Follow up on AFLD v UCI: UCI responds...

When one writes until 04h00, one may not be privy to the clearest of analyses, regarding a situation stemming from the recent news out of Paris, concerning the recent pair of articles concerning the 2009 Tour de France.


Thus we tip our WADAwatch hat to a close-to-the-family 'trans-Alpine' friend, who reminded this author that this news falls suspiciously soon after the UCI announced that ProTour licences for BBox Bouygues Telecom and Cofidis were not to be renewed (although rumours have been circulating since the Tour de France, when certain Swiss individuals were discussing the futures of Astana, and the ProTour Council...).

Quid pro quo?


Et tu Brutus?

Yet the fact remains, that France: its Agencies and Justice system, have occasionally, previously displayed a quality in their justice system that recalls the Bush 'misAdministration', and its penchant for quashing 'bad news' with a rapid recourse to the 'Orange Terrorism Alerts' issued by the Homeland Security Department.


Months ago, the Floyd Landis 'hacking' case resurfaced, within a week of the 'blanchissement' (clearing) of the Lance Armstrong 'Case of the Cold French Shower'; in 2005, the great War between UCI and AFLD/LNDD began with the scandal-generating article by a French journalist who was able to connect Lance's name to re-examined B Samples from the 1999 Tour de France, at the same time that the journalist successfully covered-up any potential release of information tying FIVE other Tour de France participants whose samples 'revealed' exactly the same 'evidence' for which they chose to slam Lance in the worldwide sporting news.


One can only speculate, of course, as to the protected nationality (-ies?) of those protected riders (or the nationality of the teams to which they were contracted...).


Further speculation as to the legitimacy of both series of allegations: the AFLD "UCI complacency" Report, or the 'Case of the Hotel Poubelles' (EN: 'Dustbins'), is something we leave to the rumour-mongerers, until proper UCI or WADA responses are available.


But they are!


UCI announced yesterday that its future testing of Tour de France cyclists may no longer include use of the LNDD/Département des analyses de l'AFLD. They noted (as did our sister blog crystelZENmud: see FLOYDING FRENZY: Day 3 Flash) that other 'neutral' laboratories were available to perform the 'beauty of science' portion of the processes. Our article elaborated how the ITF flew its samples, taken at the French Open-Roland Garros tournament, to Montreal (the basis of 'cost' was then the official 'Party line'... Dr Ayotte's Montreal lab was approximately $100 cheaper PER sample) a choice of transport involving 3,400 km of air-transport, rather than 18km via French 'taxis'...


The scathing commentary published by UCI leaves one frothing to read the 'official report' issued by AFLD. One of their 'gentle' commentaries is:

This attitude is not appropriate and does not give credit to the enormous amount of work carried out by many people during the three weeks of the event under the scope of an intensive anti-doping programme that is the most complete and sophisticated implemented for any sporting event outside the Olympic Games.

Unfortunately, WADAwatch has not yet acquired the AFLD chef d'oeuvre, and can only request (or hope) that someone, sympathetic to the cause, can forward same to our email (no questions asked):

wadawatch *** multimediORwrite.com
/ you know what to replace in the space -***- /

(One could create a Hotmail (TM) or GMail (TM) account for a one-time transaction); any contributions to this are guaranteed the 100pc confidentiality that is so often violated en la belle France.

Gentile Pierre, vous avez la tête qui brule!
Ceci n'est pas de la grippe porcine,
par hasard? Au lit! Toute de suite!

..........@.........WADAwatch
one hundred percent pure

copyright © 2009