- 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
- OnYerBike 56 sec ago
Yeah, doesn't look much better on the model photographed on Kostume's website either...
- Hirsute 4 min 16 sec ago
Avoided speeding cyclist
- chrisonabike 23 min 42 sec ago
I would prefer we stop "paying lip service to cycling infrastructure" and ... actually build proper cycling infrastructure (best guidelines in UK...
- Dnnnnnn 27 min 53 sec ago
Maybe so, and causing fear in someone to this extent should certainly be a crime. My initial responses were to those who specifically said there...
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 14 min ago
It's not as ideal as providing proper infrastructure, but I can't see that the UK is going to implement that....
- brooksby 1 hour 32 min ago
OK, my misunderstanding then.
- Grumpy17 1 hour 49 min ago
I was knocked off in very similar circumstances. There was absolutely no contesting the claim and I was paid out very quickly. We should ignore any...
- brooksby 1 hour 31 min ago
I think it's the stereotype of who votes Tory. Once you get out into the countryside south of the A369 heading out toward Nailsea, Tickenham, etc,...
- mctrials23 2 hours 14 min ago
I think this is the only data that they probably can't really assess accurately. They can tell how often, how long, what sort of stuff people do in...
Add new comment
51 comments
Personally, I think it's a good thing that they've jumped on it. Drugs have no place in sport at whatever level and so, if people are going to bleat about it from their moral high ground, why shouldn't we be held to account in the same way? Now, as the the way with most fine arguments, there is a glaring inconsistency, which is that there is no way that I am going to get a TUE for my asthma/hay fever medication, nor am I going to carefully study the label on Benylin or whatever if I start to cough and splutter. If I do compete (team time trials at a gentleman's pace), it will simply be to avoid complete humiliation by finishing behind the team that got two punctures.
However, some tit who buys rubbsh like that deserves said public humiliation in spades.
What a bizarre set of circumstances.
I've just looked at the BC website and discovered that they've got a whole new range of different memberships (race/ride/fan) which I'm sure didn't exist last year when I opted for silver race (even though I don't race and had it purely to have some form of insurance in place) membership. I'm not even sure if there was any mention of the 2015 doping regulations either, but that could be down to how the drugs have affected my memory
My fault entirely for being with BC I suppose but it's a bit harsh getting an automatic ban from all sports if I refuse a drugs test.
I don't even do all sports!
How UKAD did know he had them?
How did the border force know he was subject to UKAD?
Some nasty big brother stuff it seems.
Good point brooksby. I'm a 100% amateur, non-racing member of British Cycling. If I went on some dodgy website and ordered a load of steroids, would BC turn up asking for a blood sample?!
This whole issue is hilarious
.
wasn't it Wiggo who said if you're not a member of British Cycling then you're not a real cyclist?
Hmmmm, I'm a BC Race member (as it was cheaper than theur ride???). Don't race but do i need a TUE for the insulin I take, and would a large starbucks on the way to a sportive have potential to lead to a ban from playing darts in the future?
Sounds like BC is taking the piss.
I hope all the BC asthma sufferers not competing in any events have the correct TUEs in place in case BC rep comes a knocking....
you see, the trick is to give them to a BC employee and ask them to carry them over international borders - but don't open the box....
So it's possible to cheat without actually competing? And without knowing that you're cheating, cos you're not even intending to compete. I'm sure there's some logic there. Somewhere.
Cheers.
Now I know to order under a false name and send it to a pick up location in town if I ever feel the need to dope for the racing I'm not doing.
Why did he have to submit to a drugs test at all? Is there something in the BC membership small print which says you have to submit to drugs tests? Should all BC members have to tell BC where they are at all times, just in case?
If he doesn't competitively race, but just - for the sake of argument - joined BC for the insurance (I'm sure many people do) then what does it matter what he ingests?
If he was intending to supply, then that's a whole different thing.
(I'm a member of CTC, not BC
).
Sounds about right of the logic that comes out of BC
Actually that is part of the TUE protocol for amateurs.
amateur racers...absolutely, people who are just "members" of BC who have no intention of racing, and Ride membership doesnt even get you a race licence, just because BC havent updated their handbook since theyve introduced new levels of non-racing "membership"...err not sure a good chunk of the 75,000 BC members who joined since 2012 have any idea they signed up to that.
So, as a member of British cycling I am obliged to be available of drug testing? Whether I race or not?
Was just taken aback somewhat by this myself. I must admit I'd not read the small print or T&C's re BC membership, but still surprised by this.
Saying that, it might be the BC race membership this guy has, rather than the bog-standard Ride membership?
The BC website does say this:
Anti-doping, like sport is governed by rules. From 1 January 2015 a revised World Anti-Doping Code (2015 Code) comes into effect. As a member of a British Cycling, these anti-doping rules apply to you too regardless of what level you compete at.
Still a bit ambiguous, especially with the inclusion of the word 'compete'. I suppose if you don't compete, then why the hell would you take PEDs anyway? To get a PB on a Sportive?
Well in this case who knows,but technically anything on the WADA list that required a TUE would count wouldn't it if competition is loosely worded as just being a member of BC? ,like certain treatments for asthma,no not that one
but prednisone/prednisolone is commonly prescribed asthma treatment and would need a TUE to be compliant 'in competition'.
Can BC not give him a back dated TUE?
Mmmm, were they for someone else...?
Pages