Shuggie_Murray7 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I see the Wiggins bashing has begun already. He has had an excelent season, but won one TDF against very weak opposition. He didn't have to contend with Andy Schleck or Alberto Contador. If he goes on to convincingly win the TDF against these guys then fair enough, everyone is right to be suspicious, but FFS he was up against a weak Cadel Evans, Vincenzo Nibali and his own team mate this year hardly anything to be overly suspicious about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I can't believe that the consensus view seems to be that he is guilty. Where is the evidence? There still isn't any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC 33 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Marion Jones admitted to being tested over 160 times whilst using performance enhancing drugs, and never once tested positive. Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, the doping doctors were years ahead of WADA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds are Forever Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Is there a reason for doping seeming so prevalent in cycling? On a very basic level it's that it's not really a skills based sport. I could take all the drugs I wanted but I'd still be rubbish at tennis, football, golf etc. Whereas in cycling it would make a significant difference, therefore there's far more incentive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placidcasual Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 On a very basic level it's that it's not really a skills based sport. I could take all the drugs I wanted but I'd still be rubbish at tennis, football, golf etc. Whereas in cycling it would make a significant difference, therefore there's far more incentive. Yeah, that makes sense. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamonds2002 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I can't believe that the consensus view seems to be that he is guilty. Where is the evidence? There still isn't any. Is that not kind of the point of not fighting on? No-one needs to hear the evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I can't believe that the consensus view seems to be that he is guilty. Where is the evidence? There still isn't any. Well the USADA are taking the case to the UCI. That wouldn't happen on a groundless insinuation, surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I can't believe that the consensus view seems to be that he is guilty. Where is the evidence? There still isn't any. Oh f**k off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted August 24, 2012 Author Share Posted August 24, 2012 1345804059[/url]' post='6559486']From your death bed to the greatetr cyclist of all time just seems too far fetched. If they are using his ex-team mates as witnesses though then surely any case against him can't stand. They are mainly guys who have been caught ouyt tryin to ytake him down with them. I don't think the testimony of a confirmed doper carries any real weight. 10 former team mates are willing to swear under oath In a federal hearing that they witnessed him taking drugs , bearing in mind that athletes have went to prison (famous female sprinter forget her name) for lying whilst under oath as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted August 24, 2012 Author Share Posted August 24, 2012 1345807797[/url]' post='6559633']As stated above, the USADA are not stripping anyone of anything. Armstrong is just accepting their case. It's a tacit admission of guilt. Titles will be stripped by somebody else if deemed appropriate. Which clearly it will be. According to The cycling jurno on the news this morning ,he will be stripped of all titles , because cycling is in the Olympic family and Armstrong is falling to face the accusations there is no choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted August 24, 2012 Author Share Posted August 24, 2012 1345812388[/url]' post='6559938']Is there a reason for doping seeming so prevalent in cycling? Yeah because is impossible for a clean athlete to win the tour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convenor Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 He should change his name to The Lance Armstrong, then attempt to keep his titles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave020 Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 He has failed a test before and produced a back-dated doctors note... highly suspicious but he doesn't get the bad press that others get so people outside of cycling don't know that side of things. If he was anybody else, he would have been condemned years ago, and anyone who thinks that he hasn't doped at times in his career is naive beyond belief! You are probably the same lot who think that sports stars would never throw a competition for a few quid and act surprised that Italian football has a problem with match fixing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 this a good outcome but i'd much rather the evidence was presented so we can see exactly who said what. lance has been a dead man walking for years, the real story now is to uncover what levels of complicity the uci, usa cycling, nike and the us postal service are guilty of. to those that still don't believe his guilt, you are idiots. there is so much evidence in the public domain and no doubt lots more in the usada dossier. but ignoring all that if you can't simply put 2+2 together in regards to armstrong crushing doped opposition then there is no hope for you. hopefully this wakes people up to the reality of modern day sport. armstrong was allowed to cheat because he was a marketable money making machine. the result of his doping was tens of millions of dollars for him and the companies he was involved with. the public craves superhuman performances and PEDs are the way to produce them. the media go happily along with it as they are on the money train as well. anyone watching the olympics with a critical eye has to have major doubts about the likes of bolt and blake, mo farah and carmelita jeter but the media presents them to us as heroes which the public laps up then opens their wallets for whatever these supermen are selling. top class international sport is as much about marketing consumer products as it is about competition these days. i hope bradley wiggins has a terrible nights sleep tonight. his time will come but it'll be a little while off yet for as long as there is a buck to be made off him the media will ignore the unbelievable improvement arc, the associations with dodgy doctors, the lance arse licking and the incredible consistency and domination of his team. wiggins has been praising armstrong as recently as this summer, hopefully someone will have the bottle to ask him what he thinks of armstrong now. and to whoever asked about why drugs are so prevalent in cycling compared to other sports - they aren't. drugs are visible in cycling because of the efforts of the french and italian police forces and an educated and mature fanbase who are passionate about their sport. rugby, athletics, football and tennis are just as bad as cycling and probably worse due to the lack of scrutiny by their fanbases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 excellent david walsh interview from cycling news David Walsh, the author of From Lance to Landis and LA Confidential has welcomed the news that Lance Armstrong will not contest USADA’s charges relating to alleged doping offences during the Texan’s cycling career. Armstrong looks set to be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles, although the UCI may appeal that decision to CAS. “I’m pleased that it’s come to this and that he’s accepted the charges against him. I’m disappointed that it didn’t go to arbitration because that would have given us the details as to why this process was so necessary,” Walsh told Cyclingnews. “For me it’s a good day in at least that some guy who has been incredibly cynical has his just desserts. But the investigation should really be much deeper than Lance Armstrong. Who are the people who protected him? Are they still in cycling, are they still controlling cycling? Even the most neutral observer would say that cycling has been incredibly badly served by its leadership.” Walsh, who was sued by Armstrong in relation to his book LA Confidential, went on to explain that he feels no sense of vindication. Armstrong still denies doping during his career and despite a US court ruling otherwise, believes that the UCI should hold jurisdiction over the results management of sport. According to Armstrong, the actions of USADA amount to a ‘witch hunt’. “People have been saying to me for a number of years now, because it was perfectly clear to most intelligent people that Armstrong had been doping, and they asked if I felt vindication because I was accusing him for many years. I’ve never felt vindicated because I’ve never needed vindication in my life. I was never sure of anything more in my life than that this guy and his team were doping and that was form the very first Tour in 1999.” “It’s just wrong that guys who were riding the race clean and never appeared in the top 20 were screwed by a corrupt system and in my view a system that couldn’t not have remained corrupt without the complicity of the people who run the sport, the race organisers, the sponsors, the cycling journalists. Too many people turned a blind eye to something that was obviously wrong and they did it for all the wrong reasons.” Although Walsh has refrained from covering the Tour de France in recent years he was a permanent figure on the race circuit throughout the 80s, 90s and early 2000s. However, as his suspicions and stance became more and resolute he didn’t just find enemies in Armstrong’s camp, as even sections of the press corps turned their backs on him. “In 2004 I was meant to travel in a car that had an American writer, a British writer and an Australian writer and I had travelled with them many times. I first travelled with the English journalist back in 1984, if memory serves me. They didn’t want me in the car because Armstrong’s team had made it known to them that they wouldn’t get a lot of cooperation if I was in the car. And rather than stand by journalism they chose to do what was expedient but that’s what people did. Pretty much every English speaking journalist on the Tour in those early Armstrong years was in one way or another trying to defend Armstrong.” “When you think of all the nonsense we had to listen to about Armstrong being faster than Pantani in '98. Armstrong goes and rides a faster Tour a year later and you have all these idiot journalists saying, well the roads and the bikes are better, it’s logical. It was all completely illogical and if they were being honest they would have known this.” “You still see it today. There are still some journalists going out from England to cover the Tour who half believe that Armstrong is innocent, who have been defending him. Complete buffoons.” So what of the Tour de France and its murky history book? If Armstrong is finally stripped of his Tour victories it’s unlikely that the sport will rejoice in handed down celebrations for Jan Ullrich, Alex Zülle, Andreas Klöden and Ivan Basso. “The history of the Tour de France, over the last 20 years, since EPO and blood boosting drugs were big, the history of the Tour de France has been bunkum. It’s hasn’t been a story of triumph and great achievement, it’s been a story of corruption and innocent people who rode the race clean being screwed. They were the people we always needed to stand up for. The spiritual leader of that peloton was Christophe Bassons and we all remember what happened to him in 1999.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Nomad Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Some laughable comments on this thread. XBL please go and do some research, the evidence is all out there. Cycling forums would be a good start. He has failed tests before 1999 Tour springs to mind. I'm away from home so on my phone with a dodgy WiFi connection. If I was I could dig out all sorts of links for you. Have a look at the procycling thread, a lot posted in there over the years. The domino effect will happen here, expect Bruyneel to fall and hopefully the top of the lot Pat the rat McQuaid. Thought much the same as you TSAR, Wiggins looking very foolish re his comments on Armstrong. He will be stripped no doubt. I wouldn't hand them out to anybody else, all the runners up have served bans, been implicated in doping before. The single biggest sporting fraud of all time, let's not forget the whole Livestrong charity was based on his achievements as a rider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highlandcowden Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Is there a reason for doping seeming so prevalent in cycling? go and cycle up a long hill;then imagine the really long climbs they do in the tour that totally dwarf what youve just climbed;throw in 2 or 3 of these,add 200 plus kilometres at racing speed and only 2 days off in 23 days.then throw in relly competitive guys and teams determined to get exposure for the jersey which means you do it or get nowhere in the sport and,finally,add in a world governing body that for years tried to pretend there wasnt a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 go and cycle up a long hill;then imagine the really long climbs they do in the tour that totally dwarf what youve just climbed;throw in 2 or 3 of these,add 200 plus kilometres at racing speed and only 2 days off in 23 days.then throw in relly competitive guys and teams determined to get exposure for the jersey which means you do it or get nowhere in the sport and,finally,add in a world governing body that for years tried to pretend there wasnt a problem plus the ability to make loads of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckles Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Interesting that for the present at least, uci seem to be backing Armstrong and I think it's safe to assume that they will oppose any TDF title stripping because, if the Armstrong case is even partly based on anecdotal evidence, then titles would have to be stripped all the way back to at least 1967 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Nomad Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Really not the thread for it but again TSAR is spot on. Doping in other sports is prevalent, I for one can't wait for the day tennis is busted wide open. Back to XBL where is the evidence? Covered up by Pat the rat and the corrupt UCI. Go and read Paul Kimmage. If you want to keep up your current line of thinking, I'd say you are seriously misinformed or more likely just ignorant. The USDA can't strip the Tour wins, but they've opened the door to the people who can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.