The FredCast Cycling Podcast - Bicycle Podcast for Endurance and Recreational Cyclists

It’s bad news for those hoping for an Astana invite and a chance for last year’s champion Alberto Contador to defend his title. With no invitation for Astance, Levi Leipheimer won’t get to try to better his third place finish either.

On the bright side, Team Slipstream-Chipotle has earned a place in the starting line up for this year’s race.

Here is the complete list of invitees:

Ag2r-La Mondiale
Agritubel
Barloworld
Bouygues Telecom
Caisse d’Epargne
Cofidis
Crédit Agricole
CSC
Euskaltel-Euskadi
Française des Jeux
Gerolsteiner
Lampre 
Liquigas
Milram
Quick Step
Rabobank
Saunier Duval
Silence-Lotto
Slipstream-Chiptole
Team High Road

On last night’s show, I mentioned the Associated Press story about how the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is paying so much for the Floyd Landis appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport that it is going to take 5 – 10% out of their annual budget.

Today, the Associated Press reports (via the International Herald Tribune) reports that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is stepping in to cover USADA’s expenses.

According to the AP story, “One source familiar with the arrangement told The Associated Press that WADA was footing the entire bill; another said ‘most’ of the bill. Neither agreed to be identified because of the sensitivity of the case.”

What is also interesting is that WADA made the decision to step in when it became apparent that the International Cycling Union (UCI) refused to offer any assistance to USADA. According to WADA, this was “disappointing, particularly as it is a case under UCI rules.”

Personally, I don’t see why anyone is upset that USADA, WADA, or any other alphabet soup group has to foot the bill for this case. Part of the reason they exist is not only to test athletes, but also to adjudicate cases of suspected doping. If this is part of your business and your charter, then budget for it.

Typical pseudo-governmental agency. I’m surprised they aren’t considering a doping tax to be added to the purchase of all new bicycles sold in the U.S.

Press release : Consequences of Paris-Nice: UCI declaration
18.03.2008
In order to let the riders to concentrate on their race, the International Cycling Union (UCI) opted to refrain from making any declarations during the Paris-Nice event.

The UCI is currently looking into the consequences that will apply to those who breached its rules. This evaluation will take into account the fact that Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO), with the collusion of the French Cycling Federation (FFC), deliberately removed Paris-Nice from the organisational structure of the UCI, thus creating a problematic situation for riders and teams alike.

A disciplinary procedure will be opened against the FFC and its President, with a view to imposing sanctions commensurate with the considerable responsibility they bear for the development of the situation.

As far as the riders and their teams are concerned, the UCI will ask for measures appropriate to the situation. A meeting with riders has been scheduled for 25 March, when any relevant information can be exchanged.

The UCI notes that ASO has refused to register Paris-Roubaix – an event regarding which the UCI and ASO substantially agree, e.g. in terms of the applicable participation rules – on the UCI calendar, as well as the Tour de France and Paris-Tours. ASO and the FFC are the only stakeholders to have taken this position, which contradicts the agreement made in Treviso between the UCI and the Presidents of the French, Italian, Spanish, Belgian and Luxembourg federations. The Italian, Belgian and Spanish federations have honoured their commitment by securing from the organisers in their countries an agreement to register their events on the calendars agreed to in Treviso (Tirreno-Adriatico, Milan-San Remo, Giro d’Italia and the Tour of Lombardy for Italy; the Flèche Wallonne and Liège-Bastogne-Liège for Belgium; and the Vuelta a España for Spain). The Treviso agreement shows that the UCI and the other parties continue to act in good faith by seeking solutions that are in the best interests of the sport of cycling, its participants and its public.