In Contador Case, Cycling's Integrity Is on the Line

There's a lot riding on the case, writes Frankie Andreu

Alberto Contador in his hometown of Pinto, Spain, August 2011. (James Startt)
Alberto Contador raced through the 2011 season as though there was nothing wrong. He won the Giro d’Italia and raced to a fifth place overall at the Tour de France. And to this day he continues to carry an International Cycling Union (UCI) professional license. But something was wrong—a positive test for clenbuterol from the 2010 Tour de France.

After being delayed three times, a hearing finally got under way last week in Lausanne, Switzerland, where the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has been charged with deciding Contador’s fate. The hearing ended after four days, but a ruling is not expected before 2012.

At this point, does anyone care?

I’m sure there are many riders in the peloton who do care. They are the ones who follow the rules. They race clean, and they use their natural abilities the best they can to try to win races. Then there are the riders who cheated and have been caught and suspended. They sit on the sidelines and watch Contador race on TV because that’s about as close as a suspended rider can get to the sport after being sanctioned.

The question is, who should be suspended, the UCI or Contador? The UCI, under Pat McQuaid, allegedly tried to cover up this mess by telling Contador to keep his positive test quiet. The UCI is said to have told Contador not to tell anyone. Contador did not inform the people who send him his paycheck, nor the new team he had signed for the following year. Yes, it was a secret, but only until German TV ARD found out about it and brought it to the surface. Why would the UCI keep it a secret and let the case drag out for a year and a half? That is a question many are asking, in addition to whether Contador is guilty.

Contador’s positive test, taken on July 21, 2010, was from a urine sample that contained 50 picograms of clenbuterol. Both his A and B samples tested positive. This should have been an open-and-shut case. To let the adjudication process take as long as it has absolutely harms the sport. With no definitive outcome well over a year after he tested positive, all the results from the races Alberto participated in could change depending on the outcome of this case. It’s not a suitable situation for the cyclists, the events, or the fans.

Contador hasn’t denied the test findings, either. He claims he ate contaminated meat from Spain. While this may be the case, the No. 1 rule that all professional cyclists know—and go to great lengths to protect themselves from—is this rule from World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA):

2.1.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an antidoping violation under Article 2.1.

All athletes in all sports under WADA have to follow this rule; it’s the same for everyone. At least, that should be the message delivered to Contador. We cannot have a sport that has certain rules for some cyclists and not for others.

Cycling has taken a stand against doping, and it has made progress. But if Contador does not get suspended, the trust in the UCI, the process, and the testing will crack. As it is today, riders are scared to dope because they know there is a chance they’ll get caught. This scare tactic is probably the best deterrent against doping. If riders think they can get away with cheating, some will take risks. If Contador can get caught with as little as 50 picograms in a sample, that sends a clear message that the tests work. The next step is to follow up with the correct penalties to back up the tests. Without the penalties the tests are useless.

If what Contador claims is true, I would still expect WADA to enforce its own rules. There are other athletes who have fallen into this predicament, that is, ingested something that contained an illegal substance. The Americans Tom Zirbel and Scott Moninger are two riders who come to mind; they both served suspensions for inadvertent ingestion. In Moninger’s case, he was even able to prove the source of contamination but still served a suspension.

It would not be fair if Contador got off when others get penalized. Whether it was by accident or on purpose, they suffered the consequences. Many proclaim their innocence, but we have seen that a claim of innocence doesn’t always equate to the truth. The tests provide boundaries and lines that cannot be crossed, even if it’s for a questionable three-time Tour de France winner.

Frankie Andreu is a former professional cyclist who raced the Tour de France several times. He is a contributor to Bicycling.
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
More From Racing