UCI does not plan to appeal Armstrong's lifetime ban

Pat McQuaid to examine USADA case file

by Sarah Barth   September 8, 2012  

Lance Armstrong (pic courtesy Photosport International)

The UCI President Pat McQuaid has said that the cycle sport governing body has 'no intention' to appeal against the USADA decision to ban Lance Armstrong for life.

Late last month, the USADA formally banned Armstrong for life, and disqualified him from all results since 1 August 1998. Armstrong says that only the UCI has the power to sanction him and protests his innocence.

The UCI is yet to receive the case file on the decision, but McQuaid told Reuters that there was no reason not to believe it was all in order.

He said: "The UCI has no reason to assume that a full case file does not exist. They (USADA) have a full case file so let them provide the full case file.

"And unless the USADA's decision and case file give serious reasons to do otherwise, the UCI has no intention to appeal to CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) or not to recognise the USADA's sanctions on Lance Armstrong.

"We need to examine the decision and the file in order to deal with it properly and this is going to take some time. However, I can assure you that this will be prioritised.

"The reason the UCI is seeking the file is that we want to provide a timely response and not delay matters any further than necessary. The sooner we receive the full decision and case file the sooner we can provide its response."

McQuaid also addressed the allegations made by Armstrong's former team mate Tyler Hamilton in his book, "The Secret Race: Inside the Hidden World of the Tour de France: Doping, Cover-ups and Winning at All Costs". Hamilton claims that Armstrong failed a dope test in 2001 but that it was covered up by the UCI, an allegation that has dogged the rider.

"There is nothing new. There was no cover up in 2001 and we see no evidence to support such allegation," he said.

He added: "When people time the arrival of books to meet certain situations I question what their real motivations are. Is it to make money?"

 

 

 

9 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

Methinks Pat McQuaid protesteth too much.

Paul W

posted by PaulVWatts [111 posts]
8th September 2012 - 19:12

1 Like

Looks like Pat Mc Quaid is abandoning Lance Armstrong in the hope that the UCI's good name (sic) remains unsullied. Careful Pat, Lance's reputation for vindictiveness is not entirely undeserved, and it would be the supreme irony if it were him that brought the whole house of cards crashing down.

posted by The Rumpo Kid [590 posts]
8th September 2012 - 20:05

1 Like

It's a little rich of Pat to suggest Hamilton's motives are money lead. I would imagine much of the UCI's sloth over the last decade has been motivated by a desire to protect revenue and hope the storm blows over. The UCI needs a good sweeping out. .I hope they get it.

Silly me. You're probably right....

MercuryOne's picture

posted by MercuryOne [1084 posts]
8th September 2012 - 20:15

1 Like

Agree with comments above. Given USADA's forthcoming report and Tyler Hamilton's book, they didn't really have much choice - side with Lance and in many peoples minds you are pro doping.

The bigger question for me about the UCI is why are these sports governing bodies so universally bad, inept, incompetent, corrupt etc.? FIFA, UEFA, IOC - all dreadful. UCI is in good company.

Pastaman

posted by pastaman [221 posts]
8th September 2012 - 21:09

1 Like

There rotten because there's no transparency and accountability other than to themselves - they're self selecting, self governing, swiss registered. The same reasons that saw UK MP's rip off the electors via the expenses system, Banks rob us blind, Company boards awarding themselves piss taking salary and bonus hikes whilst "reducing overheads" . The UCI needs to understand that without the discipline of a wider constituency to which it's directly accountable it must be a paragon of transparency and openness. No wonder its inept - try finding the UCI income & expenditure accounts on its website . . . .

Sudor

posted by Sudor [183 posts]
9th September 2012 - 7:23

0 Likes

Big surprise, Pat and Hein prepared Larry under the bus to save their own skins.....the Dons of the UCI can't sustain the Omerta anymore and deserve everything that's heading their way.
In the late 90s/early00s their sole focus way on screwing the global media-rights to major races away from the event organisers and Larry was their golden-ticket for success after the Festina scandal. With the prospects of millions of gullible people believing in the Miracle of Lance, plus big corporate sponsorship - all they needed to do was make sure nobody tested positive...

Make mine an Italian with Campagnolo on the side

posted by monty dog [377 posts]
9th September 2012 - 9:55

1 Like

UCI = Equally Guilty

UCI = Dopers Stooges

UCI = FINISHED

Brummmie's picture

posted by Brummmie [56 posts]
9th September 2012 - 20:18

2 Likes

""There is nothing new. There was no cover up in 2001 and we see no evidence to support such allegation," [Pat McQuaid] said." - you say you didn't see any evidence Pat, but did you look for any?

posted by Sadly Biggins [266 posts]
10th September 2012 - 9:15

2 Likes

This is a non-story really, isn't it?

"unless the USADA's decision and case file give serious reasons to do otherwise, the UCI has no intention to appeal to CAS"

So, McQuaid is not definitely ruling out an appeal to CAS, as the headline suggests. He's still waiting to see the USADA's evidence and will THEN make his (the UCI's) decision. I'm assuming the USADA's evidence will leave him little or no wiggle room, but we'll have to wait and see.

posted by Clenbutador [15 posts]
10th September 2012 - 14:05

0 Likes