CIRC désolé

March 10, 2015 § 20 Comments

The Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) released the results of its year-long investigation into doping, and CitSB sat down with the lead investigator, Jean-Claude Peut-être, to discuss the significance of the commission’s findings even as shock waves continue to roil the cycling community.

CitSB: After a full year of intensive research and investigation, the retention of a former war crimes prosecutor to head the effort, and a budget of €12 million, what is the commission’s most significant finding?

JP: There are actually three. First, Lance doped. Second, so did many others. Third, Betsy is still very angry.

CitSB: Wow. How confident are you regarding that first finding?

JP: I would say that we are probably 95% certain. When you add up the back-tested results, the statements of his former teammates, USADA’s Reasoned Decision, the finding of the arbitrator in his insurance case, his settlement with the Times of London, and his 12-hour confessional special on national TV, we think it’s highly likely that he doped. But of course nothing is 100% certain.

CitSB: This is going to destroy a lot of childhood dreams, isn’t it?

JP: Oh, yes. There are a lot of masters racers out there who will be taking off their yellow bracelets.

CitSB: And you are equally certain with regard to your second finding, that many others doped as well?

JP: Unfortunately, yes. We dug deeply into the history of the sport and learned some fairly shocking things which we frankly haven’t shied away from including in our report.

CitSB: Like what?

JP: Well, the biggest one is that doping has been around for a long time.

CitSB: Really? You mean that Wikipedia doping cheat web page is true?

JP: It appears to be.

CitSB: And it took you a year’s investigation and a €12 million budget to Google “doping in cycling” and click on the first link that came up?

JP: We had to be thorough.

CitSB: How is your report going to change cycling at the professional level?

JP: Fundamentally it will let cyclists at all levels know that the UCI and the organizations responsible for clean sport are now on the alert that doping used to exist, and that in all likelihood it still does.

CitSB: You’re suggesting that actual professional riders are still cheating?

JP: It’s possible.

CitSB: So when Chris Froome puts out 6.84 w/kg this past week on a mountaintop finish, you think that’s fishy?

JP: I wouldn’t say “fishy.” But It suggests that perhaps he may have an unfair performance advantage over other riders.

CitSB: Such as?

JP: Wheaties, perhaps.

CitSB: And what about corruption at the UCI? What were your findings in that regard?

JP: There was no corruption.

CitSB: Wow. What about that whole Verbruggen/McQuaid/Armstrong kerfuffle? You know, backdated TUE’s, giving Brochard a pass, letting Armstrong’s lawyer write up the results of the independent investigation, that stuff?

JP: It wasn’t corruption. There simply was no corruption.

CitSB: The preferential treatment of Armstrong to the detriment of other riders, bending the rules about Contador’s tainted meat? Accepting massive donations from a rider they were supposed to be monitoring? That wasn’t corruption? What was it?

JP: It wasn’t corruption. More like being bad boys. They were sort of bad boys, naughty, you know? Mischievous, even. But not corrupt.

CitSB: And what did the commission find regarding the current UCI and its president, Brian Cookson, who funded this completely independent report?

JP: We think he’s a wonderful chap, really, and look forward to working with him in the future.

CitSB: I’m sure you do.

END

————————

For $2.99 per month you can subscribe to this blog and learn how clean the professional sport has become and about how 6.84 w/kg is not fishy. Click here and select the “subscribe” link in the upper right-hand corner. Thank you!

You can also follow me on the Twitter here:

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

§ 20 Responses to CIRC désolé

  • Peter says:

    Meet the old boss, same as the new boss.

  • channel_zero says:

    The whole thing seems to be a scheme to get Hein to abdicate his assigned-for-life title at the UCI and apparently, in turn, get Lance’s ban reduced. Machiavellian stuff!!!

    One of the interesting things is the amount of cash the UCI uses to pay people. As in envelopes with currency in them. And then there was 12 million CHF spent in 14 days. IOC sports administration pays cash like a high level drug dealer!

    Maybe a post explaining how I get into the fast paced, exciting world of the local association? I hear there’s lots going on there. 🙂

  • Tom Paterson says:

    I might have forgotten what is important here, what is non-Schwinn-with-two-n’s-on-the-end paramount in this and all investigations into Cheating (aka “CHEATING!!!”) in Sport.

    OK OK, I *did* forget. It was all this talk of truth but mostly, reconciliation, and “moving forward”. Ha! They fooled me! And there I was, listening to the weasely-weevily sob-sisters who are talking about how He “Wasn’t any worse than the rest” and worse, that maybe He “doesn’t really deserve that iron-clad Lifetime Ban”. OMG, did he pay *them* off, too?

    Now I’ll go finish reading this episode. I saw the word “Betsy” in there, the rest should be pretty good, too.

    Thank you, CitSB. Elsewhere is waywardness.

  • dangerstu says:

    Obviously they need to spend more money on this. Maybe bring back Claude Réponse-évasive instead of Monsignor Peut-être.

    • dangerstu says:

      Because I’m cheap, had 15 minutes to spare and wanted to win some new Spys I filled in the US Cycling questionnaire last weekend. If your answers indicate they are doing a bad job they start asking questions about why. Unfortunately there was no check box to indicate that it makes my skin crawl that part of the membership fees goes straight to the UCI.

      • fsethd says:

        Worst part is that if you do a race you can’t get to the next screen unless you evaluate, even though there’s a “skip” option … which doesn’t work.

    • fsethd says:

      If money can’t fix their problems, they need bigger problems.

  • Winemaker says:

    I was up early today to begin the 2nd half of pruning the vines. Then, after fixing the oatmeal, I read this post, starting with Jean-Claude Peut-être. Gagged and spewed with violent laughter all that first bite.
    Your take on Mr. P-e reminds me of Northern France (or, for that part, every cheese eatin’ surrender monkey in residence south of Belgium) so much, as in:

    Winemaker: the route has a big hill in it near the end, right?
    Frog: peut-etre
    Winemaker: Well, I think the sprint is downhill, no?
    Frog: peut-etre
    Winemaker: Is this rain going to turn to sleet or snow?
    Frog: peut-etre

  • Jeffrey says:

    You don’t get paid enough to write this priceless blog, at least you get to say “panties” “wad” and “cash” in the same sentence without getting whacked!

  • New Girl says:

    A kerfuffle, indeed. Hilarious, Wanky. Thank you for writing.

  • GT says:

    Aww, Betsy got a mention.

  • Jim Bangs says:

    Along with this, I enjoy using and saying the word mischievous.

What’s this?

You are currently reading CIRC désolé at Cycling in the South Bay.

meta

%d bloggers like this: