Basso: 'I have had no contact from any judge, investigator, the UCI'



S

Simon Brooke

Guest
Quote from:
http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/news/articles/10193.0.html

"Riis still believes me. I told him I have nothing to do with the Fuentes
story, but he said I was suspended until all this business is over. Now
my lawyers will be doing the talking for me," Basso said. "I have had no
contact from any judge, any investigator, no one from the UCI. I left
because of the Ethics Code, there was no other option, but I have
nothing to hide."

What gets me is the line 'I have had no contact from any judge, any
investigator, no one from the UCI'. These people - Basso, Ullrich,
Mancebo and all the others - are having their livelihood literally taken
away from them. Their reputations are being tarnished for ever. For
Ullrich in particular this is possibly his last real chance to win the
Tour again.

And the people making the accusations don't even have the guts to pick up
the phone and ask to hear the accused's side of the story. It makes you
sick. I'm not asking for justice here - in a case like this 'justice'
may be too abstract a concept. But, for heaven's sake, just basic human
decency.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Want to know what SCO stands for?
;; http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030605
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Quote from:
> http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/news/articles/10193.0.html
>
> "Riis still believes me. I told him I have nothing to do with the Fuentes
> story, but he said I was suspended until all this business is over. Now
> my lawyers will be doing the talking for me," Basso said. "I have had no
> contact from any judge, any investigator, no one from the UCI. I left
> because of the Ethics Code, there was no other option, but I have
> nothing to hide."
>
> What gets me is the line 'I have had no contact from any judge, any
> investigator, no one from the UCI'. These people - Basso, Ullrich,
> Mancebo and all the others - are having their livelihood literally taken
> away from them. Their reputations are being tarnished for ever. For
> Ullrich in particular this is possibly his last real chance to win the
> Tour again.
>
> And the people making the accusations don't even have the guts to pick up
> the phone and ask to hear the accused's side of the story. It makes you
> sick. I'm not asking for justice here - in a case like this 'justice'
> may be too abstract a concept. But, for heaven's sake, just basic human
> decency.
>


One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal... and
this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds out
there.

Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that some
200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about 50
were cyclists...

....why then is this being painted in the media as purely a *cycling*
scandal?

.... why is no journalist, as far as I can find in the media looking to find
out who the non-cycling cheats are?

.... why there appears to be no overt reaction from the sporting bodies that
are non-cycling about rooting out the cheats?

If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't *just*
about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting away
with it?

Cheers, helen s
 
N

Ningi

Guest
wafflycat wrote:
<snip>
> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal... and
> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds out
> there.
>
> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that some
> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about 50
> were cyclists...


Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated people
being cyclists seems pretty significant. Reports are that they were
colour coded by team as well, with a separate category for 'others'

>
> ...why then is this being painted in the media as purely a *cycling*
> scandal?
>
> ... why is no journalist, as far as I can find in the media looking to find
> out who the non-cycling cheats are?
>


I'm sure they will. I assume the release of the names of cyclists has
been timed to get them out of the way _before_ the tour starts. It's
better than having to suspend half the field 2 weeks in.

> ... why there appears to be no overt reaction from the sporting bodies that
> are non-cycling about rooting out the cheats?
>
> If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't *just*
> about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting away
> with it?
>


I agree - but this does seem to so much more about cycling than anything
else.

Pete (trying to find the TdF on TV)
 
D

Danny Colyer

Guest
Ningi wrote:
> Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated people
> being cyclists seems pretty significant.


I understood that cycling was actually rather a major sport in much of
Europe.


--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Subscribe to PlusNet <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Ningi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat wrote:
> <snip>
>> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal... and
>> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds
>> out
>> there.
>>
>> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that some
>> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about 50
>> were cyclists...

>
> Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated people
> being cyclists seems pretty significant. Reports are that they were
> colour coded by team as well, with a separate category for 'others'
>


Actaully 50 out of 200 is a lot less than 2/3rds... it's actually 1/4



>>
>> ...why then is this being painted in the media as purely a *cycling*
>> scandal?
>>
>> ... why is no journalist, as far as I can find in the media looking to
>> find
>> out who the non-cycling cheats are?
>>

>
> I'm sure they will. I assume the release of the names of cyclists has
> been timed to get them out of the way _before_ the tour starts. It's
> better than having to suspend half the field 2 weeks in.
>
>> ... why there appears to be no overt reaction from the sporting bodies
>> that
>> are non-cycling about rooting out the cheats?
>>
>> If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't
>> *just*
>> about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting away
>> with it?
>>

>
> I agree - but this does seem to so much more about cycling than anything
> else.
>


No, it's not. Most of those doping (according to the figures) are *not*
cyclists...

This isn't excusing the cheats - but it simply isn't fair to say that it's
so much more about cycling when *most* of the allegeed cheats are not
cyclists


> Pete (trying to find the TdF on TV)
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Ningi
('[email protected]') wrote:

> wafflycat wrote:
> <snip>
>> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal...
>> and this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating
>> b*st*rds out there.
>>
>> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that
>> some 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which
>> about 50 were cyclists...

>
> Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated
> people being cyclists seems pretty significant.


Fifty (actually 35, but anyway) out of two hundred does not sound like
two thirds to me. Perhaps it's too long since I learned arithmetic.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When all else fails, read the distractions.
 
T

triddletree

Guest
wafflycat wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>> Quote from:
>> http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/news/articles/10193.0.html
>>
>> "Riis still believes me. I told him I have nothing to do with the Fuentes
>> story, but he said I was suspended until all this business is over. Now
>> my lawyers will be doing the talking for me," Basso said. "I have had no
>> contact from any judge, any investigator, no one from the UCI. I left
>> because of the Ethics Code, there was no other option, but I have
>> nothing to hide."
>>

>
> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal... and
> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds out
> there.
>
> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that some
> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about 50
> were cyclists...
>
> ...why then is this being painted in the media as purely a *cycling*
> scandal?


It IS a major cycling scandal. Of course the media are focusing on
cycling as it coincides, if you hadn't noticed, with one of the biggest
sporting events on the calendar and involves a 'sport' that bleats about
cleaning up its act.

It obviously hasn't done so, as this latest episode shows. Many of the
teams still emply membesr who have very chequered histories - Basso's
latest team being no exception.

Neither should it be forgotten that virtually every rider who has been
caught had previously categorically denied any involvement Millar,
Virenque... You just cannot blame anyone for cynicism.
The higher levels of the 'sport' seem to be riddled with, as you put it,
"lying cheating b*st*rds" and they need to be removed. The use of life
bans is long overdue.
What is scary is how far down into the sport does the cheating go.


> ... why is no journalist, as far as I can find in the media looking to find
> out who the non-cycling cheats are?


I'm sure they will be. If there were top tennis players on the lists
that are now at Wimbledon I'm certain it would have been made well known.

> ... why there appears to be no overt reaction from the sporting bodies that
> are non-cycling about rooting out the cheats?


> If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't *just*
> about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting away
> with it?


So really you *are* concerned about comparing the reactions between
different sports. If you want to attack other sports this ng is not the
place.
IMO this year's Tour should have been cancelled and the strongest
possible stand taken.
I feel sympathy for those who have arranged trips and tours to support
riders who they thought were clean. I feel sorry for both young and old
who support individuals and teams, and even for those misguided souls
who ride around in trade kit who will now be implicated through association.

I feel the best they can do is to show a complete boycott of this year's
event, and of the sponsors. E-mails and letters in their hundreds of
thousands from true supporters should be sent to the UCI, the Tour
organisers, and the sponsors. A strong message needs to be sent from the
'fans'.

Regrettably I don't think this will happen. Too many 'supporters' will
mutter in mitigation "other sports are worse, why aren't they condemned
too", then continue to cheer on the cheats. "It's the Media's fault for
not focusing on other sports".
Get real.

Would you place a bet on Basso being innocent of any irregularities?

tt
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"triddletree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat wrote:
>>
>> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>
>>> Quote from:
>>> http://www.velonews.com/tour2006/news/articles/10193.0.html
>>>
>>> "Riis still believes me. I told him I have nothing to do with the
>>> Fuentes
>>> story, but he said I was suspended until all this business is over. Now
>>> my lawyers will be doing the talking for me," Basso said. "I have had no
>>> contact from any judge, any investigator, no one from the UCI. I left
>>> because of the Ethics Code, there was no other option, but I have
>>> nothing to hide."
>>>

>>
>> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal... and
>> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds
>> out
>> there.
>>
>> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that some
>> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about 50
>> were cyclists...
>>
>> ...why then is this being painted in the media as purely a *cycling*
>> scandal?

>
> It IS a major cycling scandal. Of course the media are focusing on cycling
> as it coincides, if you hadn't noticed, with one of the biggest sporting
> events on the calendar and involves a 'sport' that bleats about cleaning
> up its act.
>


My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears to be
largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation had noticed
that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does tennis and football,
yet their apparent cheats are not being named in public.


> It obviously hasn't done so, as this latest episode shows. Many of the
> teams still emply membesr who have very chequered histories - Basso's
> latest team being no exception.
>
> Neither should it be forgotten that virtually every rider who has been
> caught had previously categorically denied any involvement Millar,
> Virenque... You just cannot blame anyone for cynicism.
> The higher levels of the 'sport' seem to be riddled with, as you put it,
> "lying cheating b*st*rds" and they need to be removed. The use of life
> bans is long overdue.
> What is scary is how far down into the sport does the cheating go.
>
>
>> ... why is no journalist, as far as I can find in the media looking to
>> find
>> out who the non-cycling cheats are?

>
> I'm sure they will be. If there were top tennis players on the lists that
> are now at Wimbledon I'm certain it would have been made well known.
>


I don't 'blame' anyone for criticising cycling. I'm actually not so sure
that other sports do want their cheats named & shamed. Look at the disgrace
heaped upon cycling and loss of sponsors - I think that other sports *might*
wish to avoid loss of sponsors and bad press.


>> ... why there appears to be no overt reaction from the sporting bodies
>> that
>> are non-cycling about rooting out the cheats?

>
>> If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't
>> *just*
>> about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting away
>> with it?

>
> So really you *are* concerned about comparing the reactions between
> different sports. If you want to attack other sports this ng is not the
> place.


Of course I'm concerned about the different reactions between sports. That's
not condoning any cheating that goes on in cycling. My post is appropriate
to cycling as cycling is involved in the scandal. What is wrong about being
interested in why the cycling cheats are being named and why the apparent
cheats from say, football & tennis are not. This is not 'attacking' other
sports, it's simply a query as regards the current scandal.


> IMO this year's Tour should have been cancelled and the strongest possible
> stand taken.
> I feel sympathy for those who have arranged trips and tours to support
> riders who they thought were clean. I feel sorry for both young and old
> who support individuals and teams, and even for those misguided souls who
> ride around in trade kit who will now be implicated through association.
>
> I feel the best they can do is to show a complete boycott of this year's
> event, and of the sponsors. E-mails and letters in their hundreds of
> thousands from true supporters should be sent to the UCI, the Tour
> organisers, and the sponsors. A strong message needs to be sent from the
> 'fans'.
>
> Regrettably I don't think this will happen. Too many 'supporters' will
> mutter in mitigation "other sports are worse, why aren't they condemned
> too", then continue to cheer on the cheats. "It's the Media's fault for
> not focusing on other sports".
> Get real.
>


I cannot understand why you appear to attack the simply wondering why other
sports seem to be treated differently to cycling when it comes to doping?
What part of my saying "and this is most certianly *not* a defence of any
lying, cheating b*st*rds out there." could be construed as suggesting I
condone lying, cheating b*st*rds?

> Would you place a bet on Basso being innocent of any irregularities?
>


Probably not. But wondering why other sports are being treated differently
does not mean I condone cheating by cyclists.

Cheers, helen s


> tt
 
P

Paul - xxx

Guest
wafflycat came up with the following;:

> My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears to
> be largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation had
> noticed that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does tennis and
> football, yet their apparent cheats are not being named in public.


Ahh, the old "..well they do it, why can't we?.." excuse.

Where, when and who are the football and tennis cheats you speak of?
(Maradona springs to mind, but that was hardly not publicised was it?)

> I don't 'blame' anyone for criticising cycling. I'm actually not so sure
> that other sports do want their cheats named & shamed. Look at the
> disgrace heaped upon cycling and loss of sponsors - I think that other
> sports *might* wish to avoid loss of sponsors and bad press.


I think cycling would also like to not have their cheats named and shamed,
as in the past. Unfortunately they have, in this case, been found out
publicly.

If it's so rife, as you suggest, in other sports then where is your proof?

It seems to me that cycling and Le Tour have done an exemplary thing by
opening their doors and admitting there's a problem.

> Of course I'm concerned about the different reactions between sports.
> That's not condoning any cheating that goes on in cycling. My post is
> appropriate to cycling as cycling is involved in the scandal. What is
> wrong about being interested in why the cycling cheats are being named
> and why the apparent cheats from say, football & tennis are not. This is
> not 'attacking' other sports, it's simply a query as regards the current
> scandal.


Which apparent cheats from football and tennis are not being named then?

> Probably not. But wondering why other sports are being treated differently
> does not mean I condone cheating by cyclists.


Other sports don't appear to be treated differently, it just hapopens that
Le Tour is the biggest sporting spectacle and cheats were found just as it
started.

The same has happened at the Olympics when 'champions' and 'world record
holders' have been stripped of their medals and times when found cheating
and have also been done so in as public a manner as possible.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
 
T

triddletree

Guest
wafflycat wrote:
>
> "triddletree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>> wafflycat wrote:


>>> If someone cheats, he or she deserves to be banned... but this isn't
>>> *just*
>>> about cycling... so why are the other sports appearing to be getting
>>> away with it?

>>
>>
>> So really you *are* concerned about comparing the reactions between
>> different sports. If you want to attack other sports this ng is not
>> the place.

>
>
> Of course I'm concerned about the different reactions between sports.
> That's not condoning any cheating that goes on in cycling.


I understand that, but by bringing the other sports into it *will* be
seen as using 'attack as the best form of defence'.

But there can be no defence.
The cycling world should not be concerned with the other sports; rather
it needs to get its own house in order first.
It has failed dismally and the 'sport' has lost credibility.
Just who would encourage new riders into cycle-racing today?

My post is
> appropriate to cycling as cycling is involved in the scandal.


Then I would anyone who 'cares' for the sport to stick to that alone

What is
> wrong about being interested in why the cycling cheats are being named
> and why the apparent cheats from say, football & tennis are not.


As above. Many, particularly those with any anti-cycling agendas, will
see it differently. It will be viewed as cyclists' whining "Why are
others getting away with it when cyclists' can't".
Look at the hypocrisy in 'Cyclists slam Footballers over Drug taking'.
Would you really feel happy about such a headline, however accurate it
may be?
I wouldn't.

tt
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Paul - ***" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat came up with the following;:
>
>> My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears to
>> be largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation had
>> noticed that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does tennis and
>> football, yet their apparent cheats are not being named in public.

>
> Ahh, the old "..well they do it, why can't we?.." excuse.
>


Bolox. What part of my saying "and this is most certianly *not* a defence of
any lying, cheating b*st*rds out there." do you not understand? Cheats - in
any sport - deserve to be banned. Now - what part of *that* don't you
understand?




> Where, when and who are the football and tennis cheats you speak of?
> (Maradona springs to mind, but that was hardly not publicised was it?)
>


Read my post. When the current Spanish doiping scandal was announced, it was
said that 'other sports' were included and since then, tennis, football and
athletics have been mentioned as those 'other sports'.



>> I don't 'blame' anyone for criticising cycling. I'm actually not so sure
>> that other sports do want their cheats named & shamed. Look at the
>> disgrace heaped upon cycling and loss of sponsors - I think that other
>> sports *might* wish to avoid loss of sponsors and bad press.

>
> I think cycling would also like to not have their cheats named and shamed,
> as in the past. Unfortunately they have, in this case, been found out
> publicly.
>
> If it's so rife, as you suggest, in other sports then where is your proof?


FFS - I'm not condoning cycling cheats - just merely querying that as other
sports have been mentioned I wonder why the individuals concerned in those
sports haven't been publicly named as the cyclists have. This is not
condoning cheating in cycling.


>
> It seems to me that cycling and Le Tour have done an exemplary thing by
> opening their doors and admitting there's a problem.
>
>> Of course I'm concerned about the different reactions between sports.
>> That's not condoning any cheating that goes on in cycling. My post is
>> appropriate to cycling as cycling is involved in the scandal. What is
>> wrong about being interested in why the cycling cheats are being named
>> and why the apparent cheats from say, football & tennis are not. This is
>> not 'attacking' other sports, it's simply a query as regards the current
>> scandal.

>
> Which apparent cheats from football and tennis are not being named then?
>


The ones not being named, obviously. Even Chris Boardman has said that other
sports have been mentioned in the current doping scandal.

>> Probably not. But wondering why other sports are being treated
>> differently
>> does not mean I condone cheating by cyclists.

>
> Other sports don't appear to be treated differently, it just hapopens that
> Le Tour is the biggest sporting spectacle and cheats were found just as it
> started.
>
> The same has happened at the Olympics when 'champions' and 'world record
> holders' have been stripped of their medals and times when found cheating
> and have also been done so in as public a manner as possible.
>
> --
> Paul ...
> (8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
>
>
>
 
T

triddletree

Guest
Paul - *** wrote:
> wafflycat came up with the following;:
>
>> My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears to
>> be largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation had
>> noticed that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does tennis and
>> football, yet their apparent cheats are not being named in public.

>
>
> Ahh, the old "..well they do it, why can't we?.." excuse.


That's what it reads like.
ISTR a certain waffleycat household member may be a Basso/CSC wannabe ;-)
I doubt that has any bearing on the 'defence'.

> Where, when and who are the football and tennis cheats you speak of?
> (Maradona springs to mind, but that was hardly not publicised was it?)


To be fair, wafflycat is right.
UCI President Pat McQuaid is quoted as saying "only riders have been
named so far. But many footballers, tennis players and athletes are on
the list"
>
> I think cycling would also like to not have their cheats named and
> shamed, as in the past. Unfortunately they have, in this case, been
> found out publicly.


Again. to be fair it was the UCI which has released the names. Neither
are they proven cheats - yet. AIUI Ullrich was suspended by his team for
lying, by denying contact with the Spanish doctor Fuentes, not for any
drug taking. It is part of Le Tour's ethical code that the team's sign
up to - anyone linked in any way to an investigation will face sanctions.
Basso was withdrawn apparently because of pressure from the organizers.
Who wants tainted riders in a sport that is trying to clean itself up?

> If it's so rife, as you suggest, in other sports then where is your proof?


I'm sure the names will eventually appear.

> It seems to me that cycling and Le Tour have done an exemplary thing by
> opening their doors and admitting there's a problem.


I suspect they would have preferred not to have had their hand forced by
the Spanish police.

> Other sports don't appear to be treated differently, it just hapopens
> that Le Tour is the biggest sporting spectacle and cheats were found
> just as it started.
>
> The same has happened at the Olympics when 'champions' and 'world record
> holders' have been stripped of their medals and times when found
> cheating and have also been done so in as public a manner as possible.


The problems within cycling are so deep that even if found doping,
titles are not always removed.

tt
 
P

Paul - xxx

Guest
wafflycat came up with the following;:
> "Paul - ***" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> wafflycat came up with the following;:
>>
>>> My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears
>>> to be largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation
>>> had noticed that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does
>>> tennis and football, yet their apparent cheats are not being named in
>>> public.

>>
>> Ahh, the old "..well they do it, why can't we?.." excuse.

<
> Bolox. What part of my saying "and this is most certianly *not* a defence
> of any lying, cheating b*st*rds out there." do you not understand? Cheats
> - in any sport - deserve to be banned. Now - what part of *that* don't you
> understand?


LOL, OK, misunderstanding ... I didn't suggest or say it's a defence of
cheats ... You seemed to think that as Football and Tennis haven't named
their cheats, then cycling also shouldn't have had to, which is what I was
aiming my remark at. At the time I was thinking of the old saying of
sweeping it under the carpet, so maybe my choice of words was a little
ambiguous.

I feel they should, indeed they all should, publicise everyone involved,
whatever their level and whatever event happens to be happening.. ;)

>> Where, when and who are the football and tennis cheats you speak of?
>> (Maradona springs to mind, but that was hardly not publicised was it?)

>
> Read my post. When the current Spanish doiping scandal was announced, it
> was said that 'other sports' were included and since then, tennis,
> football and athletics have been mentioned as those 'other sports'.


Maybe there are good reasons why 'others' haven't been named, but that
doesn't mean the cyclists shouldn't be.

>>> I don't 'blame' anyone for criticising cycling. I'm actually not so sure
>>> that other sports do want their cheats named & shamed. Look at the
>>> disgrace heaped upon cycling and loss of sponsors - I think that other
>>> sports *might* wish to avoid loss of sponsors and bad press.

>>
>> I think cycling would also like to not have their cheats named and
>> shamed, as in the past. Unfortunately they have, in this case, been
>> found out publicly.
>>
>> If it's so rife, as you suggest, in other sports then where is your
>> proof?

>
> FFS - I'm not condoning cycling cheats - just merely querying that as
> other sports have been mentioned I wonder why the individuals concerned
> in those sports haven't been publicly named as the cyclists have. This is
> not condoning cheating in cycling.


Maybe the 'other sports' are not actually the sportsmen, indeed most of the
people involved in this latest scandal appear to be background staff to the
teams/riders etc, and the names within those sports, if also background
people, would mean little to anyone, I dunno, but just 'cos they aren't
named doesn't mean cycling shouldn't name it's cheats.

Many 'sports doctors' seem to move from one discipline to another, so could
easily be involved with many sports, hence why they _all_ should be named.

LOL, having re-read our posts, I believe we're both actually arguing against
each other for the same thing?

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
 
N

Ningi

Guest
wafflycat wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal...
>>> and
>>> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating
>>> b*st*rds out
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that
>>> some
>>> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which
>>> about 50
>>> were cyclists...

>>
>>
>> Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated
>> people being cyclists seems pretty significant. Reports are that they
>> were colour coded by team as well, with a separate category for 'others'
>>

>
> Actaully 50 out of 200 is a lot less than 2/3rds... it's actually 1/4
>


We can juggle numbers all we like while until the complete lists are
made public, which I guess will happen in due course.

One set of figures says 200 cyclists are implicated

http://www.cyclingpost.com/rider/article_002785.shtml

Although this doesn't seem to be corroborated yet.

I was working on 58 cyclists implicated currently and 90 litres of blood
found in the raid for my estimate. I'm happy to be shown that cycling
isn't the major sport involved but at the moment it's looking that way.

The fact that, once again, none of this is coming to light due to any
actions of the governing body suggests to me that they aren't working
too hard to remove drug use from cycling.

Pete
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Paul - ***" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat came up with the following;:
>> "Paul - ***" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> wafflycat came up with the following;:
>>>
>>>> My point was, that it is more than a cycling scandal. Yet that appears
>>>> to be largely ignored by the media. And yes, my powers of observation
>>>> had noticed that cycling has a big event on right now, but so does
>>>> tennis and football, yet their apparent cheats are not being named in
>>>> public.
>>>
>>> Ahh, the old "..well they do it, why can't we?.." excuse.

> <
>> Bolox. What part of my saying "and this is most certianly *not* a defence
>> of any lying, cheating b*st*rds out there." do you not understand? Cheats
>> - in any sport - deserve to be banned. Now - what part of *that* don't
>> you
>> understand?

>
> LOL, OK, misunderstanding ... I didn't suggest or say it's a defence of
> cheats ... You seemed to think that as Football and Tennis haven't named
> their cheats, then cycling also shouldn't have had to, which is what I was
> aiming my remark at. At the time I was thinking of the old saying of
> sweeping it under the carpet, so maybe my choice of words was a little
> ambiguous.
>


I seemed to think nothing of the kind as far as cycling not having to name
their cheats. I was thinking what I said; why haven't the non-cycling cheats
been named and why is this current scandal being viewed in terms of purely a
cycling scandal when it is much more than that. As I've already said, cheats
are cheats and should be banned. Wondering why the non-cyclists haven't been
named does *not* mean I think the cycling cheating should be swept under the
carpet. It is about wondering why a scandal which involves more sports than
cycling is being viewed purely as a cycling scandal by the media.


> I feel they should, indeed they all should, publicise everyone involved,
> whatever their level and whatever event happens to be happening.. ;)
>
>>> Where, when and who are the football and tennis cheats you speak of?
>>> (Maradona springs to mind, but that was hardly not publicised was it?)

>>
>> Read my post. When the current Spanish doiping scandal was announced, it
>> was said that 'other sports' were included and since then, tennis,
>> football and athletics have been mentioned as those 'other sports'.

>
> Maybe there are good reasons why 'others' haven't been named, but that
> doesn't mean the cyclists shouldn't be.
>



So far, there hasn't been *definitive* proof given out that the cyclists are
gulity. There is certainly a lot of circumstantial evidence... and I've
never said the cyclists shouldn't be named. I repeat, yet again, wondering
why cycling is being treated apparently differently to the other sports does
not mean I condone cheating in cycling... I do not. Nor have I in any way
said I don't think cheats should be outed.



>>>> I don't 'blame' anyone for criticising cycling. I'm actually not so
>>>> sure
>>>> that other sports do want their cheats named & shamed. Look at the
>>>> disgrace heaped upon cycling and loss of sponsors - I think that other
>>>> sports *might* wish to avoid loss of sponsors and bad press.
>>>
>>> I think cycling would also like to not have their cheats named and
>>> shamed, as in the past. Unfortunately they have, in this case, been
>>> found out publicly.
>>>
>>> If it's so rife, as you suggest, in other sports then where is your
>>> proof?

>>
>> FFS - I'm not condoning cycling cheats - just merely querying that as
>> other sports have been mentioned I wonder why the individuals concerned
>> in those sports haven't been publicly named as the cyclists have. This is
>> not condoning cheating in cycling.

>
> Maybe the 'other sports' are not actually the sportsmen, indeed most of
> the people involved in this latest scandal appear to be background staff
> to the teams/riders etc, and the names within those sports, if also
> background people, would mean little to anyone, I dunno, but just 'cos
> they aren't named doesn't mean cycling shouldn't name it's cheats.
>
> Many 'sports doctors' seem to move from one discipline to another, so
> could easily be involved with many sports, hence why they _all_ should be
> named.
>
> LOL, having re-read our posts, I believe we're both actually arguing
> against each other for the same thing?
>


Of course you made the assumption that by me merely asking why the other
sports seem to be treated differently that that means I want cycling to
sweep the cheating that goes on in its ranks under the carpet - which I
don't.

Cheers, helen s


> --
> Paul ...
> (8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
>
>
>
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Ningi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> One of the things that get sme about this latest *cycling* scandal...
>>>> and
>>>> this is most certianly *not* a defence of any lying, cheating b*st*rds
>>>> out
>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>> Is this actually a *cycling* scandal? Originally it was put out that
>>>> some
>>>> 200'ish sports' people were implicated in this scandal, of which about
>>>> 50
>>>> were cyclists...
>>>
>>>
>>> Given that cycling is a minor sport, almost 2/3 of the implicated people
>>> being cyclists seems pretty significant. Reports are that they were
>>> colour coded by team as well, with a separate category for 'others'
>>>

>>
>> Actaully 50 out of 200 is a lot less than 2/3rds... it's actually 1/4
>>

>
> We can juggle numbers all we like while until the complete lists are made
> public, which I guess will happen in due course.
>


No 50 out of 200 is 1/4 no matter how much you juggle it :)




> One set of figures says 200 cyclists are implicated
>
> http://www.cyclingpost.com/rider/article_002785.shtml
>
> Although this doesn't seem to be corroborated yet.
>


See

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2006/tour06/news/?id=/news/2006/jul06/jul02news2

"The new Spanish anti-doping law is not aimed specifically at cyclists,
according to the country's State Sports Secretary Jaime Lissavetsky. "This
new Law is not against the cycling, but against doping," Lissavetsky was
quoted by EFE as saying on Friday.
Although some 200 athletes (from track and field, basketball, tennis and
football) are said to be implicated in Operacion Puerto, only 31 (of 58)
cyclists have been named so far. Lissavetsky said that he is not aware of
the names of any athletes from outside cycling yet. "There exists a report
from the Guardia Civil which talks about cyclists, and from it, they could
be identified according to the presumed plot...

"We did all that was asked of us. The French minister requested an official
report from us on Operacion Puerto, and we have fulfilled this with great
speed since the information leaked. It is necessary to discern between the
criminal aspect on the one hand, and the cyclists on the other. The UCI has
taken a decision which I cannot enter into." "

When this first hit the news, back in May, it's been about 200 names in
total with about 50 cyclists within that list of names. I clearly remember
the first TV news reports, showing the raid where they brought out blood
bags. It was stated even then, the 200'ish total and 50'ish cyclists. The
reaosn I remember it was because of my emotions of "Oh no, here we go
again!" combined with "I wonder who they all are?" and "Perhaps the media
will realise that doping is rife in many a sport."



> I was working on 58 cyclists implicated currently and 90 litres of blood
> found in the raid for my estimate. I'm happy to be shown that cycling
> isn't the major sport involved but at the moment it's looking that way.
>


There's lots of reports out there about the current figures of about 200
*total* names and of those, about 1/4 being cyclists.

For me, the bottom line is if they cheat - they should be exposed and out,
whoever they are. But I'm not naive to think the only sport to be badly
tainted by doping is cycling.

Cheers, helen s







> The fact that, once again, none of this is coming to light due to any
> actions of the governing body suggests to me that they aren't working too
> hard to remove drug use from cycling.
>
> Pete
>
>
 
A

Al C-F

Guest
Simon Brooke wrote:

>
> Fifty (actually 35, but anyway) out of two hundred does not sound like
> two thirds to me. Perhaps it's too long since I learned arithmetic.
>


It depoends on whether you're buying or selling.

Or what sort of newspaper you work for...
 
M

Mr [email protected] \(2.30zi\)

Guest
"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]


> For me, the bottom line is if they cheat - they should be exposed and out,
> whoever they are. But I'm not naive to think the only sport to be badly
> tainted by doping is cycling.
>


There is no "bright side" in much journalism today - so perhaps one angle
worth considering is that other sports provide far more /interesting/
negative coverage for journos?

Tennis players always seem to be kicking off at the umpire and/or bitching
about this or that.

Footballers are often goading and attacking one another on the pitch,
assaulting their WAGs or or even brawling with random members of the general
public.

Even *chess* players are capable these days of a good old fashioned punch-up
over a woman (with a racially motivated element thrown in).

I'm not that much into the racing side of things but I do occasionally read
the news on competitive cycling and it seems *very* rare to hear of
fights/violence at a cycling event compared to other sports, or cyclists
lives being picked apart by the tabloids..

The only real problem in professional cycling *does* seem to be the doping;
so perhaps its not surprising that this negative aspect is constantly picked
up by the hacks?

Alex

--
Mr [email protected] / General Lighting
Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom
http://www.partyvibe.com
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"triddletree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> wafflycat wrote:
>>

>
>> For me, the bottom line is if they cheat - they should be exposed and
>> out, whoever they are. But...

>
> Look, its that word "but" again ;-)
>
> tt


Here's another couple...

*plonk* moron
 
T

triddletree

Guest
wafflycat wrote:
>


> For me, the bottom line is if they cheat - they should be exposed and
> out, whoever they are. But...


Look, its that word "but" again ;-)

tt
 

Similar threads