Just briefly, here are some top line conclusions for the period up to 2006:
- There is little evidence to support allegations that Lance Armstrong bribed the UCI with several cash donations that he made to the organization.
- There is strong circumstantial evidence that Armstrong did in effect bribe (a "temporal link" in CIRC's words) UCI president Pat McQuaid by agreeing to participate in the Tour of Ireland, directed by McQuaid's brother, in exchange for favorable treatment.
- The UCI conspired with Armstrong to undercut a report into his alleged doping led by Emile Vrijman.
- UCI was "run in an autocratic manner without appropriate checks and balances."
- UCI lacks transparency in financial matters. (Some parts of the report are redacted.)
- UCI turned a blind eye to doping, and sought to manage "the abuse of doping substances, rather than the use of them."
- There are considerably more ugly details in the lengthy report.
The CIRC report finds evidence of some improvements in governance and outcomes since 2006, but "a culture of doping in cycling continues to exist."
The report is hard hitting and substantive. In the coming days I'll have further posts taking a closer look at different parts of the report. There is a lot in there -- like footnote 296 which alleges that at the 2010 World Cup, 11 soccer players for one particular team tested positive for a banned substance, which was judged to be the result of contamination, and not publicized.