Should Rock Racing have fired Kayle Leogrande earlier?

December 3rd, 2008 by Ron Callahan 449 views 2 Comments

Rock Racing, and specifically team owner Michael Ball, is coming under fire for not suspending team member Kayle Leogrande as soon as he was suspected of doping.

Leogrande received a two year suspension from the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) this week after being found guilty of a “nonanalytical positive.” Leogrande never had a positive doping result, but was instead found guilty through the testimony of witnesses, documentation and other evidence.

It’s my opinion that the finding against Leogrande sets a very dangerous precedent in anti doping defenses for athletes. While there was a preponderance of evidence against him, the case was largely decided on the testimony of Rock Racing soigneur Suzanne Sonye and former DS Frankie Andreu. Floyd Landis recently filed a suit for the purpose of addressing the unbalanced burden of proof against athletes. If someone can be found guilty of doping without ever having a positive test, the scales of justice tip even farther in the wrong direction.

Ball allowed Leogrande to continue racing while the cases were underway. In his words:

“In Kayle’s case, knowing that several of the sport’s governing bodies were also conducting their own investigations, we felt it was not appropriate to prevent him from racing until a verdict was reached. USA Cycling and the UCI [International Cycling Union] did not deny him the right to race.”

Now, various news outlets are saying that Ball is not serious about anti-doping efforts.

I’m torn, because in the current doping environment, teams need to be extremely vigilant against even the suspicion of doping if they want to protect sponsorship dollars. Ball doesn’t need to be concerned with sponsors as much, since he pretty much bankrolls his team. This gives him the freedom to do what he wants, but after a number of questionable staff selections, people are wondering if he evens cares about doping. In his defense, he says:

“Whenever a rider is suspended – be it for doping or any disciplinary issue – it brings negative attention to the sport that so many of us are working hard to cast in a positive light.”

Tags: floyd landis, International Cycling Union, Kayle Leogrande, Michael Ball, united states, United States Anti-Doping Agency

2 Comments »

Chief Commissaire said:

“Now, various news outlets are saying that Ball is not serious about anti-doping efforts.”

Which outlets are saying this?

“I’m torn, because in the current doping environment, teams need to be extremely vigilant against even the suspicion of doping if they want to protect sponsorship dollars.”

Really? If that was the case, all the teams that had positive doping cases in 2008 and 2007 and 2006, etc., would be out of business. That’s far from the case.

# 3 December 2008 at 10:37 am

admin (author) said:

Radsport News said: “The behavior of the leadership team in this case raises a significant light on their attitudes about doping.” I found similar comments on other European sites.

A good number of teams, or at least sponsors, are gone: Saunier Duval-Scott, Discovery Channel, Gerolsteiner, Milram, Phonak, Credit Agricole, Liberty Seguros and Unibet to name just a few.

Some teams have successfully argued that dopers were lone wolves and were able to continue, but I think that will happen less and less.

# 3 December 2008 at 11:36 am