OK i have read Cadels diary, and have had time to form an opinion. I am going to look at hrothas take on it to formulate my own thoughts. Before I do I will come straight out and say it is completely sterilised, not a single personal thought on display, and is completely inoffensive and non-confrontational. Because of this I believe this has been gone over by the PR guys, his manager, probably BMC and certainly Cycling Australia.
I hope that people remember that the events being uncovered mostly occurred seven or more years ago, amongst a minority of those involved in a sport which has already changed and moved on
hrotha said:
Blatant lie.
This involved a majority of those involved in the sport.
He omits that the Armstrong case goes up to 2010.
The sport hasn't moved on: the same people are in charge of the UCI, Padua shows doping is still widespread. Hell, there are now less tests than a couple of years ago.
Its not a blatant lie, its obfuscation. Careful use of words, very careful. By saying "events being uncovered" and "mostly" its pretty much limiting the comment to USADA vs LA, USPS and Discovery. You are correct hrotha in your observations based on an overall understanding and disregarding the specific exclusion words.
let's commend the authorities who are succeeding in the battle against doping
hrotha said:
Disgusting.
The authorities face very serious allegations they have to answer to after the USADA report. The authorities are not to be commended. Inasmuch as they've cleaned up the sport, they've done so reluctantly, and again, the tide has turned the last few years (less controls, rule-bending, cover-up attempts).
Again, there is nothing specific, very carefully worded, so we don't know WHICH authorities. We know "authority" USADA has done an excellent job, but we also know "authority" UCI has been labelled as corrupt. Hrotha you have summed up the actuality of the situation, the cycling establishment also knows this, so the comment is again obfuscation on purpose.
not on the front page of tabloid newspaper
hrotha said:
Blatant lie. Disgusting spin.
It's not on the front page of tabloids. It's everywhere, because it's THE BIGGEST EVENT IN THE HISTORY OF CYCLING. Whether he likes it or not. A few lines above he was saying it's all been blown out of proportion by sensationalist media. No, Cadel: this is HUGE by its own right. Don't try to downplay it.
On this one hrotha you have misinterpreted the comment. Its not saying at all that cycling is NOT on the front page, its saying it IS on the front pages
but for the wrong reason. This is the problem with snipping half a sentence as it does not show the overall intent of the statement. He is actually saying USADA investigation and Lances downfall will eventually take cycling from the from
doping news on front pages to
racing news.
but to a level playing field where the hard work, meticulous equipment preparation and natural ability are winning the big beautiful prestigious races.
hrotha said:
As of yet, unsubstantiated PR comment.
THIS is the actual company line. THIS is the message they are desperately trying to get out into the public domain. All the rest of the diary comment is actually froth and bubble to get THIS message across.
For those who are disappointed with the situation right now: do not dispair, do not abandon us now we are in our best years, preparing things for our most important moment yet - the future.
hrotha said:
Standard PR comment: let's focus on the future, we're all clean now because I say so. This is no different from what Contador said. He fails to understand there's no credibility while the UCI are in charge. At the same time, he's spent the better part of this statement saying this isn't that big of a deal - how can we trust the future will be better, when one of the guys who should be leading the peloton says it wasn't that bad in the first place?
Hrotha is completely correct, and this comment has been said several times - who was the latest, Talansky? Who got lambasted here. "Trust us". The problem being after 20 years of deception at the highest echelon, why should we trust anyone or anything? But again, this is the company line of the cycling establishment.
Hrothas personal summation, not Cadels diary"
hrotha said:
Nowhere does he condemn Armstrong, or Bruyneel, or anyone else. No mention of Verbruggen or McQuaid. Nothing. Just "believe in us because I say so", without any substance backing it, without taking a stance, and with some glaring lies which make up the core of this piece: that this was "a long time ago", that this has been "blown out of proportion by sensationalist media", and that "the UCI has won the fight against doping already".
I completely and categorically agree with hrotha's summation. Sums up my opinion exactly.
To reiterate, my own thoughts are that there is no way on earth Cadel Evans wrote that article. I don't think it was even his thoughts ghost written. No mention of specific concepts like "USADA investigation" let alone the names of the participants. Nothing. Nada. It could not be any more sterile if he tried. Now the average cyclist (and he is well above average) could not even string a sentence together without talking about the biggest names in the sport. Inconceivable. Because the names ARE the sport. Riders, bikes, gear. Its all names. We can all happily rattle off the names back to the war, because the sport from the beginning has been packaged as heroic deeds performed by heroes. And heroes have names. Its almost like The Illiad.
The second reason why Evans has not contributed a word to this article is the almost poetic language. Lets be honest here, comments like
"a level playing field where the hard work, meticulous equipment preparation and natural ability are winning the big beautiful prestigious races" and
"do not dispair, do not abandon us now we are in our best years, preparing things for our most important moment yet - the future" are NOT how Evans speaks.
The real issue is that the whole world have been waiting for wiggo and Evans to speak. The last two winners of the TdF. Evans has not been available for interviews by the major journos in the Australian press (I know this for a fact), and his agent has made a couple of blase comments. Now this article has popped up on his website.
So as far as Evans is concerned I read nothing into these comments. I don't believe they are his own, nor that they are his thoughts. What I find disappointing is that we STILL do not have his thoughts, nobody has stuck a microphone under his nose and asked the hard questions.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram