lunedì 6 febbraio 2012

That's a shame.

I'm ashamed, scandalised and most of all disgusted for how Contador's case was handled by UCI and WADA. After more than 18 months of await (during which the Spaniard could quietly keep on racing and winning) in fact WADA's jury finally reached a verdict about the infamous clenbuterol case. And that verdict is: Contador is banned for 2 years. Unfotunately for the credibility of the world of cycling, WADA decided to give Alberto a retrospective ban. This means that the Spaniard will lose all the victories he's achieved since July 2010 and that he won't be able to come back racing before the 5th of August 2012. This also means that the winner of 2010 Tour is now Andy Schleck and that the winner of 2011 Giro is Michele Scarponi.
Now, I actually see some logic in the fact that the Tour 2010 was taken away from Contador (after all, he 'doped' during that race), but in my mind and my eyes the winner of the Giro 2011 will always be the climber from Pinto. His deeds during the 2011 Giro were too good to be forgotten (do you remember his victory on Etna? And the one on Plan de Corones? And the way he controlled the race on Zoncolan, Grossglockner and Macugnaga? I do, and it still gives me goosebumps), but now for UCI it will be as all those victories never took place. In just one day, UCI and WADA have cancelled a part of the recent history of cycling. 
People who'll start following cycling in 2040 (if cycling still exists in 30 years time...) will learn that the 2011 Giro d'Italia was won by Scarponi in front of Nibali and Gadret, but they won't be able to remember Contador's egemony in the competition. Those supporters will learn that Schleck won the 2010 Tour in front of Menchov and Sanchez, but they won't be able to remember the furious battle between the Spaniard and the Russian in order to get on the third step of the podium. Now, two years later, those two riders have both achieved the aim for which they battled so much during that race. Still, Sanchez (just like Schleck) will never have the 2010 award ceremony on Champs Elysées back, whereas Menchov will never have the chance of re-writing his 2011 season. In fact me thinks that, if Denis' second place in the Tour had become official already at the end of 2010, his team would have surely been invited to the 2011 Grande Boucle.
At the same time, Andy Schleck will never be able to know how his career would have unfolded if Contador had been banned immediately after the 2010 Tour. Who knows, perhaps right now Andy wouldn't be so Tour-de-France-centric and perhaps this year he would come to the Giro. Perhaps people (me included) would criticise him less and perhaps he would have won also last year Tour. Actually, this is the thing that annoys me the most about this verdict: even if UCI has the power of deleting a rider's result in a certain race, no one can delete the effects that said rider's presence had on the development of the race itself. Let me explain. 
In Giro 2011, Nibali often tried to drop Contador. Unfortunately the Spaniard was way too strong for the Italian, who often worn himself out because of his useless (even if very brave) attacks. In spite of this, Vincenzo was eventually third on the Milan podium, with about 40 "of delay from Scarponi. However me believes that, if Contador hadn't taken part in the 2011 Giro at all, Nibali would have raced in a much more conservative way and, perhaps, in that circumstance he could have actually won the race in front of Scarponi. 
Let's take another example: Tour de France 2011. During the whole race Andy Schleck was so focused on Contador that he let Evans slip under his radar. And when Contador attacked on le Telegraphé during the Alpe d'Huez stage, Schleck followed him like a shadow; a move that, according to many people, caused the Luxembourgian to lose the race. Now, 6 months later, UCI has deleted Contador's final 5th place in that race. However, who will give Schleck the chance of modifying the final podium of the competion? No one, simply no one.
Another hateful thing about this whole trial, then, is the fact that all these problems were caused by a very small quantity of clebuterol. Actually, said quantity of clenbuterol was so small that people (journalists, supporters, ecc.) weren't even supposed to find out about it. Then a scientist from an anti-doping laboratory made a leak, the press found out about this case and, in less than three days, Steak-Gate began. If WADA had banned Contador as soon as Steak-Gate began, I would have probably agreed with their decision. But banning him retrospectively now, well, this is just ridicolous. Especially because this retrospective ban will be over in just 6 months time, so that Contador will probably be back stronger (and angrier) than ever and won't have to face all the problems that traditional 2 years ban involve (a come back after 2 years in fact involves the search of a new team and of a new sponsor, it can cause a rider to get depressed and it can also cause him problems once he comes back racing, since finding the race rythm again after 2 years of 'rest' isn't easy). Instead, Contador won't have any of these problems. Simply, WADA decided to destroy part of his career in just one day. And, perhaps, that's even more painful, especially because I'm sure that Alberto's recent victories were clean ones.
Unfortunately, as usual, we supporters can't do anything against this injustice. UCI is said to work for improving cycling, but so far it is doing the opposite. This verdict is simply ridicolous and I really don't know how Alberto mus feel right now. To me it seems that WADA didn't care about banning a rider because he doped, to me it seems that WADA tried to destroy a man by deleting all his recent, most important victories. And that's something I can't stand. The cycling politicians have disappointed us once again. And this makes me feel sick. Hopefully when Contador comes back racing in August he'll be able to get many, wonderful victories that will be remembered forever and ever. That's all I hope right now.
Sorry for the confused post, but I needed to get this off my chest.

10 commenti:

  1. Totally agree with you. And you made me thinking more with that sentence about Contador feelings. My brain is working, searching for reasons... Maybe I'll sleep tomorrow.
    Narce

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. UCI seems to have gone mad in these days. First Contador, then Armstrong, now Ullrich... As Cougar Girl (http://eisenandy.blogspot.com/) has said, it looks like UCI had all those decisions taken in these days so that now we can go on talking about the true cycling. Let's hope it's true!

      Contador must be a destroyed man right now. No one could see this coming and I don't think he expected UCI to take the Giro away from him. The Spanish journalists are very angry at UCI right now, whereas the Gazzetta's ones think that re-writing the podium of last year Giro was an offence to the Italian race itself. And now there are problems on the horizon also for Bjarne Riis and Saxo Bank... Seriously, this situation completely sucks. If Bjarne had known about the verdict sooner, perhaps he would have been able to employ another strong GC rider. Now, instead, there's very little he can do to save his team's ProTour license. That's such a horrible situation!!

      Elimina
  2. I couldn't have said it better, Fede. I feel the same way.. the whole investigation/trial took way, way, way too long. Not even doping is killing cycling, it's the long wait for a verdict. I don't know what should happen, but something needs to happen in order to keep cycling a healthy, clean and good sport. You can't let a rider race again when he hasn't had his trial yet. It's just unfair and you get strange situations like you have now; all of a sudden Scarponi wins the Giro and it doesn't matter that Contador was clean there. Like you said, Nibali, without Contador, may have been better than Scarponi because it completely changes the race. It's so unfair and yet, so UCI/WADA/CAS. This is (are) cycling's black page(s) and I hope someday this (crazy system) will come to an end.

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. I completely agree with you. UCI doesn't seem to care about cycling at all. They're busy inventing and sponsoring new races all across the World (*coughs* Tour of Beijing *coughs*) but then they ignore the problems of the strongest GC cyclists of our days. Right now no one actually cares whether Contador doped or not, supporters just want to know why he was allowed to compete and win races when he was under investigation. I didn't believe his SteakStory at all at first, but now I just don't care about whether he said the truth or not. People now just think that his verdict was a shame because it arrived after a year and a half. Mosquera's positivity at the anti-doping was announced on the very same day as Contador's one, but he was immediately forced to stop racing. So why was Contador treated in a different way? This impartiality sucks and that's what annoys me the most. Basso got 2 years and couldn't race for 2 years, the same goes for Vinokourov, Di Luca and so on. So why could Contador race and keep on winning, if then UCI took all the victories away from him? Seriously, that's something I can't understand at all. The outside world doesn't believe that cycling is the most-controlled sport of the world and when those things happen they take them as a chance of saying: 'see, cycling is a rotten world'. And instead the only rotten thing in cycling is UCI. Oh, that's so annoying!
      Last May I told a classmate of mine that I was going to watch a Giro stage live, and she told me that I was wasting my time because 'the man in the pink jersey is a doper'. How can I explain her that he didn't dope during the Giro, but that they took the victory in that race away from him anyway? Seriously, this system is almost as unjust as the one described by Kafka in 'The Trial'. And the fact that no one can do anything about it simply sucks.

      Elimina
  3. I'm back again! Thanks to an offline life that I want to be monotonous and you know what I mean ;-)

    The more you keep people waiting for the outcome the more this outcome will seem unjust, whichever it is.
    In Italy we say that "there are children and stepchildren" and Contador's case is not a shining example of impartiality. IMO he's been treated fairly good: his defence was whimsical, yet they kept believing it was plausible; he got the chance to train because he didn't lose a team, to ride and so to win because he is a great talent, to be visible therefore to not damage his sponsors and probably even the Grand Tours. Who would have seen a Giro d'Italia (worldwide I mean) with just Nibali and Scarponi? And what about the Tour de France without the promise of another Contador-Schleck duel? Yes, Contador has been treated with bias, but I don't know if he was a son or a stepson for the system.
    And really, anyway, what a shame.

    Francesca

    RispondiElimina
  4. Your words made me think a lot, my dear. Now that I've read them, in fact, I really can't say whether Contador was a son or a stepson of the system either.

    On the one hand, I think UCI was very harsh in deleting all Contador's victories because, after all, we have no proof that he doped during the Giro 2011 and during all the other races he won in the last few months.
    On the other hand, however, thanks to this verdict Contador will be able to come back racing just in 6 months time, thus avoiding all the problems that traditional 2 years ban involve. Moreover, in the last two years Contador has been able to race freely and to humiliate his adversaries on many occasions, so that people now consider him the strongest rider of his generation. Still, if Conti had been banned right after his TdF victory in 2010 (victory that he achieved after looking as weak as never before), people probably would see things in a different way.
    On the one hand, Contador has lost a great success that he's achieved honestly (the Giro 2011), but on the other one he won't have to go through the insults and the problems that traditional dopers must face after a 2 years ban. You're right, it's difficult to understand whether he was a son or a stepson of the system. From the human point of view I'd say that yes, Contador was treated in a horrible way, but from the logical point of view I'd say that no, he wasn't treated too badly.
    Actually, I think that UCI's verdict was very disrespectful towards the whole cycling world, and not just towards Contador. Now it is as if the Giro 2011 was never raced and many athletes are probably wondering how things would have gone if Contador hadn't taken part in the same races in which they took part too.
    Think also about Bjarne Riis: he exploited Contador's fame to save his team back in 2010, but now he's likely to find himself without a ProTour license and with the season that has already started. Seriously, the whole way people treated this thing was simply terrible.

    RispondiElimina
  5. Hello guys! First of all, I hope everyone is warm and safe from this cold front. Switzerland had it quite bad for a few days, we had quite a bit of snow and -27 degrees one night. My workplace hasn't been in full force since Monday! I was actually supposed to go in yesterday and today, but my lovely coworker offered to take it so that I don't have to take Olivia out to the daycare until it's at least a bit warmer. :)

    Re our topic, I have to say that, like him or hate him, the whole Contador thing has long ago stepped well over the "as shameful as it gets" line. However, it's the verdict itself that made me wonder about the possibility that the people in the UCI are either abusing drugs or they're serious mental hospital candidates.

    There are several things in that whole affair that are simply wrong. The fact that Contador was even allowed to race during investigation when so many other guys aren't was beyond ridiculous to begin with, but oh well, past tense. Then there's the question of what exactly took so much time to investigate. That's the part that I really don't understand. They only have so much blood samples from the relevant period that they could test. Even taking Contador's (also fairly ridiculous) excuse into consideration, that *exact* piece of meat he claims to have eaten can't possibly be recovered. It all boils down to Contador's word vs. anyone else's. I don't see anything in that case that would require 18 months to investigate. But okay, still past tense.
    Which begs the last question - what's the name of the drug that the person who decided a retrospective ban could ever be a good idea was taking? Now that's the most ridiculous thing in this whole case. Unless the UCI possesses hard proof that Contador's wins during the said 18 months weren't clean (which isn't the case), there's nothing okay about that verdict.
    The Tour de France 2010 plays the least role here. Taking that victory away from Contador is something I can agree with. It won't give Schleck, Sanchez and Menchov a replay of the podium, but Contador did have a banned substance in his blood. How much of it and how it got there doesn't matter, for I wouldn't consider TDF '10 a clean victory even if he had been declared not guilty.
    However, erasing everything else he's done while under investigation is just unfair for everyone involved. It's unfair for Contador because he earned those results with his own sweat and pain, and now what? They never happened? It's unfair to everyone else who races against Contador. Every last race he was in lately would have most likely been vastly different without him. TDF '11 is maybe taking it a bit too far, since Contador personally didn't make as much an actual difference as Andy Schleck's thought process did. Or, to put it clearly, the only people in that race who ever focused on Contador were Andy Schleck and his team.
    But nobody can say that the Giro '11 wouldn't, realistically, have been a whole different race if Alberto Contador hadn't been in it.

    I think that, any way you look at it, the general consensus is that this "verdict" is a shame for cycling.

    Cristin

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. Hi Cristin! I'm awfully sorry for replying your comment just now... Still, 'better late than never', right? :P

      We had a very cold February here in Italy too, we reached -12° (which for us is a freezing temperature)! Luckily now things are much better, we had +27° yesterday! I hope things are better in Switzerland too! Btw, how's the little princess Olivia doing? Give her a big kiss from me!

      I completely agree with everything you've said about the whole Contador case. Seriously, I couldn't have said it better. The whole retrospective thing is a shame and it makes no sense at all, just the thought of it makes me sick.

      Sometimes I just wonder whether UCI & Co. care about cycling as much as we normal supporters do... :(

      Elimina
  6. Fede, I just love your blog.
    Giving words to my confused feelings.
    Angry at the months gone by, but especially angry and feeling sorry for a guy like Mosquera. Big money rules.
    I stopped reading Franz Kafka's stories a long time ago. Without them it's difficult enough to stay out a severe depression.

    Barbara.

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. You're completely right, dear. A guy like Mosquera could have been racing for the last year and a half, and instead he was simply fired by his team and forgotten by everyone else. They say that rules are the same for everyone, but I think that this way of saying is just a big lie. And the funny thing is that Conti will be back already in August, ready to win his 2nd Vuelta. That's so annoying!!

      Elimina