Competitor.com

CAS rejects Rebellin’s CERA appeal

By VeloNews.com • Published: Jul 30th 2010 1:16 PM EDT

The International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on Friday rejected Italian cyclist Davide Rebellin’s appeal against a doping charge that saw him lose his silver medal from the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

Rebellin had initially been awarded the medal after finishing second behind Spain’s Samuel Sanchez in the 245km road race. Blood and urine analysis conducted immediately after the event showed Rebellin to have tested negative for banned substances. However, in January of 2009, the International Olympic Committee ordered the re-examination of several athletes’ samples in order to test for a new generation of the blood boosting drug EPO, known as a Continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA). Rebellin was one of several athletes who tested positive in that second round of analysis.

In November 2009, pursuant to a recommendation from the IOC Disciplinary Commission, the IOC Executive Board disqualified Rebellin and withdrew his medal.

Rebellin, however, filed an appeal with CAS, which was heard on June 17.

“For his defense, Davide Rebellin has alleged several mistakes concerning the analysis procedure of the samples and has challenged the validity of the method applied by the (French national anti-doping) laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry,” said Friday’s statement from CAS.

“The CAS panel has rejected all the arguments put forward by the athlete and has confirmed that the procedures of the chain of custody have been complied with and that there was no departure from the international standards for laboratories (ISL) which could have reasonably caused an abnormal analysis result.”

CAS confirmed that the presence of CERA had been validly detected in Rebellin’s blood samples and that the laboratory followed the correct method and system of analysis.

With Rebellin’s disqualification, Switzerland’s Fabian Cancellara moved up to the silver medal position and Alexander Kolobnev of Russia took the bronze.

Filed under : News
Read more about : , , ,
Previous Post : Colorado stage race to launch in 2011
Next Post : Bissell dominates at Tour of Elk Grove ITT

  • VeloAsia
    @jamessrq. It's not the labs, they are solid but the excuse has had great success with Landis et al. cases. Your posting reflects this. In Landis' case, he was successful in duping so many people yet the lab produced hundreds - hundreds - of pages to show protocols were carefully followed. Do you ever see these documents? No, a mike in front of a dopers mouth gets the press. You will continue to hear this one, which sounds better than the excuses we used to hear. You remember them? "I took medicine for an allergy/cough." "I put a cream on my saddle sore." etc.
  • The labs are solid? The labs can be just as bad as the dopers are in taking short cuts and in making mistakes. In the Landis case:

    1. The lab incorrectly performed the steps for the first testosterone test, thus the test was thrown out.
    2. The lab produced a documenting claiming that a machine had been tested/certified on a specific date. However that conflicts with the machine's hard drive where the date/folder name claimed on the document was not present on the hard drive. All other certification tests for several years were on the hard drive. Wada accepted the document because "we believe the lab would never be incorrect".
    3. The Gas Chrom (sp?) machine was set to the wrong tube. This setting was changed by the repair tech during calibration when he puts a different tube in. He testified that he did put the correct tube back after calibration , but forgot to change the setting back. But does the setting impact the test results? Remember in the first hearing, before the Landis team found the mistake, Prof. Meyer-Augstien (sp?) testified that from a mathematical standpoint, the numbers do not add up. But all of that should not matter, a setting was incorrect on the machine, thus you can not accept its results.

    Labs can take short cuts, labs can make mistakes. A number of US crime labs have been shut down due to such problems. The labs should be held to the highest standards. Unfortunately, in their Landis decision, WADA said that the labs do NOT need to be held to the highest of standards, the only need to be held to a "good enough" standard. Who decides what is "good enough".... well the labs do.

    WADA and the labs are descending to the same standard as the dopers. The ends justify the means. That is wrong on the dopers part.... and it is wrong on the labs part.
  • VeloAsia
    But even if the labs do not perform at the highest standards (OJ Simpson anyone?), Landis and Rebellin both were allowed to appeal to arbitration independent of WADA and the laboratories. My point is the labs provide an excuse for dopers, although most are guilty. To my point, Hamilton and Landis are confirmed dopers, yet here we are debating whether their lab worked was screwed up.
  • jamessrq
    Why is it that in so many doping cases there is clear evidence of mishandling the samples? This case, the Landis and Hamilton cases all had problems with proper sample collection and analysis. My point here is not to judge guilt but to question why it seems that so often there is a problem with the system itself. If the labs cannot be trusted, no one can have any faith in the system.
blog comments powered by Disqus