Amnesty for Australian cyclists??

Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
"with the possibility of several Australian riders and staff implicated by the evidence Mueller says Cycling Australia is taking the revelations very seriously."
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Amnesty? I think he means, "Sweep it under the carpet and carry on as you were."

Since when have ASADA, CA or AIS ever given a damn about doping?
 
Apr 7, 2010
612
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Amnesty? I think he means, "Sweep it under the carpet and carry on as you were."

Since when have ASADA, CA or AIS ever given a damn about doping?
i couldnt agree with this more

rogers and white should be looking down the barrel of 6 months to 2 years

but nothing will come of this in australia
 
May 20, 2010
718
0
0
While an individual may infer "amnesty for Aussies"...

I inferred that (any) proposed amnesty would be applied globally.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Australian side note relating to Pat's cycling family. Was news to me. You Aussies may know already:

"Australia has several links to Armstrong. He made his racing comeback in January 2009 at the Tour Down Under in Adelaide, and then last year, he raced professionally for the final time in the same event.

Tour Down Under race director Michael Turtur was unable to comment on the USADA findings yesterday as, in his role as vice-president with the International Cycling Union, he cannot comment until the union has officially released its statement on the matter."

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/ais-professor-triggered-red-alert-on-armstrong-blood-cells-20121011-27fr2.html
 
msjett said:
I think that there should be investigations and suspensions not amnesties...
The thing is, investigations are costly, complicated, and difficult to prove. USADA struck gold with this one. It combined many rare elements, without any of which the case never would have gone forward as it did. I see these elements as:

1) a high-profile professional cyclist who was on the inside track of a sophisticated doping program;

2) a cyclist who has been blacklisted from the sport because of his high-profile bust and has nothing to lose;

3) a cyclist who decides that he cares about the truth and wants to tell it.

Without any of these elements, not even Floyd speaks. And then,

4) a grand jury investigation due to the high-profile central figure. Without that you definitely don't get George and Levi, who I think are key in terms of credibility.

5) maybe most importantly, a culture where doping was open enough that you could get corroborating witness testimony from 11 former teammates. I don't know much about the inner workings of pro cycling, but I'm willing to bet that there is no one in the past 7 years who would be overt enough to have 11 former teammates have conclusive proof of him doping.

Imagine the cost of a single case, even if you could find evidence on increasingly-careful dopers. The threat of punishment still terrifies teammates, so silence reigns. Everyone wants their career to continue more than anything else.

With amnesty, it costs very little to hear stories, there is more incentive to tell them, and if you can get a few leading figures in cycling to be onside and tell what they know, it's possible that it will become the thing to do. Maybe not, as teams are still terrified of losing sponsors and don't want to make any waves. But I think it's the best shot, not only in terms of efficiency, but in terms of encouraging honesty.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Amnesty is a joke.

Levi Leipheimer just testifed before a grand friggin' jury and then gave a sworn, corrobrated by the feds affidavit about his doping history.

Apparently, nothing happened after 2006.

Bull friggin' dust.

And you amnesty lovers really think anything of value is going to come out of an amnesty?

You really think suddenly all the dopers are going to be happy to lose - their spots in the A teams, the race winnings, the contracts.

Doping = guaranteed place in the peloton. Otherwise, it's pot luck and hard work, and they (meaning the entire friggin peloton) are too used to getting the easy way out.

And no, I don't mean they don't train hard, I mean they can train however much they want with a little red gel squeeze from Mr Testosterone, and keep their Hct up with Mr EPO and lose weight easily by training 6/7 and use as much cortisone as it takes to cover the pain etc, etc, etc.

The real natural riders have to take a break every now and then, and recover, etc, etc, etc. They certainly don't dominate the peloton from March to August.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
...Since when have ASADA, CA or AIS ever given a damn about doping?
au contraire, Krebs Cycle has a PhD in AIS and has never never never in 10 years witnessed a needle being shared around. Not even by Mark French, Damian Hill or Ryan Bayley. It was hamburgers and coca cola. ;)

Dear Wiggo said:
...The real natural riders have to take a break every now and then, and recover, etc, etc, etc. They certainly don't dominate the peloton from March to August.
Ive been taking a break from 1996 to 2012 :eek:
 
pelodee said:
Hmmm, have a read about Mueller here
I THOUGHT I had seen his name quite recently. Another tosspot sports "administrator". I bet it was his uncle who banned Dawn Fraser, and his father who blackballed Peter Norman for Munich.

There was another one in the SMH at the same time, who is a rep on the UCI I think. Equally deluded. Kogoy wrote the article from memory.

reinforces my thoughts that the entire structure of cycling has to be dismantled, and start again with a constitution.

Rule #1: NO DUCKHEADS
 
Jul 16, 2012
201
0
0
Ferminal said:
lol, they already cleared White two years ago, no case to answer.

The amnesty thing is just in case another federation makes a move against an Australian.
Do you have a link for that? Cleared by ASADA?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS