Leblanc doubts David Walsh.........

[steve007]

For the first time this Tour, the UCI plans to conduct blood tests in anti-doping controls. Previously officials relied solely on urine tests and drew blood just to determine whether cyclists' count of red blood cells was too high, a possible indicator but not proof of doping.

"As long as there are a few cheaters, we will refuse them in the Tour de France," Leblanc said.

Leblanc said he has not had time to read an incendiary new book -- L.A. Confidential, The Secrets of Lance Armstrong -- that insinuates that the five-time Tour champion has likely used drugs, even though the book produces no solid proof. Armstrong has repeatedly said that he has never taken performance-enhancers.

Asked whether he believed Armstrong was clean, Leblanc said: "I don't know" but added he had doubts about the motivation of authors Pierre Ballester and David Walsh.

"I have my doubts about human nature," Leblanc said. "Jealousy toward others is everywhere."
AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

 

[limerickman]

Originally posted by steve007

Asked whether he believed Armstrong was clean, Leblanc said: "I don't know" but added he had doubts about the motivation of authors Pierre Ballester and David Walsh.

This really says it all, doesn't it ?

JML doesn't know whether or not the man on whom he has placed the Golden Fleece, for the past five years, is clean !

 

[steve007]

I dont think it should be taken too literally, he just doesnt want to be on record supporting LA or not, although his reluctance to state either way has kinda back fired as you point out.

 

[limerickman]

Regardless of who he puts the Golden Fleece on - be it LA or JU or whoever - it should be the case that he and everyone else is 100% sure that bearer of the maillot jeune is clean.
This may seem Utopian but it is the way cycling should be.

As things stand - JML cannot say that he is certain that the person wearing the maillot jeune is clean.

It just shows how low this sport has become - when the director of the TDF cannot be sure.

 

[Jakebrake]

How much do we really know about anyone? We think we know them, those that are in the public eye. But do we really? How many times have you been shocked to find out something about your sports/political hero? Even a family member or close friend for that matter?

Look at Kobe Bryant saga. Great career, loving wife, outstanding role model. Who would have thought that of him before he was accused/charged?

Pete Rose? Gambling? I would have never believed it.

Eugene Robinson anyone? The great safety for the Seattle Seahawks, Green Bay Packers and Atlanta Falcons. Great family man, wife, kids, involved in many charities and foundations, strong religious beliefs. On the night before his biggest game with Atlanta, the Superbowl, and shortly after he just received an award for high moral character, he was arrested for attempted to solicit an undercover officer he thought was a prostitute for $40. I was shocked as hell.

I learned a long time ago not to put 100% faith in any public figure. Though I still get tripped up from time to time.

I'm a Lance supporter. I'd like to believe him, and about 85% of me does. but I'll still always have a nagging doubt in my mind. It's probably just the cynic in me. But until I see positive proof, I'm leaning in his direction.

On the flip side of the coin, in regards to David Walsh. With Limerickman's assurances that Mr. Walsh has an impeccable reputation aside, I've mentioned before several journalist/writers who had the same untouchable reputation. Walter Duranty, Janet Cooke, Jack Kelley, Mike Barnicle. All journalists with great credentials, yet all them either outright fabricated stories, or plagerized from other writers. Hell, Duranty and Cooke both were Pulitzer prize winners for the New York Times and Washington Post respectfully. He comes across to me as someone with an agenda.

How much do we really know anyone? For Leblanc to say "I don't know", that doesn't seem too far off the mark. I'm sure he tries to do what he can to be 100% sure, but is that possible in today's day and age?

 

[steve007]

Limerickman

This isnt what leblanc is saying...... I'm sure it was more of a dismissive response rather than him saying he is actually unsure.

You have to try to understand the media engine......

So Leblanc says "Yes i believe Lance is clean" and then Lance tests positive - the situation for LeBlanc could backfire....

Equally if Leblanc indicates he suspects LA might be doping, then people might question why he is allowed to compete, or when Lance passes another drug test /wins, question the system itself.

Some one in Leblanc's position cannot afford, with such current media interest, to be dishing out open sound bites, which might be used against him at a later date.

 

[Jakebrake]

Very true steve, does LeBlanc have any political ambitions? He would do very well.

 

[limerickman]

Originally posted by Jakebrake
How much do we really know about anyone? We think we know them, those that are in the public eye. But do we really? How many times have you been shocked to find out something about your sports/political hero? Even a family member or close friend for that matter?

Look at Kobe Bryant saga. Great career, loving wife, outstanding role model. Who would have thought that of him before he was accused/charged?

Pete Rose? Gambling? I would have never believed it.

Eugene Robinson anyone? The great safety for the Seattle Seahawks, Green Bay Packers and Atlanta Falcons. Great family man, wife, kids, involved in many charities and foundations, strong religious beliefs. On the night before his biggest game with Atlanta, the Superbowl, and shortly after he just received an award for high moral character, he was arrested for attempted to solicit an undercover officer he thought was a prostitute for $40. I was shocked as hell.

I learned a long time ago not to put 100% faith in any public figure. Though I still get tripped up from time to time.

I'm a Lance supporter. I'd like to believe him, and about 85% of me does. but I'll still always have a nagging doubt in my mind. It's probably just the cynic in me. But until I see positive proof, I'm leaning in his direction.

On the flip side of the coin, in regards to David Walsh. With Limerickman's assurances that Mr. Walsh has an impeccable reputation aside, I've mentioned before several journalist/writers who had the same untouchable reputation. Walter Duranty, Janet Cooke, Jack Kelley, Mike Barnicle. All journalists with great credentials, yet all them either outright fabricated stories, or plagerized from other writers. Hell, Duranty and Cooke both were Pulitzer prize winners for the New York Times and Washington Post respectfully. He comes across to me as someone with an agenda.

How much do we really know anyone? For Leblanc to say "I don't know", that doesn't seem too far off the mark. I'm sure he tries to do what he can to be 100% sure, but is that possible in today's day and age?

It's a fair point - none of us can know for certain what anyone
else is up to.

As regards Walsh, his reputation is impeccable - but I can only say that from having contact with him years ago and from what I have read from him and from meeting him recently (in 2002,
just prior to his TV debate with Stephen Roche when, on national television, he openly questioned Roche's authenticity - to Roches face - following the disclosures from the Conconi trial in Italy).
But yes, how am I to know what is really in Walsh's heart when he wrote LA Confidential ?

I am not familiar enough with the names of the people you have listed in your reply (Rose - he plays Baseball, I think ???).
The rest of the names you posted don't register with me - so I cannot offer an opinion, one way or the other.
But I do take your central point !

Still trying to come with a reply for the thread "Great things about the USA" (LOL !)

 

[Jakebrake]

Hmmm... well, we took those bog swilling plastic paddies off your hands because they couldn't tough it out in the Old Country, that has to count for something.

 

[steve007]

hee hee, yes.

Also we must not forget the language thing.....

Phrases/words are often misused when the language you speak isnt your first language.

 

[limerickman]

Originally posted by steve007
Limerickman

This isnt what leblanc is saying...... I'm sure it was more of a dismissive response rather than him saying he is actually unsure.

You have to try to understand the media engine......

So Leblanc says "Yes i believe Lance is clean" and then Lance tests positive - the situation for LeBlanc could backfire....

Equally if Leblanc indicates he suspects LA might be doping, then people might question why he is allowed to compete, or when Lance passes another drug test /wins, question the system itself.

Some one in Leblanc's position cannot afford, with such current media interest, to be dishing out open sound bites, which might be used against him at a later date.

Fair point - and I see where you are coming from.
But I would contend that JML's comments are more reflective of the shitstorm that is envoloping this sport.

I think JML's comment reflects the reality that the sport has no credibility left that this is why he has to say he doesn't know.

I know the media game - I work in it and from what I hear
JML and Hinault and the rest of them are under serious, serious
pressure.
We have a colleague based in Europe and what he is telling me
about the ongoing investigation in to drug trafficking of performance enhancing drugs is going to lead to a lot of police
activity in the next few weeks.
The cops know who is involved and it is only a matter of when not if.

 

[gntlmn]

Originally posted by limerickman
Fair point - and I see where you are coming from.
But I would contend that JML's comments are more reflective of the shitstorm that is envoloping this sport.

I think JML's comment reflects the reality that the sport has no credibility left that this is why he has to say he doesn't know.

I know the media game - I work in it and from what I hear
JML and Hinault and the rest of them are under serious, serious
pressure.
We have a colleague based in Europe and what he is telling me
about the ongoing investigation in to drug trafficking of performance enhancing drugs is going to lead to a lot of police
activity in the next few weeks.
The cops know who is involved and it is only a matter of when not if.

I think the blood testing is in response to the fact that sponsors are losing faith in the sport of cycling. I was reading in some Aussie publication recently about Coca-Cola backing off from sponsoring next year's Tour because too many riders are doping. When this starts to happen, guys like Leblanc start to scramble. They better get the testing done and done right. Otherwise, more sponsors will follow.

 

[steve007]

Originally posted by limerickman
Fair point - and I see where you are coming from.
But I would contend that JML's comments are more reflective of the shitstorm that is envoloping this sport.

I think JML's comment reflects the reality that the sport has no credibility left that this is why he has to say he doesn't know.

I know the media game - I work in it and from what I hear
JML and Hinault and the rest of them are under serious, serious
pressure.
We have a colleague based in Europe and what he is telling me
about the ongoing investigation in to drug trafficking of performance enhancing drugs is going to lead to a lot of police
activity in the next few weeks.
The cops know who is involved and it is only a matter of when not if.

What sector of media?

Not a day goes by without the police investigating something relating to performance enhancing drugs. Generally its a half hearted approach as most people taking these sort of drugs are not committing crimes to generate funds in order to feed their supply, its all statistics these days!

Meantime the labs are releasing more advanced drugs all the time, to those willing to test them anyway, which will only make detection (and therefore prevention) far harder, if not impossible.

We should also not forget the massive number of doctors willing to prescribe/supply and availability in mexico of steroids,growth hormone and other performance drugs.

The future is clearly visable. By 2100 it wont just be a battle of fitness, but a race to perfect the greatest drug, like something out of some Iron man type sci-fi movie.

Now its discovered mobile phones lower sperm counts in men, will we stop using them? What other horrific discoveries will we make about them? Will mobile phone companies stop selling? I doubt it.

Thats progress for you......

 

[limerickman]

Originally posted by steve007
What sector of media?

I work for a media company which is in the TV, Radio and Publishing media.

 

[meehs]

Originally posted by gntlmn
I think the blood testing is in response to the fact that sponsors are losing faith in the sport of cycling. I was reading in some Aussie publication recently about Coca-Cola backing off from sponsoring next year's Tour because too many riders are doping. When this starts to happen, guys like Leblanc start to scramble. They better get the testing done and done right. Otherwise, more sponsors will follow.

I've heard that EPO is very difficult and costly to detect in tests. Does anyone know if this is true? Also, is EPO still the "drug of choice" in the peleton? Do those that are cheating by using this substance have methods of masking it's detection if they're tested?

Does anyone have the facts about the current substances that are being used and how they are going about testing for them? This thread has me curious...