Don't miss

Replay


LATEST SHOWS

EYE ON AFRICA

Benin feels the pinch of Nigeria's economic woes

Read more

BUSINESS DAILY

Deutsche Bank shares recover after turbulent week

Read more

MEDIAWATCH

Inside Aleppo: 'Feels like prison'

Read more

THE WORLD THIS WEEK

The Legacy of Shimon Peres, The Battle of Aleppo (Part 1)

Read more

THE WORLD THIS WEEK

Trump-Clinton Debate, Colombia Peace Deal, Death of the BlackBerry (Part 2)

Read more

FRANCE IN FOCUS

Backstage at Paris Fashion Week

Read more

FASHION

Paris Fashion Week: Saint Laurent, Lanvin, present new designers

Read more

#THE 51%

Online and proud: Iranian women use social media in a campaign for equality

Read more

#TECH 24

Say hello to Pepper!

Read more

Sports

UCI in fresh spat with French anti-doping agency

Text by News Wires

Latest update : 2009-10-30

The International Cycling Union (UCI) has fired back at France's anti-doping agency, blasting a French report that suggested the cycling governing body had given the Astana team an easy ride in the Tour de France.

AFP - The International Cycling Union (UCI) on Thursday reopened a war of words with the French anti-doping agency AFLD in blasting an AFLD report which suggested the Union had favoured the Astana team in the Tour de France.

The French earlier this month released a critical report suggesting the UCI gave an easy ride to the team of star riders Lance Armstrong and Alberto Contador but the UCI blasted the allegation as "totally unfounded" and hinted they would in future seek a "neutral" partner for doping tests carried out in France.

French media suggested strongly that Astana enjoyed preferential treatment from drug-testers at the race including flexibility on the time of the test, and the UCI hit out once again at the insinuations.

"The UCI did not actually need the services of AFLD. The role of the AFLD according to the agreement was modest. In short, they provided the doctors to assist our Doping Control Officers. The UCI also agreed to ollaborate on targeted testing before and during the event, based on our respective information sources.

"While the UCI Anti-Doping programme always welcomes independent and professional scrutiny, the AFLD did not seek that role in the agreement with the UCI.

"The AFLD’s unilateral decision to conduct an informal observer programme, with the unfortunate result of an untimely, incomplete, misinformed and inaccurate report is puzzling and disappointing. It calls into question the motives of AFLD," the UCI noted.

"Now that the Tour is over, it is even more evident that Astana received absolutely no special treatment, except in the sense of their riders being subject to considerably more doping controls than other riders," the UCI went on.

"In fact the top individual Astana riders received more than three times the number of tests of most other riders in the race."

The UCI concluded in a further barb that "it is important for everyone to understand that AFLD is far from perfect in the implementation of their own anti-doping activities.

"By the start of the Tour, UCI had conducted 190 out-of competition tests on riders short listed for the Tour, while AFLD had conducted 13 tests. Of these, six were on French riders whom they have access to test all year round. But of great significance is that five of the samples collected from riders in the same French team, were sent to the laboratory with the full names and details of the riders.

"This completely invalidates the anonymous chain of custody requirements of the Code and International Standard of Testing."

The UCI further complained it had to endure "a lack of confidentiality from AFLD" and several UCI international races went without adequate doping control because of the failure of AFLD to fulfil their commitment to the French Cycling Federation and the UCI to send doctors to conduct testing."
 

Date created : 2009-10-30

  • CYCLING

    Armstrong's RadioShack granted ProTour licence for next four years

    Read more

  • CYCLING

    Police target Astana in new doping case

    Read more

COMMENT(S)