Aru Suing Henderson for Defamation

pelevin

Story here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/arus-lawyer-confirms-legal-action-against-greg-henderson-for-twitter-comments

Aru’s lawyer confirms legal action against Greg Henderson for Twitter comments . . . Henderson wrote on Twitter, writing: “Sad to see @fabaro1 "sick". Mate make sure next time u come back to our sport "healthy". Aka. Clean! #biopassport! Or don't come back!”
He followed that up by posting: “I am so sick of it. It becomes common knowledge within days. Why try cheat.”

I know we're not allowed speculate about doping here so it's not as if this thread can pretend to be an open debate but I think it is probably a good sign to some degree at least that Aru is suing. If Henderson was right that Aru was the subject of close Biological Passport scrutiny, then it's hard to see how this could not come very much to light in the course of the lawsuit. The suit should only make sense that in bringing everything to light, nothing damning comes to light - specifically with regard to the Biological Passport. It might seem off-putting a la Armstrong in terms of bringing in the lawyers but it is the necessary means for Aru to prove that Henderson was accusing him wrongly. It is also undeniable that the airing of the accusation has been damaging to Aru's public perception.

Henderson by his angry posting would seem to have the best of intentions regarding clean racing but I think he can't argue with these repercussions.

I'm not making any claims about Astana here, good, bad or indifferent, but am talking simply about Henderson's accusations regarding bio-passport anomalies.

Inquitus

pelevin wrote: »

Story here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/arus-lawyer-confirms-legal-action-against-greg-henderson-for-twitter-comments

Aru’s lawyer confirms legal action against Greg Henderson for Twitter comments . . . Henderson wrote on Twitter, writing: “Sad to see @fabaro1 "sick". Mate make sure next time u come back to our sport "healthy". Aka. Clean! #biopassport! Or don't come back!”
He followed that up by posting: “I am so sick of it. It becomes common knowledge within days. Why try cheat.”

I know we're not allowed speculate about doping here so it's not as if this thread can pretend to be an open debate but I think it is probably a good sign to some degree at least that Aru is suing. If Henderson was right that Aru was the subject of close Biological Passport scrutiny, then it's hard to see how this could not come very much to light in the course of the lawsuit. The suit should only make sense that in bringing everything to light, nothing damning comes to light - specifically with regard to the Biological Passport. It might seem off-putting a la Armstrong in terms of bringing in the lawyers but it is the necessary means for Aru to prove that Henderson was accusing him wrongly. It is also undeniable that the airing of the accusation has been damaging to Aru's public perception.

Henderson by his angry posting would seem to have the best of intentions regarding clean racing but I think he can't argue with these repercussions.

I'm not making any claims about Astana here, good, bad or indifferent, but am talking simply about Henderson's accusations regarding bio-passport anomalies.

The first response of anyone famous these days is to sue regardless of the truth, take Armstrong as a relevant example as you mention........

Not saying Aru is or isn't doing anything wrong, just that him suing tells use nothing either way, in fact not suing would perhaps be a tacit admission.

Zyzz

Armstrong sued and look what happened there..







..I was left with a tainted Livestrong helmet

MPFG

Hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something And he is not the only pro to think it

Suing doesn't mean much as it can take forever and still not prove anything

Darkglasses

MPFG wrote: »

Hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something And he is not the only pro to think it

Suing doesn't mean much as it can take forever and still not prove anything

Even if he personally knew 100% (or not), you can't say anything unless it's proven publicly and documented. Same situation as our rules here really.

Kaisr Sose

Anybody with alleged discrepancies is entitled to due process. Comments on Twitter etc don't help that. Although these type of things are decided on the metrics of the biopassport, which removes any subjectivity. Say nothing till it's resolved would be the best advice!

MPFG

I guess the pros are damned if they do and damned if they don't

How many on here kept going on about Omerta ...and castigating pros

As for due process ...what due process ....We saw what happened to the UCI challenge to Astana licence

But yeah lets protect Aru 'rights' in this process

MPFG

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Anybody with alleged discrepancies is entitled to due process. Comments on Twitter etc don't help that. Although these type of things are decided on the metrics of the biopassport, which removes any subjectivity. Say nothing till it's resolved would be the best advice!

The bio passport removes subjectivity ?

What !!! ..did you not see the French uni programme on the massive problems with the bio passport...not reflecting massive breaches

The one thing that can open the can of worms are pros speaking out ...but hey lets follows the rules ...which favour noone especially the innocent

Do me a favour !!

fishfoodie

Darkglasses wrote: »

Even if he personally knew 100% (or not), you can't say anything unless it's proven publicly and documented. Same situation as our rules here really.

I don't think that's strictly true. Defamation, in a lot of countries, requires the statement to be 'reckless'. There are plenty of people & organizations who've made untrue & injurious, statements & been ruled not-guilty of defamation.

If the defense can convince the jury that the mythical, 'reasonable person', would conclude based on what Henderson says he understood to be the truth, that Aru was under suspicion, then it isn't defamation.

If I were the defense, I'd start with the statement from the testimony to the CIRC that 90% of the peleton were doping, & then record the lamentable record of Astana over the last year or two, & let the jury make their own decision !

RobFowl

Zyzz wrote: »

..I was left with a tainted Livestrong helmet

Rule #51 // Livestrong wristbands are cockrings for your arms

Darkglasses

fishfoodie wrote: »

I don't think that's strictly true. Defamation, in a lot of countries, requires the statement to be 'reckless'. There are plenty of people & organizations who've made untrue & injurious, statements & been ruled not-guilty of defamation.

If the defense can convince the jury that the mythical, 'reasonable person', would conclude based on what Henderson says he understood to be the truth, that Aru was under suspicion, then it isn't defamation.

If I were the defense, I'd start with the statement from the testimony to the CIRC that 90% of the peleton were doping, & then record the lamentable record of Astana over the last year or two, & let the jury make their own decision !

Fair enough, I'm not remotely a legal expert, I just does what I'm told

Zyzz

RobFowl wrote: »

Rule #51 // Livestrong wristbands are cockrings for your arms

You obviously mistook which 'helmet' I was referring to :pac:

fishfoodie

Darkglasses wrote: »

Fair enough, I'm not remotely a legal expert, I just does what I'm told

Me either, but I play one in my mind

Kaisr Sose

MPFG wrote: »

The bio passport removes subjectivity ?

What !!! ..did you not see the French uni programme on the massive problems with the bio passport...not reflecting massive breaches

The one thing that can open the can of worms are pros speaking out ...but hey lets follows the rules ...which favour noone especially the innocent

Do me a favour !!

g

Fair point and I can see your frustration. It was supposed to be and if they had a robust process it would. That said, nobody has the right to out somebody in public because they have a hunch or a feeling. If Hendesdon is right, he may feel he did right but if he is wrong ......?

RobFowl

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

g

Fair point and I can see your frustration. It was supposed to and if they had a robust process it would. That said, nobody has the right to out somebody in public because they have a hunch or a feeling. If Hendesdon is right, he may feel he did right but if he is wrong ......?

Henderson was out of order, that said not too sure anyone riding for Astana can claim to be too bothered about their reputation as a clean rider.....

MPFG

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

g

Fair point and I can see your frustration. It was supposed to and if they had a robust process it would. That said, nobody has the right to out somebody in public because they have a hunch or a feeling. If Hendesdon is right, he may feel he did right but if he is wrong ......?

Henderson may have more than a hunch ..we don't know

but there is a lot circumstantial evidence around Astana to draw on

My point is pros have little recourse given the lack of movement by the UCI and the lack of a reliable process and given all the stick they get and how it has impacted on their sport

People say play by the rules ,,,,but the rules are flawed and the other guy may be able to feel secure in that intelligence

Kaisr Sose

RobFowl wrote: »

Henderson was out of order, that said not too sure anyone riding for Astana can claim to be too bothered about their reputation as a clean rider.....

That is true.
:-)

pelevin

Inquitus wrote: »

The first response of anyone famous these days is to sue regardless of the truth, take Armstrong as a relevant example as you mention........

Not saying Aru is or isn't doing anything wrong, just that him suing tells use nothing either way, in fact not suing would perhaps be a tacit admission.

My point though is that by suing the UCI will have to reveal the evidence of whatever is on Aru's bio-passport - which Henderson stated was damning for Aru. Aru & Astana aren't bullying the truth from public view in the manner of Armstrong. Instead they are forcing the airing of whatever is the truth on his passport which Henderson claimed showed Aru was dirty. Unless truth is on Aru's side regarding Henderson's specific claim, how could the lawsuit make sense?

Doc07

MPFG wrote: »

Henderson may have more than a hunch ..we don't know

but there is a lot circumstantial evidence around Astana to draw on

My point is pros have little recourse given the lack of movement by the UCI and the lack of a reliable process and given all the stick they get and how it has impacted on their sport

People say play by the rules ,,,,but the rules are flawed and the other guy may be able to feel secure in that intelligence

I like Aru and have no info about any alleged doping on his part. However he and his teammates should unfortunately expect plenty of allegations this year. I've neither time nor interest to get into discussion about the whether the nature of such accusations are right or wrong in the grand scheme of things. Looking in from the outside the Astana situation is as farcical as Father Ted, especially only two years on from the USADA reasoned decision and fall from grace of the last great cycling empire. The UCI tried to kick the team out this year but were overruled and the DS is an unrepentant and very recent doper.

pelevin

MPFG wrote: »

I guess the pros are damned if they do and damned if they don't

How many on here kept going on about Omerta ...and castigating pros

As for due process ...what due process ....We saw what happened to the UCI challenge to Astana licence

But yeah lets protect Aru 'rights' in this process

Henderson basically specifically stated Aru had damning bio-passport irregularities. By suing that evidence will come to light. The nature of your words here which very much suggest guilt imo shows Aru is right to sue for defamation because that is exactly what has happened. His integrity has been defamed/damaged. Repeating myself butIf Henderson's claim was right that he has bio-passport irregularities, the legal steps undertaken mean those bio-p facts he claimed to know will be publicly aired & Henderson will be shown to be right. How this would help Aru I have no idea.

pelevin

RobFowl wrote: »

Henderson was out of order, that said not too sure anyone riding for Astana can claim to be too bothered about their reputation as a clean rider.....

True to whatever degree but how many top teams are there? Not a whole lot. How many teams give off a big aura of being clean? It's a very finite pool for pro-cyclists to swim in in terms of teams & contracts.

MPFG

pelevin wrote: »

Henderson basically specifically stated Aru had damning bio-passport irregularities. By suing that evidence will come to light. The nature of your words here which very much suggest guilt imo shows Aru is right to sue for defamation because that is exactly what has happened. His integrity has been defamed/damaged. Repeating myself butIf Henderson's claim was right that he has bio-passport irregularities, the legal steps undertaken mean those bio-p facts he claimed to know will be publicly aired & Henderson will be shown to be right. How this would help Aru I have no idea.

First of all you say how can Astana sue if they don't have right/truth on their side..That didn't stop Armstrong suing ..In fairness it is naive to suggest you must be innocent to sue...suing can be a ploy and it can take years

Secondly I am not implying guilt on Aru's side...What i am saying is given the UCi/rules/system, etc pros may find they have no other recourse but to go public and rather than say as many are on here that Henserson should not have said what he said. I am saying that maybe he had good reason but had no other outlet
What else maybe could he have done ...gone to a journalist, gone to the UCI , etc ...

Anyone who says Henderson is wrong should wait to see if maybe he is speaking the truth and also should not castigate any pro about Omerta again

RobFowl

pelevin wrote: »

True to whatever degree but how many top teams are there? Not a whole lot. How many teams give off a big aura of being clean? It's a very finite pool for pro-cyclists to swim in in terms of teams & contracts.

Fair point though Astana stands out as a cess pool even amongst the rest...

Darkglasses

RobFowl wrote: »

Fair point though Astana stands out as a cess pool even amongst the rest...

Well, them and Katusha.

boege

RobFowl wrote: »

Fair point though Astana stands out as a cess pool even amongst the rest...

Too true, but then how Astana were allowed get a licence without an at least one certain head rolling has, for me, left the UCI completly compromised.

If Aru is quilty then for me UCI has to look at itself, once again!

pelevin

MPFG wrote: »

First of all you say how can Astana sue if they don't have right/truth on their side..That didn't stop Armstrong suing ..In fairness it is naive to suggest you must be innocent to sue...suing can be a ploy and it can take years

Secondly I am not implying guilt on Aru's side...What i am saying is given the UCi/rules/system, etc pros may find they have no other recourse but to go public and rather than say as many are on here that Henserson should not have said what he said. I am saying that maybe he had good reason but had no other outlet
What else maybe could he have done ...gone to a journalist, gone to the UCI , etc ...

Anyone who says Henderson is wrong should wait to see if maybe he is speaking the truth and also should not castigate any pro about Omerta again

I have already said pretty clearly though how I think this differs from Armstrong who used the legal system, or threat of it, to shut people up. Aru's course will air the evidence that Henderson claimed to know. For Aru & Astana to successfully sue, the evidence will have to be very much on their side, otherwise all they will gain will be a lot of legal fees & certainly no improvement in their & Aru's public reputation which is all that is at stake here. They lose nothing by not suing. There are no meaningful repercussions by letting this blow over except that Aru's reputation has been somewhat damaged. A long drawn-out lawsuit won't improve that.

Also what you have said earlier which I in turn said shows that his reputation has been damaged by Henderson's words:

"Hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something And he is not the only pro to think it."

I think that's pretty unarguably an implication that truth here isn't good for Aru.

"But yeah lets protect Aru 'rights' in this process."

Again I'd say that's a fairly clear implication that Aru's "rights" are nothing to write home about; i.e. fair enough if someone says he is doping.

MPFG

pelevin wrote: »

I have already said pretty clearly though how I think this differs from Armstrong who used the legal system, or threat of it, to shut people up. Aru's course will air the evidence that Henderson claimed to know. For Aru & Astana to successfully sue, the evidence will have to be very much on their side, otherwise all they will gain will be a lot of legal fees & certainly no improvement in their & Aru's public reputation which is all that is at stake here. They lose nothing by not suing. There are no meaningful repercussions by letting this blow over except that Aru's reputation has been somewhat damaged. A long drawn-out lawsuit won't improve that.

Also what you have said earlier which I in turn said shows that his reputation has been damaged by Henderson's words:

"Hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something And he is not the only pro to think it."

I think that's pretty unarguably an implication that truth here isn't good for Aru.

"But yeah lets protect Aru 'rights' in this process."

Again I'd say that's a fairly clear implication that Aru's "rights" are nothing to write home about; i.e. fair enough if someone says he is doping.

With all due respects you have not said how it is different to Armstrong suing and have not taken on board my point that suing does not imply innocence or even an ability to open up the truth...it could be a deflecting ploy as the process is long (even longer in Italy) and can be halted at any stages in years time

I am not going to argue semantics with you but neither of my statements you highlight imply guilt to Aru ...in fact they imply non assumption of guilt/error to Henserson which is completely different issue ...subtle but there..In fact what you have read into my statements is based on your inference and not stated anywhere

pelevin

MPFG wrote: »

With all due respects you have not said how it is different to Armstrong suing and have not taken on board my point that suing does not imply innocence or even an ability to open up the truth...it could be a deflecting ploy as the process is long (even longer in Italy) and can be halted at any stages in years time

I am not going to argue semantics with you but neither of my statements you highlight imply guilt to Aru ...in fact they imply non assumption of guilt/error to Henserson which is completely different issue ...subtle but there..In fact what you have read into my statements is based on your inference and not stated anywhere

I have stated clearly how it differs from Armstrong suing who used financially backed legal power to shut people up & prevent the airing of evidence. Here the suing will air the relevant evidence. Also here Henderson has already apologised & described himself as in the wrong. He has willingly already shut himself up. That doesn't remotely equate to the Armstrong story. Aru & Astana could accept the apology, take no further steps & actually take the moral high ground which Henderson has already ceded to Aru. There is no truth bursting to get out that Astana are trying to block - which is what Armstrong's suing used to amount to. Instead they are forcing the truth of the bio-passport, which Henderson claimed was damning for Aru, to be aired.

"In fact what you have read into my statements is based on your inference and not stated anywhere."

"Hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something And he is not the only pro to think it."

I don't know what the above is meant to imply other than isn't it very probable Henderson had very good reason to say Aru was doping.

MPFG

Pelevin

Firstly you are arguing the same point over and over again

We know not why Henderson 'apologised' ..maybe his team made him for PR reasons...we don't know ...

You have not taken on boards that suing is a process and does not necessarily yield a 'truth' outcome...And Astana can use it also to shut people up by putting it on the long finger and be seen to take action .. Suing is not an indicator of innocence as you assume

"hard to know why Henderson would say what he said unless he knew something' is a statement of fact ...if it is evidence well who knows as evidence is hard to come by in cycling with a failed BP...what Henderson knows may be inconsequential or it may be flawed, it may be erroneous or it could be damning .....but he is not an idiot to say something from nothing and that does not mean he has proof of Aru's guilt or even Aru is guilty....

" he is not the only pro to think that" ...is because I heard another pro agree with Henderson

I don't know what the above is meant to imply other than isn't it very probable Henderson had very good reason to say Aru was doping.

...Yes he probably had ...but that is still not saying he was right in his reasoning only in his opportunity with no other recourse to voice them

I think I have done this to death now

Carawaystick

Doesn't say where the case is filed, just they're looking for criminal charges as well as civil.

I approach these things like the axiom : how do you know a politician is lying? lips moving.

quozl

MPFG, you may not have intended it but what you wrote reads exactly as Pelevin describes it.

dragratchet

The secret Pro on Cycling Tips weighs in on the debate.

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/05/the-secret-pro-aru-vs-henderson-the-giro-and-more/

wirelessdude01

dragratchet wrote: »

The secret Pro on Cycling Tips weighs in on the debate.

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/05/the-secret-pro-aru-vs-henderson-the-giro-and-more/

Love those articles. Hadn't been one since last year. What he doesn't say says a lot in this instance.

el tel

Until anything is proven otherwise, we must assume that the recent sucesses Astana and Katusha are down to the contemorary techniques of as riders having their own lovely mattresses and fluffy pillows.

mcgratheoin

Serious question, would any reasonable jury find that an Astana rider has a reputation to be damaged by Henderson-esque comments?

Carawaystick

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Serious question, would any reasonable jury find that an Astana rider has a reputation to be damaged by Henderson-esque comments?

In Ireland or in Italy?

mcgratheoin

Carawaystick wrote: »

In Ireland or in Italy?

Where have they filed the suit? Not sure of the legalities of defamation in differing jurisdictions, but I'd say it's far from clear cut that his comments were defamatory.

MPFG

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Where have they filed the suit? Not sure of the legalities of defamation in differing jurisdictions, but I'd say it's far from clear cut that his comments were defamatory.

Suit filed in Italy and I agree it is far from clear that his comment is defamatory

Glad the secret pro pointed out the point I was trying to make re Omerta

Taxuser1

The Secret Pro is........

Sam Bewley - Orica Green Edge

MPFG

quozl wrote: »

MPFG, you may not have intended it but what you wrote reads exactly as Pelevin describes it.

Oh well....I will have to get better at making arguments

It was not my intention to assume guilt or innocence only to point out that Henderson (before we condemn his action) had no other alternative given the UCI , BP , etc and he wouldn't have done it unless he knew something (not that that something is correct or evidence)

After seeing a discussion with Daniel Friebe re not being able to ask Astana hard hitting questions that get you anywhere one wonders how they are scrutinized and maybe inadvertently Henderson has opened a can a of worms no one else can

D9Male

A few points from me.

- If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be cycling for Astana.
- Announcing one's intention to sue means nothing until a case is heard in court. I think it is just as likely to be grandstanding, and I would be surprised if the case went to court. Whether he is innocent or guilty, I don't see how public scrutiny of Aru's blood passport is going to help his reputation. This will make people think twice before messing with Astana again.
- It is all pretty depressing really.

Brian?

D9Male wrote: »

A few points from me.

- If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be cycling for Astana.

He's contracted to Astana, if he doesn't ride for them he's riding for no one. If he renews his contract, it's definitely his problem.

D9Male

Fabio Aru signed for Astana at the start of the 2012 season. They were one of the most troubled teams on the circuit even then, with numerous doping positives, shady characters and rumours.

Fabio Aru extended his contract at the end of 2013. This is after a number of Astana employees (past and present) were implicated in doping controversies at US Postal.

Fabio Aru again extended his contract a few weeks ago. This was after all the issues around both Iglinskiy brothers, Davidenok and the Lausanne institute.

So I repeat.

If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Astana.

pelevin

D9Male wrote: »

If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Astana.

If a rider claimed Nico Roche was a doping cheat a year ago, would your response have been: if Roche is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Riis. He has no complaints, people should be allowed accuse away.

Fr D Maugire

D9Male wrote: »

Fabio Aru signed for Astana at the start of the 2012 season. They were one of the most troubled teams on the circuit even then, with numerous doping positives, shady characters and rumours.

Fabio Aru extended his contract at the end of 2013. This is after a number of Astana employees (past and present) were implicated in doping controversies at US Postal.

Fabio Aru again extended his contract a few weeks ago. This was after all the issues around both Iglinskiy brothers, Davidenok and the Lausanne institute.

So I repeat.

If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Astana.

There is a legitimate question of who a rider should ride for if they want to remain clear of past doping links. Even the so called clean team Garmin have there skeltons like the manager himself Vaughters, a list of admitted dopers, mostly now retired, Hesjedal etc.

Ditto SKY and their hiring of dodgy people like Leinders, Julich, De Jongh, this was a team with a so called zero tolerance policy. There are next to no teams without some skeltons somewhere which is a sad reflection of the history of the sport.

Admittedly Astana probably have the worst rep at the moment but a contract is a contract.

D9Male

pelevin wrote: »

If a rider claimed Nico Roche was a doping cheat a year ago, would your response have been: if Roche is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Riis. He has no complaints, people should be allowed accuse away.

I don't think Nico should have gone to Saxo. I questioned it at the time.

However, Astana are in a different ballpark to any other WT team. I have no idea how they managed to hold onto their WT license.

Any rider at Astana is going to have their integrity questioned.

pelevin

D9Male wrote: »

I don't think Nico should have gone to Saxo. I questioned it at the time.

However, Astana are in a different ballpark to any other WT team. I have no idea how they managed to hold onto their WT license.

Any rider at Astana is going to have their integrity questioned.

Fair enough that their integrity may be questioned but what I think should be the specific interest here is whether Henderson had truth on his side or not when it seems to be generally taken that he claimed Aru had bio-passport irregularities after coming to light. There seems to me an odd lack of interest in whether this was true or not - more just Aru is guilty in general so to speak & that's all there is to it.

fishfoodie

pelevin wrote: »

Fair enough that their integrity may be questioned but what I think should be the specific interest here is whether Henderson had truth on his side or not when it seems to be generally taken that he claimed Aru had bio-passport irregularities after coming to light. There seems to me an odd lack of interest in whether this was true or not - more just Aru is guilty in general so to speak & that's all there is to it.

Even the scientists can't agree what constitutes an 'irregular' reading. Didn't one of the scientists who was involved in the development of the Passport write an article contradicting some of the statements coming out of the UCI on what the Passport could & could not do for clean cycling, i.e. it wasn't worth a rats a$$ when it came to micro-dosing, but it leveled the playing field a bit ?

ROK ON

I am of the view that Henderson deserves to be sued. The questions people raise about Aru's team are a red herring in the specific incidence of being accused of doping on a social media.
In any walk of life you cannot accuse a fellow professional (employee) of wrong doing publicly without proof - cycling is no different in this regard.

If Henderson has suspicions that are worth raising then he should have gone through the appropriate channels (maybe he did?).

This thing about Omertà is another nonsense. To do what Henderson did actually undermines any potential investigation into an outed athlete. If you know nothing, say nothing. If you suspect something bring it to the attention of Wada and Cookson. If something has been proven then by all means shout from the rooftops and make an athlete returning from a doping ban feel unwelcome.

In any other walk of life Henderson would have been sanctioned by his employer.
Presumption of innocence is a big thing in life - sometimes some of the cycling evangelists here and on other fora miss that. These athlete deserve the same basic human rights and employee rights as any of the rest of us.
Who he works for is irrelevant. He has not been done for anything. Until then what occurred was a travesty.

Brian?

D9Male wrote: »

Fabio Aru signed for Astana at the start of the 2012 season. They were one of the most troubled teams on the circuit even then, with numerous doping positives, shady characters and rumours.

Fabio Aru extended his contract at the end of 2013. This is after a number of Astana employees (past and present) were implicated in doping controversies at US Postal.

Fabio Aru again extended his contract a few weeks ago. This was after all the issues around both Iglinskiy brothers, Davidenok and the Lausanne institute.

So I repeat.

If Aru is so worried about his reputation, he shouldn't be riding for Astana.

Ok, I stand down. He's a numpty.

D9Male

ROK ON wrote: »

I am of the view that Henderson deserves to be sued. The questions people raise about Aru's team are a red herring in the specific incidence of being accused of doping on a social media.
In any walk of life you cannot accuse a fellow professional (employee) of wrong doing publicly without proof - cycling is no different in this regard.

If Henderson has suspicions that are worth raising then he should have gone through the appropriate channels (maybe he did?).

This thing about Omertà is another nonsense. To do what Henderson did actually undermines any potential investigation into an outed athlete. If you know nothing, say nothing. If you suspect something bring it to the attention of Wada and Cookson. If something has been proven then by all means shout from the rooftops and make an athlete returning from a doping ban feel unwelcome.

In any other walk of life Henderson would have been sanctioned by his employer.
Presumption of innocence is a big thing in life - sometimes some of the cycling evangelists here and on other fora miss that. These athlete deserve the same basic human rights and employee rights as any of the rest of us.
Who he works for is irrelevant. He has not been done for anything. Until then what occurred was a travesty.

Very good post, ROK ON.

Although I stand by my smart arse remark about Aru, and wouldn't trust a sky blue shirt, you are right....you are right. Omerta is bad, but the way to break it down is not by going on Twitter and calling people out. There are avenues. Explore them. If that doesn't work, then consider Twitter.