Changes Cookson has implemented at UCI

[the sceptic]

thank you thehog for republishing Stefano Agostini's letter.

Why is it not in the mandate of the MPCC to help poor guys like Stefano?
Two sides to the coin.

Shameful stuff. Feel really bad for that guy.

 

[stutue]

I expect you feel really bad for Contador too.

After all he only had an infintessimal quantity of A banned substance in his sample too.

 

[DirtyWorks]

proposing a 15-month ban, in addition to the payment of the expenses incurred by you

Interesting. They aren't getting rich, but aggressively discouraging fighting the sanctions and suggesting to the athlete to not bother defending the sanction anyway.

Knowing what we know, the UCI's actions make perfect sense.

 

[Catwhoorg]

There's some history here. Journalists in the UK press have slated organised bike rides/races alleging that the cyclists have blocked the roads and dropped litter everywhere. Some areas of society would like all cycle races on the highway banned.

You mean banned AGAIN.
(as it was until the 1950's)

 

[the sceptic]

I expect you feel really bad for Contador too.

After all he only had an infintessimal quantity of A banned substance in his sample too.

True, banned for 50 picograms when Froome can legally win stage races on horse steroids isnt fair either. But what can you do?

 

[thehog]

Interesting. They aren't getting rich, but aggressively discouraging fighting the sanctions and suggesting to the athlete to not bother defending the sanction anyway.

Knowing what we know, the UCI's actions make perfect sense.

Correct and judging the reaction to Horner releasing his passport they want to keep it all in house.

Just like Froome's TUE for horse biscuits. Would have been perfect until someone decaded to leaked it. The UCI appear perfectly happy with the way Froome won the race and don't feel he stole it from those not on steroids.

Which again raises the question of favoritism. No wonder the Dawg is so confident of not testing positive.

 

[stutue]

True, banned for 50 picograms when Froome can legally win stage races on steroids isnt fair either. But what can you do?

I think the key word is 'legally'.

You can be sure that all teams will have their toes right up against the line of what is legal, Sky included.

That is what professional sport breeds.

 

[the sceptic]

I think the key word is 'legally'.

You can be sure that all teams will have their toes right up against the line of what is legal, Sky included.

That is what professional sport breeds.

Do you have any evidence that other teams have used horse steroid TUEs in order to win stage races?

You can call it legal all you want, but is it fair? Should Froome be allowed to race on horse steroids because Brailsford has Zorzoli on speed dial? What about those that dont have the opportunity to get express TUEs to boost their performance?

 

[stutue]

Don't know about the TUEs but Vayer seems to think that the French are stuffed full of cortisone.

The problem with being so obsessed with Sky is that you can't see the wood for the trees.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I think the key word is 'legally'.

You can be sure that all teams will have their toes right up against the line of what is legal, Sky included.

That is what professional sport breeds.

Legal apparently includes "never tested positive."

That's not sport. That's entertainment. Which, if the UCI gave up any pretense of being a sport would be fine. But, they insist on pretending it's a sport.

 

[stutue]

Sport is entertainment.

 

[del1962]

Sport is entertainment.

Welcome back stutue

 

[Bronstein]

Sport is entertainment.

For you it is entertainment. For other people it is profession. How would you feel if dopers were cheating you out of better results and therefore a greater salary? I'm sure there were many riders who chose to walk away from professional cycling because they didn't want to jump on the EPO bandwagon during the 90s.

 

[the sceptic]

For you it is entertainment. For other people it is profession. How would you feel if dopers were cheating you out of better results and therefore a greater salary? I'm sure there were many riders who chose to walk away from professional cycling because they didn't want to jump on the EPO bandwagon during the 90s.

Im sure its entertaining for sky fans to watch their guy juiced on horse steroids winning. But what about Spilak who got cheated out of a stage race win? Sport should be fair, and those that chose not to dope on horse steroids should have the same opportunities as everyone else.

This is where the UCI has made a huge mistake, by allowing one guy to juice up on horse steroids they are basically telling the cycling world that they dont care and have no problem with treating their favourite riders differently.

 

[del1962]

For you it is entertainment. For other people it is profession. How would you feel if dopers were cheating you out of better results and therefore a greater salary? I'm sure there were many riders who chose to walk away from professional cycling because they didn't want to jump on the EPO bandwagon during the 90s.

While obvioulsy doping is wrong (I don't think stutue said otherwise), that does not mean sport is not entertainment at the pro level, otherwise there would not be any salary from sport.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Im sure its entertaining for sky fans to watch their guy juiced on horse steroids winning. But what about Spilak who got cheated out of a stage race win? Sport should be fair, and those that chose not to dope on horse steroids should have the same opportunities as everyone else.

This is where the UCI has made a huge mistake, by allowing one guy to juice up on horse steroids they are basically telling the cycling world that they dont care and have no problem with treating their favourite riders differently.

While I realise 'horse steroids' is the new 'badzhilla' or 'sky bot', three times in one post is overkill. Everyone knows they're just steroids, and bad enough without you and hog desperately trying to make them sound worse. There's no need: he shouldn't have been racing while taking them, 100%

 

[Beech Mtn]

LOL at how "horse steroids" has become a thing now. Probably best PR for Sky fans is to just leave it be, since horse steroids sounds crazy and over-the-top, as opposed to the discussions of real people telling about their experiences going out and easily setting PBs on Strava while hopped up on pred.

Besides, after Typhoid Mary's 467,259 bouts with Badzhilla and every other tropical disease, it probably requires something industrial strength like horse steroids to treat a common chest infection.

edit-
Didn't see Jimmy's post until after I wrote mine. Wasn't meant to have a go at him, but more to laugh at Hog and Sceptic's new meme.

 

[stutue]

Yep. They are no more 'horse steroids' than my morning porridge is 'horse food'. There really is no need to resort to exagerrating if you have a strong argument.

Which you don't.

Nobody was cheated because, rightly or wrongly, Froome's use of cortisone was well within the rules. Now, if you suggested that some consideration should be given to revisiting the rules and possibly amending them, then I would agree. But as it stands, Froome has not broken the rules with his TUE. Whether he needed it is another matter, and I would agree that this is why the rules need examination.

 

[wansteadimp]

Im sure its entertaining for sky fans to watch their guy juiced on horse steroids winning. But what about Spilak who got cheated out of a stage race win? Sport should be fair, and those that chose not to dope on horse steroids should have the same opportunities as everyone else.

This is where the UCI has made a huge mistake, by allowing one guy to juice up on horse steroids they are basically telling the cycling world that they dont care and have no problem with treating their favourite riders differently.

Assuming Spilak isn't fully charged too.

 

[thehog]

While I realise 'horse steroids' is the new 'badzhilla' or 'sky bot', three times in one post is overkill. Everyone knows they're just steroids, and bad enough without you and hog desperately trying to make them sound worse. There's no need: he shouldn't have been racing while taking them, 100%

And just think nobody ever would have known if it wasn't for the French journalist.

Appears froome has no issue in ingesting narcotics for performance enhancement which puts paid to all his BS about being clean and wanting more testing etc.

The guy is a walking medicine cabinet.

 

[thehog]

LOL at how "horse steroids" has become a thing now. Probably best PR for Sky fans is to just leave it be, since horse steroids sounds crazy and over-the-top, as opposed to the discussions of real people telling about their experiences going out and easily setting PBs on Strava while hopped up on pred.

Besides, after Typhoid Mary's 467,259 bouts with Badzhilla and every other tropical disease, it probably requires something industrial strength like horse steroids to treat a common chest infection.

edit-
Didn't see Jimmy's post until after I wrote mine. Wasn't meant to have a go at him, but more to laugh at Hog and Sceptic's new meme.

I'm sure we're not far off the official horse steroids thread. Once we find out Froome has used them more then the two occasions we are aware of.

 

[the sceptic]

Yep. They are no more 'horse steroids' than my morning porridge is 'horse food'. There really is no need to resort to exagerrating if you have a strong argument.

Which you don't.

Nobody was cheated because, rightly or wrongly, Froome's use of cortisone was well within the rules. Now, if you suggested that some consideration should be given to revisiting the rules and possibly amending them, then I would agree. But as it stands, Froome has not broken the rules with his TUE. Whether he needed it is another matter, and I would agree that this is why the rules need examination.

Froome gained an unfair advantage over riders that didnt have a TUE for horse steroids. It might have technically been within the rules, even though the UCI decided the rules needed changing shortly afterwards, but it was still very unethical and of course it makes skys zero tolerance an even bigger joke.

"I struggle to see how I could be any cleaner, except when the UCI allows me to juice up on ***** steroids to win stage races"

 

[thehog]

Froome gained an unfair advantage over riders that didnt have a TUE for horse steroids. It might have technically been within the rules, even though the UCI decided the rules needed changing shortly afterwards, but it was still very unethical and of course it makes skys zero tolerance an even bigger joke.

"I struggle to see how I could be any cleaner, except when the UCI allows me to juice up on ***** steroids to win stage races"

Correct and the other riders didn't know they were competing against someone up to his eyeballs on 40mg per day of quadruped steroids.

Froome should have been recovering. Not attacking in the cold and wet from 27km out. Must have been confident

 

[stutue]

Correct and the other riders didn't know they were competing against someone up to his eyeballs on 40mg per day of quadruped steroids.

Of course they did.

Your faux naievity is just a little too transparent.

 

[JimmyFingers]

This and much of Froome's book does make him firstly look a hypocrite and frankly a bit of a ****, and secondly look utterly ruthless. I'll chime in and say his calls for more testing at Mt Teide when considered alongside this makes him look very sketchy indeed.

And while he didn't cheat, I think morally he crossed the line and he certainly gained an unfair advantage by taking the drug which has a potent systemic effect as well as curing a cough, and potentially denied another rider the win because of it.

Really unimpressed by Froome, always was a bit suspicious of him, now I just plain distrust him. But at least the Cound twitter has been shut down, so every cloud and all of that....