TechPowered By

More tech

Pound: UCI must have known about doping

By:
Cycling News
Published:
October 14, 2012, 16:33 BST,
Updated:
October 14, 2012, 17:24 BST
Edition:
First Edition Cycling News, Sunday, October 14, 2012
WADA chairman Dick Pound Photo: © AFP

WADA chairman Dick Pound Photo: © AFP

view thumbnail gallery

Says timing of doping controls during races also suspicious

Former World Anti-Doping Agency president Dick Pound has said that it “is not credible” that the UCI did not know about doping in the peloton. He also blamed the scheduling of doping controls and race stages for abetting doping.

“It is not credible that they didn’t know this was going on,” Pound told the AFP news agency.  “I had been complaining to UCI for years.”

“They can’t be so blind to not know this was going on.”

During races, the doping controllers would test the riders in the early morning hours, leaving the riders free for several hours with the possibility of then taking doping products, he suggested.

“The race starts at 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. in the afternoon and there are no tests prior to the race to see if they are bumped up,” he said. There was then an unchaperoned hour before further tests.

“So then you go in and get saline solutions and other means of hiding the effects (of) EPO and whatever else it is,” he said. “You have to say, ‘I wonder if it was designed not to be successful?’”

Pound praised the USADA report, although he was appalled by its contents. “I thought it was a very thoroughly researched report with evidence sworn or otherwise,” he said. “I was disappointed to see the extent of the scheme and of the conspiracy and the large number of people involved in it.”

He also questioned how Lance Armstrong would deal with things. “I don’t think it is credible for Armstrong to say ‘all 26 of these people are liars and cheats and ax grinders. I am afraid his time has just run out on that.

“What is going to be a surprise is (if) after all this, Lance persists in saying he never did it. He’s already lost in the court of public opinion.”

Back to top