Brad Mcgee's rant on drugs



Originally posted by c_record
is that better?
Click to expand...

Yep, nice work. Perhaps we should start a 'talking to my mate in France thread'? What forum do you reckon that goes in?
 
Originally posted by Roadie_scum
Yep, nice work. Perhaps we should start a 'talking to my mate in France thread'? What forum do you reckon that goes in?
Click to expand...

the " man its cold" one? or the "ah these roads are quite". maybe the "so many climbs at my doorstep, i just can't decide?"

or even "how cool is team kit".
 
Loved his website. You only have to trace his press clippings archived over the years to see the guys credentials.

A credit to himself, country, family and the sport.
 
Originally posted by c_record
the point that is often made by brad and others on this site is that the sport is not any worse than others. take a look at the pro's and rug use thread. all the other pro athletes are involved too, but cycling is the only sport with the thorough testing. and thats a fact.

How do they take the easy way out? did you miss the bit about the 300km ride through the Mexican mountains?


they already do! there is a range of bans which are from months to 4 yrs to life for third offence. remember inadvertant doping counts, so it would be a bit unfair to hand out life bans straight away.

The media already do more than their fair share of criticism. Why should a team sponsor be discredited when an athlete is deemed to have an anomolie in his or her test. it is not an positive, so the athlete shouldn't face the trial by media.

If the scientific community can not prove that a rider like Marco Pantani ever used performance enhancing drugs (cocaine aside!), than what right does the media have to call him a doper.

well that was my rant!
Click to expand...

I agree with your views about the role that the media play.
But who gives them the opportunity to criticise ?
The UCI share some blame - they equivocate at every opportunity.
Look at how the Festina riders were welcomed back !
Virenque and the rest of his cheating buddies were welcomed back by Verbruggen and his dysfunctional organisation.

The UCI need to be seen to act and to act harshly.
If a cyclist is found to have cheated - he gets banned for life.
No equivocation.
I'm reading a copy of cycle sport here from 1995 : Philip Gaumont
was handed a ban for steroids when he was with LeGroupment.
1995.
The same cheat was caught a couple of weeks ago in the Cofidis
scandal and he starts mouthing off about other riders using the stuff and pointing the finger.
So what was he doing between 1995-2004 ?
Why weren't the UCI on his case ?

I'll tell you why because they're ****ing inept !
 
Just read McGees article.
What can one say ?
I hear where he's coming from but McGee and the rest of his colleagues now have to understand that the currency of credibility
in cycling is zero.
No one that I know accepts that any of the pros are clean.
Is this unfair on McGee ?
Probably.
But who's fault is that ?
Can people be expected to think otherwise ?

I think if there was a bit of moral backbone within the peleton, the cheats would be exposed.
McGee says the peleton knows who the cheats are !
If they know who the cheats are - why is there a code of silence ?
This code of silence compounds the crime of cheating.
By staying quiet - the clean riders maintain the cosy concensus.
It's easy for me to have a go at McGee - I'm not dependent upon cycling for my wages.
But a point of critical mass approaches where a clean rider, no matter how talented or how hard he works, is beaten by a doper.
At that point the clean rider has to decide do take a stand.
 
Originally posted by Spider1977
Drug takers - kick them out of the sport for life, no second chances.
Click to expand...


Yes but what´s a drug : THG , EPO yes but so many other things that are banned are almost impossible to avoid , until you can define what´s theraputic and what´s cheating you´ve got a problem ; also how accurate are the tests ? how many are false positives ? remember Garzelli testing for a diuretic that has not been made for years ? ( and it´s only banned because at the time , 10 - 15 years ago it was thought that it might mess up some tests , last positive in any sport was Delgado in´88 )
Should , for example , a tennis player who´s been given nandrolon by ATP trainers ( the on court trainers that is ) be banned for life because of somebody else´s actions ?
Armstrong tested for cortisone , a very very low leval , due to treatment for a boil on the bum ( in every sense of the word ) , should that result in a life ban ?
Cycling is a mostly European sport so why not complain about US sports as well : american football player banned for 4 matches (?) for taking THG ? US athletics hiding positive dope tests for 15 years ?
There are hundreds and hundreds of cyclists in Europe who can finish the Tour de France , how many Americans , a dozen ? two ? it´s not because they are not on drugs , they just ain´t good enough , so is your attitude envy or something worse ? If they´re good we want to see them just like the Aussies or the Columbians etc , join in and contribute to the history of this beautiful sport before it dies at the hands of the commercial interests .
 
Originally posted by el Inglés
Yes but what´s a drug : THG , EPO yes but so many other things that are banned are almost impossible to avoid , until you can define what´s theraputic and what´s cheating you´ve got a problem ; also how accurate are the tests ? how many are false positives ? remember Garzelli testing for a diuretic that has not been made for years ? ( and it´s only banned because at the time , 10 - 15 years ago it was thought that it might mess up some tests , last positive in any sport was Delgado in´88 )
Should , for example , a tennis player who´s been given nandrolon by ATP trainers ( the on court trainers that is ) be banned for life because of somebody else´s actions ?
Armstrong tested for cortisone , a very very low leval , due to treatment for a boil on the bum ( in every sense of the word ) , should that result in a life ban ?
Cycling is a mostly European sport so why not complain about US sports as well : american football player banned for 4 matches (?) for taking THG ? US athletics hiding positive dope tests for 15 years ?
There are hundreds and hundreds of cyclists in Europe who can finish the Tour de France , how many Americans , a dozen ? two ? it´s not because they are not on drugs , they just ain´t good enough , so is your attitude envy or something worse ? If they´re good we want to see them just like the Aussies or the Columbians etc , join in and contribute to the history of this beautiful sport before it dies at the hands of the commercial interests .
Click to expand...

Your question - what is a drug ? - is interesting because the drug THG was unknown until very recently.
And the only reason this drug came to prominence was because a
disaffected coach happened to phone WADA and tell them about
it !!!!!!!
So your question is valid - what do we designate as a drug and what is not a drug.

Of course testing and security of samples is very important.
In so far as is practicable, all samples must be kept in a secure location and with minimal access.
And it behoves the testing authorities to ensure the integrity of same.

But my central point, is that there is a deep cultural issue that needs to be overcome before we can stand a chance of clearing up this problem - and Brad McGee's comment reflects this issue.

The fact that the peleton know who's doping but yet stay silent is
a damning issue.
How can the sport hope to clean up it's act, if the very participants
in that sport chose to stay quiet and maintain the consensus.
If you bring this to it's logical conclusion, there are clean riders who will gladly keep this code of Omearta : you could have a clean rider placed 4th and 1-3 placed riders are dopers, yet 4th
placed will keep his counsel.
It is truly ludicous - and I'm not having a go at McGee, I'm having a go at all of the peleton.
Until you change this thinking - we can forget about trying to eradicate drugs in cycling.

And finally, finally, I know cycling points the finger to other sports and say "well, our house is not in order but neither is
athletics, swimming".
I cannot answer for other sports - and it is really immaterial if other sports are better, the same or are worse than cycling, regarding drug abuse.
We - the fans, cyclists, sponsors,managers - are all responsible for cycling and it's up to us to get our house in order.

Leave athletics, swimming etc to their own devices.
I want a sport where we can see genuine (slower) performances,
instead of the same cheats being applauded year after year by the same lackies who are so quick to condemn the likes of Pantani etc.
 
Of course testing and security of samples is very important.
In so far as is practicable, all samples must be kept in a secure location and with minimal access.
And it behoves the testing authorities to ensure the integrity of same.

>the testing operation is a very secure one - i dont believe there is much of an issue there. it is very difficult for the athlete to decieve and the motivation of someone else to tamper is very rare.

But my central point, is that there is a deep cultural issue that needs to be overcome before we can stand a chance of clearing up this problem - and Brad McGee's comment reflects this issue.
The fact that the peleton know who's doping but yet stay silent is
a damning issue.

>fair call. why do they protect each other? it must be hard to claim that another rider is a doper and not face defamation suits

And finally, finally, I know cycling points the finger to other sports and say "well, our house is not in order but neither is
athletics, swimming".
I cannot answer for other sports - and it is really immaterial if other sports are better, the same or are worse than cycling, regarding drug abuse.
We - the fans, cyclists, sponsors,managers - are all responsible for cycling and it's up to us to get our house in order.

>Yes, but the questions raised by the responders in this thread are asking why cycling is recieving so much attention, when other sports are glossed over? and how much this attention leads to incidents like Pantani?

>Did Pantani ever test positive or did he just have high haematocrit levels? i can't remember exactly.
 
Originally posted by c_record
Of course testing and security of samples is very important.
In so far as is practicable, all samples must be kept in a secure location and with minimal access.
And it behoves the testing authorities to ensure the integrity of same.

>the testing operation is a very secure one - i dont believe there is much of an issue there. it is very difficult for the athlete to decieve and the motivation of someone else to tamper is very rare.

But my central point, is that there is a deep cultural issue that needs to be overcome before we can stand a chance of clearing up this problem - and Brad McGee's comment reflects this issue.
The fact that the peleton know who's doping but yet stay silent is
a damning issue.

>fair call. why do they protect each other? it must be hard to claim that another rider is a doper and not face defamation suits

And finally, finally, I know cycling points the finger to other sports and say "well, our house is not in order but neither is
athletics, swimming".
I cannot answer for other sports - and it is really immaterial if other sports are better, the same or are worse than cycling, regarding drug abuse.
We - the fans, cyclists, sponsors,managers - are all responsible for cycling and it's up to us to get our house in order.

>Yes, but the questions raised by the responders in this thread are asking why cycling is recieving so much attention, when other sports are glossed over? and how much this attention leads to incidents like Pantani?

>Did Pantani ever test positive or did he just have high haematocrit levels? i can't remember exactly.
Click to expand...

First of all Pantani was never convicted on a positive drug test.
He did however break the UCI rule which says that riders cannot have a haemocrit level greater than 50.
Pantani was found to have 52.
But I must re-iterate that he was never convicted of a positive
drug test.

As regards the code of silence - cycling needs to come up with a method by which cyclists can, safely, make a charge against another cyclist without fear or favour.
In addition, the person accused of doping needs the full protection of due process.
This is a legal subject and I don't have the experience to formulate a solution here and now.
But the hurdle of silence needs to be overcome in order that clean cyclists can feel assured that if they make an accusation that they will not be treated as pariahs by their colleagues.
Obviously such a system has to be abe to withstand the rigour
of all legal and ethical imperatives,
But without such a structure in place, the code of silence will remain.
Whistleblowers need to be assured that they will not be made to pay a price for making their accusations.

One one hand I commend McGee for expressing his views - it just disappoints me that this code of silence simply re-enforces the cheats.

As to why cycling is getting this level of media coverage.
Well, I don't man to be disrepectful but what other sport has a double champion six years ago, now lying cold in a grave in Northern Italy ?
What other sport has incurred the roll call of death that our sport
has ?
It's quite right that the media focusses on this sport.
Especially in the light of the fact that the UCI make a big play about the fact that cycling has more drugs tests than any other sport.
If this sport is so good at detecting drug abuse - how come the UCI has never, never, uncovered a drug scandal ?
If this organization is so vigilant – how come not one single drug scandal has been exposed by the UCI ?
Look at the history : festina was uncovered by the French police at the Belgian border.
Look at the 1999 Giro, it was the Italian police which tailed a freight container through Greece which contained EPO.
Look at the Cofidis affair, it was the French police again who were surveying a trafficking ring.
Look at the Rumsas affair, this was exposed when customs officials acted.
Where were the UCI when all of this was happening ?
All of the scandals happened under their watch !

Make no mistake, the UCI have played their part in allowing drugs to flourish in our sport and they too are culpable in all of this.
 
Why do you think the UCI is based in Switzerland, a neutral country?

Looking back in history they (the Swiss) quite happily sit on a fence quoting neutrality and peace, but underneath it all they're doing deals with all the robbers rogues and charlatans that the world posesses, and most of it for the wicked lucre. So no doubt when things come light eventually, and they always do, they'll have had their mucky little paws in the mire somewhere.
 
Limerickman has hit the nail on the head: cycling can never be clean until the unwritten code of silence amongst the peloton is broken.

Look at how Christophe Basson was treated in the 1999 Tour when he spoke out against drugs - Armstrong told him to shut his mouth and leave the race. I'm not implying Armstrong has ever taken banned substances but when the patron of the biggest cycling race and the sport's biggest 'star' takes this stance, it is a sorry state of affairs.
 
Originally posted by GuyStevens
Limerickman has hit the nail on the head: cycling can never be clean until the unwritten code of silence amongst the peloton is broken.

Look at how Christophe Basson was treated in the 1999 Tour when he spoke out against drugs - Armstrong told him to shut his mouth and leave the race. I'm not implying Armstrong has ever taken banned substances but when the patron of the biggest cycling race and the sport's biggest 'star' takes this stance, it is a sorry state of affairs.
Click to expand...

Bad example , Basson was claiming in his TV interviews that HE was the only clean rider in the pelaton ( he was paid by french tv by the way ) which is never going to make freinds and influence people.
If you want to deprive workers of their lively hood for more than 2 years then they have to have the same legal rights as you or I
ie to be able to take it to the house of lords or supreme court or what ever and then sue for compensation if they are wrongfully convicted , just like everybody else . The system now is in place to protect the vested intrests of the sports bodies , and anyway why do you say that cycling is all dopers?? what´s your evidence ? There are less positives in our sport per 1000 tests than almost any other .:confused:
 
From cyclingnews.com

Latest doping sanctions
The UCI has reported that the following riders have been sanctioned for doping offences:

Alejandro Diaz De La Peña, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, fined CHF 300.
Fausto Esparza Muñoz, sanctioned by Federación Mexicana de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Cycliste de Beauce, 18 June, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 6 August, 2003 to 5 February, 2004 and fine of CHF 1,250.
Rafael Mateos Perez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Pino Cerami April 10, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 19 September, 2003 to 19 June, 2004 and fine of CHF 2,000.
Julian Adrada Rodriguez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, warning (art. 129 AER).
____________________________________________________

What an absolute joke! Their mothers probably gave them a harder time than the UCI.

Fausto Esparza Muñoz actually gets suspended for a retrospective period. Given it's now March 3, I'm sure he's upset about his suspension which ended a month ago.

Kick them out for life, before the IOC kicks the sport out of the Olympics (with some justification when you read this garbage).
 
Originally posted by Spider1977
From cyclingnews.com

Latest doping sanctions
The UCI has reported that the following riders have been sanctioned for doping offences:

Alejandro Diaz De La Peña, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, fined CHF 300.
Fausto Esparza Muñoz, sanctioned by Federación Mexicana de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Cycliste de Beauce, 18 June, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 6 August, 2003 to 5 February, 2004 and fine of CHF 1,250.
Rafael Mateos Perez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Pino Cerami April 10, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 19 September, 2003 to 19 June, 2004 and fine of CHF 2,000.
Julian Adrada Rodriguez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, warning (art. 129 AER).
____________________________________________________

What an absolute joke! Their mothers probably gave them a harder time than the UCI.

Fausto Esparza Muñoz actually gets suspended for a retrospective period. Given it's now March 3, I'm sure he's upset about his suspension which ended a month ago.

Kick them out for life, before the IOC kicks the sport out of the Olympics (with some justification when you read this garbage).
Click to expand...


we have no idea what the sanctions are for! They must be minor infringements to recieve those types of sanctions. They maybe athsma or anti inflammation type of useage. the penalties for steriod, epo, etc are generally longer - just ask perez, who recieved a 6month then 4 yr ban in short sucession for epo use.

or maybe they are just those wonderful health rests that are given out. I here they come with a free business class return ticket to Bali Club Med. Aren't those guys at the UCI generous!
 
Originally posted by Spider1977
From cyclingnews.com

Latest doping sanctions
The UCI has reported that the following riders have been sanctioned for doping offences:

Alejandro Diaz De La Peña, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, fined CHF 300.
Fausto Esparza Muñoz, sanctioned by Federación Mexicana de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Cycliste de Beauce, 18 June, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 6 August, 2003 to 5 February, 2004 and fine of CHF 1,250.
Rafael Mateos Perez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, disqualification from GP Pino Cerami April 10, 2003, suspension of 6 months from 19 September, 2003 to 19 June, 2004 and fine of CHF 2,000.
Julian Adrada Rodriguez, sanctioned by Federación Española de Ciclismo, warning (art. 129 AER).
____________________________________________________

What an absolute joke! Their mothers probably gave them a harder time than the UCI.

Fausto Esparza Muñoz actually gets suspended for a retrospective period. Given it's now March 3, I'm sure he's upset about his suspension which ended a month ago.

Kick them out for life, before the IOC kicks the sport out of the Olympics (with some justification when you read this garbage).
Click to expand...


You can take a man´s lively hood away for life without giving him access to the FULL court system , and a life ban for any infringement ? have you seen just how many products are on the banned list ? most of them staples of the household med chest .

Why is pro cycling in the olympics anyway ?

What is it about aussies and yanks that makes some of them such puritanical tyrants ? at least cycling lists it´s positives , in most sports you only hear of the highprofile cases : or in the US they either hide them ( athletics , 15 years of hiding positives ! ) or give silly bans - 4 match ban for steroid abuse in american football ( THG ) .

Take care of your blood pressure , if the meds don´t get you banned that is . :confused:
 
I just want to expand on another couple of points referred to by other posters.

Of course, Armstrong was wrong to have a go at Bassons (and I’m not singling out
Armstrong when I refer to this), it is incumbent on every cyclist to try to make the sport
clean and to promote fair competition.
If the top men like Ullrich, Armstrong etc, were more vocal in their support of the likes
of Basson then perhaps it might bring about a cultural change in the peleton.
But I suspect that a stronger cure needs to be proscribed.

This cultural denial of drugs abuse – the code of silence, in the peleton is pernicious.
The following statements are indicative of the outlook of managers, organizers and
the UCI.
I have just re-read an article in Cycle Sport magazine from October 1998 (written
in the immediate aftermath of the Festina scandal)
Bill Fotheringham in an interview with Hein Verbruggen, Jean Marie LeBlanc and
Manolo Saiz, elicits some very interesting responses for each of them.

When asked about the state of cycling : Verbruggen states “this sport (cycling) is competing against other sports for money, for audience numbers. People want to see
winners and they want to see great deeds being done in that winning. This may cause
cyclists to feel that they need to take drugs to achieve that level of success”.
JML replies “we’re going to introduce checks so as, to first of all, protect the health
of each cyclist and to protect the integrity of the sport”.
Verbruggen : “we must learn from Festina, if we don’t then our cause is hopeless – and without hope we have nothing”
JML : “where there is life, there is hope. I believe that the riders will, from now on, start
to consider what they’re doing before taking drugs”
JML : “I believe that Festina is the turning point for our sport – things will improve,
we will see more accountability”
Verbruggen : “let there be no doubt, the UCI take this issue of drug use very, very
seriously”
Fine words.

Implicitly, both Verbruggen and JML, never refer to the taking of drugs as being ethically
or morally wrong : nor do they condemn those involved in the Festina scandal.
They never state in this interview that the Festina scandal was an attempt by a team to
systematically cheat.
Nor do they unequivocally state that Festina broke UCI laws.

If this is their collective response in the white heat of a raging controversy – when the premier cycling event is on the rack – I would suggest that either they are incompetent,
or they’re confident that, despite the controversy, they can brazen it out.
My own view is that they brazen out each and every controversy, knowing that the next big story will come along to divert attention away from their duplicity.



For duplicity is what this subject is all about.
The duplicity of cheats being allowed to continue to win without fear or favour.
Duplicity of treating one set of cheats, differently from another set of alleged cheats.
Duplicity, by allowing clean riders to compete against other riders using drugs.

The claims that our sport is at the forefront of drug testing and the eradication of cheating
is not true.
If this sport of ours was at the forefront of the battle against drugs, we would see what is happening in other sports.
Athletics, so often used by cycling as an example where drug use is prevalent, show
that performance times have actually to dropped.
The sprint times recorded by Flojo, Marles Goehr and Ben Johnson, are so far ahead of
current performance times that their records will probably be never broken.
Each of these athletes created their records when drug abuse WAS prevalent in athletics.

Swimming times have also begun to get slower because the authorities and the sport itself
have taken affirmative action.
In cycling, times have gotten faster – NOT SLOWER.
What does this say ?
The apologists for our sport, spout on about better technology, better training, better preparation, more specialization, as being the reasons to substantiate these improvements.
Better technology, better training, better preparation, more specialization, pertains to all
sports – so why are times getting slower in most other sports ?
Does any other sport have the rollcall of young deaths that our sport has ?
Drug taking and cheating and the number of tragically young deaths, are not, respectively, mutually exclusive.

So I have a lot of sympathy for Brad McGee.
Cyclists are allowed to take drugs with impunity because they know that
the sport doesn’t really want to take the action that is necessary to tackle this problem.
Professional cycling credibility deserves all the opprobrium it’s gets from other sports, the media and the civil authorities like the police.
This sport is unable to regulate itself – it’s dysfunctional attitude to what is going on at
it’s core, is delinquent.

Of course livelihoods of cyclists have to be protected – but aren’t doped cyclists who beat
clean riders stealing money from their clean colleagues when they beat them in races ?
Is that protecting a livelihood ?
And I agree that due judicial process needs to be in place.
But it is the responsibility of the sport – UCI, managers, cyclists – to put in place competent, genuine structures to tackle the problem of cheating and to allow allegation to be made – and to afford riders protection under the Law.

Six years ago – we had Festina.
What changed since then – nothing has changed since then.
Nothing has changed – except the roll call of death has increased.
 
Limerickman, do you think there will be a change at the UCI regarding this issue when Hein Verbruggen leaves his post next year?
 
100m athletics times have fallen, as have swimming. Ben Johnson ran 9.84 whilst Tim Johnson current world rec is 9.79

other mainstream sports don't have as larger improvement because they don't have as much reliance on technical equipment like cycling does. the difference in speed of the same cyclist whilst putting out 400w varied from 42.7 to 46.9 kmh depending on which bicycle he rode. Road Cycling - Conconi, Gregor page 44
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back