A Dave Millar thread

[pmcg76]

bassons, simeoni.

I admire these guys a lot but wouldn't say they were true whistle-blowers in the sense of coming forward voluntarily. Simeoni was involved in a court case in Italy where he was called as a witness against Ferrari and told the truth.

Bassons was only brought to the forefront by his team-mates at Festina saying he was clean. It was the media that forced him into the limelight. Did he ever reveal details about the actual doping or who was doing what.

 

[pmcg76]

autobiography: press release guaranteed to make you some money.

please, stop referencing it as a strictly factual account. cf leipheimer affidavit with perjury penalty yet he stopped doping in 2007......

As opposed to Hamilton, Willy Voet or that nice article Jaksce did for the German media etc. Or is it only the truth when it matches your pre-held opinions.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I admire these guys a lot but wouldn't say they were true whistle-blowers in the sense of coming forward voluntarily. Simeoni was involved in a court case in Italy where he was called as a witness against Ferrari and told the truth.

Bassons was only brought to the forefront by his team-mates at Festina saying he was clean. It was the media that forced him into the limelight. Did he ever reveal details about the actual doping or who was doing what.

someone told : listen to pat, it's obvious he's answering questions.

look at what happened after they spoke.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

As opposed to Hamilton, Willy Voet or that nice article Jaksce did for the German media etc. Or is it only the truth when it matches your pre-held opinions.

are they the same books? coz only one rider is winning stage 12 in 2012 and saying himself and brad are clean and has dodgy blood values from 2008.

i'll look for his autobiog but if i find errors, i am going postal on it...

 

[pmcg76]

someone told : listen to pat, it's obvious he's answering questions.

look at what happened after they spoke.

Yeah Simeoni won a stage at the Vuelta and was leading a normal life in pro cycling until Armstrong intervened in 04. I think Simeoni testified in 00/01.

Likewise Basson's suffered the wrath of Armstrong, perhaps if he hadn't he might have had a more prolific career.

I still admire them both for what they did and indeed all the others who admitted to what they did, regardless of how long it took.

 

[roundabout]

Because that is what it is about, another poster claimed Millar never publically revealed his sources for EPO or his accomplices or never ratted on Saunier Duval to any authority.

This is in fact incorrect as he did and that is what I pointed out.

I also asked the same poster to name active pros who became whistle blowers. He named O'Reilly who was a soigneur, Landis and Manzano who were both unemployed at the time. None of these guys were riding in the pro bunch at the time of their confession's. I wasn't belittling them, merely pointing out those facts.

Once again, Millar's level of cooperation wasn't enough to get his ban reduced.

Naming Losa in his recent book is nothing groundbreaking given that the guy has a looong history of doping connections. I think even Duenas may have named Losa as his supplier.

As for accomplices, any idea who "Le Boss" is? Probably a guy still in the sport, who is given a chance for a "clean" start.

And the Saunier Duval episode as far as I understand ,while whistleblowing, is rather wishy-washy. Finally, not riding doesn't mean that a confession has less consequences. Manzano and Landis were both young enough to swallow their pride and keep on riding. Instead they had enough balls to fight back, while removing any hope they had of being pros again.

But we are going in circles. You with your Millar propaganda, and me, wasting my time.

 

[pmcg76]

are they the same books? coz only one rider is winning stage 12 in 2012 and saying himself and brad are clean and has dodgy blood values from 2008.

i'll look for his autobiog but if i find errors, i am going postal on it...

Why bother, it is abundantly clear you wont believe anything in it anyways.

 

[pmcg76]

Once again, Millar's level of cooperation wasn't enough to get his ban reduced.

Naming Losa in his recent book is nothing groundbreaking given that the guy has a looong history of doping connections. I think even Duenas may have named Losa as his supplier.

As for accomplices, any idea who "Le Boss" is? Probably a guy still in the sport, who is given a chance for a "clean" start.

And the Saunier Duval episode as far as I understand ,while whistleblowing, is rather wishy-washy. Finally, not riding doesn't mean that a confession has less consequences. Manzano and Landis were both young enough to swallow their pride and keep on riding. Instead they had enough balls to fight back, while removing any hope they had of being pros again.

But we are going in circles. You with your Millar propaganda, and me, wasting my time.

I would say the boss was Bernard Quilfen or maybe Francois Van Loonsderle?

Manzano was done, he had no team and was a rider with little to no results. Perhpas he might have got a place on a small team which he did anyway, Amore E Vita.

Landis had admitted that if he had been given a job by you know who, he probably would have kept his mouth shut. I admire that he finally came clean but come on, balls?

So if Millar was telling fibs about who he was working with etc, who was he really protecting??

 

[roundabout]

I would say the boss was Bernard Quilfen or maybe Francois Van Loonsderle?

Manzano was done, he had no team and was a rider with little to no results. Perhpas he might have got a place on a small team which he did anyway, Amore E Vita.

Landis had admitted that if he had been given a job by you know who, he probably would have kept his mouth shut. I admire that he finally came clean but come on, balls?

So if Millar was telling fibs about who he was working with etc, who was he really protecting??

Maybe? Why doesn't whistleblower Millar come out and tell it? Are the libel laws that strict? Makes you wonder why he names Losa then.

I did forget about Manzano's bad knee. Explains why I forgot about Amore E Vita as he never actually rode for them. He did last for 4 years at Kelme though so he may not have been as bad as (once again) you make him out to be.

Floyd certainly had balls. We can waste bandwidth debating his motives, but he wasn't afraid to ultimately do the right thing. Only future will tell whether Landis would get any tangible gain from his actions.

And I didn't say fibs. I was trying to put Millar's information about Cofidis into proper context. I would think given your preference for balance, you would have understood.

 

[pmcg76]

Maybe? Why doesn't whistleblower Millar come out and tell it? Are the libel laws that strict? Makes you wonder why he names Losa then.

I did forget about Manzano's bad knee. Explains why I forgot about Amore E Vita as he never actually rode for them. He did last for 4 years at Kelme though so he may not have been as bad as (once again) you make him out to be.

Floyd certainly had balls. We can waste bandwidth debating his motives, but he wasn't afraid to ultimately do the right thing. Only future will tell whether Landis would get any tangible gain from his actions.

And I didn't say fibs. I was trying to put Millar's information about Cofidis into proper context. I would think given your preference for balance, you would have understood.

Nice of you to finally admit that Millar did in fact name sources for his EPO and his accomplices. That is all I was saying to start with. Now perhaps you could point that out to Mrs John Murphy who claims Millar never admitted to any of this.

 

[hiero2]

Wow guys. You are really turning on some hate here. I'm standing with the pmcg fella on this one. You guys are bashing David Millar, and without good reasoning or good cause.

For instance, the Landis quote. Millar is talking JUST LIKE YOU GUYS. He is saying "Landis should have come out first thing!" This is so exactly like one of your reasons to condemn Millar and others, I am in awe. Several of you are clearly demonstrating to me that your ability to be cynical outweighs everything. You are not being skeptical, and certainly not realists. Sorry, but I'm calling this one like I see it. You don't WANT to believe anybody - excepting Betsy A., O'Reilly, and Mike Anderson. You believe captainbag over Ashenden, when it is convenient.

Millar was pointing out that Landis tried to maintain the omerta for years, finally blowing away his living, his standing in the community, his marriage, his sobriety, and his belief in himself. Landis raised, what, nearly a half mill to fight the charges? Wrote a book that was a lie?

Today I defend Landis - because he did finally speak out - and because I believe Floyd is basically an honest person. I defend Millar, because he DID finally speak out. I also happen to believe Millar is acting honestly in doing what he can to fight doping. AT LEAST HE IS SPEAKING openly. How many riders have we (and I include myself) criticized because they did NOT speak out after the USADA release? Lots, just lots.

But Phinney finally spoke openly and honestly. And Millar and JV have been speaking openly and honestly all along. This fact, ALONE, that Millar has been speaking out, FROM the peloton, against doping, means he is doing something.

But if you get on about them self-promoting again, forget it. EVERYBODY who has any sense self-promotes. Ashenden self-promotes. YOU self-promote. You're posting here is a "self-promoting" act. If you don't "self-promote" at work, I'll wager a paycheck you haven't been getting the promotion you think you should, either. Standing up for yourself is part of life. You want to call him a whinger, ok. You want to call him an arsehole, no problem by me. But this self-promotion slam is a hit job, nothing better.

Millar's statement about Rabo is a move forward. Vaughters statement about Sky is a move forward. Let's spend some time applauding the moves forward, instead of slamming people for the fun of it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Uh no captainbag and ashenden agree with each other.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Nice of you to finally admit that Millar did in fact name sources for his EPO and his accomplices. That is all I was saying to start with. Now perhaps you could point that out to Mrs John Murphy who claims Millar never admitted to any of this.

LOL Dave. So how many people were banned or punished as a result of you 'naming' them?

The question is still - what have you actually done? The answer is still nothing.

 

[roundabout]

Nice of you to finally admit that Millar did in fact name sources for his EPO and his accomplices. That is all I was saying to start with. Now perhaps you could point that out to Mrs John Murphy who claims Millar never admitted to any of this.

Tremendous. I certainly wasn't wrong about wasting my time if that's how you understand my posts.

 

[roundabout]

The current commander in chief throwing his predecessor under the bus shows that Millar went for the lowest hanging fruit.

 

[skidmark]

Wow guys. You are really turning on some hate here. I'm standing with the pmcg fella on this one. You guys are bashing David Millar, and without good reasoning or good cause.

For instance, the Landis quote. Millar is talking JUST LIKE YOU GUYS. He is saying "Landis should have come out first thing!" This is so exactly like one of your reasons to condemn Millar and others, I am in awe. Several of you are clearly demonstrating to me that your ability to be cynical outweighs everything. You are not being skeptical, and certainly not realists. Sorry, but I'm calling this one like I see it. You don't WANT to believe anybody - excepting Betsy A., O'Reilly, and Mike Anderson.

To clarify my own beef with Millar's response to Landis - I didn't mean it to suggest that I think he's upholding omerta, just that he sounds like a hypocritical jerk sometimes, without any empathy or understanding that not everyone had the same process admitting to doping that he did. I still err on the side of thinking he's clean.

 

[zigmeister]

Why does anybody care what Millar thinks these days regarding doping?

It is always funny how after guys are stone cold busted, or later after their careers/finances don't depend on cycling, do they come forward and start proclaiming how the sport needs to be cleaned up.

He is hypocritical like most of the former dopers.

Everyday, there is some new quote, article whatever..with Millar blathering on and on.

 

[Benotti69]

Nice of you to finally admit that Millar did in fact name sources for his EPO and his accomplices. That is all I was saying to start with. Now perhaps you could point that out to Mrs John Murphy who claims Millar never admitted to any of this.

Who got busted for selling EPO to Millar?

Who was Millar's accomplice?

 

[Zam_Olyas]

David Millar ‏@millarmind
I'm on Radio 5 Live at 17:15ish. Not talking about my trip to the supermarket.

 

[Don Quixote]

David Millar ‏@millarmind
I'm on Radio 5 Live at 17:15ish. Not talking about my trip to the supermarket.

One can only hope that McQuaids slight will encourage him to reach a little higher up the tree....

 

[Don Quixote]

One can only hope that McQuaids slight will encourage him to reach a little higher up the tree....

Yup - "At least one head needs to roll"

Slowly, slowly catchee monkey

 

[The Hitch]

I dont like millar going around telling everyone who is and isnt clean. Im getting tired of him always saying - "Wiggins won the tour de france clean" as if he was talking about Moncoutie or bassons. This is the same guy who last year told us Contador was clean.

 

[coinneach]

Millar has shifted his position on Pat Mc.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20034768

"Regarding the UCI, there needs to be change. Some will not resign, so they will have to be removed. If they don't and there isn't a change then it would have to be forced upon them.

Should UCI president Pat McQuaid resign? I dont know. He has to distance himself from former UCI chief Hein Verbruggen and accept the past. We have to get rid of Verbruggen as honorary president. "

OK, its not a big shift, but its sure not support.

 

[hrotha]

Millar has shifted his position on Pat Mc.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20034768

"Regarding the UCI, there needs to be change. Some will not resign, so they will have to be removed. If they don't and there isn't a change then it would have to be forced upon them.

Should UCI president Pat McQuaid resign? I dont know. He has to distance himself from former UCI chief Hein Verbruggen and accept the past. We have to get rid of Verbruggen as honorary president. "

OK, its not a big shift, but its sure not support.

No shift. He's basically saying that, if Pat distances himself from Hein, THEN he doesn't have to resign. But he doesn't know if Pat will do that, so the answer to "Should Pat resign?" is "I don't know".

Which is what he's been saying from the start, and it sickens me.

 

[Don Quixote]

No shift. He's basically saying that, if Pat distances himself from Hein, THEN he doesn't have to resign. But he doesn't know if Pat will do that, so the answer to "Should Pat resign?" is "I don't know".

Which is what he's been saying from the start, and it sickens me.

Agreed. He lacks the bottle to be the voice of the peloton.

The press are looking for something to run with and he won't give it to them.

Pathetic.