Oh this is hilarious, I wouldn't have thought the comment on twitter was worth a second glance. But here it is getting more analysis then a Lance Armstrong urine sample. But honestly who really gives a rats what it means. 
-
Willing to volunteer time as a moderator? We'd love to hear from you!
- Mar 18, 2009
- 2,442
- 0
- 0
Was it a dig at Valverde? If so, was it for racing and winning the Vuelta when banned by CONI, or for his collusion with Contador in the Dauphine? Or was it a dig at the management of the race as highlighted by the big ring?
You know what? I don't care. Twittering is just so annoying. Lance is annoying. And now Cadel has joined the ranks of annoying twits.
Cadel is a good racer. He should let his legs do the talking and zip his mouth closed. Everything he says is interpreted as whining (or whinging in Aussie speak), so he cannot win if he opens his mouth. The media know he is good for a story because they know he will trip over his own tongue at some stage and on a fairly regular basis.
As for Valverde - he doped in the past (with probably every other top contender). I have long stated my views on the current CONI case - I do not think Valverde should be sanctioned despite his obvious guilt because he is just a scapegoat for the whole Operation Puerto fiasco. Get everyone or get no one. Did Valverde dope this year? A host of people would say yes. But working under the assumption that Evans is clean, is it that unbelievable that a clean Valverde can beat a clean Evans by a minute and a half when Cadel lost that minus 8 seconds on the wheel change?
You know what? I don't care. Twittering is just so annoying. Lance is annoying. And now Cadel has joined the ranks of annoying twits.
Cadel is a good racer. He should let his legs do the talking and zip his mouth closed. Everything he says is interpreted as whining (or whinging in Aussie speak), so he cannot win if he opens his mouth. The media know he is good for a story because they know he will trip over his own tongue at some stage and on a fairly regular basis.
As for Valverde - he doped in the past (with probably every other top contender). I have long stated my views on the current CONI case - I do not think Valverde should be sanctioned despite his obvious guilt because he is just a scapegoat for the whole Operation Puerto fiasco. Get everyone or get no one. Did Valverde dope this year? A host of people would say yes. But working under the assumption that Evans is clean, is it that unbelievable that a clean Valverde can beat a clean Evans by a minute and a half when Cadel lost that minus 8 seconds on the wheel change?
The irony of being mocked by someone analysing a bunch of pro-cyclist comment analysers is noted.
Loser
Valverde is the bigger loser that is for sure. Valverde wins a number of big races every year. May even win the world champs this year to go on the great track record.
Cadel never wins anything then crys foul and makes excuses for his failings. What a loser. Even manages to convince David Harmon of how unfortunate he is and how harshly he is treated.
Thinking that Valverde is doping any more than Evans at the moment is ridiculous.
Puerto as explained by the man in the centre Fuentes some of the riders they accuse they got wrong. Some were right. On Valverde no comment. Lots of people could be involved not known and some mistakes have been made. No other sports and nearly 200 athletes involved have prosecuted anyone for doping just cycling. How fair is that.
auscyclefan94 said:
Valverde is the bigger loser that is for sure. Valverde wins a number of big races every year. May even win the world champs this year to go on the great track record.
Cadel never wins anything then crys foul and makes excuses for his failings. What a loser. Even manages to convince David Harmon of how unfortunate he is and how harshly he is treated.
Thinking that Valverde is doping any more than Evans at the moment is ridiculous.
Puerto as explained by the man in the centre Fuentes some of the riders they accuse they got wrong. Some were right. On Valverde no comment. Lots of people could be involved not known and some mistakes have been made. No other sports and nearly 200 athletes involved have prosecuted anyone for doping just cycling. How fair is that.
There are always going to be those people who have some **** to say when they are way down the block or across the street. Evans is a child bully and deserves a good Spanish smack in the mouth,Cadel please use a Wolfmother song or Crowded House, loosen up your thong and walk on.With the way he is always crying twitter would seem not to have enough room to voice his world of complaints. In the old days he would have been hooked and not helped up off the pavement. When Armstrong is ****ed off he chases you down and ruins your race. If your in his face he calls you a pussy to yours. It would seem that dopers and mammas boys should be separated. Cadel is better suited for women's racing where sucking wheel and bellowing about everything are common place. If only Gesink had pinched him into the fence...another lost chance.
Never understood why Evans gets so much flak (esp here in Holland)
Is it the high pitched voice?
If he doesn't attack he is boring and a wheel sucker
If he does attack he is not good enough and shouldn't bother
For the record if there is one "veteran" GC guy in the peloton who has consistently (since his early days at the AIS and in MTB) demonstrated himself to be a supreme talent (VO2 max round 90 I heard?) and performed at a high level without ever doing anything in the "too good to be true" enhanced performance category.
He isn't an ex-classics man who lost weight (or just said he did) and then started climbing and TTing like a freak, and to my knowledge he has never been implicated in any doping scandals. How many current GC riders can claim that? Hell some of them even have books written about their misdemeanors!
Let's give the guy a break - if i'd just lost to Valv.piti (banned in Italy) i'd be pretty annoyed too.
Is it the high pitched voice?
If he doesn't attack he is boring and a wheel sucker
If he does attack he is not good enough and shouldn't bother
For the record if there is one "veteran" GC guy in the peloton who has consistently (since his early days at the AIS and in MTB) demonstrated himself to be a supreme talent (VO2 max round 90 I heard?) and performed at a high level without ever doing anything in the "too good to be true" enhanced performance category.
He isn't an ex-classics man who lost weight (or just said he did) and then started climbing and TTing like a freak, and to my knowledge he has never been implicated in any doping scandals. How many current GC riders can claim that? Hell some of them even have books written about their misdemeanors!
Let's give the guy a break - if i'd just lost to Valv.piti (banned in Italy) i'd be pretty annoyed too.
- Jun 18, 2009
- 1,086
- 1
- 0
TRDean said:
msjett said:Oh this is hilarious, I wouldn't have thought the comment on twitter was worth a second glance. But here it is getting more analysis then a Lance Armstrong urine sample. But honestly who really gives a rats what it means.
+1 on both of these comments.
Everyone has a right to be pissed off at Valverde winning..... especially someone like Basso who "served time" for OP while Valverde did not.
This thread, however, is a joke. A twitter comment referencing a song and no mention of Valverde?! One thing Cadel has never been accused of (until now) is being cryptic when he is pissed off at someone. If he was upset at Valverde winning, he probably would have come out and said so directly.
ak-zaaf said:
Better than nothing though IMO.
And it's not like he'll get sued for it either.
Unfortunately it seems in cycling if you speak out too explicitly you stand to lose everything.
Cobber said:
I dunno; I read the comment when it was posted, before the forum threads and news stories and the 'methods you've abused' line jumped out at me.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 8,660
- 16
- 17,510
Interesting quote from Paolo Bettini in la Gazzetta dello Sport today (paraphrasing):
J: "What do you think of Valverde's Vuelta victory?"
PB: "Well the issue is sensitive, CONI set out to find the answer, they did so now we know, and so it was up to the UCI to take definitive action. But for some reason the UCI showed no interest in the matter. Whereas Basso and few others have had to take the full penalty for everyone's (in OP) crime. In any case OP needs to be gotten passed...."
So esentially Bettini finds it disappointing that Valve-Piti won, that it is even worse that the UCI did nothing to support CONI, but that we should "get passed" OP...
Is the guy running for political office??? Because his position is as conservitive and PC as what the UCI and the Spanish have done. So disappointing.
J: "What do you think of Valverde's Vuelta victory?"
PB: "Well the issue is sensitive, CONI set out to find the answer, they did so now we know, and so it was up to the UCI to take definitive action. But for some reason the UCI showed no interest in the matter. Whereas Basso and few others have had to take the full penalty for everyone's (in OP) crime. In any case OP needs to be gotten passed...."
So esentially Bettini finds it disappointing that Valve-Piti won, that it is even worse that the UCI did nothing to support CONI, but that we should "get passed" OP...
Is the guy running for political office??? Because his position is as conservitive and PC as what the UCI and the Spanish have done. So disappointing.
- May 18, 2009
- 3,757
- 0
- 0
rhubroma said:
Bettini? The one threatening to boycott races a few years ago in protest of testing? He's not gonna make waves.
Yes, let's start letting other national federations investigate riders from other countries. Then, UCI fall right in line. That's not how it works....if that is being promoted now then change the rules. Basso is Italian and under CONI, Piti is not. End of story.
Cad
Guy was trained up took third. Deserves one better(at least) because Valve.
should have sat out 09 Vuelta.
Valverde is dirty and puts stain on pro-cycling.
Whiner Cadel deserved 2nd or better.
Reason Valv. raced is because the race was in Spain and organisers wanted to appease the Spainish fans.
Valv. is a straight up cheater.
Guy was trained up took third. Deserves one better(at least) because Valve.
should have sat out 09 Vuelta.
Valverde is dirty and puts stain on pro-cycling.
Whiner Cadel deserved 2nd or better.
Reason Valv. raced is because the race was in Spain and organisers wanted to appease the Spainish fans.
Valv. is a straight up cheater.
- Jul 9, 2009
- 7,623
- 974
- 19,680
flicker said:
An accused cheater, only convicted in a country with no real jurisdiction.
How does his "cheating" differenciate him from Contador Armstrong Wiggens Evans Schleck(s) etc. etc. etc.?
- Jul 9, 2009
- 7,623
- 974
- 19,680
Cobber said:
No, you are right and I didn't mean to imply anything in the way of formal charges. Only that they are most likely on similar medical programs and so are also "cheating". Also you could have thrown F. Schleck in there with Armstrong and Contador IMO.
I do believe sport must be clean and cheaters must be banned from playing the game. But most discussions regarding this issue tend to mix aspects of sports rules and state law in a dangerous way.
If I kick someone on the street and break his leg, I can be taken to court. If I do that playing a football competition, I can just be banned from playing a few matches, but cannot be taken to court. There is a clear separation between sport and state in this case.
Unfortunately, this is not the case for doping. I can consume cocaine or any other drug and I cannot be taken to court for that (at least in my country). I'm free to harm myself. However, I cannot sell cocaine, and I cannot keep at home 1 kg of cocaine claiming that is for my own use. I'm not free to harm others' health.
If the use of drugs in sport is against the sport rules, it must be prosecuted at the expense of the sports authorities (federations, Olympic committee) and competition organisers. I don't want taxpayer money being spent on this. And I don't want Congress and Government (particularly in a democratic country) surrender to the demands of private organisations such as sport federations or the Olympic Committee to enact laws on the subject and treat cheaters like criminals.
That being said, OP was a public case against a doctor for bad medical practices. He was just accused of knowingly harming the health of others. Form the point of view of the law, his patients were victims even if they knew what they were doing (or intending to do), and their identities should have never been published.
Unfortunately, the Spanish Justice did a very bad job allowing the leak of some identities (only cyclists, as some have said) and the scandal was served.
In the Spring of 2008, the Spanish Government asked all sport federations whose teams or athletes had not qualified for the Beijing Olympics to renew their governing bodies (following an agreement between the Government and the Olympic sports federations) to prepare as soon as possible for the next Olympic cycle. This included the football federation, but UEFA told the Government that if elections for president of the federation were forced the national football team would be banned from the Eurocup. If you remember the result of Eurocup 2008 you guess what was the decision.
I'm sorry, but if sports authorities think they are beyond common law and Government agreements their activities should be banned. They should run their private games and enforce their private rules with their private resources. And they should be sued if they don't abide by the state's laws.
I'm not defending cheaters. I'm defending a clear separation between sport and state and the submission of sport to state's law. Under such premises, if CONI has blood samples from OP, CONI should be sued for the illegal obtention of those samples. Yes, I know, it would be easier to sue the Vatican Church for whatever.
And if CONI, UCI or WADA want to catch Valv.piti or any other cheater, send the vampires to wherever he is every day, pay the vampires with your own money and do not involve the Police or the state's Justice in your private game. And do not complain because the Government and the state's Justice does not help you.
If I kick someone on the street and break his leg, I can be taken to court. If I do that playing a football competition, I can just be banned from playing a few matches, but cannot be taken to court. There is a clear separation between sport and state in this case.
Unfortunately, this is not the case for doping. I can consume cocaine or any other drug and I cannot be taken to court for that (at least in my country). I'm free to harm myself. However, I cannot sell cocaine, and I cannot keep at home 1 kg of cocaine claiming that is for my own use. I'm not free to harm others' health.
If the use of drugs in sport is against the sport rules, it must be prosecuted at the expense of the sports authorities (federations, Olympic committee) and competition organisers. I don't want taxpayer money being spent on this. And I don't want Congress and Government (particularly in a democratic country) surrender to the demands of private organisations such as sport federations or the Olympic Committee to enact laws on the subject and treat cheaters like criminals.
That being said, OP was a public case against a doctor for bad medical practices. He was just accused of knowingly harming the health of others. Form the point of view of the law, his patients were victims even if they knew what they were doing (or intending to do), and their identities should have never been published.
Unfortunately, the Spanish Justice did a very bad job allowing the leak of some identities (only cyclists, as some have said) and the scandal was served.
In the Spring of 2008, the Spanish Government asked all sport federations whose teams or athletes had not qualified for the Beijing Olympics to renew their governing bodies (following an agreement between the Government and the Olympic sports federations) to prepare as soon as possible for the next Olympic cycle. This included the football federation, but UEFA told the Government that if elections for president of the federation were forced the national football team would be banned from the Eurocup. If you remember the result of Eurocup 2008 you guess what was the decision.
I'm sorry, but if sports authorities think they are beyond common law and Government agreements their activities should be banned. They should run their private games and enforce their private rules with their private resources. And they should be sued if they don't abide by the state's laws.
I'm not defending cheaters. I'm defending a clear separation between sport and state and the submission of sport to state's law. Under such premises, if CONI has blood samples from OP, CONI should be sued for the illegal obtention of those samples. Yes, I know, it would be easier to sue the Vatican Church for whatever.
And if CONI, UCI or WADA want to catch Valv.piti or any other cheater, send the vampires to wherever he is every day, pay the vampires with your own money and do not involve the Police or the state's Justice in your private game. And do not complain because the Government and the state's Justice does not help you.
- Jun 18, 2009
- 1,086
- 1
- 0
Hugh Januss said:
I agree with Frank, especially given his ties to Fuentes. In my opinion, Cadel, and possibly Wiggo, are probably as clean as a GT contender gets. Just looking at Cadel ride up a mountain makes me think he is pretty clean. He always looks like he is about to die from the exertion, while almost everyone else around him looks like they are trying to stay awake. You almost never see AC/LA/Valv and many others gasping for air!
I think you'll find Armstrong ruins the races of people who talk out about doping and dopers.fatandfast said:
I also think you'll find Armstrong is the KING of twitter cry baby content. Go back and read his Anti-Contador tweets.
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
- Jun 19, 2009
- 13,250
- 1
- 0
icefire said:
I had posted this on another thread - you have made some interesting points on seperation between State and Sport - however this piece should explain how CONI was able to get the evidence from the Spanish authorities.
.....
Some points here though - OP was instigated because of Menzanos confessions. The laws were not in place to prosecute riders - however I feel that part of the reason for photographing athletes etc was to highlight their roles and seek an amendment to the existing laws.
This was done, however it was not allowed to be applied retroactively - this was a political decision.
CONI had a disgraceful reputation in particular through their [url="http://www.playthegame.org/knowledge-bank/author-profile/sandro-donati.html']treatment[/url] of Sandro Donati. So a large part of the credit goes to Ettore Torri.
The reason CONI can get their hands on Bag no. 18 for comparison is because it is a public institution and part of the State.
UCI, WADA etc are private organizations.
CONI was able to work through the Italian judiciary and Interpol to request the bags from Judge Serrano.
What this case highlights is the difficulties that sporting authorities have in gaining access to evidence so as to apply sanctions and penalties.
Dr. Maserati said:
Bah, how about if Evans actually wins one once? Tired of this guys alligator tears and juvenile tantrums. Win or go home Cadel.
looks
The way a rider looks when racing has nothing to do with doping. Some can internalise the sufferring better than others this is true at all levels of the sport. Evans finds it hard to keep his emotions under control and gives away when he is suffering
What everyone wants is a competition where everyone is given the same rights and opportunities. This cannot happen when riders face trial by media and can be stopped for racing on any suspicion and when riders have to keep defending themselves after a fair investigation has been held and someone has been cleared.
Icefires post makes good points about following state laws. State laws have had more time to mature than many rules and practices involved in trying to prevent doping
Armstrong was treated unfairly to be named as having bags of blood with EPO. I dont like him as a rider at all but this was unfair and you cannot trust these tests as a result.
Riders were named in the Puerto investigation and trial by media has given them no chance to clear there name even if the accusation was unsubstantiated. Fuentes said himself some of the riders named he doesn't work with and they didn't name all of his clients. Anyone could have been involved some accused clearly weren't. In most criminal cases a far greater number of suspects are cleared than convicted why is anyone accused in the Puerto investigation automatically seen as guilty.
Until fair trials and consistent treatment is not applied all testing lacks credibility and there is a unfair competition. You cannot accuse one rider over another of being any more of a cheat unless one rider is proven guilty by fair process.
Fortunately some of the newer rules with the doping passport and retrospective testing have made the gains from doping less than in recent history so the advantage has been reduced.
Cobber said:
The way a rider looks when racing has nothing to do with doping. Some can internalise the sufferring better than others this is true at all levels of the sport. Evans finds it hard to keep his emotions under control and gives away when he is suffering
What everyone wants is a competition where everyone is given the same rights and opportunities. This cannot happen when riders face trial by media and can be stopped for racing on any suspicion and when riders have to keep defending themselves after a fair investigation has been held and someone has been cleared.
Icefires post makes good points about following state laws. State laws have had more time to mature than many rules and practices involved in trying to prevent doping
Armstrong was treated unfairly to be named as having bags of blood with EPO. I dont like him as a rider at all but this was unfair and you cannot trust these tests as a result.
Riders were named in the Puerto investigation and trial by media has given them no chance to clear there name even if the accusation was unsubstantiated. Fuentes said himself some of the riders named he doesn't work with and they didn't name all of his clients. Anyone could have been involved some accused clearly weren't. In most criminal cases a far greater number of suspects are cleared than convicted why is anyone accused in the Puerto investigation automatically seen as guilty.
Until fair trials and consistent treatment is not applied all testing lacks credibility and there is a unfair competition. You cannot accuse one rider over another of being any more of a cheat unless one rider is proven guilty by fair process.
Fortunately some of the newer rules with the doping passport and retrospective testing have made the gains from doping less than in recent history so the advantage has been reduced.
- Jul 9, 2009
- 7,623
- 974
- 19,680
Cobber said:
I'm not sure "probably as clean as a GT contender gets" is much of a distinction though, although to be fair I don't much like it when BB chimes in with his "are you serious they are all doing everything otherwise they would never keep up". I'm conflicted that way.
Your last point though is why I really responded this time. People say this all the time like it proves anything. Guys just look different when riding hard, some are smooth as silk right up until they blow and others are all knees and elbows as they ride off up the road. If the ones who look so at ease aren't hurting why don't they ride faster and increase their margin by that much more. They all look to me like they left it on the road when they get to a summit finish (except for the autobus).
Dr. Maserati said:
Right, I missed that point. But, do we want public resources devoted to prosecute sports' cheaters? Why don't they prosecute those who score goals with "God's hand" in the World Cup finals?
Sports' cheaters should only be prosecuted if they are paid to lose and there are bets on it.
Cadel Evans does not fall into this category
He took the Vuelta very seriously -as Basso and Gesink did- and I really appreciate him for that. Otherwise, it would have been just a local event for local riders
- Jun 16, 2009
- 19,654
- 2
- 0
Overnight the Italian doping federation had a go at valverde saying that the uci should not let him race.ChrisE said:
elapid said:
i agree with you on most points. i think cadel's dig was a general comment about hte spanish camera men slipstreaming valverde in the tt. I think it was also to do with his frustration of valverde hiding behind his puppet AC. From what i've read on this forum their have been a few other incidents of helping valverde through the vuelta. just to let you know, nearly all the big riders and famous people in general have twitter. It's becoming a way of life.
cyclingmad said:
valverde will be the one who will be crying as he will be hopefully banned from racing. Lots of mistakes were made accusing people you say? They didn't make mistakes, their was a lack of evidence which doesn't make the innocent.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Paris-Roubaix 2025, one day monument, April 13 (men)- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 2K
-
-
Amstel Gold Race 2025, one day classic, April 20 (men's)- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 821
-
-
Ronde van Vlaanderen 2025, one day monument, April 6 (men's)- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 2K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram