pmcg76 said:
So you actually admit to being hypocritical and yet you are slamming other people for being hypocritical.
I dont think it was wrong that Contador was punished and am not happy that this case took so long as it let Contador ride and win which is all now scrubbed. Whatever people believe of Contador doping, what he was punished for and what was stated in the report leaves a very bad aftertaste. People are behaving like he was busted for EPO or blood doping which of course is also very likely. Thats not the case so calling for a 4 year ban is ridiculous.
You are so full of it, who really believed 2007 was going to see a new era of clean cycling. The only time in cycling history that I seen a genuine belief that cycling was really going to clean up was in 1999 and reading back through the stories, it did clean up a bit for a very short period. Of course who arrived on the scene in 1999.
The French and people like Walsh and Kimmage knew the score from the start but were silenced by Lance's beloved 'I had cancer so no way would I dope' card. I never seen Contador pulling the same trick with his illness.
it's likely...but not the case? huh?...Do you even follow yourself?
Blood doping was exactly what WADA and the UCI were accusing him of, and was what CAS could not entirely rule out, only stating it was not the likeliest reason for his fail. What is it with some people thinking that EPO or blood doping is worse than other doping? Doping is doping.
As to the second bolded part....your memory of cycling history has I fear been slightly swayed by subsequent events and not reality. 98, when half the race threatened to quit because of what had happened, did not in anyones eyes usher in a new dawn, it merely confirmed what most already knew, that most riders tacitly endorsed "medical" preparation and did not want that changing.
What made 2006 different was that it was the first time a TDF winner had been busted. It had sent out a message....it doesn't matter any more who you are.
See this is the problem with "reading back through the old stories"...or to the rest of us "wikipedia"....some people's "memories" of events is very much tarnished by their opinions and beliefs from the present.
And Walsh and Kimmage did not know the score "from that start". Walsh was a big fan of LA originally, until he fell out of favour, and LA confidential wasn't published until 2004. Kimmage didn't get in on the act until then either. Only Bassons said something in 99, and the rest of the peloton and the media hardly came racing to his side in support.
Contador has had plenty to say about why he "would never dope", whether they are related to his Brain Hemmorage are kind of irrelevant, though frankly, I am sure they would have been just as risible as Steakgate.
As to his narcissism generally, maybe his foundation might give us some better clues....
http://www.albertocontador.com/prensa.detalle.php?id=397