- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
SyringeAmateur cyclist who says he's never raced gets four-year doping ban
A Nottingham man who says he has never raced a bike competitively has been banned from all sport for four years after the UK Border Force intercepted nandrolone and testosterone that he had ordered online from India.
Ian Edmonds, aged 41, also refused to provide a sample when he was visited by a doping control officer from UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) on 1 May this year, three weeks after the package containing 20 capsules of testosterone and 100 nandrolone tablets had been intercepted.
According to the decision published on the UKAD website, Edmonds, a member of Mapperley Cycling Club, was also a member of British Cycling (BCF) and therefore subject to anti-doping rules.
In an interview with UKAD on 6 June, he admitted Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance and Refusing to Submit to Sample Collection.
He said that he had ordered the steroids for his personal use and that he had refused to provide a sample when the UKAD staff member visited because he was unaware that he had an obligation to comply with anti-doping rules because he had never competed.
But UKAD said that “his ignorance to that fact is not sufficient explanation that would justify a reduction [of the sanction] based on his level of Fault.”
It added; “As a registered member of the BCF, Mr Edmonds was under a duty to comply with his personal responsibilities to acquaint himself with the ADR and their specific requirements including what constitutes an Anti-Doping Rule Violation.
“He was also under a requirement to carry out research on an products he planned to ingest to ensure compliance with the ADR and to make himself available for testing when requested to do so by UKAD.”
Banning Edmonds until 1 August 2020, it added: “He failed to meet those requirements.”
Pat Myhill, director of operations at UKAD, said: “The ordering of prohibited substances online by those subject to the anti-doping rules continues to be a major concern for UKAD.
“Whether they are obtained in an attempt to improve sporting performance or for aesthetic purposes, a significant threat is posed to both clean sport and public health.
“Ordering prohibited substances via the internet may result in a ban from all sport and, in some cases, constitute a criminal offence.
“The Edmonds case is an excellent example of how we work alongside law enforcement partners to deter and detect doping in the UK by targeting the supply of illicit substances,” he added.
“I would encourage anyone who has information about the purchase or supply of performance and image enhancing drugs to contact us in confidence via 08000 322332 or via reportdoping.com.”
Edmonds is banned from all sport from 1 August 2016 until midnight on 1 August 2020.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 44 min 36 sec ago
This is worthy of Chris Morris! What is going on?! Is this the dark side of Deliver-ewe? A new way of camoflaging drugs mules? Has all the...
- mctrials23 49 min 5 sec ago
Whats funny about this is that insurance is directly related to the likelihood of you being involved in a crash. Its funny how insurance companies...
- HoarseMann 46 min 26 sec ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crr97dl4740o Mother and child escaped unharmed; unclear who was driving.
- mikeclarke 5 hours 21 min ago
Have the 'Welsh News Website' published an apology for spreading Mr Kane's lies?
- mark1a 9 hours 54 min ago
I understand what you're saying, but I think when you get north of £10k, for the average amateur road.cc reader who maybe in the market for a so...
- brooksby 4 hours 42 min ago
They (wheelywheely) haven't been seen for ages- did they get banned?
- ktache 14 hours 23 min ago
For double that you can' get a Pedro's vise whip Ii. Or half, the reportedly excellent decathlon thingy. And Sigma has the Silca for only £150.
- KDee 14 hours 29 min ago
I'm no detective, but the "NOAHFAST" decal vertically stickered on the headtube is a little bit of a clue.
- Spangly Shiny 14 hours 49 min ago
I remember my driving test examiner, straight after congratulating me for having passed the test said, "Don't be a twat and have that as your best...
- Bigfoz 16 hours 57 min ago
Did they think it was a drive thru?
Add new comment
51 comments
British Triathlon and British Rowing membership both include compliance with WADA rules, so I would expect British Cycling does. Rowing clearly states all levels including Supporter!
LCC do simple 3rd party insurance.
I guess he’s halfway through that ban now, considering this thread is 2 years old
A bloke illegally imports drugs which is noticed by the UK Border Force. After that UKAD are involved and following a refusal to supply a sample and admission that they were for his own use he was rightly banned from all sports.
Surely the big story here is that UK Border Force have actually managed to do something right!
if he is illegally importing drugs he should be prosecuted by customs. He hasn't been which would imply it is not illegal.
The big question here is why do UKAD have the authority to demand a sample from someome who is not competing at all?
Artical is not clear whether he has ride membership or silver race membership.
As someone with a ride membership am I now obliged to pay the same attentoin to the banned substances list as professional athletes, or else be banned from sport. According to the relase the ban is from all cycling activities, does this incluse the club run of any affiliated cycling club? or sportives? or audax rides?
I can't find the membership terms and conditions on british cycling site, So I am not sure if I am under this obligation, and since the charge is nornmally failing to provide a sample does this mean I have to submit my whereabouts for a 1 hour period every day? Do I need to consider what cows might have been fed in countries I may visit before eating beef? Submit a TUE if I am prescribed anything (unlikely as I think it may be easier to see the pope than my GP)
You see how absurd this gets if they want to follow this line with british cycling members who do not race?
It seems like a massive over reaction to me. and I will seriously consider whether I should renew my membership, or join cycling UK when the time comes.
Anabolic steroids are a class C controlled drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act - so actually unauthorised possession is illegal.
The same act makes it illegal to either import of export these drugs. In general terms when they are possessed for personal use the prosecution is waived but that does not make the acts legal.
so why no prosecution? bang to rights obviously
also it seems if you an an amateur who doesn't compete a 4 year ban is in order, but if you are a pro at the top level whose employer has access to top lawyers 2 years or even 8 months is the more llkely outcome.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/3333091.stm
It's not a cycling specific ban so he's buggered if he plays any other competitive sport.
Alcohol is on the banned list, but not for cyclists, so it's ok to ride smashed*...
ALCOHOL Alcohol (ethanol) is prohibited In-Competition only, in the following sports. Detection will be conducted by analysis of breath and/or blood. The doping violation threshold is equivalent to a blood alcohol concentration of 0.10 g/L. • Air Sports (FAI) • Automobile (FIA) • Archery (WA) • Powerboating (UIM)
* I'm teetotal so obviously it's only the roids, EPO, stimulants, corticosteroids, methamphetamine etc I need to worry about
Anyone taking insulin, yes it probably is worth looking into whether you need a TUE.
That said UKAD don't have a history of testing random amateurs enough to ever catch anyone so this was the result of a tip off. I'd love to know the internal politics of Mapperly CC...
Or maybe it was Fancy Bears monitoring his web history.
JHarrison,
True, but as highlighted by the comments here, we are potentially signing up to something that could have consequences.
I sign up as a race member (as it's cheaper), take insulin (as a diabetic), ride socially but get banned by UKAD and it has an impact on a career (as a PE teacher for example)...
The TUE system, prospective or retroactive, is there to protect people in this circumstance. An insulin dependent diabetic would generate an Adverse Analytical Finding, not an Anti Doping Rule Violation. It will not have consequences if there is a genuine medical need to take a medicine. If you ever need to have the conversation with UKAD, I'm quite happy to explain how DKA works to them but I'm absolutely confident that it wouldn't be a problem. I believe there's some guy called Redgrave who has set a precedent.
See: http://www.ukad.org.uk/medications-and-substances/checking-medications/
Looks like he'd have been safer if he'd been an Olympic athlete...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/37794421
"The World Anti-Doping Agency said many athletes who had been targeted for testing "simply could not be found".
sadly, there's all sorts of middle aged blokes out there now taking all sorts of stuff, just on club runs, to maintain a 20mph average over say, a 50 mile loop
avoid the shame of being dropped, on your 3 grand carbon!
If the drugs I take to keep me in good health have a performance enhancement, so what. I don't race for other than self satisfaction and fitness. Ignoring the fact the best I have ever done is come in the top 10 at my local timetrial.
That guy who came 11th was done out of 10th place
This story isn't about a guy with a condition who was prescribed medicines to treat it. It's about a guy who bought illicit performance enhancers on the internet. The rules look after us here. He didn't know who made them, what the actual dose is, or what kind of other junk is in there. The TUE system was developed for people with genuine medical need, who have been through a robust prescription process, like the one we use in the UK.
I joined British cycling ride membership with my fiance about 3 years ago and both of us remember specifically reading quite clearly that as a member were were subject to anti doping... we were warned!!
sounds like a thrilling evening spent with your fiancé, reading the BC Ts&Cs
I think we've all got it wrong...
It had nothing to do with his cycling ability...
...he bought the steroids from India because he wanted to work on his fore arms...
or 8...or 10
ScreenHunter_11 Oct. 27 20.49.gif
I do a little bit of doping now and again but I don't race - purely because my wife gets the hump when I'm late after saying I'll be back at 11, I need to get the club run finished as swiftly as possible.
Mmm..Googles nandrolone and testosterone from India.
I used to perform quality control for pharmaceuticals being legaly imported from India. The numbers that we had to reject for being out of specification was not very confidence inspiring.
Stick with the double espresso.
Personally I think a doping ban is far kinder than being prosecuted under the Misuse of Drugs Act. All of the testosterone and nandrolone products licenced for use in the UK are controlled drugs and are available only with a prescription.
As has already been mentioned, I'm more bothered that a personal import of steroids was somehow linked to your membership of a private organisation.
Can't wait until Lego come knocking on my door because I bought a Lepin Millennium Falcon on Aliexpress (not far off Lego quality in case anyone wondered)
.
They're illegal drugs. Similar to how I'd probably get kicked out of Shepherd's Bush Model Railway Club if I was caught coming back from Pakistan with five kilos of black-tar heroin.
Roids aren't illegal to actually possess and the importation bit of the law appears to be worded towards importing with intent to supply. I just imported some b12 ampules from Germany for injection as you have to get the doc to do it over here.
I think they aren't a potential gold mine of men's health if they ever get researched in proper clinical trials. Sadly they are 'dirty' in a sporting sense and associated with a lot of health myths. If I had the money and medical guidance I'd be on some test and hgh for injuries and general well being. If the guy that got busted knows what he's doing , let him do it. There's far worse health disasters walking our streets.
Be interesting to hear from BCF definitively whether "Fan" or "Ride" memberships mean you are subject to ADRs, but I suspect even if he wasn't a direct BC member he would still be covered by being a member of a BCF affiliated cycling club.
Under clause 38 of the ruling, "[...] Mr Edmonds shall not be permitted to participate in any capacity in a Competition, Event or other activity [...] organised, convened or authorised by:
So I guess he's now banned from the Mapperley CC (BCF affiliated) christmas party.
They are.
Its akin to asking a Man Utd Season ticket holder to agree to the WADA code.
I beleive its entirely disproportional.
Take for example somebody with a Chronic condition who is taking a prescription medicine, that just so happens to be defined as 'prohibited' out of competition under WADA.
By simply becoming a BC 'fan' or a ride member to cover himself for insurance purposes he is now committing an AD offence ?
Is that fair ? Reasonable ?
I dare say that many of the 125,000 members of BC and specifically the non competitive members do not know they are subject to AD rules , since they are buried in the terms and conditions. Having gone through the application process its very easy to fall foul of it and click through without reading the words 'ANTI DOPING READ THIS BEFORE YOU SIGN'
I would also like to know UKAD's view on wht BC think it appropriate to force AD rules on non competitive members since the WADA code is aimed at competive athletes.
My bet is that its further up in the constitution at Sport England Level that 'ALL' members of an NGO must adhere.
We seem in so many ways to have entered the age of no common sense. My caffine addiction will probably get me banned. Oh! am not a member of BC, cycle on.
Slightly more seriously. Whilst I strongly disagree with the use of steriods and would suggest no one should take them without proper medical supervision; the man is a free agent and as long as his usage does not detrimentally affect others and he is aware of and excepts the risks then the problem is all his.
Of course it's a good thing that, had he wanted to race, he wouldn't be allowed.
However I am surprised that BC would do this to an amateur member. He's unlikely to renew now and they need our subs to pay for lawyers to get Lizzie Armistead et. al. out of anti-doping bans, sending secret packages to France etc.
Pages