Armstrong charged and banned

[Red Light]

Depends upon what you call an interest?

Wiggins and Cavendish?

If we were in the US then it would have been different.

Cavendish missed a drugs test in 2011

USADA have on at least one occasion decided on a six month suspension for this....had we been under USADA's jurusdiction, then there is a chance we would not have been celebrating Cavendish's fourth win!

To say nothing of Wiggo smuggling drugs in his nappies. Clearly he's been party to a "massive doping conspiracy" worthy of a lifetime ban and stripping of his titles

 

[ufkacbln]

What a sad, pedantic misery-guts you are. There's nothing like spreading your doom-and-gloom and hoping everyone catches it, is there? FFS!

Delighted to help!

 

[Chuffy]

I consider it my mission in life to bring light.

In truth, it doesn't bother me to cover old ground. It actually helps my own thinking rather than being frustrating... but point taken, I'll rein it in for the sake of others!

I always forget that you suffer fools much more patiently than I do, which is admirable. So long as it pleases you, keep it up!

 

[Chuffy]

What was it Cicero said? If you have no basis for an argument abuse the plaintiff? You really do yourself no favours by trying to do character assassinations rather than addressing the issues or just keeping schtumm.

Just stating the facts.
You've comprehensively lost the argument yet you insist on coming back for more. At what point in this process am I supposed to say 'that Redlight chap, I respect his persistence'?

 

[Noodley]

Cunobelin and Red Light, you have reached the point of being marked down as "nobbers" on my list.

Yenners was the only one on it until today...

(not that it matters, but just saying)

 

[Red Light]

Cunobelin and Red Light, you have reached the point of being marked down as "nobbers" on my list.

Yenners was the only one on it until today...

(not that it matters, but just saying)

Why thank you sir!

Which type by the way?

1. nobber, n.1

...A blow to the head....
2. † nobber, n.2 1821

...A boxer skilled in delivering blows to the head....
3. nobber, n.3 1890

...A person who seeks contributions of money, esp. after a performance....

 

[ufkacbln]

Cunobelin and Red Light, you have reached the point of being marked down as "nobbers" on my list.

Yenners was the only one on it until today...

(not that it matters, but just saying)

Nothing like a measured and well informed response to a valid point being raised.

It is always reassuring when this is the best someone can come up with, simply reinforces the fact that the questions you have raised are ones they simply cannot or will not answer, often because they are uncomfortable with the position they have put themselves in and this is the easy way out.

Why answer the points when you can evade?

 

[Red Light]

Just stating the facts.
You've comprehensively lost the argument yet you insist on coming back for more. At what point in this process am I supposed to say 'that Redlight chap, I respect his persistence'?

When Armstrong is acquitted by the USADA or CAS?

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Why answer the points when you can evade?

Neither you nor red light have no points that have not been answered ad nauseam. You don't get a special prize for carrying on regardless, nor does this make all the many people who clearly know far more about his than you somehow wrong because they can't be bothered dealing with your sheer bloody-minded persistence any more.

 

[Chuffy]

Nothing like a measured and well informed response to a valid point being raised.
It is always reassuring when this is the best someone can come up with, simply reinforces the fact that the questions you have raised are ones they simply cannot or will not answer, often because they are uncomfortable with the position they have put themselves in and this is the easy way out.

You and that other chap have had your points not just rebutted but stamped into a jammy puddle. At this point in the thread (and the other) being called a nobber is about the best you can expect or deserve. You've lost, comprehensively. Give it a rest.

 

[Red Light]

Give it a rest.

I will if you will.

Neither you nor red light have no points that have not been answered ad nauseam. You don't get a special prize for carrying on regardless, nor does this make all the many people who clearly know far more about his than you somehow wrong because they can't be bothered dealing with your sheer bloody-minded persistence any more.

Yes you made your certainty of his guilt clear in the first few posts of this thread. Why would I expect anything else from a signed up member of the lynch mob? And why do you find an innocent until proven guilty stance so difficult to accept?

P.S. Not sure if you realise but unwinding the triple negatives of your first sentence it reads "You and red light have points that have not been answered ad nauseam" Just thought you'd like to know that

 

[Red Light]

You and that other chap have had your points not just rebutted but stamped into a jammy puddle.

Yes, I've noticed you like to stomp "innocent until proven guilty" into a jammy puddle whenever you get the chance.

 

[ufkacbln]

Methinks you protest far too much.



I know that the gist of this thread is that questioning the USADA, its actions or their problems is unwelcome and difficult, but tough as they exist.

If you wish to sit in a little fantasy world of denial then feel free to ignore reality and what is actually happening, then feel free.

Even the most basic assumptions such as the nature of the contract between athletes and the USADA are questioned by senior figures in the US legal system - then surely an open mind would and should at least listen?

However that is not the case - in reality there is a wish to close the discussion and limit it to sycophantism.

I suppose that is your right.

Us "nobbers" should have known better than to try and post anything that did not fit the prescribed agenda, or the ethos that the USADA cannot be challenged or it's actions questioned.

.

 

[yello]

You're assuming that these two are interested in cycling?

Cheap shot and not a response I was expecting from you Rich. Where you including me in that statement? If so, I'm offended.

Clearly, having an interest in cycling does not mean you have to follow pro-cycling. I happen to but many on this forum don't. I'm surprised, and disappointed, by some of the names that 'liked' your post - I would have thought they knew better.

 

[rich p]

Cheap shot and not a response I was expecting from you Rich. Where you including me in that statement? If so, I'm offended.

Clearly, having an interest in cycling does not mean you have to follow pro-cycling. I happen to but many on this forum don't. I'm surprised, and disappointed, by some of the names that 'liked' your post - I would have thought they knew better.

Yello my dear friend!!! I fear you have misinterpreted my barb. I have nothing but respect for you and agree almost 100% with everything you post in these sections.
The 'two' I was referring to were Cunobellin and Red Light which was obviously understood by the 'likers' who, I'm sure, hold you in as high esteem as I do.
Reading my post again, I can see how you misconstrued it and I can only offer my unreserved apologies.