B
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
S
Scott
Guest
B. Lafferty wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
If they'd announced that Jan could ride at the same time they tried to
deny everyone else, then I'd say there was a double standard.
This announcement was made after they've already been rebuked in their
efforts at denying others who've been implicated, but not prosecuted.
My guess is they've just decided it wasn't worth the effort to single
Jan out at this time, considering they would be denied there as well.
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
If they'd announced that Jan could ride at the same time they tried to
deny everyone else, then I'd say there was a double standard.
This announcement was made after they've already been rebuked in their
efforts at denying others who've been implicated, but not prosecuted.
My guess is they've just decided it wasn't worth the effort to single
Jan out at this time, considering they would be denied there as well.
P
There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
B. Lafferty wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
B. Lafferty wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
B
B. Lafferty
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
> C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
>
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> Looks that way.
>> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
>
news:[email protected]...
> There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
> C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
>
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> Looks that way.
>> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
>
P
The IOC should just say "Ciao" to cycling and cut us loose. Then
they'll no longer have to worry about **** Pound (or what Lance
Armstrong thinks of **** Pound).
Then the UCI can just deregulate doping, being that "so few" riders
test positive anyway. That's what they wish for anyway. Not being
involved.
B. Lafferty wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
>
>
> >
> > C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
> >
> >
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> Looks that way.
> >> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
> >
they'll no longer have to worry about **** Pound (or what Lance
Armstrong thinks of **** Pound).
Then the UCI can just deregulate doping, being that "so few" riders
test positive anyway. That's what they wish for anyway. Not being
involved.
B. Lafferty wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
>
>
> >
> > C'mon, lets at least give Ulrich a few moments to breathe.
> >
> >
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> Looks that way.
> >> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
> >
B
B. Lafferty
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The IOC should just say "Ciao" to cycling and cut us loose. Then
> they'll no longer have to worry about **** Pound (or what Lance
> Armstrong thinks of **** Pound).
>
> Then the UCI can just deregulate doping, being that "so few" riders
> test positive anyway. That's what they wish for anyway. Not being
> involved.
The business of cycling is a bit more complicated than that.
news:[email protected]...
> The IOC should just say "Ciao" to cycling and cut us loose. Then
> they'll no longer have to worry about **** Pound (or what Lance
> Armstrong thinks of **** Pound).
>
> Then the UCI can just deregulate doping, being that "so few" riders
> test positive anyway. That's what they wish for anyway. Not being
> involved.
The business of cycling is a bit more complicated than that.
B
Bret
Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
a result before the Tour starts.
Bret
> There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
a result before the Tour starts.
Bret
B
B. Lafferty wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote :
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
It's not a double standard - that would imply the riders are on
an equal basis. But calculate the number of Germans likely
to come to the Tour, buy products of the Tour sponsors and so on.
Now compare that to the number of Kazaks likely to. There's a
clear difference, by which ASO may make an impartial distinction.
Isn't the war on doping grand? Without it, we might not have any
moral standards!
> <[email protected]> wrote :
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man for
> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of the
> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
It's not a double standard - that would imply the riders are on
an equal basis. But calculate the number of Germans likely
to come to the Tour, buy products of the Tour sponsors and so on.
Now compare that to the number of Kazaks likely to. There's a
clear difference, by which ASO may make an impartial distinction.
Isn't the war on doping grand? Without it, we might not have any
moral standards!
B
B. Lafferty
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote :
>> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
>> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
>> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>>
>> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man
>> for
>> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
>> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of
>> the
>> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
>> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
>> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
> It's not a double standard - that would imply the riders are on
> an equal basis. But calculate the number of Germans likely
> to come to the Tour, buy products of the Tour sponsors and so on.
> Now compare that to the number of Kazaks likely to. There's a
> clear difference, by which ASO may make an impartial distinction.
> Isn't the war on doping grand? Without it, we might not have any
> moral standards!
>
"Money talks; nobody walks." Dennison, the Men's Clothier, Paramus, New
Jersey.
news:[email protected]...
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote :
>> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
>> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
>> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>>
>> It's more than a one word reference. You also have his right hand man
>> for
>> the mountains implicated. Nothing has thus far been "proved" that wuld
>> allow the UCI to take disiplinary action against any of them on any of
>> the
>> teams involved. Yet, Communidad is out and the Tour is seeking to have
>> Wurth barred as well. Perhaps Vino is not seen as the contender that Jan
>> is. That's not exactly equal treatment of the teams.
>
> It's not a double standard - that would imply the riders are on
> an equal basis. But calculate the number of Germans likely
> to come to the Tour, buy products of the Tour sponsors and so on.
> Now compare that to the number of Kazaks likely to. There's a
> clear difference, by which ASO may make an impartial distinction.
> Isn't the war on doping grand? Without it, we might not have any
> moral standards!
>
"Money talks; nobody walks." Dennison, the Men's Clothier, Paramus, New
Jersey.
M
Michael Press
Guest
In article
<[email protected]>,
"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
It's not in French is it?
--
Michael Press
<[email protected]>,
"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
It's not in French is it?
--
Michael Press
T
Tuschinski
Guest
Bret wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
> Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
> a result before the Tour starts.
>
> Bret
Can you force Ullrich to take a test? Can you deny him if he doesn't?
Considering there is no precedent, I would say No way they can pull
that off.
> [email protected] wrote:
> > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
>
> True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
> Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
> a result before the Tour starts.
>
> Bret
Can you force Ullrich to take a test? Can you deny him if he doesn't?
Considering there is no precedent, I would say No way they can pull
that off.
T
Tuschinski
Guest
B. Lafferty wrote:
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
I think they have little choice. Astana wurth has a truck load of solid
involvement going against them and even they are fighting this legally.
A case against Ullrich would more than likely be lost hands down. With
Astana there are at least a few criminal cases against the
organisation, against Ullrich they only have speculation. And yes, I
think noone really doubts that Ullrich is involved, but the proof is
too easily shot down.
Btw. Double standards? I think that the admission of Phonak is a lot
worse. The evidence mounting against that team are overwhelming (How
many riders have to be caught on the same offense?) and at least there
are some convictions against them, so action from the UCI should be
possible.
> Looks that way.
> http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto915706.shtml
I think they have little choice. Astana wurth has a truck load of solid
involvement going against them and even they are fighting this legally.
A case against Ullrich would more than likely be lost hands down. With
Astana there are at least a few criminal cases against the
organisation, against Ullrich they only have speculation. And yes, I
think noone really doubts that Ullrich is involved, but the proof is
too easily shot down.
Btw. Double standards? I think that the admission of Phonak is a lot
worse. The evidence mounting against that team are overwhelming (How
many riders have to be caught on the same offense?) and at least there
are some convictions against them, so action from the UCI should be
possible.
B
Bret
Guest
Tuschinski wrote:
> Bret wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
> >
> > True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
> > Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
> > a result before the Tour starts.
> >
> > Bret
>
> Can you force Ullrich to take a test? Can you deny him if he doesn't?
> Considering there is no precedent, I would say No way they can pull
> that off.
Do they really need Ullrich's cooperation? Wouldn't a DNA test against
a relative suffice? Maybe Gaby is offering a hair from her daughter's
head to the highest bidder.
Bret
> Bret wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > There is a huge difference between a document with a one-word reference
> > > to a *possible* nickname for Ulrich's coach, and an entire team that is
> > > quite obviously on a program (with full team ownership/support).
> >
> > True, but it's enough evidence to warrant a DNA test on the blood.
> > Maybe they are doing that. If so, you'd think they'd make sure they had
> > a result before the Tour starts.
> >
> > Bret
>
> Can you force Ullrich to take a test? Can you deny him if he doesn't?
> Considering there is no precedent, I would say No way they can pull
> that off.
Do they really need Ullrich's cooperation? Wouldn't a DNA test against
a relative suffice? Maybe Gaby is offering a hair from her daughter's
head to the highest bidder.
Bret
D
Donald Munro
Guest
Bret wrote:
> Do they really need Ullrich's cooperation? Wouldn't a DNA test against
> a relative suffice? Maybe Gaby is offering a hair from her daughter's
> head to the highest bidder.
Does gaby know more ? You know what they say about scorned women.
> Do they really need Ullrich's cooperation? Wouldn't a DNA test against
> a relative suffice? Maybe Gaby is offering a hair from her daughter's
> head to the highest bidder.
Does gaby know more ? You know what they say about scorned women.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 901
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 867
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 370