Boonen tests positive for cocaine... again

[bonj2]

So, a fella who happens to be really good at cycling and wins races enjoys getting off his tits on charlie every now and again. And? So do loads of people. I cant' see what difference the fact that he's a pro cyclist makes.
Can't see what the problem is myself.

 

[gavintc]

So, a fella who happens to be really good at cycling and wins races enjoys getting off his tits on charlie every now and again. And? So do loads of people. I cant' see what difference the fact that he's a pro cyclist makes.
Can't see what the problem is myself.

OK, You are a multi millionaire running a large European company. you like cycling and fancy sponsoring a team. In return, you want the opportunity to have the team in your logo, turn up to some corporate events and to use the face of the main rider on advertising. Now, if that main rider was into illegal drugs, would you sponsor that team or the one down the road that is clean.

What is the problem now?

 

[Skip Madness]

You state speculation does not suffice, but start off with the line, 'what if..'

Contradiction no?

...

Just as you state it is wrong for me to suppose that his loved ones did nothing, equally it is wrong for you to suppose they did - after all, how do you know they helped him?

No, not a contradiction. I was not drawing any conclusions. I opened my post with those hypotheticals precisely to point out that you are just speculating and that you can easily flip it round to dismiss your own baseless claims. I haven't actually praised Boonen's family or friends for their support/criticsed them for their lack of it because I don't know what happened.

Finally, any personal issue that stops someone acting in the best interests and allows a loved one to carry on taking drugs is IMO pathetic.

Assuming Boonen has close friends and family who do know about this, there could be a whole raft of possible reasons why relationship problems make tackling the problem difficult. I don't know, so I am not going to make any judgments of character of people I do not know in a story I know relatively nothing about.

Tom knows who gave him the drugs, both last year, and this year. As it is a 'recreational' drug, and usually taken in a nightclub-type environment, my money's on the fact that the same 'friends' that stood by last year when he did it, were there again faithful as ever when he sniffed again.

I have already stated Tom will have to carry the can for this, but my point is why should the so-called 'friends' get away without a mention in his demise?

Who knows whether he took it alone or with friends? Who knows if his friends were even aware of it? Who knows if he might just know a dealer? Why not wait until you do know these things before colouring people's characters?

 

[Skip Madness]

Now, if that main rider was into illegal drugs, would you sponsor that team or the one down the road that is clean.

Clean or not, no-one will want to sponsor Silence-Lotto on this year's performances.

 

[Keith Oates]

So, a fella who happens to be really good at cycling and wins races enjoys getting off his tits on charlie every now and again. And? So do loads of people. I cant' see what difference the fact that he's a pro cyclist makes.
Can't see what the problem is myself.

The words 'Serious Cyclist' take on a whole new meaning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dellzeqq]

OK, You are a multi millionaire running a large European company. you like cycling and fancy sponsoring a team. In return, you want the opportunity to have the team in your logo, turn up to some corporate events and to use the face of the main rider on advertising. Now, if that main rider was into illegal drugs, would you sponsor that team or the one down the road that is clean.

What is the problem now?

absolutely. No question. But that's a commercial decision. And Boonen's cavalier attitude to the fortunes of his team mates is rubbish. But coke is not a performance enhancing drug, and he's been banned by the authorities, not sacked by his team. So the blazers are effectively acting as moral guardians, rather than guardians of sport.

 

[gavintc]

absolutely. No question. But that's a commercial decision. And Boonen's cavalier attitude to the fortunes of his team mates is rubbish. But coke is not a performance enhancing drug, and he's been banned by the authorities, not sacked by his team. So the blazers are effectively acting as moral guardians, rather than guardians of sport.

I accept this, and to a large extent, we do not expect out Premier Div footballers to be anything more than highly paid chavs/neds. Perhaps our European cousins have better moral values.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Why not wait until you do know these things before colouring people's characters?

We ought to agree to disagree.

I will not be changed on my opinion of people around him that knew he was doing it a year ago, and stood by and watched him do it again (refering to people who supply him with it or do it with him).

Those people are scum, end of.

 

[mondobongo]

And again!!

Cycling News are reporting he tested positive in 2007 but as it was Cocaine and Ecstasy which are not prohibited substances out of Competition the UCI recorded it as a negative.

 

[Keith Oates]

Another good athelete on the road to ruin, shame really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[yello]

Not just cyclists, French tennis player Richard Gasquet also...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8042543.stm

 

[mondobongo]

Has been confirmed that he will not be taking part in this years Tour by Christian Prudhomme.

 

[Keith Oates]

Boonen is said to be considering taking ASO to task in the courts if he gets barred from racing the Tour. Seems to me he'll be wasting his money and in any case does the sport need him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Will1985]

And look where we are now - Boonen and Quickstep want to go to court!

As far as I'm concerned a positive is a positive, irrespective of whether it was in or out of competition. He is a role model so he must act like one. After 3 positives there is really no excuse - kick the druggie out!

It also gives Cav more of a chance

 

[Skip Madness]

Boonen personally may have a case (as much as I disagree with him making it) to be able to ride the Tour, but for ASO the solution is simple - just bar Quickstep from the race. Tell them they can enter without Boonen or not at all because they want to protect their image - a defence which they have successfully deployed to prevent Fuji from entering this year.

Edit: Another thing - will the UCI really want to get into another stand-off with the ASO by ruling against it after having to climb down so publicly over everything last year?