Julen Lopetegui admits West Ham fan fury is fair after supporters called for him to be sacked during defeat by Leicester - as under-fire Spaniard reveals he is in regular contact with Hammers co-owner David Sullivan
It looked like a recipe for disaster. So, when his country's swimmers were being accused of doping earlier this year, one Chinese official cooked up something fast. He blamed it on contaminated noodles. In fact, he argued, it could have been a culinary conspiracy concocted by criminals, whose actions led to the cooking wine used to prepare the noodles being laced with a banned heart drug that found its way into an athlete's system. This theory was spelled out to international anti-doping officials during a meeting and, after weeks of wrangling, finally made it into the thousands of pages of data handed over to the lawyer who investigated the case involving 23 Chinese swimmers who had tested positive for that same drug. The attorney, appointed by the World Anti-Doping Agency, refused to consider that scenario as he sifted through the evidence. In spelling out his reasoning, lawyer Eric Cottier paid heed to the half-baked nature of the theory. "The Investigator considers this scenario, which he has described in the conditional tense, to be possible, no less, no more," Cottier wrote. Even without the contaminated-noodles theory, Cottier found problems with the way WADA and the Chinese handled the case but ultimately determined WADA had acted reasonably in not appealing China's conclusion that its athletes had been inadvertently contaminated. Critics of the way the China case was handled can't help but wonder if a wider exploration of the noodle theory, details of which were discovered by The Associated Press via notes and emails from after the meeting where it was delivered, might have lent a different flavor to Cottier's conclusions. "There are more story twists to the ways the Chinese explain the TMZ case than a James Bond movie," said Rob Koehler, the director general of the advocacy group Global Athlete. "And all of it is complete fiction." In April, reporting from the New York Times and the German broadcaster ARD revealed that the 23 Chinese swimmers had tested positive for the banned heart medication trimetazidine, also known as TMZ. China's anti-doping agency determined the athletes had been contaminated, and so, did not sanction them. WADA accepted that explanation, did not press the case further, and China was never made to deliver a public notice about the "no-fault findings," as is often seen in similar cases. The stock explanation for the contamination was that traces of TMZ were found in the kitchen of a hotel where the swimmers were staying. In his 58-page report, Cottier relayed some suspicions about the feasibility of that chain of events — noting that WADA's chief scientist "saw no other solution than to accept it, even if he continued to have doubts about the reality of contamination as described by the Chinese authorities." But without evidence to support pursuing the case, and with the chance of winning an appeal at almost nil, Cottier determined WADA's "decision not to appeal appears indisputably reasonable." A mystery remained: How did those traces of TMZ get into the kitchen? Shortly after the doping positives were revealed, the Institute of National Anti-Doping Organizations held a meeting on April 30 where it heard from the leader of China's agency, Li Zhiquan. Li's presentation was mostly filled with the same talking points that have been delivered throughout the saga — that the positive tests resulted from contamination from the kitchen. But he expanded on one way the kitchen might have become contaminated, harkening to another case in China involving a low-level TMZ positive. A pharmaceutical factory, he explained, had used industrial alcohol in the distillation process for producing TMZ. The industrial alcohol laced with the drug "then entered the market through illegal channels," he said. The alcohol "was re-used by the perpetrators to process and produce cooking wine, which is an important seasoning used locally to make beef noodles," Li said. "The contaminated beef noodles were consumed by that athlete, resulting in an extremely low concentration of TMZ in the positive sample. "The wrongdoers involved have been brought to justice." This new information raised eyebrows among the anti-doping leaders listening to Li's report. So much so that over the next month, several emails ensued to make sure the details about the noodles and wine made their way to WADA lawyers, who could then pass it onto Cottier. Eventually, Li did pass on the information to WADA general counsel Ross Wenzel and, just to be sure, one of the anti-doping leaders forwarded it, as well, according to the emails seen by the AP. All this came with Li's request that the noodles story be kept confidential. Turns out, it made it into Cottier's report, though he took the information with a grain of salt. "Indeed, giving it more attention would have required it to be documented, then scientifically verified and validated," he wrote. Neither Wenzel nor officials at the Chinese anti-doping agency returned messages from AP asking about the noodles conspiracy and the other athlete who Li suggested had been contaminated by them. Meanwhile, 11 of the swimmers who originally tested positive competed at the Paris Games earlier this year in a meet held under the cloud of the Chinese doping case. Though WADA considers the case closed, Koehler and others point to situations like this as one of many reasons that an investigation by someone other than Cottier, who was hired by WADA, is still needed. "It gives the appearance that people are just making things up as they go along on this, and hoping the story just goes away," Koehler said. "Which clearly it has not." Get local news delivered to your inbox!
US nerve center to combat China and Russia global propaganda shut down by GOP oppositionClubs from across the football pyramid are “alarmed” by the lack of consultation on legislation which could “fundamentally affect the future of English football”, West Ham vice-chairwoman Karren Brady has said. The Apprentice star also argued that a lack of clarity from the Government on the ownership test is causing “significant uncertainty” for potential investors. This came as the House of Lords continued its scrutiny of the Football Governance Bill, which seeks to establish an independent regulator for the top five tiers of the men’s game. In the upper chamber, Baroness Brady said: “We are creating legislation which will profoundly affect 160 quite unique institutions, from Premier League clubs through to the National League community clubs, but it is important for everyone to understand that the consultation with these affected businesses by the current Government has been remarkably limited, almost unbelievably so. “Just seven Premier League clubs, I was one of them, was granted a brief half-hour meeting with the Secretary of State over the summer. “And following this cursory engagement, significant decisions were made that could fundamentally affect the future of English football, most notably with the inclusion of parachute payments within the backstop mechanism. “This is particularly concerning given that fundamental issues still remained unresolved, we still lack any clarity on Uefa’s position on state interference, for example, this clearly creates profound uncertainty for clubs competing in or aspiring to European competition, as well as our national teams.” “We don’t know what the ownership test will look like, this causes significant uncertainty for potential investors as to whether they are able to own a club,” she added. Lady Brady continued: “I have spoken to many of my colleagues across all of the football pyramid, we are all alarmed about and puzzled by the lack of discussion on the Bill with ministers. “Would the minister agree that we all want to get the detail of this Bill right? And can she see any downsides to providing meaningful opportunities to hear from all clubs across the football pyramid affected by the legislation?” Prior to this, Tory shadow sports minister Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay had tabled an amendment which he said would allow clubs to “make their views known on this legislation” by including specific competitions on the face of the Bill. Labour frontbencher Baroness Twycross told the upper chamber: “I don’t think the leagues are confused either on which leagues this legislation will apply to.” She added: “This power is both reasonable and the result of evidence-based consultation with all key stakeholders in the industry. “This power ensures that the competitions in scope can be amended in a timely manner and ensures the scope of the regime remains relevant.” The peer later said: “Over the past three years there have been countless opportunities for all affected and interested parties to make representations.” Lady Brady also raised concerns about the financial distribution backstop, which she said is “clearly designed as a mechanism to gain direct access to, and apportionate Premier League revenue, and no-one else’s”. “I might add the backstop will allow the IFR (Independent Football Regulator) to do this even if it was against the Premier League clubs’ will, or even without the clubs’ agreement, even if it was to have a detrimental effect on the clubs and the overall competition it removes revenue from,” she added. The backstop would allow the new IFR to intervene in the distribution of Premier League broadcast revenue down the leagues as a last resort. It could be triggered by the Premier League, English Football League (EFL) or National League to mediate the fair financial distribution of this revenue if they are not able to come to an agreement. Conservative peers later raised concerns over the cost implications to clubs of establishing the regulator, although they faced claims of “filibustering” – wasting time by making overlong speeches in a bid to delay progress. Watching opposition benches blatantly filibustering to destroy the Football Governance Bill is nothing short of sporting vandalism.Football is broken. Clubs are struggling. Now those seats have been lost, do they no longer care about likes of Reading or Southend? @FairGameUK — Niall Couper (@NiallCouper) December 4, 2024 Labour peer Lord Watson of Invergowrie questioned why Lord Parkinson was showing “confected outrage” at the Bill when the former culture minister would have been defending a similar proposal had the Tories remained in power. Lord Parkinson, in his reply, said: “We want to see this regulator established, we want to see it doing its work and doing so effectively, but we also see before us a Bill that is different because of the election that was called and the result that happened, and we’re interrogating particularly closely the changes that the Government have made to the Bill – of which there are many. “And we have more concerns on these benches than we did before the election from my colleagues behind me about the way we do it.” The Tory peer pointed to Labour frontbenchers fulfilling their duties to “properly scrutinise” then-government legislation when they were on the opposition benches. Lady Twycross, in an intervention, said: “While I agree that (Lord Parkinson) is correct that I would scrutinise legislation when I was sitting on those (opposition) benches, I have never sought to filibuster a Bill to which my party had committed, which my party had laid before Parliament, and intended to filibuster it to the point of getting us stuck in treacle.” Lord Parkinson replied: “That is not what we’re doing.” Niall Couper, chief executive of the campaign group Fair Game, wrote on social media site X: “Watching opposition benches blatantly filibustering to destroy the Football Governance Bill is nothing short of sporting vandalism.”