Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
May 31st 2006 | 5:08 am
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
The following deals with a nasty interaction with
the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
with regard to information. Basically information
like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
by media demand.
`
On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
*****
Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance Armstrong
of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and accused anti-doping
authorities of misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.
A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible legal
and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider
"appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of Armstrong's
urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record seven-straight
Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO when
they were retested in 2004.
Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last
October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by the
French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym LNDD.
Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely
with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."
The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping
control forms to the French newspaper.
The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international
anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law.
Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and later
defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with Adriaan van
der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six years
ago, and how they were handled.
Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking of the
results to the French paper.
He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to the
people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on sanctions
if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the alleged
violations were.
The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report before
all parties involved in the case were informed.
"Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the content
before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a statement.
WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but, based on
what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of Vrijman's
findings.
"It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in determining
whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not," he told The
Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We were afraid of that from
the very beginning."
Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a reporter
from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples being linked to
Armstrong.
"Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch lawyer
with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading laboratories
in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally
exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
"Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews were
given to the media," the statement said.
"WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the matter
must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging information
regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also addressing the
question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by athletes."
The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
confidentiality regulations.
Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping control
forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month earlier this year.
He has since been reinstated.
The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports ministry,
WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic Committee also had
requested a copy.
The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen samples,
routinely held for eight years, should be used.
AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
The following deals with a nasty interaction with
the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
with regard to information. Basically information
like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
by media demand.
`
On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
*****
Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance Armstrong
of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and accused anti-doping
authorities of misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.
A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible legal
and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider
"appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of Armstrong's
urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record seven-straight
Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO when
they were retested in 2004.
Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last
October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by the
French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym LNDD.
Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely
with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."
The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping
control forms to the French newspaper.
The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international
anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law.
Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and later
defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with Adriaan van
der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six years
ago, and how they were handled.
Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking of the
results to the French paper.
He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to the
people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on sanctions
if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the alleged
violations were.
The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report before
all parties involved in the case were informed.
"Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the content
before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a statement.
WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but, based on
what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of Vrijman's
findings.
"It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in determining
whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not," he told The
Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We were afraid of that from
the very beginning."
Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a reporter
from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples being linked to
Armstrong.
"Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch lawyer
with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading laboratories
in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally
exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
"Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews were
given to the media," the statement said.
"WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the matter
must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging information
regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also addressing the
question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by athletes."
The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
confidentiality regulations.
Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping control
forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month earlier this year.
He has since been reinstated.
The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports ministry,
WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic Committee also had
requested a copy.
The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen samples,
routinely held for eight years, should be used.
AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
May 31st 2006 | 7:43 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
Earl Evleth wrote:
> This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
> It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
> The following deals with a nasty interaction with
> the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
> with regard to information. Basically information
> like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
> by media demand.
> `
> On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
Yep. My money's going on Alejandro Valverde
Jan
> *****
> Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
> By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
> AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance
> Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and
> accused anti-doping authorities of misconduct in dealing with the
> American cyclist.
> A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss
> possible legal and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency
> and to consider "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
> The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of
> Armstrong's urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his
> record seven-straight Tour titles, came back positive for the
> endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.
> Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
> The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman
> last October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999
> Tour by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its
> French acronym LNDD.
> Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong
> completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de
> France."
> The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing
> doping control forms to the French newspaper.
> The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
> completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of
> international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been
> against the law.
> Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and
> later defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with
> Adriaan van der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
> EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
> oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
> Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
> Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six
> years ago, and how they were handled.
> Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking
> of the results to the French paper.
> He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to
> the people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on
> sanctions if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the
> alleged violations were.
> The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report
> before all parties involved in the case were informed.
> "Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the
> content before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a
> statement.
> WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but,
> based on what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of
> Vrijman's findings.
> "It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in
> determining whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or
> not," he told The Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We
> were afraid of that from the very beginning."
> Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a
> reporter from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples
> being linked to Armstrong.
> "Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch
> lawyer with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading
> laboratories in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong
> is totally exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
> In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
> disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
> "Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
> should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews
> were given to the media," the statement said.
> "WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the
> matter must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging
> information regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also
> addressing the question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by
> athletes."
> The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
> confidentiality regulations.
> Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping
> control forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month
> earlier this year. He has since been reinstated.
> The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports
> ministry, WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic
> Committee also had requested a copy.
> The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen
> samples, routinely held for eight years, should be used.
> AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
> This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
> It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
> The following deals with a nasty interaction with
> the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
> with regard to information. Basically information
> like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
> by media demand.
> `
> On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
Yep. My money's going on Alejandro Valverde
Jan
> *****
> Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
> By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
> AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance
> Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and
> accused anti-doping authorities of misconduct in dealing with the
> American cyclist.
> A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss
> possible legal and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency
> and to consider "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
> The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of
> Armstrong's urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his
> record seven-straight Tour titles, came back positive for the
> endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.
> Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
> The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman
> last October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999
> Tour by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its
> French acronym LNDD.
> Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong
> completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de
> France."
> The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing
> doping control forms to the French newspaper.
> The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
> completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of
> international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been
> against the law.
> Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and
> later defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with
> Adriaan van der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
> EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
> oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
> Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
> Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six
> years ago, and how they were handled.
> Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking
> of the results to the French paper.
> He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to
> the people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on
> sanctions if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the
> alleged violations were.
> The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report
> before all parties involved in the case were informed.
> "Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the
> content before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a
> statement.
> WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but,
> based on what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of
> Vrijman's findings.
> "It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in
> determining whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or
> not," he told The Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We
> were afraid of that from the very beginning."
> Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a
> reporter from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples
> being linked to Armstrong.
> "Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch
> lawyer with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading
> laboratories in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong
> is totally exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
> In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
> disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
> "Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
> should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews
> were given to the media," the statement said.
> "WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the
> matter must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging
> information regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also
> addressing the question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by
> athletes."
> The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
> confidentiality regulations.
> Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping
> control forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month
> earlier this year. He has since been reinstated.
> The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports
> ministry, WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic
> Committee also had requested a copy.
> The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen
> samples, routinely held for eight years, should be used.
> AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
May 31st 2006 | 8:38 am
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
What was that ? Evleth a dope ?
Apparently evleth has been chased away from his death group by some sort of
troll...
so as he just HAS to spam about anything, here he is back again
"Earl Evleth" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
C0A39A28.A74E1%[email protected]...
> This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
> It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
> The following deals with a nasty interaction with
> the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
> with regard to information. Basically information
> like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
> by media demand.
> `
> On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
> *****
> Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
> By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
> AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance Armstrong
> of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and accused anti-doping
> authorities of misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.
> A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible
> legal
> and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider
> "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
> The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of
> Armstrong's
> urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record
> seven-straight
> Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO
> when
> they were retested in 2004.
> Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
> The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last
> October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by
> the
> French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym LNDD.
> Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely
> with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."
> The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping
> control forms to the French newspaper.
> The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
> completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international
> anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law.
> Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and later
> defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with Adriaan van
> der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
> EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
> oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
> Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
> Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six years
> ago, and how they were handled.
> Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking of
> the
> results to the French paper.
> He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to the
> people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on
> sanctions
> if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the alleged
> violations were.
> The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report before
> all parties involved in the case were informed.
> "Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the content
> before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a statement.
> WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but, based on
> what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of Vrijman's
> findings.
> "It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in determining
> whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not," he told The
> Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We were afraid of that from
> the very beginning."
> Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a reporter
> from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples being linked to
> Armstrong.
> "Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch lawyer
> with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading
> laboratories
> in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally
> exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
> In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
> disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
> "Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
> should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews were
> given to the media," the statement said.
> "WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the
> matter
> must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging information
> regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also addressing the
> question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by athletes."
> The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
> confidentiality regulations.
> Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping control
> forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month earlier this
> year.
> He has since been reinstated.
> The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports ministry,
> WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic Committee also had
> requested a copy.
> The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen
> samples,
> routinely held for eight years, should be used.
> AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
>
troll...
so as he just HAS to spam about anything, here he is back again
"Earl Evleth" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
C0A39A28.A74E1%[email protected]...
> This years tour de France begins in a little over a month.
> It is a whole new ball game, with Armstrong.
> The following deals with a nasty interaction with
> the media (L'Equipe) and those having responsibility
> with regard to information. Basically information
> like this should be handle in "toute tranquillité", not influenced
> by media demand.
> `
> On with the next Tour de France. May the best Spaniard win.
> *****
> Report clears Armstrong of doping in 1999 Tour de France
> By ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer
> AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) -- Dutch investigators cleared Lance Armstrong
> of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, and accused anti-doping
> authorities of misconduct in dealing with the American cyclist.
> A 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible
> legal
> and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider
> "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."
> The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of
> Armstrong's
> urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record
> seven-straight
> Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO
> when
> they were retested in 2004.
> Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.
> The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last
> October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by
> the
> French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym LNDD.
> Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely
> with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."
> The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping
> control forms to the French newspaper.
> The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are
> completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international
> anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law.
> Vrijman, who headed the Dutch anti-doping agency for 10 years and later
> defended athletes accused of doping, worked on the report with Adriaan van
> der Veen, a scientist with the Dutch Metrology Laboratory.
> EPO, or erythropoietin, is a synthetic hormone that boosts the
> oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood.
> Testing for EPO only began in 2001.
> Armstrong had challenged the validity of testing samples frozen six years
> ago, and how they were handled.
> Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking of
> the
> results to the French paper.
> He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to the
> people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on
> sanctions
> if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the alleged
> violations were.
> The UCI said it was upset with Vrijman for commenting on the report before
> all parties involved in the case were informed.
> "Upon reception of the document, the UCI will study in details the content
> before publishing it in its whole," the UCI said in a statement.
> WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but, based on
> what he had read in news accounts, was highly critical of Vrijman's
> findings.
> "It's clearly everything we feared. There was no interest in determining
> whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not," he told The
> Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We were afraid of that from
> the very beginning."
> Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a reporter
> from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples being linked to
> Armstrong.
> "Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch lawyer
> with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading
> laboratories
> in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally
> exonerated seems strange," Pound said.
> In a separate statement, WADA expressed "grave concern and strong
> disappointment" over Vrijman's reported comments.
> "Elementary courtesy and professionalism would have dictated that WADA
> should have been provided with a copy of the report before interviews were
> given to the media," the statement said.
> "WADA continues to stress its concern that an investigation into the
> matter
> must consider all aspects -- not limited to how the damaging information
> regarding athletes' urine samples became public, but also addressing the
> question of whether anti-doping rules were violated by athletes."
> The anti-doping lab at Chatenay-Malabry has been accused of violating
> confidentiality regulations.
> Mario Zorzoli, the doctor who gave copies of Armstrong's doping control
> forms to L'Equipe, was suspended by the UCI for one month earlier this
> year.
> He has since been reinstated.
> The full report was sent to the UCI, the LNDD, the French sports ministry,
> WADA and Armstrong's lawyer. The International Olympic Committee also had
> requested a copy.
> The accusations against Armstrong raised questions about how frozen
> samples,
> routinely held for eight years, should be used.
> AP Sports Writer Stephen Wilson in London contributed to this report.
>
