the inconsistencies: Here's what the original SAIDS statement said: "The 2015 anti-doping rules only permit the public disclosure of the athlete’s name after the administrative period of confirmation and the opportunity to contest the charge has elapsed, hence the long period between the test result and the public disclosure."

[DJR]

.........

BTW Cool name you picked  It can be read in so many ways!

[Frosty]

2/ Event organisers and not CSA are responsible for notifying and arranging dope control at events, and in many cases its not compulsory.

In my experience, an event organiser only has to make provision for a place to test, i.e. a room with toilet facilities, with the request to test an athlete coming from SAIDS.

 

A start list must be handed to CSA and SAIDS from the organiser and the names to be tested are then given to CSA officials by SAIDS.

 

It's happened for the last 4 years at the race I'm with. A few pro's, 2 Vets (one who wasn't present after winning SA's and later bust), as well as a few woman this year.

[Danger Dassie]

SAIDS does the announcing and is constrained by processes required in terms of WADA regulations. These include whether the athlete wants to have his or her B sample tested and legal representations. Each case is inevitably different, hence the inconsistencies: Here's what the original SAIDS statement said: "The 2015 anti-doping rules only permit the public disclosure of the athlete’s name after the administrative period of confirmation and the opportunity to contest the charge has elapsed, hence the long period between the test result and the public disclosure."

 

That's applies to an announcement to the public only, it's doesn't cover informing the federation of the respective code. As soon as there's a positive the federation is informed or at least supposed to be. 

 

Tombeej summed it up perfectly in a earlier post.

[Danger Dassie]

 

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:

1. Possession of needles & syringes just before the World Champs at the end of August.
2. 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.

 

[Iwan Kemp]

Just wondering (as always, and possibly stirring the teeniest bit):

What would be the difference if RC was found guilty of the needle thing VS the EPO use? Would being banned fro needles preclude him from being banned again for the EPO use? IE if he was banned for the needles they would not be able to ban him for the epo? As much as I agree with most that CSA is incompetent, could this offer an explanation?

 

Possible, I think. He wasn't busted for doing drugs and then later for EPO. Being in possession of a syringe is illegal and you can be charged for it. Actually doing drugs will be another charge.

 

For example:

Being in possession of an unlicensed firearm VS Being found guilty of shooting / killing someone with it. Those will be 2 separate charges.

 

Instead of using money for sheets and giggles use it to have testing done at ALL major races. Random before, ALL of the Top 10 after. You can spend eleventy gazillions trying to be fancy, but the there's one way to stop this.

 

1A. Test the crap out of them

1B. Ban the crap out of them

[Danger Dassie]

Was it CSA or the SA Doping Control Commission? 

 

CSA. SAIDS don't hold hearings, that's upto the federation. Since the syringe thing was a medical infringement and not a doping one, it doesn't involve SAIDS.