She is the current World Champion and see the excuses. She also claims that she did not contest the first strike because she did not have legal advice. Double standards. Family issue for the 3rd strike???????
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sp...s-cycling-chiefs-fault-missed-test.htmlLizzie Armitstead claims cycling chiefs are at fault for third missed test
Lizzie Armitstead has hit back at critics with 1,200-word statement
The cyclist missed a third drugs test which put her participation at the Rio Olympic Games in jeopardy
The 27-year-old admitted she was naive not to challenge first missed test
By MATT LAWTON FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 07:31 +10:00, 4 August 2016 | UPDATED: 11:00 +10:00, 4 August 2016
Lizzie Armitstead has attempted to shift the blame on to British Cycling for the drug test violation that almost resulted in her missing the Olympics.
Armitstead issued a 1,200-word statement on Wednesday insisting the test she missed in June — the third such incident in a year which left her facing a possible two-year ban — was an ‘oversight’ that ‘could have been prevented’ had she had the assistance of a British Cycling official.
Simon Thornton, until May the British Cycling compliance manager who now works for Liverpool Football Club, was assigned to Armitstead to help her with the World Anti-Doping Agency ‘whereabouts’ system after she recorded her second violation in October 2015. Athletes use the system to tell drugs testers where they can be found for an hour each day.
Lizzie Armitstead has hit back at her critics and written to explain her missed drugs test
Armitstead arrived at Rio International airport in the early hours of Thursday morning
Armitstead had to win a court fight with doping testers to ensure she could compete in Rio
Armitstead had to win a court fight with doping testers to ensure she could compete in Rio
The cyclist missed three tests, throwing her Olympic participation into serious doubt
However, Thornton left just weeks before a tester arrived at Armitstead’s Monaco apartment to discover she was not there, and on Wednesday the 27-year-old world champion gave that as a reason for her mistake.
‘Simon Thornton was put in place to check my whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis,’ said Armitstead. ‘We had regular contact and he would help me with any problems, effectively he was a failsafe mechanism.
‘Unfortunately, this system fell apart on June 9 when UK Anti-Doping tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be. Simon Thornton had left British Cycling three weeks (earlier) without anybody informing me.
‘If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented.’
HOW SPORTSMAIL REVEALED ARMITSTEAD'S MISSED TESTS
Sportsmail's Matt Lawton revealed Lizzie Armitstead feared she would miss the Rio Olympics after UK doping officials tried to have the world champion cyclist banned last month.
The 27-year-old was facing up to a two-year ban after being charged last month by UK Anti-Doping for three 'whereabouts' failures in a 12-month period.
But with the support of a legal team backed by British Cycling, Armitstead went up against UKAD at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on July 21 and successfully had the first of the three failures struck from her record, citing what CAS agreed was an administrative error by her accusers.
That has enabled the hugely gifted Armitstead to race in Rio on Sunday as one of the favourites for gold.
Even if British Cycling technical director Andy Harrison might now be asked to explain why Thornton was not replaced to support Armitstead when she was in such a precarious position, insiders were stunned at her attempt to absolve herself of responsibility.
One senior official said: ‘Whereabouts remains the ultimate responsibility of the athlete and Lizzie is bright enough not only to know that but to keep her where-abouts information updated.’
Armitstead, who escaped a ban after successfully having her first missed test struck from her record by the Court of Arbitration for Sport only last month, also cited a serious illness in the family as a reason for making the mistake. While she has not been prepared to reveal more precise details, Sportsmail understands it was indeed a distressing situation.
That said, Armitstead confirmed: ‘UK Anti-Doping did not perceive my situation to be “extreme” enough to alleviate me of a negligence charge.
‘A psychiatrist assessment of my state of mind at the time was contrary. In my defence I was dealing with a traumatic time and I forgot to change a box on a form.’
But blaming British Cycling remained a surprise as they paid for the legal advice which helped her appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
It was Thornton’s role to support all the riders on the whereabouts system.
As one British rider said on Wednesday: ‘It takes 10 seconds to update your whereabouts information,’ and it can be done online, by email or a text up to 60 seconds before their daily one-hour slot for testing.
The Otley-born rider, who arrived here in Rio on Thursday as favourite for the gold medal in Sunday’s road race, also said that she did contest her first missed test in Sweden in August 2015 at the time.
‘When I received the letter from UK Anti-Doping I immediately contested it with a written explanation, this was not accepted on the eve of me travelling to America for my world championships,’ she wrote.
But what she did not request was an external administrative review that might well have resulted in her having that first missed test erased from record. She blamed a lack of legal advice.
Sportsmail understands UK Anti-Doping only agreed to take Armitstead’s case to CAS because it was the quickest and simplest way to resolve the situation only a few weeks before the Olympics.
In normal circumstances the case would have gone before an independent national anti-doping panel, with both sides able to appeal against any decision.
But with CAS there is no right of appeal, which amounted to a risk for both sides at the hearing on July 21 but did mean it was settled in time for Armitstead to compete in Rio.
‘I am sorry for causing anyone to lose faith in sport, I am an example of what hard work and dedication can achieve,’ she said in her statement.
‘I hate dopers and what they have done to sport. To any of the “Twitter Army” reading this, do yourself a favour and go for a bike ride. It’s the most beautiful thing you can do to clear your mind.’
LIZZIE ARMITSTEAD'S FULL 1,275-WORD STATEMENT
I am writing this statement in my own words, something I have wanted to do from the very beginning.
Understandably people have questions which I want to answer as openly and honest as I can. I hope people understand that speaking with journalists is a necessary part of my job, speaking directly to the public in a statement like this, which has not been ghost written or moulded by somebody else is unheard of.
I want to take responsibility for this message, this is my life and not a game of headlines. I want to state the facts but also try to explain my situation further. I believe I owe this statement to sports fans, people who love sport like I do.
As an 18-year-old schoolgirl I was introduced to the whereabouts system, nine years ago. Since then the system has evolved and developed, post October 2015 I recognised this and requested further education from UKAD, I will come back to this later.
By submitting my whereabouts I am consenting to people coming into my house or hotel and taking blood and urine samples. This is a part of my sport that I accept and wholeheartedly support.
To add some background before I explain the specific details of my three 'strikes'.
I have been tested 16 times in 2016.
I have a clear and valid blood passport (a more detailed use of looking for doping violations by looking for trends versus anomalies in my blood values).
I have been tested after every victory this season.
I am on the road for around 250 days a year, with around 60 race days.
I have never tested positive for a banned substance.
I have never taken a banned substance.
I will present the facts of my three 'strikes'.
Sweden: August 20, 2015
UKAD are allowed a maximum of two weeks to inform you of a 'strike'. When I received the letter from UKAD I immediately contested it with a written explanation, this was not accepted on the eve of me travelling to America for my world championships. I had no legal advise or external support at the time.
Last week:
CAS ruled quickly and unanimously in my favour and cleared me of any wrong doing, because:
I was at the hotel I stated.
The DCO didn't do what was reasonable or necessary to find me.
I was tested the next day, this test was negative.
Calling an athlete's mobile phone is not a method approved by UKAD to try and locate an athlete, as such it is not an argument against me that I slept with my phone on silent in order not to disturb a room mate.
Put simply I was available and willing to provide a sample for UKAD.
Second 'strike': October 2015
Despite being reported as a 'missed test' this was in fact a 'filing failure'.
UKAD did not try to test me, instead this was an administrative spot check. They found an inconsistency between an overnight accommodation and a morning time slot.
A busy post world championship period meant I had no firm plans and as such was changing address and plans very quickly. I made a mistake. This was an honest mistake rather than trying to deceive anybody. A mistake that many athletes who are honest with themselves will admit to having made themselves. I was tested by UKAD later that week and produced a negative result.
In December 2015, I met with UKAD and British cycling to discuss a support plan in order to avoid a third potential 'strike'.
Simon Thornton from British Cycling was put in place to check my whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis. We had regular contact and he would help me with any problems, effectively he was a fail-safe mechanism. Since meeting with UKAD my whereabouts updates have been as detailed and specific as they can possibly be. Going as far as I can in describing my locations to avoid any further issues.
Unfortunately, this system fell apart on the June 9 when UKAD tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be.
Simon Thornton had left BC three weeks prior to my strike without anybody informing me. We worked under a policy of 'no news was good news' as outlined in my support plan with UKAD.
If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented. My overnight accommodation (the bed in which I was sleeping the morning of the test) was correct, but I had failed to change the one hour testing slot, it was clearly impossible to be in both locations.
This is where I believe I have the right to privacy. My personal family circumstances at the time of the test were incredibly difficult, the medical evidence provided in my case was not contested by UKAD, they accepted the circumstances I was in.
UKAD did not perceive my situation to be 'extreme' enough to alleviate me of a negligence charge.
A psychiatrist assessment of my state of mind at the time was contrary. In my defence I was dealing with a traumatic time and I forgot to change a box on a form.
I am not a robot, I am a member of a family, my commitment to them comes over and above my commitment to cycling. This will not change and as a result I will not discuss this further, our suffering does not need to be part of a public trial.
I hope I have made it clear that family comes before cycling, I am not obsessively driven to success in cycling, I love my sport, but I would never cheat for it.
To conclude:
I currently have one filing failure and one missed test.
The reason this hasn't been discussed publicly until now is because I had the right to a fair trial at CAS, it is clear sensationalised headlines have a detrimental effect to any legal case.
In the days following the revelations in the press my family and I have been the victim of some incredibly painful comments.
I ask people to take a moment to put themselves in my shoes, I am an athlete trying to do my best, I am a clean athlete. I am the female road race world champion, I operate in a completely different environment to the majority of athletes in the testing pool.
I am self coached, I work outside British Cycling and its systems, I race for a women's team that doesn't have a budget to match a world tour men's team who have staff specifically in place to supports riders with whereabouts.
I don't wish to make excuses, I made one mistake which was noticed in a 'spot check' my second strike came at a time when anybody who lives for and loves their family would understand my oversight. It's as simple as ticking the wrong box on a form.
I love sport and the values it represents, it hurts me to consider anybody questioning my performances. Integrity is something I strive for in every part of my life. I will hold my head high in Rio and do my best for Great Britain.
I am sorry for causing anyone to lose faith in sport, I am an example of what hard work and dedication can achieve. I hate dopers and what they have done to sport.
To any of the 'Twitter Army' reading this, do yourself a favour and go for a bike ride. It's the most beautiful thing you can do to clear your mind.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sp...s-cycling-chiefs-fault-missed-test.htmlLizzie Armitstead claims cycling chiefs are at fault for third missed test
Lizzie Armitstead has hit back at critics with 1,200-word statement
The cyclist missed a third drugs test which put her participation at the Rio Olympic Games in jeopardy
The 27-year-old admitted she was naive not to challenge first missed test
By MATT LAWTON FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 07:31 +10:00, 4 August 2016 | UPDATED: 11:00 +10:00, 4 August 2016
Lizzie Armitstead has attempted to shift the blame on to British Cycling for the drug test violation that almost resulted in her missing the Olympics.
Armitstead issued a 1,200-word statement on Wednesday insisting the test she missed in June — the third such incident in a year which left her facing a possible two-year ban — was an ‘oversight’ that ‘could have been prevented’ had she had the assistance of a British Cycling official.
Simon Thornton, until May the British Cycling compliance manager who now works for Liverpool Football Club, was assigned to Armitstead to help her with the World Anti-Doping Agency ‘whereabouts’ system after she recorded her second violation in October 2015. Athletes use the system to tell drugs testers where they can be found for an hour each day.
Lizzie Armitstead has hit back at her critics and written to explain her missed drugs test
Armitstead arrived at Rio International airport in the early hours of Thursday morning
Armitstead had to win a court fight with doping testers to ensure she could compete in Rio
Armitstead had to win a court fight with doping testers to ensure she could compete in Rio
The cyclist missed three tests, throwing her Olympic participation into serious doubt
However, Thornton left just weeks before a tester arrived at Armitstead’s Monaco apartment to discover she was not there, and on Wednesday the 27-year-old world champion gave that as a reason for her mistake.
‘Simon Thornton was put in place to check my whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis,’ said Armitstead. ‘We had regular contact and he would help me with any problems, effectively he was a failsafe mechanism.
‘Unfortunately, this system fell apart on June 9 when UK Anti-Doping tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be. Simon Thornton had left British Cycling three weeks (earlier) without anybody informing me.
‘If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented.’
HOW SPORTSMAIL REVEALED ARMITSTEAD'S MISSED TESTS
Sportsmail's Matt Lawton revealed Lizzie Armitstead feared she would miss the Rio Olympics after UK doping officials tried to have the world champion cyclist banned last month.
The 27-year-old was facing up to a two-year ban after being charged last month by UK Anti-Doping for three 'whereabouts' failures in a 12-month period.
But with the support of a legal team backed by British Cycling, Armitstead went up against UKAD at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on July 21 and successfully had the first of the three failures struck from her record, citing what CAS agreed was an administrative error by her accusers.
That has enabled the hugely gifted Armitstead to race in Rio on Sunday as one of the favourites for gold.
Even if British Cycling technical director Andy Harrison might now be asked to explain why Thornton was not replaced to support Armitstead when she was in such a precarious position, insiders were stunned at her attempt to absolve herself of responsibility.
One senior official said: ‘Whereabouts remains the ultimate responsibility of the athlete and Lizzie is bright enough not only to know that but to keep her where-abouts information updated.’
Armitstead, who escaped a ban after successfully having her first missed test struck from her record by the Court of Arbitration for Sport only last month, also cited a serious illness in the family as a reason for making the mistake. While she has not been prepared to reveal more precise details, Sportsmail understands it was indeed a distressing situation.
That said, Armitstead confirmed: ‘UK Anti-Doping did not perceive my situation to be “extreme” enough to alleviate me of a negligence charge.
‘A psychiatrist assessment of my state of mind at the time was contrary. In my defence I was dealing with a traumatic time and I forgot to change a box on a form.’
But blaming British Cycling remained a surprise as they paid for the legal advice which helped her appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
It was Thornton’s role to support all the riders on the whereabouts system.
As one British rider said on Wednesday: ‘It takes 10 seconds to update your whereabouts information,’ and it can be done online, by email or a text up to 60 seconds before their daily one-hour slot for testing.
The Otley-born rider, who arrived here in Rio on Thursday as favourite for the gold medal in Sunday’s road race, also said that she did contest her first missed test in Sweden in August 2015 at the time.
‘When I received the letter from UK Anti-Doping I immediately contested it with a written explanation, this was not accepted on the eve of me travelling to America for my world championships,’ she wrote.
But what she did not request was an external administrative review that might well have resulted in her having that first missed test erased from record. She blamed a lack of legal advice.
Sportsmail understands UK Anti-Doping only agreed to take Armitstead’s case to CAS because it was the quickest and simplest way to resolve the situation only a few weeks before the Olympics.
In normal circumstances the case would have gone before an independent national anti-doping panel, with both sides able to appeal against any decision.
But with CAS there is no right of appeal, which amounted to a risk for both sides at the hearing on July 21 but did mean it was settled in time for Armitstead to compete in Rio.
‘I am sorry for causing anyone to lose faith in sport, I am an example of what hard work and dedication can achieve,’ she said in her statement.
‘I hate dopers and what they have done to sport. To any of the “Twitter Army” reading this, do yourself a favour and go for a bike ride. It’s the most beautiful thing you can do to clear your mind.’
LIZZIE ARMITSTEAD'S FULL 1,275-WORD STATEMENT
I am writing this statement in my own words, something I have wanted to do from the very beginning.
Understandably people have questions which I want to answer as openly and honest as I can. I hope people understand that speaking with journalists is a necessary part of my job, speaking directly to the public in a statement like this, which has not been ghost written or moulded by somebody else is unheard of.
I want to take responsibility for this message, this is my life and not a game of headlines. I want to state the facts but also try to explain my situation further. I believe I owe this statement to sports fans, people who love sport like I do.
As an 18-year-old schoolgirl I was introduced to the whereabouts system, nine years ago. Since then the system has evolved and developed, post October 2015 I recognised this and requested further education from UKAD, I will come back to this later.
By submitting my whereabouts I am consenting to people coming into my house or hotel and taking blood and urine samples. This is a part of my sport that I accept and wholeheartedly support.
To add some background before I explain the specific details of my three 'strikes'.
I have been tested 16 times in 2016.
I have a clear and valid blood passport (a more detailed use of looking for doping violations by looking for trends versus anomalies in my blood values).
I have been tested after every victory this season.
I am on the road for around 250 days a year, with around 60 race days.
I have never tested positive for a banned substance.
I have never taken a banned substance.
I will present the facts of my three 'strikes'.
Sweden: August 20, 2015
UKAD are allowed a maximum of two weeks to inform you of a 'strike'. When I received the letter from UKAD I immediately contested it with a written explanation, this was not accepted on the eve of me travelling to America for my world championships. I had no legal advise or external support at the time.
Last week:
CAS ruled quickly and unanimously in my favour and cleared me of any wrong doing, because:
I was at the hotel I stated.
The DCO didn't do what was reasonable or necessary to find me.
I was tested the next day, this test was negative.
Calling an athlete's mobile phone is not a method approved by UKAD to try and locate an athlete, as such it is not an argument against me that I slept with my phone on silent in order not to disturb a room mate.
Put simply I was available and willing to provide a sample for UKAD.
Second 'strike': October 2015
Despite being reported as a 'missed test' this was in fact a 'filing failure'.
UKAD did not try to test me, instead this was an administrative spot check. They found an inconsistency between an overnight accommodation and a morning time slot.
A busy post world championship period meant I had no firm plans and as such was changing address and plans very quickly. I made a mistake. This was an honest mistake rather than trying to deceive anybody. A mistake that many athletes who are honest with themselves will admit to having made themselves. I was tested by UKAD later that week and produced a negative result.
In December 2015, I met with UKAD and British cycling to discuss a support plan in order to avoid a third potential 'strike'.
Simon Thornton from British Cycling was put in place to check my whereabouts on a bi-weekly basis. We had regular contact and he would help me with any problems, effectively he was a fail-safe mechanism. Since meeting with UKAD my whereabouts updates have been as detailed and specific as they can possibly be. Going as far as I can in describing my locations to avoid any further issues.
Unfortunately, this system fell apart on the June 9 when UKAD tried to test me in my hour slot and I was not where I had stated I would be.
Simon Thornton had left BC three weeks prior to my strike without anybody informing me. We worked under a policy of 'no news was good news' as outlined in my support plan with UKAD.
If Simon was still in place the following oversight could have been prevented. My overnight accommodation (the bed in which I was sleeping the morning of the test) was correct, but I had failed to change the one hour testing slot, it was clearly impossible to be in both locations.
This is where I believe I have the right to privacy. My personal family circumstances at the time of the test were incredibly difficult, the medical evidence provided in my case was not contested by UKAD, they accepted the circumstances I was in.
UKAD did not perceive my situation to be 'extreme' enough to alleviate me of a negligence charge.
A psychiatrist assessment of my state of mind at the time was contrary. In my defence I was dealing with a traumatic time and I forgot to change a box on a form.
I am not a robot, I am a member of a family, my commitment to them comes over and above my commitment to cycling. This will not change and as a result I will not discuss this further, our suffering does not need to be part of a public trial.
I hope I have made it clear that family comes before cycling, I am not obsessively driven to success in cycling, I love my sport, but I would never cheat for it.
To conclude:
I currently have one filing failure and one missed test.
The reason this hasn't been discussed publicly until now is because I had the right to a fair trial at CAS, it is clear sensationalised headlines have a detrimental effect to any legal case.
In the days following the revelations in the press my family and I have been the victim of some incredibly painful comments.
I ask people to take a moment to put themselves in my shoes, I am an athlete trying to do my best, I am a clean athlete. I am the female road race world champion, I operate in a completely different environment to the majority of athletes in the testing pool.
I am self coached, I work outside British Cycling and its systems, I race for a women's team that doesn't have a budget to match a world tour men's team who have staff specifically in place to supports riders with whereabouts.
I don't wish to make excuses, I made one mistake which was noticed in a 'spot check' my second strike came at a time when anybody who lives for and loves their family would understand my oversight. It's as simple as ticking the wrong box on a form.
I love sport and the values it represents, it hurts me to consider anybody questioning my performances. Integrity is something I strive for in every part of my life. I will hold my head high in Rio and do my best for Great Britain.
I am sorry for causing anyone to lose faith in sport, I am an example of what hard work and dedication can achieve. I hate dopers and what they have done to sport.
To any of the 'Twitter Army' reading this, do yourself a favour and go for a bike ride. It's the most beautiful thing you can do to clear your mind.
