Cadel Evans is a Clean Champion

[onimod]

How does it affect you whether he does or doesn't though?
Surely you realise the ethical minefield that is life on planet earth.
I think it's fair to say that we have all made less than ethically perfect choices at times.
Why do you think Cadel is any different?
Do you realise that your "faith" just adds to the pressure that has lead to the position we are in?

 

[AussieEdge]

How does it affect you whether he does or doesn't though?
Surely you realise the ethical minefield that is life on planet earth.
I think it's fair to say that we have all made less than ethically perfect choices at times.
Why do you think Cadel is any different?
Do you realise that your "faith" just adds to the pressure that has lead to the position we are in?

Well how is that different to some who thinks he dopes

Does it changed them, is it the same for them?

If I nor it have no effect whatsoever as you claim , it should add no pressure at all all I have done is stated my view, it's the 'must dope' bridge that's doing the forcing of views around here

Bit hypocritical to be honest

 

[Zultronova]

Nobody knows for sure if Cadel Evans has doped or not at any stage of his career.
But this is professional cycling and given the culture of doping within its ranks I would remain highly skeptical.

 

[onimod]

Well how is that different to some who thinks he dopes

Does it changed them, is it the same for them?

If I nor it have no effect whatsoever as you claim , it should add no pressure at all all I have done is stated my view, it's the 'must dope' bridge that's doing the forcing of views around here
Bit hypocritical to be honest

This isn't a question about whether he does or doesn't - it's about why it matters.
I can also guarantee your that your faith most definitely adds pressure to Cadel - it's fundamental to the human condition.
Do you think your faith adds to your life in some way?
Are you proud to associate yourself with him because he's a winner, because of the way he goes about competing or is it just a nationality thing?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

How much is a cup of coffee in Australia?

$2.50 - $5.00+

We have Gloria Jeans, Starbucks here too.

 

[AussieEdge]

This isn't a question about whether he does or doesn't - it's about why it matters.
I can also guarantee your that your faith most definitely adds pressure to Cadel - it's fundamental to the human condition.
Do you think your faith adds to your life in some way?
Are you proud to associate yourself with him because he's a winner, because of the way he goes about competing or is it just a nationality thing?

It effects me no more than it affects anyone else on the forum - pure and simple

can I say all of the above as far as reasons why not in the order you have put them in (put the winner bit last and you might be better correct.

Guess what I'm not sorry for any of it

 

[Maxiton]

Thanks

Without faith you have nothing and I have faith in Cadel

And I'm no more naive or wrong than the believe everyone does it

How much is a cup of coffee in Australia?

$2.50 - $5.00+

We have Gloria Jeans, Starbucks here too.

There you go, then. "Faith" - plus anywhere from $2.50 to $5.00 - will buy you a cup of coffee in Australia.

 

[onimod]

It effects me no more than it affects anyone else on the forum - pure and simple

can I say all of the above as far as reasons why not in the order you have put them in (put the winner bit last and you might be better correct.

Guess what I'm not sorry for any of it

I'm not arguing with you and you're more than welcome to have whatever reasons you wish. I'm not suggesting in any way that you need to be "sorry" for anything.
Personally I'd like Cadel to be paniagua but I think it's unlikely given what we know about the effects of doping it's prevalence in cycling.
What I don't understand is the faith bit because if your reasons for supporting him are yours and yours alone I'm not not sure why you feel the need to project them on to others and engage in a debate to defend him.
If I may I'd like to ask a hypothetical:
Let's just say that Cadel comes out and admits he's been doping for a decade to earn a living in a sport he loves and can't live with the lie any longer and he's retiring to spend the rest of his life as an activist for the Nepalese.
Do you continue to "support" him?

 

[Shortleg]

Cuddles on Schumi ...

This just in at ABC:

Australia's 2011 Tour De France winner Cadel Evans has admitted meeting the Italian doctor at the heart of the Lance Armstrong scandal more than a decade ago but said they never discussed doping.

Evans, who was Australia's first winner of the endurance classic, said in an e-mail to SBS television that he met with Michele Ferrari to undergo a test to ascertain his suitability for road racing.

Ferrari was banned from involvement in cycling for life after the publication of the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)'s report alleging that Armstrong won his record seven Tour titles on the back of a highly sophisticated doping regime.

"My only motive at the time ... was to understand my capabilities as a road rider," Evans wrote.

"At that time, Mr Ferrari's opinion was very highly regarded by teams and team managers, and therefore helpful for me to gain opportunities with road teams.

"There was never any discussion of doping (with Dr Ferrari) or any sign of anything illegal.

"I have never seen (him) or had contact before or after this test."

Cycling's governing body UCI will announce later on Monday whether it has ratified the USADA's sanctions, including stripping Armstrong of his Tour titles.

Reuters

 

[Tinman]

Let's just say that Cadel comes out and admits he's been doping for a decade to earn a living in a sport he loves and can't live with the lie any longer and he's retiring to spend the rest of his life as an activist for the Nepalese.
Do you continue to "support" him?

Your name is not Jeffrey Robertson by any chance? Brilliant "Hypotheticals" question. And a debate like this does add value.

I would feel disappointed, try to understand the rationale for the deceipt (within the decrepit UCI framework), but yes support his Nepal activist cause. The important part is that his Nepal cause presumably is of no personal financial gain to him.

I enjoy the hypothetical approach. Next question plse.

 

[Jalina]

Let's say you're the Cadel Evans of a few years ago, and your doc/trainer/coach comes to you and says, Cadel, you are arguably the most physically gifted athlete in the peloton. You know that. You should be *dominating* these grand tours, not just winning them. And yet you're not dominating, not even winning. I think we both know why. Look, I respect your decision to win or lose on your own abilities but as things stand now you have little chance of ever getting your due in the sport of cycling. I think you should give further thought to what you are and aren't willing to do, and if you find you can't relax just a bit the restrictions you've placed on yourself, perhaps you should think about another sport - of course, I don't know which sport."

What do you think your response would be? Can you see a rider of Cadel's caliber saying something like, "Here's what I can live with: I'm willing to take vitamins and minerals, and to re-infuse my own blood. It is my blood, after all. Win or lose, that's as far as I go."

Would that put a rider on the same level of culpability as, say, Armstrong or Pantanni, or some other inveterate doper?

That's the choice every rider, every athlete, has to make. By the rules of the sport, if a rider does what you suggest, they are a doper, a cheat. For me that distinction is simple, but I don't for one second suggest it is an easy choice for any athlete to make and I do understand why they do it. But every rider that decides to dope "just a bit", makes it that much harder for any future rider to not have to dope at all.

I guess that's why we hold men such as Bassons in such high esteem, because the choice was not easy.

 

[Jalina]

ummmm....you have successfully cherry picked one sentence out of a rather long post and completely misinterpreted the entire effort. Thanks.

I make NO apologies for any doping. Never have in what, 500 posts? That sentence was alluding to the available information that I listed NOT showing him to be in the Ricco class of doping, which makes it impossible to point the finger with complete authority. Which is why this thread exists. That is all.

So get off your high horse.

Yes, and I made it very clear I was cherry picking one sentence from your post and only addressing that sentence, I did not misinterpret the entire effort, I addressed one sentence. I also made it clear I was addressing the overall tone of the thread, not your post, the thread. Perhaps that wasn't as clear as I intended it to be. The bulk of my post was directed at the thread. I was specific when I was addressing that sentence.

I only addressed something in your post, I did not have a go at you personally. It would be nice if you could extend the same courtesy.

 

[Galic Ho]

you do realise I highlighted the busted dopers?

No you didn't. Perriero was never busted. You highlighted who you thought was doping and who you think is clean. And by doing so you showed your hand and it's faults. Menchov being absent for notice is risible. It's a joke. Why? He is the guy on paper who mirrors Evans most in riding style and palmares. If Menchov could win a GT so could Evans...it was said multiple times on this forum before Evans pulled it off last year. It is also old news he was hitting insane climbing outputs in the 2009 Giro, numbers only Contador was hitting. But you missed that didn't you?

It is cute though you didn't mention the Pope or Sastre. Want to explain how good Sastre was from 2007 to the Giro 2009? Four GT's four podiums. That is how good. I'd love you to explain how he did it clean. Heck if Leipheimer loses his 3rd from the 2007 Tour, Sastre will now have 6 podiums from 6 GTs from 2006 TdF to the 2009 Giro...all clean of course.

As I said, some people have a lot of back reading to go over.

 

[Galic Ho]

ummmm....you have successfully cherry picked one sentence out of a rather long post and completely misinterpreted the entire effort. Thanks.

I make NO apologies for any doping. Never have in what, 500 posts? That sentence was alluding to the available information that I listed NOT showing him to be in the Ricco class of doping, which makes it impossible to point the finger with complete authority. Which is why this thread exists. That is all.

So get off your high horse.

What about Ricco? Do remember Mike Tomolaris in 2008? Do remember his vile appearance and reaction after Ricco was busted? I've never seen that before from him regarding any doper, despite their equal dirtiness.

Ricco was used as a bashing post from the high and mighty dumb c&$ts in the media who cannot see the forest from the tree trunk stuck in their own eye socket. He was easy to pick on, because of his brashness. At the same time everyone else was oh so clean.Just another attitude held and championed by the sheep involved in cycling. The plebs who do as they are told and with a .

So Sandgroper, are you one of them?

 

[Galic Ho]

It effects me no more than it affects anyone else on the forum - pure and simple

can I say all of the above as far as reasons why not in the order you have put them in (put the winner bit last and you might be better correct.

Guess what I'm not sorry for any of it

And that explains why you'd be ripe for a good old con. Your wording belies an underlying principle. That whether one person, a note worthy sportsman, has or has not doped, affects everyone equally.

That's also another cute viewpoint I've seen the past few weeks, but so horrible obtuse and bogus it simply must be chuckled at. How any person reacts to news of doping is NEVER equal to another person. It comes down to their perception of the sport, the anti-doping process, their access to key information, their beliefs and views regarding these things coupled with their lack or trust thereof in said doper. Similar yes, but only among like minded individuals. You have massive paradigms and cognitive shifts between what will happen. Those who already reasoned doping took place, won't be shocked. The loyal believing non questioning person will be hurt and upset and the fanboy? Still believing like a good old soldier.

See, it is never equal. How you missed that is beyond me. It's common sense.

 

[AussieEdge]

And that explains why you'd be ripe for a good old con. Your wording belies an underlying principle. That whether one person, a note worthy sportsman, has or has not doped, affects everyone equally.

That's also another cute viewpoint I've seen the past few weeks, but so horrible obtuse and bogus it simply must be chuckled at. How any person reacts to news of doping is NEVER equal to another person. It comes down to their perception of the sport, the anti-doping process, their access to key information, their beliefs and views regarding these things coupled with their lack or trust thereof in said doper. Similar yes, but only among like minded individuals. You have massive paradigms and cognitive shifts between what will happen. Those who already reasoned doping took place, won't be shocked. The loyal believing non questioning person will be hurt and upset and the fanboy? Still believing like a good old soldier.

See, it is never equal. How you missed that is beyond me. It's common sense.

He also asked if my faith added anything to my life as well - which wouldn't be any different to normal as I'm not a full on preacher

Of course I would react differently we all do - he is just using my word 'faith' to turn on me. That's got nothing to do with ones reaction

How you turned that around to see fanboyism is beyond me.

Anyone who knows me knows that if I share a view I don't give a phuck if I'm the only one...hardly soldier material

Believing in one rider ability to be clean when 90% here think everyone dopes should be proof of that

 

[sittingbison]

No you didn't. Perriero was never busted. You highlighted who you thought was doping and who you think is clean. And by doing so you showed your hand and it's faults....

GH, you need to take some chill pills. You are making a series of assumptions about me and what I posted that are based soley on your own opinions.

I simply highlighted the KNOWN dopers. Oscar was named by Landis, and I understand has admitted doping. Don't ask for a link, I cant remember it. It seems to be well known though, perhaps someone else can supply?

There is no hidden agenda or ignorance at all in the highlighted names.

 

[sittingbison]

What about Ricco? Do remember Mike Tomolaris in 2008? ...Just another attitude held and championed by the sheep involved in cycling....So Sandgroper, are you one of them?

Chill out Garlic Ho, what has got into you?

I have highlighted the KNOWN dopers in the top 10 TdF that Evans was behind and in front of - to make it clear where he was in relation to them all. There is no opinion one way or the other on any of them including Menchov. Of course I know about him, Sastre etc. however no matter what we think they are not busted.

I have then mentioned Ricco (sore thumb obvious) and Armstrong (revealed in Evidence) as being EASY to spot as opposed to the more intangible aspect of Evans, which makes it more difficult to definitively accuse him of doping. Which is why this thread exists. Get a grip.

You reckon I'm a sheep? A pleb? I politely say get frakked.

 

[sittingbison]

...I only addressed something in your post, I did not have a go at you personally. It would be nice if you could extend the same courtesy.

Sorry if I have misinterpreted. As I said to onimod above, I agreed with the content of what you said, but disagreed with using my post as the target.

 

[Jalina]

Sorry if I have misinterpreted. As I said to onimod above, I agreed with the content of what you said, but disagreed with using my post as the target.

No worries.

 

[The Hitch]

One Aussie to another. Get your head read champ and lay off the weed. It's messing with your thinking.

Sastre clean? In 2008 he climbed Alpe d'Huez two minutes faster than anyone and cracked the 40 minute barrier with a 39'30" time. Evans time ironically was almost exactly the same as he did in 2011. And that was still faster than Lemonds best time. Sastre's time is WAY TOO FAST to be that of a clean rider. Rubiera in the 80s didn't crack 41', so how did Carlos? Extra blood bag, like the one Kohl wanted, that's what won him the Tour in 2008.

Menchov??? WTF you silly silly fool? Denis I have a Suspicion Index rating for the 2010 Tour from the UCI of 9 Menchov and I also outgunned a juiced to the gills Danilo Di Luca in the 2009 Giro and to boot I have my name all throughout the Human Plasam files. Yeah the Pope is clean too.

Seriously, get your act together. Cadel has kept up with all the dopers because he is a doper. Simple. The level they were riding at in 2007 was phenomenal. If Lemond had raced that year he'd have been 20-30 minutes back no problem. Take Levi in that race for example. No where near Evans in the first chrono. Final chrono, puts 50 seconds in Cadel. Both winners, Levi and Vino were doping on that leg and Cadel came second in both, a minute down. Even Cancellara was nowhere close.

But wait...I'll raise everyone Basso. Gosh it's gold how some guys around here though Basso was clean in 2010 at the Giro and now...well it's damn clear he was doping. Mapei Clinic with Aldo Sassi's two star pupils does not equal clean cycling. Less doped than others. Heck yes, I'd wager they are doing less than others, but for the big wins, the Giro and Tour, they went all out.

Evans will not say much at all. He can have ALL his results stripped. He will not make a peep. I'd bet good coin that if people in Cycling Australia know about Evans doping, it will be kept quiet and covered up. Evans role in the legacy of Australian cycling is deep. He will be protected, very protected.

PS: I like both Evans and Basso. They have an element of class and air about them. I don't think they doped, I know they do, because everyone else does, but I'm cool with that. It's how the sport has run and yes it does need to change, but I will not begrudge them for going along with it, nor will I ridicule those who talked to USADA. People need a platform to talk about what they have done so the sport can move forward and build a future without drugs and full disclosure on what happened. But there is the problem...tell the truth, you lose all results.

Look at Levi. He was clearly clean this season, but 2007-2011, with his wins in Cali and Suisse and numerous GT placings it was obvious doping. If the sport were clean it would look like the 80s. One or two guys would be doing the top times and the rest would be miles back. They aren't, so many are doing what Lemond did and more, thus as far as I can see doping is still accepted within the peloton, the difference is now, the PR message is WE are clean, the OLD guys were dirty, rather than EVERYONE is clean. Pro-cyclists are trying to hoodwink the public AGAIN and I am not buying it.

Some good points there.

 

[The Hitch]

Thanks

Without faith you have nothing and I have faith in Cadel

If i have faith that i can fly, will i be able to pull it off tomorrow?

And an ozzie July fan believing that the ozzie July rider is clean because he is the ozzie, definitely is.more.naive than seasoned cycling fans who have been lied too over and over.for decades, not giving their trust to riders with cadels history.

 

[Shardi]

He also asked if my faith added anything to my life as well - which wouldn't be any different to normal as I'm not a full on preacher

Of course I would react differently we all do - he is just using my word 'faith' to turn on me. That's got nothing to do with ones reaction

How you turned that around to see fanboyism is beyond me.

Anyone who knows me knows that if I share a view I don't give a phuck if I'm the only one...hardly soldier material

Believing in one rider ability to be clean when 90% here think everyone dopes should be proof of that

Wow.. The term naive was raised to new levels.

 

[AussieEdge]

Wow.. The term naive was raised to new levels.

rather be niave than cycinal all my life

 

[Parrulo]

i never really understood the double standards applied to evans, in 07 he was just 30 odd seconds behind contador which is far from the "minutes behind super doper contador" people make it look like. in 08 he lost the tour because of his own lack of a winner mentality( which he gained in 09 after his worlds win) and not because of lack of form/talent/power, he simply waited to long to start chasing sastre properly.

are we supposed to believe that every1 that has ever beaten evans is a doped up donkey, honorable mentiones being contador and sastre and that evans is the most and probably the only super talented rider around because he has good lab results and won some races on MTB? hell, since when is mountain bike even a good measure for talent? talent is where the money is and that is on the road