UCI president fights rearguard action

Prior to the press conference, many were calling for the resignation of the president Pat McQuaid writes SHANE STOKES

HE VOWED to introduce change in cycling yesterday but reactions to Pat McQuaid’s press conference performance showed that many remain to be convinced the necessary transformation will take place. The Irishman accepted it was probably the toughest moment in the history of cycling, yet refused to accept that resignations were necessary, or indeed that the UCI had made mistakes.

“The UCI has of course a responsibility in that regard,” he said, responding to a question about anti-doping. “The UCI’s role is to police and administer and regulate their sport. But at any point in time – and I think people need to be reasonable here and to understand – you have to put yourself in the date when these activities were going on. These activities that we are talking about are between 1998, 1999 and 2005.

“Cycling has changed a lot since then. What was available to the UCI at that time to confront situations like this was much more limited compared to what is there now . . . When we sent samples to laboratories and those samples came back negative, that is as much that we could do. Now we do a lot more than that.”

For many, though, McQuaid’s reassurances didn’t have the desired effect.

Prior to the press conference, many were calling for the resignation of the honorary president and management committee member Hein Verbruggen, who has been much criticised due to a perceived friendship with Lance Armstrong, his repeated downplaying of the doping problem over the years and his quoted insistence last year that Lance Armstrong had “never, never, never doped”.

He has also been damaged by testimony by some of Armstrong’s team-mates that the Texan told them he had tested positive in the 2001 Tour de Suisse, but that the issue would be taken care of by the UCI.

The governing body continues to insist it did nothing wrong, and states while his samples were suspicious for EPO, that they fell short of the required proof. Yet the UCI is resisting any suggestions that the Dutchman should go, and McQuaid is similarly insistent he too will stay in place.

“I have certainly no intention of resigning as president of the UCI,” he said.

McQuaid did state the management committee will meet Friday to study the situation and to work out what changes need to be made “to ensure that this kind of situation never happens again”.

He said the UCI also planned to speak with professional teams and race organisers, discussing the ramifications of the US Postal Service situation and determining what measures need to be introduced.

However any kudos those steps earned were overshadowed by his insistence that one of the most controversial aspects of Armstrong’s relationship with the UCI would remain in place.

On at least two occasions in the past the Texan made sizeable donations to the governing body, handing over a donation of $25,000 in 2002 and then pledging $100,000 three years later. The UCI said the latter was used to purchase a blood testing machine.

Given he had returned suspicious tests in 2001 and 2002, and had also tested positive for cortisone in 1999 but was cleared due to a backdated prescription, many felt the donations were completely inappropriate.

That’s a view which has been expressed by one of sport’s most respected anti-doping scientists, Dr Michael Ashenden, who said that riders should not be giving money to those who must also test them. Others have also raised concerns.

However while McQuaid has conceded that the UCI’s image was dented by the contributions, he said yesterday the UCI would continue to accept donations from big-name riders in the future.

“The UCI aren’t like Fifa with billions in the bank,” he said, by way of explanation. He said if famous riders came forward and wanted to give money to the organisation, it wouldn’t turn them away.

Looking under pressure while being questioned on the issue, it was an aspect of the conference which led to much criticism afterwards.

Stating that the UCI was determined to press on with its defamation case against Paul Kimmage also seemed badly judged, with yesterday’s turning point in the UCI’s relationship with Lance Armstrong doing nothing to change its stance against the anti-doping journalist who was one of the rider’s biggest critics.

“This is a defamation case, plain and simple,” said McQuaid.

But with contributions to an online defence fund for Kimmage continuing to grow, the prospects of another tough moment for the UCI looms on the horizon.

That case will be heard in December and with Kimmage suggesting he’ll bring a range of witnesses to the court, McQuaid and the UCI may find itself fielding further questions about the Armstrong era, plus its welcoming back four years ago of a rider who had question marks over his name for many years.

The Texan may be scrubbed from the record books, but his shadow remains and the ramifications continue.

McQUAID ON ARMSTRONG: Then and Now:

2010

“These guys coming out now with things like this from the past is only damaging the sport.”

2012

“Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. Lance Armstrong deserves to be forgotten in cycling.

USADA INVESTIGATION: TIMELINE:

2010

May:Armstrong's former US Postal team-mate Floyd Landis launches allegations..

2011

May:Armstrong denies claims made by former team-mate Tyler Hamilton they took performance-enhancing drugs together.

2012

February:An investigation into alleged doping by Armstrong is dropped by federal prosecutors in California.

June:United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) confirm they will file formal doping charges against Armstrong.

July:Armstrong files lawsuit against USADA accusing them of "corrupt inducements" to other cyclists to testify against him.

August 20th:Armstrong's legal action dismissed in court.

August 24th:Armstrong announces he will not fight doping charges filed against him but insists he is innocent. He is stripped of all his titles and banned from cycling for life by USADA.

October 10th:USADA claim 11 of Armstrong's former team-mates have testified against him.

October 22th:Cycling's governing body, the UCI confirms it has ratified USADA's decision to ban Armstrong from cycling for life and strip him of his seven Tour titles