Log in:  

Register

Movement for credible cycling!!

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

15 Nov 2012 23:33


just waiting for Sky to endorse this, and do a team sponsorship of Bikepure.

absinthe all the way. Every Sky stage win at the Tour, you have to skull and 600ml bottle of 80%pure absinthe. And two bottles for each podium place they take up.
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

16 Nov 2012 00:27

you are getting it[color="White"]______[/color] [SIZE="5"]W R O N G[/SIZE][color="White"]____[/color] fplks




movement


for


INcredible cycling!!!

Image
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

16 Nov 2012 21:49

MPCC is a joke, founded by Legaey and Holczer amongst others.

"Ban cortisone, save cycling", and other insane stuff. Soon, everyone has joined them, and cycling remains rotten.

I read Lotto and NetApp joined them... As if Sergeant and Heppner were people who fight for a clean cycling. They just join for personal interests: Lotto for staying WorldTour, NetApp for having hope to get a TdF spot.

Waiting for the day Vino´s Astana joins MPCC, and getting praised as "super clean".

Voeckler and Rolland give a f*** about cortisone, when they can have undetectable blood infusions.
RHRH19861986
Member
 
Posts: 988
Joined: 17 Mar 2012 14:33
Location: Germany, Europe

17 Nov 2012 00:01

RHRH19861986 wrote:MPCC is a joke, founded by Legaey and Holczer amongst others.

"Ban cortisone, save cycling", and other insane stuff. Soon, everyone has joined them, and cycling remains rotten.

I read Lotto and NetApp joined them... As if Sergeant and Heppner were people who fight for a clean cycling. They just join for personal interests: Lotto for staying WorldTour, NetApp for having hope to get a TdF spot.

Waiting for the day Vino´s Astana joins MPCC, and getting praised as "super clean".

Voeckler and Rolland give a f*** about cortisone, when they can have undetectable blood infusions.

heehhehe

bigboat likes this
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

17 Nov 2012 03:58

Any movement which is designed to give cycling credibility is really doing it for one reason - to maintain fan support. It is ultimately the fans of the sport who justify the money that is spent on the sport. No fans, no bucks, and no bucks, no Buck Rogers, as they say in the film "The Right Stuff."

Before the Armstrong stuff hit the fan, the big secret was that the tests didn't work. Sometimes they worked, but most of the cyclists were able to beat them. The reason why so many people stuck by Armstrong for so long (even in the face of testimony against him) is because in any court case, physical evidence is more important than eyewitness testimony, and physical evidence (the tests) seemed to be in his favor. People roll their eyes when the number 500 comes up. I know it isn't 500, but he was tested a lot. The thing of it is, that the physical evidence in Armstrong's favor was a travesty of a mockery of a sham.

The credibility gap in cycling comes from the fact that the tests don't matter. In other words, everyone in the sport is now a suspect. The only thing we have to go on is someone's word and their reputation. This is I think why Sky went out and got people to sign documents. It is the only logical response to the current situation. And the only way this will change is that the testing must get better in order to catch all of the cheaters, not just the dumb cheaters.

This MPCC movement I see as just another version of what Sky did. Believe or don't believe them if you choose, but the word of a cyclist is all we have right now to keep this sport from being clean or dirty.

With that said, I know Garmin tries to project themselves with the image of being clean. The only thing I find wrong about this is that they have many riders who were caught or confessed to cheating. Meaning, at one point in their careers they decided to lie. Not only to themselves or their bosses or the organizers of events, but to the fans. The fans are the ones who will ultimately determine whether or not cycling is credible. If all we have to go on is the word of people who have lied to us in the past, I find it difficult to believe them. Except for David Millar, of course. Clearly, that guy is way less than he was when he was on the sauce.

Short of embedding someone from WADA with each cycling team and going through everyone's garbage, it is going to be hard to prove with physical evidence that cycling is clean until the testing improves. And even if it does, there will be forces working for the other side who will figure out ways to beat the new tests. In other words, it will be difficult to establish credibility to a sport which seems to have a huge credibility gap.

As for the MPCC, I guess every little bit helps. How much it will help, I can't say. But I say, best of luck to them.
babastooey
Junior Member
 
Posts: 180
Joined: 10 Jul 2012 14:33

17 Nov 2012 06:20

I think MPCC is still the best and most honest of these "clean cycling movements".

I think Sky´s approach is somewhere in between. Was surprised they fired deJongh, Yates, and this former Rabo doctor. They didn´t have to, but did.

The worst of these stories still remain Riis 2004/2005 ("We´re best team in the world though/because we´re super clean") and the Damsgaard fairytales later, with him working for Riis and then for Bruyneel at Astana. This was ridiculous, but shows the problem well: everyone can claim to be super-clean, even the biggest gangsters.

The last ridiculous stories, IMHO, come from within MPCC itself: Rolland/Voeckler and Kittel/Degenkolb. If that´s new, clean cycling, I have to vomit.
RHRH19861986
Member
 
Posts: 988
Joined: 17 Mar 2012 14:33
Location: Germany, Europe

17 Nov 2012 12:07

RHRH19861986 wrote:
The last ridiculous stories, IMHO, come from within MPCC itself: Rolland/Voeckler and Kittel/Degenkolb. If that´s new, clean cycling, I have to vomit.


Do you have any evidence against these cyclists or are you just making insunuations?
del1962
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,063
Joined: 16 Oct 2012 17:20

more eyebrow-raising comments from the peloton

17 Nov 2012 13:43

Evans has joined the movement.
“There has been such a change in mentality in cycling now, and I think we have left that behind us, and that’s why I say to cycling fans, let’s not lose faith.”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/evans-on-doping-accusations-and-lance-armstrongs-tours
sniper
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,578
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 23:36

30 Nov 2012 22:18

Race organisers to give wildcard priority to MPCC members

"Its current members are AG2R La Mondiale, Argos-Shimano, Bretagne-Schuller, Cofidis, Europcar, FDJ, Garmin-Sharp, the Swiss IAM Cycling project, Lotto Belisol, NetApp and Saur Sojasun, while Astana, Bardiani-CSF, La Pomme Marseille have applied for membership in recent weeks."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/race-organisers-to-give-wildcard-priority-to-mpcc-members

So what do the teams need to provide to apply for membership?
Do you want to watch better bike racing? => Team radios (not race radio) must go!
User avatar cineteq
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,797
Joined: 20 May 2009 00:52
Location: Austin, TX

30 Nov 2012 23:43

All the doping in Astana is history. That stuff happened a long time ago. They have done a very serious job about being commited to clean cycling. I think they should be let in, but im awaiting JimmyFingers input on this.
User avatar the sceptic
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,664
Joined: 21 Jul 2012 20:17

02 Dec 2012 16:18

cineteq wrote:Race organisers to give wildcard priority to MPCC members

"Its current members are AG2R La Mondiale, Argos-Shimano, Bretagne-Schuller, Cofidis, Europcar, FDJ, Garmin-Sharp, the Swiss IAM Cycling project, Lotto Belisol, NetApp and Saur Sojasun, while Astana, Bardiani-CSF, La Pomme Marseille have applied for membership in recent weeks."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/race-organisers-to-give-wildcard-priority-to-mpcc-members

So what do the teams need to provide to apply for membership?


Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but doesn't this effectively give the MPCC the right to choose which teams are eligable to gain wild cards being that they determin who may become members? If so, hopefully this is challenged in court asap.
Le Baroudeur
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: 28 Oct 2012 04:03

criteria

02 Dec 2012 16:21

Le Baroudeur wrote:Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but doesn't this effectively give the MPCC the right to choose which teams are eligable to gain wild cards being that they determin who may become members? If so, hopefully this is challenged in court asap.


my understanding is that teams had to adhere to a certain criteria.......

...obviously a doping team should not be able to become members

just because they applied
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,219
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

02 Dec 2012 16:46

ebandit wrote:my understanding is that teams had to adhere to a certain criteria.......

...obviously a doping team should not be able to become members

just because they applied


Fine, however my understanding was that all members have to agree to allow a new member?

Further what exactly constitutes a doping team? One member of the group allready has ridders that but for testimony would fall foul of their own rules?

I guess I'm just confussed as to who amoung the cycling fraternity elected the MPCC as representatives, and how this isn't anti-competative, undemocratic, or exclusive?
Le Baroudeur
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: 28 Oct 2012 04:03

02 Dec 2012 17:02

And just why cannot professional cycling be undemocratic or exclusive? Its not a right to be a cyclist, to compete in cycling, or for a team to have a place in a race. I will give you that things should not be anti-competative, but even that is not a given. For what its worth, professional cycling sets its own standards, and those standards may or may not include transparency nor fairness. Its not a government for heavens sake.
howsteepisit
Junior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: 14 Oct 2012 16:11

sign me up

02 Dec 2012 17:38

Le Baroudeur wrote:Fine, however my understanding was that all members have to agree to allow a new member?

Further what exactly constitutes a doping team? One member of the group allready has ridders that but for testimony would fall foul of their own rules?

I guess I'm just confussed as to who amoung the cycling fraternity elected the MPCC as representatives, and how this isn't anti-competative, undemocratic, or exclusive?


by definition more members the better.............if team seeking membership

fulfilled criteria for membership do you really think that existing members

would block that team joining?
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,219
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

02 Dec 2012 17:43

howsteepisit wrote:And just why cannot professional cycling be undemocratic or exclusive? Its not a right to be a cyclist, to compete in cycling, or for a team to have a place in a race. I will give you that things should not be anti-competative, but even that is not a given. For what its worth, professional cycling sets its own standards, and those standards may or may not include transparency nor fairness. Its not a government for heavens sake.


And there was I thinking professional cycling was a collective of professional cyclists riding for teams under common rules.

What we have here is race organisers allowing certain teams (of questionable merit, with unverified principles, and convienient sanctions against riders) to decide who is allowed to compete.
Le Baroudeur
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: 28 Oct 2012 04:03

02 Dec 2012 18:00

ebandit wrote:by definition more members the better.............if team seeking membership

fulfilled criteria for membership do you really think that existing members

would block that team joining?


I don't see where they state an obligation to do so, nor do I particularly trust the impartiality or ethics of all the current members, or recognise their right to be the custodians and arbiters for professional cyclist and cycling.

What the MPCC stands for realy isn't the issue here though... The issue is any noninclusive body of teams having a say in what teams they will compete against, for what ever reason. We have a governing body for that. As it is it's already predudicial if your team isn't registered in the nation the event is being held, rather than being based on fair and sporting merits.
Le Baroudeur
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: 28 Oct 2012 04:03

02 Dec 2012 18:03

Le Baroudeur wrote:I don't see how I will Ever be Happy


errr.............right..............then go and tell MPCC
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,219
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

02 Dec 2012 18:18

ebandit wrote:errr.............right..............then go and tell MPCC


Feel free to delete the edited miss-quote.

The descision introduces possibilities for uncompetitive practices and as such, and in particular at this time, it's a worrying direction to take, irrespective of the moral banner under which it hides.
Le Baroudeur
Member
 
Posts: 437
Joined: 28 Oct 2012 04:03

told ya

02 Dec 2012 18:22

Le Baroudeur wrote:Feel free to delete the edited miss-quote.

The descision introduces possibilities for uncompetitive practices and as such, and in particular at this time, it's a worrying direction to take, irrespective of the moral banner under which it hides.


as i suggested...........you will never be happy
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,219
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

Back to top