Recent content by weeniebeenie

The biggest hypocrite is Digger. He criticises people for not speaking the truth but caveats his twitter with: "Account is Satire and personal opinion...largely **** take. It is cycling after all" If he had any balls / consistency he wouldn't do that.

Do you know that the others haven't apologised to him?

Obviously. That's exactly what he said. Or not. But it's still funny if you quote him inaccurately.

Holy ****. Are you really criticising someone for talking with certainty about something they don't know for certain? Have you ever read your Twitter feed?

Not dirty.

Fair enough.

The question was how many pre-91 GT winners were disqualified.

Just a question. In some threads people have suggested that Sky / British Cycling are protected by the UCI (i.e. McQuaid) from getting positives. However, McQuaid is currently in a battle with Cookson (Head of British Cycling) for control of the UCI. Surely it would be in McQuaid's...

I totally agree but think that Walsh has done more than enough in his career to be given the benefit of the doubt. In SDS he discusses handing in his resignation (which was rejected) following amendments that were made by The Times to an article that he wrote on Armstrong. To me that...

I suspect that Race Radio's point was that there appears to be a double standard. When Walsh says he thinks that Froome is clean he is accused of being corrupt and taking money from the Sky / Murdoch empire. When LeMond says he thinks that Froome is clean he is simply assumed to be...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

And you are still the moron that you have always been.

I think Marcel Kittel and Tony Martin might disagree with that list.

Zabriskie, Vande Velde, Danielson?

Why don't you set up a blog called 'Dear Geraint' or 'Dear Dave' and ask?