Re: Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France

Earl Evleth wrote:
This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.

The following deals with a nasty interaction with
the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
with regard to information. Basically information
like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
by media demand.
`
On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.



Yep. My money's going on Alejandro Valverde

Jan




*****


Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance
Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and
accused anti-doping authorities of misconduct in dealing with the
American cyclist.

A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss
possible legal and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency
and to consider "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."

The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of
Armstrong's urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his
record seven-straight Tour titles, came back positive for the
endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.

Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.

The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman
last October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999
Tour by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its
French acronym LNDD.

Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong
completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de
France."

The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing
doping control forms to the French newspaper.

The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of
international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been
against the law.

Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and
later defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with
Adriaan van der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.

EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.

Testing for EPO only began in 2001.

Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six
years ago, and how they were handled.

Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking
of the results to the French paper.

He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to
the people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on
sanctions if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the
alleged violations were.

The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report
before all parties involved in the case were informed.

"Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the
content before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a
statement.

WADA chief *** Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but,
based on what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of
Vrijman's findings.

"It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in
determining whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or
not," he told The Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We
were afraid of that from the very beginning."

Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a
reporter from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples
being linked to Armstrong.

"Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch
lawyer with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading
laboratories in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong
is totally exonerated seems strange," Pound said.

In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.

"Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews
were given to the media," the statement said.

"WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the
matter must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging
information regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also
addressing the question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by
athletes."

The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
confidentiality regulations.

Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping
control forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month
earlier this year. He has since been reinstated.

The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports
ministry, WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic
Committee also had requested a copy.

The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen
samples, routinely held for eight years, should be used.

AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.

.

Quantcast