I hope its not true about Frank Schleck
- Thread starter mondobongo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
"I didn't inhale and never tried it again" as someone once said...
You have no evidence for those nasty insinuations and are just joining random dots to produce an apparently damning picture. Stop trying to cast apersions on honest athletes with these spurious accusation. You just need to believe in these cyclists.
PS - don't forget to write to Santa Claus this year.
You have no evidence for those nasty insinuations and are just joining random dots to produce an apparently damning picture. Stop trying to cast apersions on honest athletes with these spurious accusation. You just need to believe in these cyclists.
PS - don't forget to write to Santa Claus this year.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Festina in 2001? Hang on, was there another bust after 98 then?Noodley said:
So what about "Team GB"?
All those negative tests, and a dodgy rider with a positive rider last year?
Should we be querying the obvious drug related activity in "Team GB"?
And of course the ultimate confirmation - allegations in the french press that the increased performance and success can only be drug fuelled....
What more do we need to prove their guilt?
All those negative tests, and a dodgy rider with a positive rider last year?
Should we be querying the obvious drug related activity in "Team GB"?
And of course the ultimate confirmation - allegations in the french press that the increased performance and success can only be drug fuelled....
What more do we need to prove their guilt?
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Cute Cunobelin, very cute. FWIW I do think that Team GB should be subject to the same scrutiny as other teams. However, lets look at the scenario properly shall we?
Dodgy rider - Hayles is known as a track rider. Perhaps you could point me in the direction of all the drug scandals in track cycling over the last decade or so? There just isn't the same history of it as in road teams is there?
Allegations in the French press. Your anti-French prejudice is clouding your judgement. Do you really believe that the reports in the French press are all based on massive national jealousy of any other nation's success? Please, you're a grown up, leave that kind of logic to the 'Lans is grat and u ar all haterz' brigade. As with any press story, sometimes there's substance, sometimes there isn't. No-one on here takes everything as gospel just because it's in the press and you'd be stupid to imply that they did.
There is nothing to suggest that Team GB are anything other than clean or even that track cycling has a serious drug problem in the same way that road cycling does. There just isn't the same context. Whereas a rider on a team managed by an self-confessed doper, in a sport riddled with doping woes, paying money to a doctor known and proven to be a blood doper to the cycling stars including that team's previous star rider, now that raises eyebrows.
Dodgy rider - Hayles is known as a track rider. Perhaps you could point me in the direction of all the drug scandals in track cycling over the last decade or so? There just isn't the same history of it as in road teams is there?
Allegations in the French press. Your anti-French prejudice is clouding your judgement. Do you really believe that the reports in the French press are all based on massive national jealousy of any other nation's success? Please, you're a grown up, leave that kind of logic to the 'Lans is grat and u ar all haterz' brigade. As with any press story, sometimes there's substance, sometimes there isn't. No-one on here takes everything as gospel just because it's in the press and you'd be stupid to imply that they did.
There is nothing to suggest that Team GB are anything other than clean or even that track cycling has a serious drug problem in the same way that road cycling does. There just isn't the same context. Whereas a rider on a team managed by an self-confessed doper, in a sport riddled with doping woes, paying money to a doctor known and proven to be a blood doper to the cycling stars including that team's previous star rider, now that raises eyebrows.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Ok, let me ask you why you think it is so out of order for us to raise our collective eyebrows at Frank Schleck paying money to Dr Fuentes. Do you think that there is nothing there at all to cause concern? Your Team GB comments are just a red herring because the context is completely different. If Hayle's haematocrit test came with a bit more baggage, ie a team with a shady past or a dodgy doctor or a previous failed test etc etc then you would have more of a point.Cunobelin said:
OP
OP
mondobongo
Über Member
Like Chuffy I initially saw positives suspended strict action by the team, rider offering a DNA test. Then it descends into a quagmire of third party escrow payments! If he did break contact on realising who he was actually dealing with on the advice of his father and friends could they have not also advised him on a better defence.
Regarding Hayles was he not suspended as a precaution and subsequently found to have no case to answer hence him then going on to contest and win the British Nationals.
Regarding Hayles was he not suspended as a precaution and subsequently found to have no case to answer hence him then going on to contest and win the British Nationals.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
14 day mandatory suspension. The old 'for the good of the rider's health' thing that came in when the 50% haematocrit limit was set. The urine test, taken on the same day as the dodgy blood sample, subsequently tested negative for EPO, hence he was cleared to race.mondobongo said:
Hayles, as seen on this thread and this one probably got an slightly easier ride than, say, a Rasmussen or Landis would have got. Not that he reads this forum and anyway, our views matter less than a flea's whisker in the real world. However, there was nothing else to raise suspicions in his case whereas there is other, circumstantial, evidence against both of those riders. Enough that their protestations of innocence rang very hollow.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
The lawyers for Landis, Rasmussen, Hamilton et al thank you for your statement of support.
Meanwhile the rest of us will carry on chewing over the latest news and groaning at the same old lies and excuses being trotted out. 'kay?
Meanwhile the rest of us will carry on chewing over the latest news and groaning at the same old lies and excuses being trotted out. 'kay?
Noodley
Guest
Cunobelin said:
That is where you are going wrong - your interpretation of evidence. Evidence is not just something which can be tested by a scientist.
Evidence can come from many sources. How it is applied in a court or hearing is then dependent on the processes applied within a particular set of rules.
The processes involved on a cycling forum and the processes involved in pro cycling are not the same. Hence we can make comment on what we view as evidence, yet which would not necessarily be admissable as evidence within the processes of pro cycling.
Nonetheless the processes within pro cycling may still use the same information available to us to target specific individuals within the pro peleton. Hence we see specific riders tested at the Tour. There will have been a reason that specific riders were targetted, based on information (evidence) that they may have been involved in specific practices. Much the same as if a person seen walking away from the scene of a crime would be questioned - nothing concrete to say they committed the crime, but certainly enough to warrant further enquiry and a degree of suspicion. If further information (evidence) is found then further enquiry is made; if nothing else indicates continued suspicion then the matter is not pursued.
