Friday, February 23, 2007

"Case dismissed" ... how soon?

Much has been talked about this week's finding that the same LNDD lab technicans have analyzed both Floyd Landis' A and B sample. The Landaluze case was dismissed back in December because of this violation of WADA rules. The question was raised what exactly the rule is and what is says; the answer is buried in WADA's International Standard for Laboratory Analysis. On page 20-21, paragraph 5.2.4.3.2.2, it reads:

The “B” Sample confirmation must be performed in the same Laboratory as the “A” Sample confirmation. A different analyst must perform the “B” analytical procedure. The same individual(s) that performed the “A” analysis may perform instrumental set up and performance checks and verify results.

So here we go. Then, according to paragraph 6.4.8 and the topic about maintaining WADA accreditation, and considering the plethora of violations, LNDD should not have their accreditation suspended, but rather revoked. Let's see what the fallout of this week's revelations will be. Despite my Days-until-Floyd's-hearing countdown clock just below my picture on this page, I've started to ponder that there may not be a hearing after all. The case against Floyd is crumbling, the avalanche is on its way. Dick Pound, take cover!

No comments: