At what point did cycling become "clean"?

[sniper]

We can't have that..he should, he must condemn it.

but seriously now, if there existed such a thing as a clean peloton, wouldn't you expect to see a certain degree of astonishment among the members of this peloton when confronted with the fact that an unrepentant EPO doper earns a place in the Giro's hall of fame?

It's still early though, we might get some reactions in the coming days.

 

[pmcg76]

but seriously now, if there existed such a thing as a clean peloton, wouldn't you expect to see a certain degree of astonishment among the members of this peloton when confronted with the fact that an unrepentant EPO doper earns a place in the Giro's hall of fame?

It's still early though, we might get some reactions in the coming days.

So you say current riders who back their current team-mates as being clean should keep their mouths shut but then should open then to condemn riders who were riding over 20 years and have never definitively been proven to have doped.

This is why I cannot take you serioulsy.

 

[sniper]

So you say current riders who back their current team-mates as being clean should keep their mouths shut but then should open then to condemn riders who were riding over 20 years and have never definitively been proven to have doped.

This is why I cannot take you serioulsy.

you gotta be kiddin me.
everybody except pmcg76 knows roche was an epo doper.

why tha f is an epo doper being immortalized as some hero in a time where the fans are made to believe in some major split between the dark EPO-fuelled 90s/2000s vs. the post-2008 EPO-less clean generation?

of course i can see that it's too much to ask of a pro-rider to comment on this one. But a guy like kittel has called out second-tier non-proven dopers so let's see if he has the guts to call out a legendary (non?)proven doper. i doubt it.

as benotti said, a case like this one is the perfect illustration that the culture of doping is still there and that the desire to clean house is close to zero.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

but seriously now, if there existed such a thing as a clean peloton, wouldn't you expect to see a certain degree of astonishment among the members of this peloton when confronted with the fact that an unrepentant EPO doper earns a place in the Giro's hall of fame?

It's still early though, we might get some reactions in the coming days.

No, I would expect someone to comment if asked directly and the new riders to greet it with the complete apathy it deserves.

 

[pmcg76]

you gotta be kiddin me.
everybody except pmcg76 knows roche was an epo doper.

why tha f is an epo doper being immortalized as some hero in a time where the fans are made to believe in some major split between the dark EPO-fuelled 90s/2000s vs. the post-2008 EPO-less clean generation?

of course i can see that it's too much to ask of a pro-rider to comment on this one. But a guy like kittel has called out second-tier non-proven dopers so let's see if he has the guts to call out a legendary (non?)proven doper. i doubt it.

as benotti said, a case like this one is the perfect illustration that the culture of doping is still there and that the desire to clean house is close to zero.

I think most pros would be more concerned with whether their current team-mates are riding clean rather than about some rider from over 20 years ago going into the Giro hall of fame. Who should go into the Giro hall of fame that wouldn't fall into this category of ex-doper?

I bet most current pros barely remember Roche even riding and are probably even unaware that he appeared in the Conconi files. You think pro cyclists sit on here worrying about who was doping over 20 years ago. I think was it EBH who said he knew nothing about the history of the sport before about 2006/07. There are probably plenty more like him.

Why should riders not be allowed to express their belief in their own team-mates and then be expected to comment on some rider they are unlikely to even remember or know much about.

 

[sniper]

No, I would expect someone to comment if asked directly and the new riders to greet it with the complete apathy it deserves.

I think most pros would be more concerned with whether their current team-mates are riding clean rather than about some rider from over 20 years ago going into the Giro hall of fame. Who should go into the Giro hall of fame that wouldn't fall into this category of ex-doper?

I bet most current pros barely remember Roche even riding and are probably even unaware that he appeared in the Conconi files. You think pro cyclists sit on here worrying about who was doping over 20 years ago. I think was it EBH who said he knew nothing about the history of the sport before about 2006/07. There are probably plenty more like him.

Why should riders not be allowed to express their belief in their own team-mates and then be expected to comment on some rider they are unlikely to even remember or know much about.

fair comments.
anyway, goes to show how much RCS value clean sport.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

fair comments.
anyway, goes to show how much RCS value clean sport.

I don't mean to pick out your point.
But that is a trite comment - RCS do not care about a clean sport, they also do not care about a dirty sport, they care about profit.

Nor indeed is it their job or role to 'clean' up the sport.
But - having said all that, it does not mean they have to recognise Roche either.

 

[sniper]

I don't mean to pick out your point.
But that is a trite comment - RCS do not care about a clean sport, they also do not care about a dirty sport, they care about profit.

Nor indeed is it their job or role to 'clean' up the sport.
But - having said all that, it does not mean they have to recognise Roche either.

agreed.

i guess the heart of the matter is that this shows the tragically thin line between being a criminal and a hero.