Yolande de Villiers sanctioned for anti-doping rule violation

Nice person, salt of the earth etc. Not a doper. Only Lance type personalities dope. 

Fair point, she's a doper... not debating that. But are all dopers really made equal?

Why do you suppose she declared her doping for 4yrs if it was a malicious act?

I don't have proof of the above, just several peoples word on it, but it definitely does seem to explain the incredibly lenient ban she recieved  

Maybe SAIDS saving face since it took them 3yrs to bust someone that was regularly, albeit unknowingly declaring her doping?

Fair point, she's a doper... not debating that. But are all dopers really made equal?

 

Why do you suppose she declared her doping for 4yrs if it was a malicious act?

I don't have proof of the above, just several peoples word on it, but it definitely does seem to explain the incredibly lenient ban she recieved

 

Maybe SAIDS saving face since it took them 3yrs to bust someone that was regularly, albeit unknowingly declaring her doping?

I just cannot believe the incredibly bad luck these athletes have. 

If you have a look at the Elite testing pool for MTB in South Africa you probably have 10 ladies and 20 guys that will be winning 80% or more of the races. So for 4 years she was taking meds (if the story is to be believed) and she was totally unaware of the existence of a list of banned substances or the need for a TUE when taking these substances. 

The explanation leaves me reasonably certain that there was no attempt to cheat here. But rules are rules and a rider competing at high level should make an effort to get to know them.

But there are other guilty parties here.......guilty perhaps of an uncaring attitude and not nurturing our sport as we would expect them to.

CSA could have included in its public statement that no evidence of an intent to cheat was found, simply that the penalty was administrative for failing to follow the rules....instead they made a very minimal statement that hid their own ( and SAIDS) shortcomings and allowed her reputation to be trashed in public.

The reason I say there were shortcomings are multiple:

1) the athlete disclosed the use of prescription medicine when tested....multiple times.... but wasn't ever advised of the correct procedure or assisted with it?

2) so much time went by between testing and discilinary action that the athlete continued to compete in good faith, racking up podiums and prize money to the extent that she is now much more embarrassed by events than was necessary. This administrative negligence was also detrimental to other cyclists that followed all the rules. Why culdn't they have suspended her after the first declaration of using a listed substance without a TUE and helped her to get it sorted.

3) announcing the ban after its period has already elapsed shows that serious administrative deficiencies exist and yet no acknowledgment of this in a statement, nor any public commitment to improve the administrative rules that allowed this to happen.

These authorities are mandated by their members to govern the sport on our behalf and we pay fees for this service. As such they are answerable to their members (us) when they fail. Hiding does not cut it with me.

I think cyclists deserve better treatment.

I just cannot believe the incredibly bad luck these athletes have. 

 

If you have a look at the Elite testing pool for MTB in South Africa you probably have 10 ladies and 20 guys that will be winning 80% or more of the races. So for 4 years she was taking meds (if the story is to be believed) and she was totally unaware of the existence of a list of banned substances or the need for a TUE when taking these substances. 

Hey, that's my line! 

I think she's pretty lucky... got to ride for three years longer than she maybe should of!

You got another explanation for the overly lenient ban???

And yes, I'm going a bit on gut here too    

Huh, actually yes. She received a lifetime ban from the Epic. And she has to pay back prize money.

 

I believe that she made a mistake. Not all Drs are knowledgeable on elite athletes and meds and SAIDS and UCI and and and and....

Can you please point to the source saying she has to pay back all the prize money won in 2015, as well as sponsorship money? And also that it's going to the next people moving up one position?

If you are an elite athlete, would you not visit a doctor that knows about sport and the prohibited list? If you want a divorce, do you go to a patent lawyer?

I tend to agree with you that it looks like she made an honest mistake, but the rules are the rules and she cheated. End-van-prent.

Hey, that's my line! 

 

I think she's pretty lucky... got to ride for three years longer than she maybe should of!

 

You got another explanation for the overly lenient ban???

 

And yes, I'm going a bit on gut here too    

Andrew I do feel that is part of the problem, how long did she ride on the stuff, "declaring" it on the forms before SAIDS took action? Why did they not nail/warn her immediately the first time she declared it? If what she said is true I can't blame her for naively thinking that SAIDS was ok with her making a declaration on her TUE form as she was doing it for months/years(?)

Hey, that's my line! 

 

I think she's pretty lucky... got to ride for three years longer than she maybe should of!

 

You got another explanation for the overly lenient ban???

 

And yes, I'm going a bit on gut here too    

I'm tempted to ask again.....What ban? Seems like the only race she missed was Pioneer. 

Combination of clever/naive athletes and incompetent testing authorities the reason why we find ourselves here today? 

I'm tempted to ask again.....What ban? Seems like the only race she missed was Pioneer. 

 

Combination of clever/naive athletes and incompetent testing authorities the reason why we find ourselves here today? 

Yip, basically no racing ban... Why?

I think I know why.

Transparency? Maybe one day in our dreams...

Why does nobody ask SAIDS the hard questions?

Where are CSA in all this?

BUT the still use different strokes for different oaks.

There is ZERO consistency in the way the hand out the bans.

I just cannot believe the incredibly bad luck these athletes have. 

 

If you have a look at the Elite testing pool for MTB in South Africa you probably have 10 ladies and 20 guys that will be winning 80% or more of the races. So for 4 years she was taking meds (if the story is to be believed) and she was totally unaware of the existence of a list of banned substances or the need for a TUE when taking these substances. 

Agree, and look at this from a different angle.

With such a small testing pool, why does it take 4 years for SAIDS/CSA to get a positive test result from Yolande?

Strengthen by the fact that she declared the use at every doping control?

Yip, basically no racing ban... Why?

I think I know why.

 

Transparency? Maybe one day in our dreams...

Why does nobody ask SAIDS the hard questions?

Where are CSA in all this?

Can somebody help explain why everybody is banging on about SAIDS when it was the UCI that handled this case? As far as I understand the process, SAIDS did the test but the actual analysis was handled by an independent lab (at UFS) and then the UCI decided what steps to take against the athlete

Can somebody help explain why everybody is banging on about SAIDS when it was the UCI that handled this case? As far as I understand the process, SAIDS did the test but the actual analysis was handled by an independent lab (at UFS) and then the UCI decided what steps to take against the athlete

True

SAIDS does tests and analysis etc etc.

CSA / UCI then decides the punishment after a hearing with the athlete.

Somewhere in the process there are long delays that do not serve the cyclists whose racing and registration fees ultimately fund these organisations.

From sample collection on race day to SAIDS to UCI to CSA or whatever, substantial delays are occurring. These delays prejudice both the guilty parties and the compliant cyclists that should be earning the podiums and all that goes with that. Even if you will never step on a podium these delays even ultimately affect your seeding at your next race because the authorities are not timeously removing cyclists who should not be competing.

I understand that hearings are involved and that the accused have the right to respond and explain but why not suspend a cyclist's competition license as soon as an adverse result occurs so that the rest of us can compete fairly while they sort their issues out. If the investigation results in no sanction, the cyclist's license is re-instated - he/she ony loses out on a few events that occurred while the investigation was underway.

Maar wag so bietjie.....how can a PRO athlete make such a statement....even us fat and overweight laymen know the process.....

I think we need to start a service for these poor elite athletes who seem to have more athletic ability than intellectual capability and start a thread called something like "Are my drugs banned?".  And then us more astute laymen types can assist them in reading the enclosed leaflet and googling the active ingredients and matching it to banned substances. We can extend this service to SAIDS as well, who, although it was allegedly declared to them a number of times, seemed to be unable to determine whether Adco-Retic contains banned substances or not. Quite embarrassing for all parties involved.

Somewhere in the process there are long delays that do not serve the cyclists whose racing and registration fees ultimately fund these organisations.

From sample collection on race day to SAIDS to UCI to CSA or whatever, substantial delays are occurring. These delays prejudice both the guilty parties and the compliant cyclists that should be earning the podiums and all that goes with that. Even if you will never step on a podium these delays even ultimately affect your seeding at your next race because the authorities are not timeously removing cyclists who should not be competing.

I understand that hearings are involved and that the accused have the right to respond and explain but why not suspend a cyclist's competition license as soon as an adverse result occurs so that the rest of us can compete fairly while they sort their issues out. If the investigation results in no sanction, the cyclist's license is re-instated - he/she ony loses out on a few events that occurred while the investigation was underway.

Because the process also has to be fair on the sponsors of said rider who are expecting an appearance to deliver against the backing. It's a complex juggling at slowed down by bureaucracy that seems unavoidable. The obvious solution is better tests that can deliver same day results but something has to fund the research into that. Gas chromatography testing is not really portable with a truck of sorts and even so the test takes hours in set up and execution. A "litmus" type test would be brilliant but don't know of any for the compounds in question.the manufacturers could come on board and apply biomarkers to the compounds do that you test for the presence of the marker . Litmus type tests exist for these.

Snip< manufacturers could come on board and apply biomarkers to the compounds do that you test for the presence of the marker . Litmus type tests exist for these.> Snip

and why would manufacturers of "banned" substances want to put in markers?

and why would manufacturers of "banned" substances want to put in markers?

For the same reason that SAB sponsors the "Don't Drink and Drive Campaigns".

It looks good........

and why would manufacturers of "banned" substances want to put in markers?

Because all legal "banned" substances are actually valid pharmaceutical compounds that, in addition to having medicinal uses, confer an illegal benefit to athletes.

The problem I think is the cost and hassle of re-testing and registration of the new composition.

Because the process also has to be fair on the sponsors of said rider who are expecting an appearance to deliver against the backing. It's a complex juggling at slowed down by bureaucracy that seems unavoidable. The obvious solution is better tests that can deliver same day results but something has to fund the research into that. Gas chromatography testing is not really portable with a truck of sorts and even so the test takes hours in set up and execution. A "litmus" type test would be brilliant but don't know of any for the compounds in question.the manufacturers could come on board and apply biomarkers to the compounds do that you test for the presence of the marker . Litmus type tests exist for these.

I don't think we are ever likely to see on-site same-day testing for such a long and complex list of substances. Quite complicated instrumentation is required together with complex preparation and quality control procedures. You would also find that multiple lab techs are required for such a range of analyses.....rare to find all that expertise in one person.

The months/years of delay that we are seeing are not attributable solely to laboratory issues though.

so it looks like she's back racing (albeit trail running)

stalker

Maybe she should take up tennis. Oh wait, they test them there too!

So miss de Villiers is racing at zuurberg stage race in addo this weekend....obv they don't have any policies against dopers

Till when is she sanctioned?

It ran last year and she was allowed to race during the sanction without any explanation from CSA.