You are reading a single comment by @gbj_tester and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
With a banned substance, that element of doubt isn't there, a ban is issued, irrespective of the athlete's explanation.
Except that riders have been cleared in clenbuterol cases where they gave acceptable explanations, e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/apr/23/michael-rogers-uci-contaminated-meat
gbj_tester
andyp
It's more subtle than that, though. Being above the threshold is not forbidden per se, instead the athlete has an opportunity to explain what happened, and then, if the UCI anti doping tribunal aren't satisfied, they can open an anti-doping violation. They can also clear the rider too, if they are satisfied with the explanation.
With a banned substance, that element of doubt isn't there, a ban is issued, irrespective of the athlete's explanation.