Troubling questions about probe into syringes linked to Armstrong's former team

PARIS - There is something fishy about France's latest probe into the former team of seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong.

Leaving no stones - or in this case, syringes - unturned in the battle against doping is commendable. Unless, of course, the investigation proves to be little more than a vendetta against the cyclist some French love to hate, convinced as they are that the cancer-survivor can only have triumphed through doping.

The facts: After this year's Tour, French police descended on a waste management firm, Cosmolys, that many teams use to dispose of their medical trash - bloody bandages, used sticking plasters, etc. The officers seized 15 containers, according to a French judicial official who was happy to brief reporters about the probe but not to be identified by name.

The officers went through the boxes. All of them checked out except one that the judicial official says was labeled as belonging to Armstrong's Astana team. The official says the box was stuffed with a "large quantity" of syringes and, most alarming, equipment for doing intravenous infusions. Under the World Anti-Doping Code, such IV drips are banned without a compelling medical need.

This paraphernalia is now being inspected by a laboratory, Toxlab, which also worked on the investigation into Princess Diana's death. It is looking at whether the syringes contained substances banned for athletes and, if so, whether blood specks on some needles can, through DNA analysis, be traced to riders.

Now for the troubling aspects.

The probe comes amid a public dispute between the UCI, which governs world cycling, and France's anti-doping agency, known by its French initials AFLD.

Ideally, they should be partners. But they don't trust each other. Officials at the AFLD suspect the UCI isn't doing everything it could against doping. In a 10-page report to the UCI that leaked to French media, the agency this month accused the cycling body of messing up drug tests at this year's Tour. Perhaps most damagingly, it claimed that the UCI's testers granted "privileged treatment" to Astana, which Tour champion Alberto Contador also rides for.

The view at the UCI is that AFLD officials are unreliable publicity hounds. To rid cycling of its drug-tainted image, the UCI has spent a small fortune building one of the most sophisticated anti-doping programs in sports. It rejoiced that, for the first time in years, no rider tested positive at this year's Tour. It is miffed at AFLD suggestions that its efforts are still full of holes.

The syringe probe could work in AFLD's favour by giving an impression that there may have been nefarious goings-on at the Tour that the UCI missed or ignored.

But what prompted police to search the bins in the first place? Did they have legitimate reasons or are they being manipulated by people seeking to embarrass Armstrong and the UCI? Would they have gone to such lengths with other sports? They are refusing to comment on this case.

"We never hear of police going through the bins at Roland Garros or after a football match," notes Gerard Guillaume, a doctor for French team Francaise des Jeux.

What is clear is that the probe was kept quiet for three months until last week, when word leaked to French media just before Armstrong flew to Paris for the unveiling of next year's Tour route. The timing took some shine off the ceremony. Armstrong and Contador faced questions.

"I'm confident that our team has been racing clean," Armstrong said.

"I'm absolutely relaxed," Contador added.

Even if one assumes that someone at Astana cheated, it's difficult to believe they would throw the evidence in the trash. Doctors from other teams say Cosmolys' waste containers aren't sealed, so anyone could conceivably stuff them with needles to tarnish Astana. There also are legitimate reasons why a team might need syringes - for vitamin injections, for instance.

That doesn't mean police shouldn't investigate. Intravenous equipment found in 2007 in a bin in Lucerne, Switzerland, was traced through DNA analysis to eight Russian rowers who were banned for two years. Police will deserve applause if their doggedness turns up Tour cheats.

But if Astana is exonerated, will the same people who put Armstrong and cycling in the spotlight by leaking word on the probe say sorry?

Don't count on it.

-

John Leicester is an international sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at jleicester(at)ap.org

11 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. Robert
    11. Posted by Robert Wed Oct 21 5:33pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    It is my understanding, and forgive me if what was written in the news media was not your understanding, that Frankie Andreu never actually saw Lance take EPO. They only heard Lance tell a doctor in 1996 that he took EPO (several years before his first tour win). If I'm not mistaken, there is still no irrefutable evidence (by former teammates or others) that he actually doped. They only felt the pressure from him to do so. Andreu himself admitted to taking EPO for a few races in 1999 and another teammate indicated they took it but not during the Tour. So what are we supposed to believe? The results from the so called lab testing the French undertook indicated that he might have taken it during the 1999 tour but again - do we know for sure those samples were definitely his after 8 or 9 years? Who knows. I'm not advocating giving him a free pass at all. Personally I believe he is a bit of an arrogant ass. I had a roomate in college who went to school with Lance at Plano East who said he was the biggest jerk there. If there were irrefutable proof that he doped in '99, then I say strip him of his title for that year. However, I know of no other years in which there is even supposition or "insider testimony" that he did dope. Let's say he did dope in '99, was stripped of his title but no other years indicated any evidence whatsoever of doping - do we convict him as a doper forever and say the other 6 titles were "tainted" as you say? What if Floyd Landis or poor Tyler Hamilton would have come back after their bans and won the tour. Do we then say "Oh well...that win is from a former doper so it doesn't count"? Where does it end? The problem still remains...no hard evidence exists...

    As for Lemond...that guy will always be my hero. The 8 second win over pony-tail wearing Fignon has to be one of the greatest tours ever in my opinion. Just imagine what Lemond could have done if he hadn't been shot and then later diagnosed with some kind of iron deficiency I believe it was...
  2. Gordon W
    10. Posted by Gordon W Wed Oct 21 5:01pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    There is a long list of riders from the "Lance era" who have come out and said they used and beat the system. A significant number of his proteges from Motorola, US Postal are on the "proven guilty" list. Just because he never tested positive (his words again) does not mean he didn't use - again, a long list of those too. The advances in testing in the last 5 years have brought us to a point where it is much tighter than in the late nineties and the first part of 2000.

    I gave Armstrong his credit. He is a great athlete and great cyclist. However, his legacy is, and always will be tainted.

    And I agree that the French media do have a vendetta against him. It appears not to be based on his performance in the Tour or beating their French cyclists, and probably not on any proof they have of his doping. It's more likely based on his attitude and arrogance. (Note that the French media love LeMond and he beat two of France's legends, Hinault and Fignon in the Tour in dramatic fashion).

    That said, the lack of positive tests does not exclude, excuse or even explain the well-founded accusations by Americans against Armstrong. And you said "supposed insiders" - how about Frankie Andreau, a friend and teammate who Armstrong has sued for saying that he saw Armstrong use in the 1999 season.

    The public and particularly the US fans have put Armstrong on the hero pedestal because he survived cancer and went on to win 7 Tours. Both significant accomplishments but he and his fans have to be willing to deal with the hero's shortcomings. Because he as hugely impacted cancer research and used only "some" (as you said in 1999)of his career, you want to give him a free pass?
  3. Robert
    9. Posted by Robert Wed Oct 21 2:13pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Oh and while we are at it answer me this...If Lance really was doping - how the hell did he manage not to test positive over SO MANY YEARS of success? So many other cyclists have actually been caught during that same time frame. Was he simply the MOST BRILLIANT CHEATER of all time? C'mon, that's giving way to much credit to his intelligence and those around him...
  4. Robert
    8. Posted by Robert Wed Oct 21 2:04pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Just for the record, I'm certainly not a french hater. I do think the objectivity of the French newsmedia as well as AFLD can be brought into question on numerous occasions without having to rehash it here. I've been following cycling and specifically the Tour de France for 25 years, albeit not with the inside knowledge that you claim to have Gordon. I certainly know who Merckx, Anquetil, Hinault, Indurain, Lemond (hey what about Andy Hampsten...great climber) are and were certainly great champions of their time. My issue is with people who have no actual proof and merely spew the same ole supposition from "insiders close to Lance" that he was using. Does anyone have anything concrete to add or provide? Or do he have to continually suffer through the "Lance never could have won without drugs" camp. I'm just sick of people slandering a person's name without actual proof. I personally want to believe that Floyd Landis was clean - I mean why use steroids - they don't provide a boost to an individual performance. It just doesn't make sense to me. I think Lance was an amazing athlete and American or not deserves the respect of the cycling world for his accomplishments with his singular focus on the tour. Let's say Lance was actually using - was he using the whole time or as some have indicated it might have only been the 1999 Tour where he came back from testicular cancer. If for no other reason, he has advanced the cause of cancer research throughout the world and you have to respect him for that...
  5. Gordon W
    7. Posted by Gordon W Wed Oct 21 11:44am EDT

    Report Abuse

    Well, my comment wasn't intended to flush out the French haters but I guess it had that effect.
    Why is it that we Americans need/want to protect Armstrong from the evil French? Maybe something to do with our American sensibilities that we must rule everything? Let his record stand for itself - he's a great athlete with a significantly tainted record. His own teammates have gone on record that he used performance enhancers. I've been in involved in the sport for years both racing and in management and it is one of the worst kept secrets that most inside cycling believe that Armstrong has used. To Mark's comments, I agree that Armstrong is a great talent but due to the fact that he only won the Tour (albeit a record 7 times!) this occurred after his illness and at the time where he was directly accused of using performance enhancers by people close to him (not the evil French), he will always have an asterix next to is name and will never rise to the level of a Merckx, Hinault, Anquetil, LeMond etc. Just because he can get 3rd at the age of 38 clean, does not erase the prior record although it does underline his capabilities as a cyclist.

    For many, Armstrong is the face of cycling, one of the only names they know. That is a shame because there are many clean, talented US and international riders who's success is never known by the average myopic American fan. (And that obviously works the same way in many sports). This is not a US vs. France issue. Its an issue of integrity and many inside the sport have significant reason todoubt Armstrong's integrity. His own words are an indictment - paraphrasing, "I am the most tested athlete in the world and have never tested positive".

    Ps. Who is this mysterious Frenchman you refer to AF and SOB? There has not been a serious French Tour de France contender in years.
  6. Mark
    6. Posted by Mark Wed Oct 21 6:15am EDT

    Report Abuse

    I guess I cannot read Gordon's comment without one of my own. If Armstrong was riding a "redemption tour" as he said, and Armstrong was clean, what doe is say about Lance that even at his age he places third? I guess that maybe if he could do that, then there is a good chance that in his prime he could have done better, say... first place? Armstrong and Ulrich were the class riders of that generation of riders! Were they that much better or was this just a dry spell of so-so riders? I cannot answer that.
  7. A F
    5. Posted by A F Tue Oct 20 6:43pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Notice all this happens in FRANCE no where else in the world do they try so hard to discredit Lance Armstrong. I think its time the sorry YELLOW FRENCH get off their ASSES and come up with a rider with leg's enough to beat Lance or Alberto for that matter, instead of trying to taint their efforts with TRASH.
  8. SOB_scunner
    4. Posted by SOB_scunner Tue Oct 20 5:41pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    OK Gordie, if Armstrong was dirty, tell us about Ian Thorpe: was he clean or was it a filthy plot by AFLD and L'Equipe [ptui] which cooked up another of their notorious "leaks" to discredit an athlete who [gasp] managed to whup a Frenchman, who was, of course, the rightful winner. Uhh, why is it always L'Equipe which comes up with those scoops and why doesn't WADA do something about AFLD's persistent flaunting of the rules? The rules are pretty clear on this, just as they are for the athletes - if they get broken, penalties will be assessed. Why does AFLD, and its lab-slobs, still have its accreditation as a reputable and credible drug testing lab when it has more leaks than a sieve... and always to its cronies at one newspaper?
  9. Robert
    3. Posted by Robert Tue Oct 20 4:01pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Tarnish...not tarness. Wow...can't spell today.
  10. Robert
    2. Posted by Robert Tue Oct 20 3:58pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Tell you what...why don't you base your accusations with facts Gordon W and we'll all stand up and listen. Otherwise...why don't you hop on over the pond to France where apparently you can tarness any athletes reputation without the slightest bit of properly obtained proof...
  11. Gordon W
    1. Posted by Gordon W Tue Oct 20 3:09pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Armstrong was dirty and we all know it. He's riding he redemption tour to prove to himself that can he win without drugs.

    Pathetic
Sign in to post a comment, or sign up for a free account

Video Spotlight