Reform commission report says Armstrong paid $US1m for 2009 Tour Down Under but should not have been allowed to race

Lance Armstrong sweats it out during the second stage of the 2009 Tour Down Under.
Source: AP

A DAMNING report into cycling’s dark past claims Lance Armstrong was paid $US1 million to make his comeback at the 2009 Tour Down Under — but he should not have been allowed to race.

The Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) report, ordered by the International Cycling Union (UCI) last year and released this morning, says it understands a $1 million appearance fee was paid to Armstrong’s Livestrong charity each year from 2009 to 2011, when he took part in the TDU. (The State Government has repeatedly refused to reveal how much it paid Armstrong to come to the Tour Down Under, stating commercial in-confidence.)

But it says the fallen seven-time Tour de France winner — later shown to be a drug cheat — should never have been allowed to ride in the event because he had not been in the drug-testing pool for the required six months.

However, it cites a sudden and unexplained U-turn by the UCI to allow Armstrong to return to racing 13 days early in early.

The report references “significant political pressure” from Australia and discussions between TDU organisers, Armstrong and the UCI.

The 227-page report is based on documents, open-source information and interviews leading the CIRC to identify a timeline of events leading up to Armstrong’s comeback in the 2009 TDU:

JANUARY 2008: Discussions between TDU organisers and Lance Armstrong to attend the 2009 race as a “special guest” began.

AUGUST 4, 2008: USADA informed Armstrong he had been added to the registered testing pool from August 1, 2008, and he would not be eligible to race until February 1, 2009, when he had met the minimum six-month requirement.

SEPTEMBER 16, 2008: TDU race director Mike Turtur advised the UCI of reports that Armstrong intended to take part in the upcoming TDU.

“Considering the six month requirement for Lance Armstrong to be in the RTP before going back to competition, he asked whether this could be an issue for Lance Armstrong’s participation,” the report says.

END of SEPTEMBER, 2008: At the end of September, 2008, internal discussions at the UCI took place as to whether an exception to the rule would be made so Armstrong could ride the 2009 TDU.

“Strict application to the rule was recommended by UCI administration as the way forward, noting that Lance Armstrong should set an example,” the report said.

But the report reveals that then UCI president Pat McQuaid had found himself under “significant political pressure”.

“Mainly from Australia, which had planned a big event involving high-level politicians around Lance Armstrong’s participation in the Tour Down Under,” the report says.

OCTOBER2, 2008: McQuaid informed Amstrong that he could not race in the 2009 TDU.

But several interviewees noted an abrupt “change of mind” by McQuaid to allow Armstrong to ride, which took many people at UCI by surprise.

“No explanation was then given internally as to why Lance Armstrong was suddenly given an exemption to ride the Tour Down Under,” the report says.

OCTOBER 6, 2008: Armstrong confirmed to Irish-born McQuaid that he had decided to take part in the Tour of Ireland.

OCTOBER 8, 2008: Armstrong and the organisers of the Tour Down Under were officially informed by McQuaid that Armstrong was allowed to participate in the Tour Down Under.

The letter said:

“The purpose of Article 77 is to ensure that riders are properly tested before returning to international races from retirement. Since the introduction of the rule in 2004, significant improvement in testing have been made. Indeed, with the implementation of the program ‘100% against doping’ and the biological passport, the UCI is confident that the level of testing now required under the biological passport programme is far higher than that envisaged by the original post retirement testing rule.

“UCI’s Anti-Doping Department has assured me that they will make arrangements to ensure

that you will have been tested sufficiently prior to the Tour Down Under to enable you to

have a biological passport which can be assessed by the UCI’s group of scientific experts. Provided that you remain fully available for this testing program to be completed, the

principle of the post retirement testing rule will be respected and the short period by which

we are shortening the period you will have been in the RTP will not undermine the effect of

the rule. As a result and given that you have been considered by USADA to have been

reintegrated into their Registered Testing Pool on 1 August 2008, I am satisfied that we

should allow you to participate in the Tour Down Under”.”

OCTOBER 8, 2008: UCI released a statement entitled: “Lance Armstrong to start the 2009

Tour Down Under”.

JANUARY, 2009: Available documentation shows that UCI had difficulty organising a sample collection for Lance Armstrong because of inconsistent information regarding his whereabouts.

JANUARY 29-30, 2009: “In the minutes of the UCI Management Committee meeting under the section on “UCI Pro Tour”, it is recorded that Mike Turtur, organiser of the Tour Down Under stated that the Tour Down Under was a real success as there was very good media coverage and the public came in great numbers, notably because of the presence of Lance Armstrong,” the report says.

“The president then recalled that UCI had authorised Lance Armstrong to go back to competition before the date set by article 77 of UCI’s 2008 ADR to enable him to participate in the Tour Down Under. He then specified that Lance Armstrong had been the object of many anti-doping controls and that the fight against cancer campaign led by Lance Armstrong was a great success in Australia.”

The report also references an interview former UCI Anti-Doping Manager Anne Gripper did in 2012 in which she said:

“I have always said that Armstrong’s influence was a danger in the sport. He was allowed to

ride in the 2009 Tour Down Under. He shouldn’t have been. Once again, for Lance, special

consideration was provided.

“The justification was that (former South Australia premier) Mike Rann and (race director) Mike Turtur had announced to the whole people of South Australia that Lance was going to be there. For the UCI to say, ‘Sorry, he can’t, would have appeared churlish and mean-spirited and really what difference do 13 days make?

“For me, it was a case of, ‘Well, sure 13 days may not make a lot of practical difference’ but the perception of once again rules being different for Lance than other riders shows his influence was so great, he basically told the sport how to administer its rules.”

Source link

Reform commission report says Armstrong paid $US1m for 2009 Tour Down Under but should not have been allowed to race