With you on that one, I enjoy seeing Bruyneel twisting in the wind, and mostly I enjoy reading the Discatana's fans amazing view of the world - how they are read to twist logic around, and their hate of anything not Discotana.thoughtforfood said:
Cadel EVANS supporting Contadope !!!!
- Thread starter poulidor
- Start date
I agree with TFF and Edie here. The goal should be to get rid of cheaters, not let the best cheater win.helmutRoole2 said:
But they're all cheating. Some are just better than others -- better at cheating and better at riding their bikes. The reality is, Astana riders underwent the same scrutiny, same test and investigations as everyone else, so why not let them race? They're still the best riders in the doped peloton.TheDarkLord said:
Retribution is pointless. Decide on the rules, apply them and let the cards fall where they may. Look, you're either caught or you're not caught. JB has never been caught. Say what you will about the seemingly obvious fire that's bellowing smoke from this organization, but still, it's just smoke.
I like to see JB twisting the wind too. It's his just deserts after seven years of Armstrong shenanigans, but wouldn't you rather see him roll the dice under the microscopic pressure cooker that is the Tour de France? If he's going to get busted, it's going to be there.
I agree, but I still agree with helmut because the riders in question are at best "under suspicion." as is JB. Trust me, I would like nothing better than seeing his ass busted along with his drugged out minions (though hopefully before the Tour. This year I really want to watch a race and not a parade of drug offenses.). However, as things currently stand, there are teams and riders who will participate in the Giro that are surrounded by accusations and rumors. To pick out "the worst" seems....Bro Deal said:
You know, mid write, I realized that you do have to start somewhere...again. I am just not sure that excluding some of the best riders from the Tour is the answer. It sends a message, but will it stop the doping?
I really just want to see a good race this year, period.
I think that is a distinct possibility also. As more evidence comes to the surface, those guys were a traveling pharmaseutical/centrifuge freak show, and they didn't get caught?Bro Deal said:
I could see that, or they were running a designer form of EPO. Actually, given BALCO, that's probably the greater possibility.Bro Deal said:
Helmut, what Bro said above is why I wouldn't mind Discotana being banned from all GTs. I guess I have been turned to this opinion after (a) Victor Conte's admission of systematic widespread coverups of positive tests in professional sports and (b) what cyclingheroes has posted about UCI. So, that's what makes it unfair between JB and other teams, and that's why UCI is fighting to get Discotana invited to TdF, and that's why I would rather that ASO flips them off and doesn't invite JB's boys.Bro Deal said:
The question is, if a rider is found to be doping, what is the punishment? If you exclude the team (indefinitely), then by example you are going to have teams (and sponsors) more vigilant about monitoring their riders. But how much of Vino's doping were the Astana sponsors responsible for? How much was the team management responsible for? We need to go beyond just blaming and penalizing the rider who fails the test, but there is a limit on how much the team can do to make sure their rider is squeaky clean. If the team gets rid of the rider and sacks the DS and other support management, isn't that enough to give them a chance to prove that things have changed? Cycling needs to support its sponsors. Astanas don't grow on trees, especially in these turbulent times.
What is really needed IMHO is a step-by-step system of actions and consequences. In this mudfight over who wields the most power, the application of consequences is arbitrary/subjective and inconsistent.
Just my 2c. Apologies to the OP for my soap box rant slightly off topic.
What is really needed IMHO is a step-by-step system of actions and consequences. In this mudfight over who wields the most power, the application of consequences is arbitrary/subjective and inconsistent.
Just my 2c. Apologies to the OP for my soap box rant slightly off topic.
I can see that, but still, who's to say other teams weren't paying off the UCI too. It's all speculation. Clearly there was doping going on, but how much by which teams at a given race is anyone's guess.TheDarkLord said:
I'd like see the whole Blue Train derail if just to shut their fans up. Oh Lord, some of the mythological stories they bought into to justify the performances. What did bobke state? Something like, he saw an x-ray and Armstrong had a heart the size of football? I mean for **** sake, which seems more plausible? A man doping his ass off or a man with a heart the size of an elephant? Please.
Anyway, back on topic. The bigger they come, the harder they fall. One of these days indisputable evidence will park itself atop of Armstrong and his Johnny Appleseed image will do a 180 and everyone will love hating him like Britney Sprears. I'd bet that thought keeps him awake at night.
No, on topic to the extent that it appears that we have de facto set of consequences in action right now.Crankyfeet said:
I also agree that the sponsor and team should be held accountable. Maybe along the lines of 1 doping offense, punish rider. 2 doping offenses, rider and team, 2 doping offenses, rider, team and sponsor. That will create an atmosphere within the team, and require the DS's and others to actually police thier riders. A freaking DS should know where all of his riders are at all times in the first place. The "oh, he told us he was in Mexico" **** is transparently dishonest. A DS doesn't have that many people to keep up with, and you can bet your ass that they all knew what their riders were taking.
Starring to rant myself...I am just fed up with the denial of everyone involved.
I just want to see a clean ****ing race one summer and be able to cheer and discuss the tactics of the day with my friends. I want to talk about racing, and watch racing, and think about racing, and maybe even race a little myself. People like the entire group of **** heads that made their living from USPS and Discovery make me want to hurl things because they ****ed up the sport beyond comprehension.thoughtforfood said:
Why are you bringing LA into this??? He has zero to do with the "new Astana", yet he gets in every discussions here!!! 
We all know he doped, just like everyone else doped. He is out from the sport. The End of a bad story.
We all know he doped, just like everyone else doped. He is out from the sport. The End of a bad story.
You'll probably be dead before that happens...thoughtforfood said:
(sorry no offence mentioned!), just sarcasm...
Why, because the sport is still suffering from a single rider taking doping to the extreme. That guy paid a lot of money to ensure he was chemically superior to everyone else, and set a precident that is still in place with his former DS. Bruyneel was involved in the whole thing. He was complicit. Now he moves to another team who were the biggest emparrassment in the cycling world last year to what? Clean it up? I didn't mention Armstrong's name, you did.(I was actually talking about Bruyneel) But now that you ask, here you go.Aquamarinos said:Why are you bringing LA into this??? He has zero to do with the "new Astana", yet he gets in every discussions here!!!
We all know he doped, just like everyone else doped. He is out from the sport. The End of a bad story.
I have asked this question before - to what extent does the sponsor control what goes on in the team? I don't know the answer to this.thoughtforfood said:
If the sponsor is relatively unaware of what goes on in the team (i.e. they only interact with the team manager as to what is going on, but don't directly control anything beyond that), then I'm not sure that it is fair to take direct action against the sponsor itself. The main change I would advocate is to go higher up to the team manager at the very first doping case. Right now, the riders are the sacrificial lambs, and team managers act outraged and pretend as if they had no clue that riders were doping, etc., which really in most cases is just a bunch of BS. If the team managers are held accountable for the busted riders, then it might force them to take anti-doping more seriously, and maybe try to monitor the riders better (for example to avoid a Sinkewitz).
