Andreau leaves Rock & Republic

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

UCI is a governing body. Hamilton, Botero and Sevilla don't have to go to CAS. They have a professional riders license and have the right to race. This is how the rules are, also for race organisers. If they invite a team, all riders of that team who have a license and are not part of an open official investigation have the right to start (read the team- ToC contracts and UCI rules). The federations involved stated that there is no open investigation against Botero, Sevilla and Hamilton. They have the right to start. I don't like dopers but I even more don't like dictorial ways of governing without giving a damn of following the rules. You can't ban people for not following the rules in a way where you are yourself not following the rules. Thats a joke and organisations that work that way, are no serious organisation, nor a serious business. They are unreliable.

Nobody forced ToC (read AEG) to invite Rock Racing. Everybody knew who was in that team.
Why no extra cyclists for Rock? Why no TAS? They knew Puerto. They knew Tour of California antidoping. Same as Virenque and Valverde. A bad plan for Rock. No 2007 Vuelta for Sevilla. No 2007 Giro for Hamilton.

They are banned by races not UCI. Problem with business - go to court. Those are rules.

Why no extra cyclists for Rock? Why no TAS? They knew Puerto. They knew Tour of California antidoping. Same as Virenque and Valverde. A bad plan for Rock. No 2007 Vuelta for Sevilla. No 2007 Giro for Hamilton.

They are banned by races not UCI. Problem with business - go to court. Those are rules.
They don't have to go to court. They are not banned. According to the rules the race organisers did not have the right to ban them. The rules are there for everybody, also for the races but it seems you don't know the rules. Welcome in banana republic.

Why no extra cyclists for Rock? Why no TAS? They knew Puerto. They knew Tour of California antidoping. Same as Virenque and Valverde. A bad plan for Rock. No 2007 Vuelta for Sevilla. No 2007 Giro for Hamilton.

They are banned by races not UCI. Problem with business - go to court. Those are rules.I agree with Heroes. Everyone is playing God here. There is no accountability by the event organizers. They seem to think they can do what they like. "Oh I don't like your haircut...Your team is out". I know people don't like the idea of UCI running a Pro Tour, and I'm not happy with it either... but someone/thing needs to run a tour calendar here with a standard practice and rules that are enforced consistently. Every other sport has a governing body that controls participants as well as tournament/event owners. Invitational events are fine, but the tour needs a bedrock of standard operating procedures IMHO for sanctioned events.

Teams/sponsors and pro cyclists are being played with here like they don't have any investment in the sport. Their investment is huge.

I agree with Heroes. Everyone is playing God here. There is no accountability by the event organizers. They seem to think . "Oh I don't like your haircut...Your team is out". I know people don't like the idea of UCI running a Pro Tour, and I'm not happy with it either... but someone/thing needs to run a tour calendar here with a standard practice and rules that are enforced consistently. Every other sport has a governing body that controls participants as well as tournament/event owners. Invitational events are fine, but the tour needs a bedrock of standard operating procedures IMHO for sanctioned events.

Teams/sponsors and pro cyclists are being played with here like they don't have any investment in the sport. Their investment is huge.
They can do what they want to do. They own race. Not because of the haircut - because of doping. Virenque DiLuca Basso Ullrich Hamilton Botero Sevilla Mancebo Liberty Seguros Relax Astana.

Fault is not races. Fault is Verdruggen. Fault is Spanish Federation. Fault is Kazakhstan Federation. Fault is Bruyneel. Hired Damsgaard too late.

They can do what they want to do. They own race. Not because of the haircut - because of doping. Virenque DiLuca Basso Ullrich Hamilton Botero Sevilla Mancebo Liberty Seguros Relax Astana.

Fault is not races. Fault is Verdruggen. Fault is Spanish Federation. Fault is Kazakhstan Federation. Fault is Bruyneel. Hired Damsgaard too late.
They can't, the race is sanctioned by the UCI. All sanctioned races have to follow the UCI rules. If they don't like it they have to leave the UCI.

Not because of the haircut - because of doping.I used "I don't like your haircut" as a metaphor for any arbitrary excuse. It wasn't meant to be taken literally.

I respect your opinion.

Audio interview with Ball.

http://www.competitorradio.com/shows/194CompetitorsMichaelBall.mp3

Audio interview with Ball.

http://www.competitorradio.com/shows/194CompetitorsMichaelBall.mp3Thanks Bro. Very interesting. Got to understand this guy a lot better. He is all about branding.

Couple of moments in the interview when he revealed his character. He spent five minutes telling us that hiring Tyler was all about giving him a chance for redemption, that everyone should be allowed to make mistakes and have a chance to redeem themselves, and isn't that what this country was founded on. Then, when it was put to him that one of the big problems people have with Tyler is that he has never fessed up, Ball switches tack and says that he believes in Tyler and his claims of innocence. He basically shows us in that instant switch that Michael Ball will just come out with whatever bullshit line suits the moment. Yet he keeps trying to push the image that he is a straight talker (branding - its what he wants to be known as - not what he is).

Another example is his anecdote about how his acting training has helped him because it has taught him how to react to certain situations. Which to anyone means that it has taught him how to "act" in response to situations, to get the best message across (branding), but he suddenly realizes that he has divulged too much info about his real self so he summarizes his story by saying that acting has taught him how to react in an honest way. Huh???

I think this guy would love to be Bruyneel except be the owner of Tailwind and Discovery Channel as well. To have the best team that wins everything and everyone suspects is doping, but to never test positive. To be able to beat the system. Anti-establishment. He even says he doesn't like the Slipstream model. He would rather that any indiscretions that his athletes commit be kept within and not revealed to the public. As if that's going to make everyone accountable.

He rags on the French. "They don't like anyone. They don't even like themselves." That quote might comeback to haunt him in the garment business, let alone in his cycling endeavors.

He does understand branding though, but seems to think having a black bus, with half a dozen black Escalades, and a few glamorous paid girls hanging around the team makes them "cool".

Whatever.

FLandis (leather jacket) hanging out with Rock Racking. That looks like his lawyer next to him.

http://www.rockracing.com/gallery/2008-02-24_ToC-Stage7/397_RRStage7.jpg

Is this for real Double Penetration interview or joke? Worse cycling interview of all!

http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=12283



Some of your riders were outed right before the race, any real reason and what will be their ability to race this year?

That was just a tragedy it really was and the AEG knows that! There is not an investigation there is no indictment nothing it is all hear say and this type of thing - these allegations and the knee jerk reaction it causes is infringing on the Civil rights of the riders.

Let me be straight up here, I am a business man first and a team owner second. These people have to be out of their collective minds to think that I would lay out everything I have to build this team and then allow dirty riders on my team, thinking like that is incredulous to me. What I have allowed is guys a second chance everyone deserves a second chance everyone makes mistakes. These guys served their time they are clean and it is just dirty politics that bring this type of tragedy about, people are trying to affect the outcome of races with these types of allegations.


The riders are just not getting enough support or credit for helping the sport grow and cleaning up their act from the inside out! Think about it if you were on a pro team, rider owner and you were in contention for major wins would you knowingly allow doping on your team?

FLandis (leather jacket) hanging out with Rock Racking. That looks like his lawyer next to him.

http://www.rockracing.com/gallery/2008-02-24_ToC-Stage7/397_RRStage7.jpg
the lawyer has seen too many tanning salons.

the lawyer has seen too many tanning salons.
He has a natural tan...

Thanks Bro. Very interesting. Got to understand this guy a lot better. He is all about branding.

Couple of moments in the interview when he revealed his character. He spent five minutes telling us that hiring Tyler was all about giving him a chance for redemption, that everyone should be allowed to make mistakes and have a chance to redeem themselves, and isn't that what this country was founded on. Then, when it was put to him that one of the big problems people have with Tyler is that he has never fessed up, Ball switches tack and says that he believes in Tyler and his claims of innocence. He basically shows us in that instant switch that Michael Ball will just come out with whatever bullshit line suits the moment. Yet he keeps trying to push the image that he is a straight talker (branding - its what he wants to be known as - not what he is).

Another example is his anecdote about how his acting training has helped him because it has taught him how to react to certain situations. Which to anyone means that it has taught him how to "act" in response to situations, to get the best message across (branding), but he suddenly realizes that he has divulged too much info about his real self so he summarizes his story by saying that acting has taught him how to react in an honest way. Huh???

I think this guy would love to be Bruyneel except be the owner of Tailwind and Discovery Channel as well. To have the best team that wins everything and everyone suspects is doping, but to never test positive. To be able to beat the system. Anti-establishment. He even says he doesn't like the Slipstream model. He would rather that any indiscretions that his athletes commit be kept within and not revealed to the public. As if that's going to make everyone accountable.

He rags on the French. "They don't like anyone. They don't even like themselves." That quote might comeback to haunt him in the garment business, let alone in his cycling endeavors.

He does understand branding though, but seems to think having a black bus, with half a dozen black Escalades, and a few glamorous paid girls hanging around the team makes them "cool".

Whatever.
dichotomy is buying a $300 pair of jeans for identity and bad boy credibility.

He has a natural tan...

He's been hangin' with Tyler.

dichotomy is buying a $300 pair of jeans for identity and bad boy credibility.Dichotomy is: division into two parts; or two mutually exclusive, opposed, or contradictory groups. I don't know WTF you think it means... :D

Dichotomy is: division into two parts; or two mutually exclusive, opposed, or contradictory groups. I don't know WTF you think it means... :D
thanks Crank,

so you think someone who shells out 300 bucks on a pair of jeans, buys rebellion, buys a music creed? Rock and Roll?

Only insofar as Rock and Roll has been corporatised, and made into a product. But gigging and making no money playing music, is a little different from buying 300 buck jeans on Madison Avenue or Rodeo Drive.

You should read the context a little more closely CF.

thanks Crank,

so you think someone who shells out 300 bucks on a pair of jeans, buys rebellion, buys a music creed? Rock and Roll?

Only insofar as Rock and Roll has been corporatised, and made into a product. But gigging and making no money playing music, is a little different from buying 300 buck jeans on Madison Avenue or Rodeo Drive.

You should read the context a little more closely CF.So it's a contradiction, a paradox. I get your point. I was just confused in your meaning originally, by the use of the term "dichotomy".

I agree that it is rediculous. Though they're only $250 over here. But the fact that the guy is making millions out of it just goes to show you how farked up consumers are (including myself - though I wasn't aware of Ball or the company image, they just fit nice) and how farked up the whole world of image and branding is, that people shell out this sort of money to look like poor rebels for the cause... :p

So it's a contradiction, a paradox. I get your point. I was just confused in your meaning originally, by the use of the term "dichotomy".a 300 pair of jeans? branded as rebellion?

thats a dichotomy, with licence, not reading the Oxford dictionary.

so you think someone who shells out 300 bucks on a pair of jeans, buys rebellion, buys a music creed?
If you buy the music of Creed then you are not a rebel. You have to buy Nickelback to be a rebel.

If you buy the music of Creed then you are not a rebel. You have to buy Nickelback to be a rebel.
well, Creed capital C and small c are different, and I dont listen to either those, Creed, or Nickleback.

If you wanna talk Pixies, Afghan Whigs/Twilight Singers, Tindersticks...