# Discovery Channel excluded from ProTour team group



## madvax (Nov 6, 2005)

It's getting real ugly. Is this really what is best for cycling?

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/11301.0.html



> A decision made at a special meeting of the International Professional Cycling Teams (IPCT) group on Friday could threaten the future status of the Discovery Channel team.
> 
> The group voted to exclude Discovery from its membership over its signing of Italian Ivan Basso, who is implicated in the Operación Puerto inquiry, according to a source that attended the meeting in Brussels. However, the vote does not mean that the American team loses its UCI ProTour license, which enables it to race in all of the ProTour events.
> 
> ...


----------



## crumjack (Sep 11, 2005)

It seems like they want the sport to die. These guys are a PR disaster. Are they firm believers in cutting the nose to spite the face? I'm far from an expert but there has to be a better way...


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

but basso's gotta be clean, stapleton looked him in the eyes. nice call on that disco.


----------



## madvax (Nov 6, 2005)

blackhat said:


> but basso's gotta be clean, stapleton looked him in the eyes. nice call on that disco.


I understand what you're saying, but the guy was acquitted. How long should he be treated like an OP leper? 

I suspect the real reason is a dislike of Disco by the other teams. Basso just provides a convenient excuse. I'm sure all the other teams are clean as the wind driven snow


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*This means nothing...*

This means nothing really. Guess what? Disco is still a team, they still have a ProTour license, and they still get to ride all of the races that they want, and them some. Was it a good thing to sign Basso? Why not; he hasn't been charged with a doping infraction, and he is the best GC rider out there right now. This is not ugly at all, FDJ isn't even a member of this little group. They wield no power over who races what.


----------



## Lt. (Jun 2, 2005)

The entire debate will be based on speculation and innuendos until the evidence in Operación Puerto is made public.

I support Johan Bruyneel's position not agreeing to sign any rider currently implicated in OP. When is the investigation going to be fully made public? By agreeing to the terms, Bruyneel would be implying that Basso IS/WAS doping .

Shouldn't any rider implicated in OP have his day to refute the claims and challenge the accuser? I thought the days of McCarthism was over?! I realize doping is prevalent in cycling and change is necessary for the viability of the sport but the IPCT is just on a witch hunt.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

Lt. said:


> The entire debate will be based on speculation and innuendos until the evidence in Operación Puerto is made public.
> 
> I support Johan Bruyneel's position not agreeing to sign any rider currently implicated in OP. When is the investigation going to be fully made public? By agreeing to the terms, Bruyneel would be implying that Basso IS/WAS doping .
> 
> Shouldn't any rider implicated in OP have his day to refute the claims and challenge the accuser? I thought the days of McCarthism was over?! I realize doping is prevalent in cycling and change is necessary for the viability of the sport but the IPCT is just on a witch hunt.



Not everyone appreciates the fundimental concept of due process.


----------



## Nolamatt (Feb 4, 2005)

What I don't get s these guys say you can't sign any riders implicated but almost all of them have riders that were implicated but already signed. SO they are saying it is ok to keep signed riders and let them race but not let people who want to change teams race. Sounds like sour grapes to me.


----------



## powerdan5 (Apr 27, 2006)

This is way beyond ugly - its stupid. The IPCT needs to look at their own "gentlemans agreement" and say, even though Discovery complied with the agreement by waiting until Basso was cleared, even though CONI (one of the more aggressive drug control organizations) cleared Basso, something about Basso doesn't still feel right so lets punish Discovery. Does that make any sense? Why isn't IPCT saying, our own agreement sucks and it is insufficient. Why doesn't the IPCT require all riders to be clear of any potential, as well as actual impropriety? I guess it's easier to just go after one team than say your own system is flawwed.

I'm not a big Basso fan, or a huge Disco fan, but I think I side with them on this one. It should be noted, I'm always on whatever side Basso's sister thinks is best.


----------



## BikinCO (Feb 17, 2004)

Maybe Patrick Lefévère and QuickStep should cut their ties with Johan Museeuw, a convicted doper.


----------



## Nolamatt (Feb 4, 2005)

I thinkit is just a way to stop riders from being able to goto other teams.


----------



## Mootsie (Feb 4, 2004)

*Bad boy*

It was the Euro folks' way to slap Disco's peepee. Enough said. Let's race boys.


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

BikinCO said:


> Maybe Patrick Lefévère and QuickStep should cut their ties with Johan Museeuw, a convicted doper.


Zing. I like Lefévère, but there do seem to be a lot of pots calling kettles black. 

For Basso, just what exactly do riders have to do to prove themselves innocent, i.e. that they didn't do anything? Last time I checked, it's pretty hard to prove a negative.


----------



## bornin53 (Sep 3, 2005)

*What if Basso Stayed with CSC*

Suppose Basso has stayed with CSC and was back as an active member of the team. Do you think the other teams would have treated CSC the same way they are treating Disco now? I seriously doubt it.


----------



## Nolamatt (Feb 4, 2005)

No they would not. Most of the teams already have riders implicated. The agreement does not say you cannot have an implicated rider on the team just can't give someone from another team a contract. I think most teams are mad because they realize that Disco is going to be winning the GT's again.


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

*Disco scares the crap out of the rest of em..Long Post..Warning, Venus..*

With good reason...The Discovery organization has to be one of the most power-packed cycle teams ever, especially OFF the bikes. Johan as coach with all his strategic expertise, Lance as owner, with all his knowledge of everything about the world class cycle scene and his acquaintence with the riders of the current peloton...Lots of money available..and an incredible array of very talented and experienced riders already on the squad, being treated very well, I am sure..Happy well-paid pros who'll be very likely to give their best efforts to do good "for the team" and to hang onto their $-spot on the Disco squad..

I have observed, through the media and as a US resident only, so I may not be getting the whole story, that since US riders first started riding at the top of European races, there has been resentment. I can imagine how all the Euro-team guys feel now, being faced with Lance, again, but this time not as a 'stupid rider' but as an "important" player--a team owner! After they thought they'd seen the last of him, ruining "their" sport...

As hard and as often as they tried, they couldn't screw Armstrong over (or catch him, depending on how you read the guy) when he was "just" a rider, so they will keep trying now that he's involved in the owner's end of the biz..."Cheeky friggin Yank!" "Brash Upstart, and from Texas, no less" Pisses em off over there, being out done by someone who's not in awe of them; someone who is not crawling up, hat in hand, begging to be accepted into "their group". I hope they (team Disco) just stay quiet and do their responding to being "kicked out of the club for teams" on the roads next season..

I think having an intellegent and well-funded RIDER as a team Principal is a new thing. I think he'll be doing what he thinks is right for the Riders and the sport. Probably trouble for the "Good ole boys (or whatever they call the Elite rich in Europe) who run the teams and look at the riders as "necessary, but just peons, unimportant, in the grand scheme of things" The riders might get uppity, if they get treated well...Grin..

Just my take on it all..I do deplore dopers..I wish they had some way of getting them all out of the sport. I also wish they would do a better job and not suspend riders for being accused only..that sucks, especially the way some get let right back and some are kept out for ages..
Don Hanson


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

I'm curious when CONI supposedly became so aggressive in fighting doping since they were the central hub in a quasi state supported doping program run in cooperation with Conconi and his proteges Ferrari and Cecchini in the 80's/90's, designed to get the Italians back into the results at the Olympics.

Oddly enough Riis and T-mob are the only guys with any ethics in this whole mess. Everyone else is just acting out of self interest trying to exclude their biggest threat in Basso. Especially obvious in the case of Bruyneel since he voted one way when he didn't have a contender and has now done a 180.

Despite all that CONI was supposed to have received 500 pages of documents before they decided the Basso case and couldn't find the proof to proceed. Doesn't mean they are particularly vigiliant; rather, as is the case in all victimless crimes, there just isn't any evidence unless one side of the doping transaction turns rat.

[BTW, an interesting note - Basso's dog is named Birillo. Procycling recently reported they had interview notes confirming that. Apparently his recent explosion over a dog question in a Bicisport interview got them to look it up]


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

*500*



terzo rene said:


> I'm curious when CONI supposedly became so aggressive in fighting doping since they were the central hub in a quasi state supported doping program run in cooperation with Conconi and his proteges Ferrari and Cecchini in the 80's/90's, designed to get the Italians back into the results at the Olympics.
> 
> Oddly enough Riis and T-mob are the only guys with any ethics in this whole mess. Everyone else is just acting out of self interest trying to exclude their biggest threat in Basso. Especially obvious in the case of Bruyneel since he voted one way when he didn't have a contender and has now done a 180.
> 
> ...


just for the sake of clarity, the 500 pages that the Italians got covered all of the riders involved in OP, not just basso and was apparently an initial report. so there's likely more coming down the stream at some point, especially if basso (and others) ultimately are compelled to give DNA and the 99 bags of blood on the wall get names.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Nolamatt said:


> Most of the teams already have riders implicated.


Which ones? I think at least most of the major hitters have been relegated to non-PT teams or remain unsigned. I don't think any of the biggies (Sevilla, Ullrich, Guiterrez, Mancebo, Jaksche, etc.) have signed but I could be mistaken. Off the top of my head, Valverde seems to be an exception, but he wasn't originally named in the investigation, and might not be "officially" involved.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

blackhat said:


> so there's likely more coming down the stream at some point, especially if basso (and others) ultimately are compelled to give DNA and the 99 bags of blood on the wall get names.


Isn't this the motivation for what's going on with Basso. I have a feeling the managers, etc. know the score pretty well, especially Riis since he was Basso's boss. He probably knows full well that Basso was involved with Fuentes and that there is just more bad press in the pipeline especially so if he wins the Giro or Tour next year before they Spanish get down to business regarding the investigation.


----------



## levels1069 (Jun 9, 2006)

> DISCOVERY CHANNEL PRO CYCLING TEAM COMMENTS ON
> INTERNATIONAL PRO CYCLING TEAMS TALKS
> 
> The International Professional Cycling Teams (IPCT), a business group developed to represent the marketing interests of the UCI Pro Tour Teams but which has no governing authority, met Friday, December 8, in Brussels, Belgium. During this meeting the group discussed Team Discovery Channel’s signing of Ivan Basso. Contrary to a report that the Discovery Channel Team was voted out as a member of the IPCT for this, expulsion did not take place. The discussion by IPCT cited Basso’s signing as a violation of a gentlemen’s agreement regarding the signing of riders implicated in the Operation Puerto affair.
> ...



------------------------------------------------------------------

taken from the Disco team's website from today...thoughts?


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*Coni*



levels1069 said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> taken from the Disco team's website from today...thoughts?


CONI cleared Basso of anything dealing OP. As far as they're concerned, he's done nothing, mostly because the Spanish Civil Guardia messed up getting things together. So if his sanctioning/licensing body is not going to take any action against Basso, he should be able to sign and race with someone else. Same for Ullrich, and the others. 

Now, for the last time though, all of you lawyers out there claiming due process, it does not exist in doping in cycling. If you test positive, burden of proof is on the accused, this is not a legal system, this is a doping system. There are some countries where there are legal ramifications, and then due process comes into play. But for WADA there is no due process. There is no innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't work that way, and never has. If you get popped positive for something, YOU, the rider, have to prove that you didn't do anything. In their eyes, if you test positive in A and B samples, for whatever, you're guilty. It's up to you to prove you're not. So let's just drop this stuff about innocent until proven guilty, that's not the way that it works in cycling, and in sport in general.


----------



## kyler2001 (Sep 8, 2005)

levels1069 said:


> taken from the Disco team's website from today...thoughts?


Yeah...Let's hear it for the media...Again...:mad2:


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

"CONI cleared Basso of anything dealing OP. As far as they're concerned, he's done nothing, mostly because the Spanish Civil Guardia messed up getting things together."

I'm not sure that is really accurate. I believe they shelved the case b/c they said there wasn't enough evidence to go forward with a doping case and they reserved the right to reopen the case in light of new evidence. That isn't the same as saying he had nothing to do with it.


----------



## enemyte (Jan 31, 2006)

*Really Long, Sorry!*

A quote from the boss at gerolsteiner Hans micheal Holczer, has said that the race organizers have to exclude the discovery channel from top level races in 2007. Now then with the Deustchland land tour organizer not willing to allow any team "harbouring" either Jan Ullrich or Ivan Basso to participate in their race "no matter how much it hurts" after the tv company ARD (i think) threatened to pull the plug, do you think this is this is a turning point in the war against doping?. I personally think why disco was exluded from the meeting, because if you were a sponsor from a rival team pouring millions of €'s into the project, you would be pretty pissed if someone who had originally been accused of doping was still racing amongst your guys and still winning. I say that the sponsors (and Lefevre)from potentially the biggest sponsor Quick Step) are just looking after their interests from a business point of view, thats why they were so quick to exclude disco.


----------



## Buck Satan (Nov 21, 2005)

magnolialover said:


> Now, for the last time though, all of you lawyers out there claiming due process, it does not exist in doping in cycling. If you test positive, burden of proof is on the accused, this is not a legal system, this is a doping system. There are some countries where there are legal ramifications, and then due process comes into play. But for WADA there is no due process. There is no innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't work that way, and never has. If you get popped positive for something, YOU, the rider, have to prove that you didn't do anything. In their eyes, if you test positive in A and B samples, for whatever, you're guilty. It's up to you to prove you're not. So let's just drop this stuff about innocent until proven guilty, that's not the way that it works in cycling, and in sport in general.


Are you paying attention? BASSO AND ULRICH HAVEN'T TESTED POSITIVE FOR ANYTHING!! If we put people in jail based on "suspicion" - we'd have to build a lot more jails.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Buck Satan said:


> Are you paying attention? BASSO AND ULRICH HAVEN'T TESTED POSITIVE FOR ANYTHING!! If we put people in jail based on "suspicion" - we'd have to build a lot more jails.


You're not paying attention. No one is being put in jail.


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

levels1069 said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> taken from the Disco team's website from today...thoughts?


yikes, now disco's being <a href="http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/dec06/dec12news2">asked</a> to stay home from the tour of denmark because of basso. the race organizers obviously haven't heard that stapleton gave basso the "look him in the eye" test. surely he's clean, right?


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

magnolialover said:


> CONI cleared Basso of anything dealing OP. As far as they're concerned, he's done nothing, mostly because the Spanish Civil Guardia messed up getting things together. So if his sanctioning/licensing body is not going to take any action against Basso, he should be able to sign and race with someone else. Same for Ullrich, and the others.
> 
> Now, for the last time though, all of you lawyers out there claiming due process, it does not exist in doping in cycling. If you test positive, burden of proof is on the accused, this is not a legal system, this is a doping system. There are some countries where there are legal ramifications, and then due process comes into play. But for WADA there is no due process. There is no innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't work that way, and never has. If you get popped positive for something, YOU, the rider, have to prove that you didn't do anything. In their eyes, if you test positive in A and B samples, for whatever, you're guilty. It's up to you to prove you're not. So let's just drop this stuff about innocent until proven guilty, that's not the way that it works in cycling, and in sport in general.




Dear Professor Kingsfield,

The individuals at the center of this subject haven't tested positive for anything. In this case there are some countries where there are legal ramifications so due process does come into play. The credabiltity of any organizations that make extrajudicial judgements without any form due process or judements based on leaked circumstantial evidence from an incomplete LE investigation and subsequent judicial proceeding will be widely considered to be dubious. ...regardless of how condescend your open statements pronouncing otherwise may be.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

blackhat said:


> yikes, now disco's being <a href="http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/dec06/dec12news2">asked</a> to stay home from the tour of denmark because of basso. the race organizers obviously haven't heard that stapleton gave basso the "look him in the eye" test. surely he's clean, right?



Have you stopped beating you wife?


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

rocco said:


> Have you stopped beating you wife?




tsk tsk...we're not married, and how could I possibly strike such a face?<br>
<img src="https://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:5NjVpBQHHhM4aM:https://pjl.ath.cx/pics/2006/06/elisa-basso.jpg">


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

rocco said:


> The credabiltity of any organizations that make extrajudicial judgements without any form due process or judements based on leaked circumstantial evidence...


What makes you think the team's are making these decisions based on the investigation? More than likely the decision is based first on Basso being a star that is damaged goods regardless of any judicial process and therefore he is bad press, afterall there are plenty of formerly positive dopers still racing on these teams and other riders who have been implicated in doping (e.g. O'grady), and second I strongly suspect some of the principals (e.g. Riis) involved know full well Basso, Ullrich, etc were doping and a lot more bad press is on the way if they are allowed to ride and the Puerto case moves forward.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

Dwayne Barry said:


> What makes you think the team's are making these decisions based on the investigation? More than likely the decision is based first on Basso being a star that is damaged goods regardless of any judicial process and therefore he is bad press, afterall there are plenty of formerly positive dopers still racing on these teams and other riders who have been implicated in doping (e.g. O'grady), and second I strongly suspect some of the principals (e.g. Riis) involved know full well Basso, Ullrich, etc were doping and a lot more bad press is on the way if they are allowed to ride and the Puerto case moves forward.



Hmmmm.... Riis: DNA testing would have been enough for Basso to stay

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/nov06/nov28news2

Apparently not all of the teams believed his press coverage was too bad to have him on board. IPCT's real mission is more about creating the appearance of taking a stand against doping as opposed to participating in a credible and orderly process to curb it. Members of IPCT who are sore over the fact they didn't get Basso can use their charade to get their little piece of revenge.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

enemyte said:


> A quote from the boss at gerolsteiner Hans micheal Holczer, has said that the race organizers have to exclude the discovery channel from top level races in 2007. Now then with the Deustchland land tour organizer not willing to allow any team "harbouring" either Jan Ullrich or Ivan Basso to participate in their race "no matter how much it hurts" after the tv company ARD (i think) threatened to pull the plug, do you think this is this is a turning point in the war against doping?. I personally think why disco was exluded from the meeting, because if you were a sponsor from a rival team pouring millions of €'s into the project, you would be pretty pissed if someone who had originally been accused of doping was still racing amongst your guys and still winning. I say that the sponsors (and Lefevre)from potentially the biggest sponsor Quick Step) are just looking after their interests from a business point of view, thats why they were so quick to exclude disco.


And if the 3 major tours pull out of the "Pro Tour" - it will be easier to exclude disco if they are bringing Basso.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

bas said:


> And if the 3 major tours pull out of the "Pro Tour" - it will be easier to exclude disco if they are bringing Basso.



They could do that and then so oh well... just because the mobocracy want's it doesn't make it right.


----------



## enemyte (Jan 31, 2006)

And so what about Caisse-D'epargne/illes Baleares who is the only other "protour" team to take on a OP rider in Constantino Zaballa, will they get excluded from other races? And Allan Davis of Astana (Thats if they get their licensce)?. 
In a sport where cheating appears to be getting easier, is DNA testing the only way forward now (?) as they look to get out of the hole they dug themselves into.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

BikinCO said:


> Maybe Patrick Lefévère and QuickStep should cut their ties with Johan Museeuw, a convicted doper.


Or Van De Brucke. How many chances did he get with Lefevre over the years?


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

madvax said:


> It's getting real ugly. Is this really what is best for cycling?
> 
> http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/11301.0.html


One of the big problems with professional cycling is there are way way too many sanctioning orginzations, quasi-organization, national organizations, private promoters, doping regulators, arbitration bodies, etc. etc...

Why do they need an IPTC or whatever they call it? 

It's a Kafkaesque cock-eyed bureacracy. Confederacy of dunces. I can't believe all the public, juvenile sniping and back biting that goes on there.


----------



## WrongBikeFred (Oct 19, 2005)

crumjack said:


> It seems like they want the sport to die. These guys are a PR disaster. Are they firm believers in cutting the nose to spite the face? I'm far from an expert but there has to be a better way...


Meanwhile, back in the US cycling has a huge head of steam, is gaining momentum, and has less of this BS. 
*I know this is a long leap and a stretch to make this statment* (oh ye flamers and jumpers to conclusions pay attention to the bold type), but if the people in europe keep this sh!t up, we here in the US might get ourselves some better action on our side of the pond. This sounds cool at first, but our Paris and our Robaix don't have alot of pave' between them.  

Flamers, do not put words in my mouth, I am NOT saying that pro cycling would pack up and move to the US. I am just sayin that if this crap keeps up, some of the riders and sponsors, i.e. money, will take their ball and go play with the yanks on the other side of the pond. This would take away from European racing, possibly to the point of it loosing it's TV coverage in the US. The problem would be compounded by the fact that cycling in the US has to compete with F'ball, B'ball, and the other B'ball, so we would not gain much replacment coverage. The result would be a loss for all involved. There is probably a detail or two I am missing that will prevent this, there normaly is with doomsday like predictions(thank god), or at least I hope there is.


----------



## cyclistjeff (Dec 18, 2006)

this whole business of excluding the Disco team seems to all be a bit of crap, Many riders were "implicated" in all of the OP business, and many of them are still with protour teams, but all the high profile riders were cut from their teams and called cheaters. Maybe this is my skewed american point of view, but pro cycling has seemed to have adopted a position of "guilty until proven innocent" instead of the other way around. Well now that investigations have been shelved, to me that seems like saying, "we dont have nearly enough info to prove anything" which as I interperet means "innocent" but riders like ullrich and basso are still viewed as guilty, not to mention now they are going after hamilton when he's already served a 2 year ban from the sport. But now all the pro tour teams are getting their panties in a wad about signing someone who has been cleared. the logic in this is what now??? Sorry for my ramblings and my poorly put together thoughts, but i just thought i would throw in my 2 cents.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

WrongBikeFred said:


> Meanwhile, back in the US cycling has a huge head of steam, is gaining momentum, and has less of this BS.
> *I know this is a long leap and a stretch to make this statment* (oh ye flamers and jumpers to conclusions pay attention to the bold type), but if the people in europe keep this sh!t up, we here in the US might get ourselves some better action on our side of the pond. This sounds cool at first, but our Paris and our Robaix don't have alot of pave' between them.
> 
> Flamers, do not put words in my mouth, I am NOT saying that pro cycling would pack up and move to the US. I am just sayin that if this crap keeps up, some of the riders and sponsors, i.e. money, will take their ball and go play with the yanks on the other side of the pond. This would take away from European racing, possibly to the point of it loosing it's TV coverage in the US. The problem would be compounded by the fact that cycling in the US has to compete with F'ball, B'ball, and the other B'ball, so we would not gain much replacment coverage. The result would be a loss for all involved. There is probably a detail or two I am missing that will prevent this, there normaly is with doomsday like predictions(thank god), or at least I hope there is.


They won't take their ball and play with the yanks. They'd find another sport/venture to sponsor. 

Plus look at the vast majority of team sponsors. They are in the main small European based companies who rely on European TV audiences and would get nothing worthwhile in the US. I'm not putting US cycling down but I doubt 75% of the current sponsors could justify US exposure even if baseball, basketball and American football didn't exist.

As far as Hamilton being pursued inspite of his 2 year ban - it's for offences committed in 2003, a year before he tested positive for blood doping. If it wasn't for a storage error he's be banned for life anyway, Ekimov would have a gold medal and Tinkoff would have had one less doper on their roster. I hope he fails miserably and we see how mediocre he really is.


----------

