Iannone Ban Extended
Discussion
Brutal. Especially since it's not even been established how big a performance advantage it would have given.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
Prof Prolapse said:
Brutal. Especially since it's not even been established how big a performance advantage it would have given.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
of course, just bend over and take it, don't waste everyone's time defending yourselfThat said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
Ho Lee Kau said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Brutal. Especially since it's not even been established how big a performance advantage it would have given.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
of course, just bend over and take it, don't waste everyone's time defending yourselfThat said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
That's why the penalty was raised by such a significant amount.....
Steve Bass said:
Ho Lee Kau said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Brutal. Especially since it's not even been established how big a performance advantage it would have given.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
of course, just bend over and take it, don't waste everyone's time defending yourselfThat said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
That's why the penalty was raised by such a significant amount.....
Ho Lee Kau said:
Steve Bass said:
Ho Lee Kau said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Brutal. Especially since it's not even been established how big a performance advantage it would have given.
That said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
of course, just bend over and take it, don't waste everyone's time defending yourselfThat said, that's now two reviews concluded says he took it intentionally, and rather than take it on the chin he then wasted everyone's time with an appeal.
Should have pled guilty. It's certainly a deterrent.
That's why the penalty was raised by such a significant amount.....
Ok whatever...
FredericRobinson said:
As I understand it the drug in question helps with weight loss, he was saying before the test failure was announced that he'd lost 7kg, 7kg is a significant advantage
And originally developed for the treatment of inoperable breat cancers but no longer marketed.And given its properties unlikely to be used in the advancement of animal development or growth.
Have to admit the more comes out the more I think he deliberately took it to aid his fitness and weight loss regime and the less likely I find his accidental doping claims. He offered no further evidence at his appeal and had been under pressure to boost his fitness at the time; perhaps a reason for the (immense) loyalty from Aprilia during this period is collusion?
hiccy18 said:
Have to admit the more comes out the more I think he deliberately took it to aid his fitness and weight loss regime and the less likely I find his accidental doping claims. He offered no further evidence at his appeal and had been under pressure to boost his fitness at the time; perhaps a reason for the (immense) loyalty from Aprilia during this period is collusion?
I can imagine Aprilia putting pressure on for better fitness but no one in their right mind would leave a trail back to the team. Andrea admits to losing 7kgs which wouldn't be an issue for my fat ass but he wasn't carrying much to begin with!
Sadly he probably followed his "trainer's " advice believing the drug would be untraceable in a couple of days.
Where he fell foul though is having no credible evidence as to what meat he ate was contaminated or evidence of similar contamination.
Sadly, CAS has little option in the absence of credible substation to consider the consumption a wilful act.
Problem is that anyone can then take anything and claim contamination of food and get away with it. Sadly, some innocents will fall because of their inability to prove their innocence, possibly Andrea being one. But maybe not.
Cheeses of Nazareth said:
Its a s
t situation where the bans are designed around the Olympic cycle so 4 years... with how marginal so e of these things are, for me 6 months first offence , 1 year second... gives a guy a chance to not turn an innocent mistake into a career ending issue.
Is it an innocent mistake though? Or do you mean the innocent mistake was getting caught?
t situation where the bans are designed around the Olympic cycle so 4 years... with how marginal so e of these things are, for me 6 months first offence , 1 year second... gives a guy a chance to not turn an innocent mistake into a career ending issue.unident said:
Is it an innocent mistake though? Or do you mean the innocent mistake was getting caught?
In this instance i dont know, you would have to ask if it was possible to accidentally have the levels found , or if it a genuine case of guilty as charged.We have seen MX guys in the US banned for what is basically trace amounts they have have found in stuff that shoukd not be there in the first place.
Its difficult to compare cases, but its easy to get caught out , having gained zero advantage, or not even being aware.
And the FIM are s
t at getting this stuff pushed through... in the NFL they get caught , and banned , and are back playing befire our guys even know what they are actually going to charged with.Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff



