Why and how does it raise this question? Rasmussen lied about his whereabouts, then lied about lying. He WAS guilty and banned for a whereabouts violation.
Michael Rasmussen fessing up and ...
- Thread starter rich p
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
I think at the time of London 2012 I suggested the medal ceremonies should be held over until Brazil 2016.
I worry that the times and output stats might be down, down to 90's and 00's levels, and they still might be doping.
and if Jens Voight ever confesses to, or gets caught, doping I'll never watch another road race again.
Not even you were daft enough to plead his innocence; instead you called all the evidence circumstantial , hearsay or inadmissable. Tyler Hamilton and Landis were proven liars out to make a buck, the other testifying riders were only testifying against LA to get their sentences reduced and thus were unreliable, the 1999 EPO tests were flawed and so on, ad infinitum.
Given that Armstrong and Rasmussen never failed a test and the rest of the evidence is still flawed in your eyes, can we believe these two when they say they're guilty of doping?
I'm interested when the epihany occcurred, and the evidence we and USADA had always believed, became credible to you.
Your interpretation only - you have such a limited agenda that you assume anything else has to be supporting Armstrong, Voight and others
The discussion was over evidence
The simple (but outside your agenda) fact that this evidence was inadmissible in a court remains true, as does the point that was made that nailing Armstrong bang to rights in a court would have been a better outcome and would have prevented the present stalemate
Claiming this supports. Doping or does not recognise the present evidence is your issue
The fact that I was right and it was settled out of court as I predicted must really rankle
However I suspect that is also beyond you as you simply are unable to comprehend concepts outside your box
At least you are starting to get the point though, now all you need to do is grasp the issue of suspension during an investigation... And explain how you surmised that this is supporting doping
Out of court? I couldn't give a toss about courts. I just wanted him nailed by USADA, UCI, the IOC and WADA. Courts are irrelevant.
Claiming this supports. Doping or does not recognise the present evidence is your issue
You lost me again with this bit of garbage but not to worry. There's only so much fun I can glean from you.
Claiming this supports. Doping or does not recognise the present evidence is your issue
You lost me again with this bit of garbage but not to worry. There's only so much fun I can glean from you.
Boris Bajic
Guest
I, too, would like to hope he's not. Although I don't get the whole 'Jensie the Hero' thing, my middle child is quite taken by him and looks up to him. He certainly does entertain on quiet days and gives good TV.
Nonetheless, much about his teams, his birthplace, his teammates (Basso et al) and even his bosses (Bjarne et al) suggests that if he managed to get through PED-free for all those years he did very well to do so.
His performances too, including an almost pain-denying will to push where others (including known dopers) cannot or will not, suggests that it might have been more than more than just pan y agua that he was fuelled with.
I think if some sort of TRC does bring some big truths out of the shadows, many of us will be very surprised at who did what in the 1990s and beyond.
This post might seem like a naughty attempt to see smoke around Jens, but it isn't. I just wouldn't be at all surprised.
jdtate101
Ex-Fatman
- Location
- Boring Birmingham
It's very sad when one's hero's are caught out as fakes. It makes you question your idea's around why you supported these people in the first place. As a fan you are emotionally invested in seeing someone win, which makes it doubly painful when they dope. I do wonder if pro cycling can ever shake off the shackles that the 90's era have put on it, it's now such a HUGE thing to overcome, with every result and performance called into doubt. Even with the greater testing and improved science today, it's still a very tainted sport and will remain so for years to come, which is a huge shame for any genuinely clean riders in the peloton today (of which I'm sure the vast majority are today).
How we fix this, I have no idea, but perhaps it will take every rider, coach and manager which had anything to do with that era, retiring or being forced out, in order to move things forward. A TRC would be good in my mind as it then removes any doubts about certain people in the fans minds.
How we fix this, I have no idea, but perhaps it will take every rider, coach and manager which had anything to do with that era, retiring or being forced out, in order to move things forward. A TRC would be good in my mind as it then removes any doubts about certain people in the fans minds.
Hip Priest
Veteran
Me neither. I doubt any cyclist who made a name for themselves in that era was clean. I would think it was almost impossible to compete whilst riding paniagua. I think Boardman was clean, which is why he tended to fade in grand tours.
I think he was clean too, but he wasn't so much fading as falling off his bike.
Once again as soon as it becomes uncomfortable and you are shown to be lying you feign misunderstanding
The first few times it was funny, it is now simply pathetic
Believe me, I'm not feigning!
Actually I can believe that, the concept that there are views outside your agenda may really be too difficult for you
Eh?
Anyway, I shall leave this now as it's getting sillier and sillier and I honestly have no idea what you're on about.
