Re:
ebandit said:
red_flanders said:
rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Pure gold. Crying about bias and acting like there's a difference between Froome getting caught doping and someone else getting caught doping. Oh yeah, there is one difference. In one case, the UCI came in and exonerated the rider with absolutely no justification.
It really is curious why people dislike Sky. Must be their nationality. Can't possibly be their leadership and complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level.
but there is a huge difference...........1 allowed with limit....1 totally banned
... 'skys complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level'...
...that's a reach.....................
I'll probably regret replying here, but....
One sample massively over the limit, one from a totally banned substance. You really see a difference? A "huge" difference? I think that's a joke the way you mean it. There is a huge difference though, in enforcement. One obvious positive covered up, the other prosecuted. Corruption.
You really don't think Sky are doping, have been doping since 2011? You don't think they have won the Tour with multiple dopers, and don't see that they've obviously gotten protection from the UCI? That they have inundated the media around the sport with comically false narratives and explanations? Sky are the poster boys for the current state of the sport's corruption.
And no, none of that is because they're British. If anything they get less flak because so much of the media consumed by those who come here is english, and writers and readers are biased in favor of english-speaking riders. They have been long protected because of close ties between British Cycling, Sky, and the UCI.
The nationalistic whining of the fans is all the more ironic for all of that.