ContadorÂ’s legal team hit back at WADA report

[moi123]

Kimmage is also disparaging about Contador's justification for his Clenbuterol positive test at this year's Tour de France.

"His excuse that his meat was contaminated is laughable. It's a ****ing insult to our intelligence," he says.

"After the Dauphiné Libéré I couldn't see how he could improve so much in time for the Tour. He wasn't the same guy we'd seen in the past and had a lot to do. But he got there and won the Tour but then tested positive for Clenbuterol..."

"Now I'm not a man of science but for me the key to it was the day of the test. When I found out it was on the second rest day, that was the give away for me."

Looks like someone wants to stir it up, as if there wasn't enough hype.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Looks like someone wants to stir it up, as if there wasn't enough hype.

As in: Kimmage has spoken! Case closed!

Alberto Contador is to be hanged and that's that.

Some much for the people that supposedly like cycling.

 

[poupou]

As in: Kimmage has spoken! Case closed!

Alberto Contador is to be hanged and that's that.

Some much for the people that supposedly love cycling.

Don't confuse sport of cycling and doping. We love cycling.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Don't confuse sport of cycling and doping. We love cycling.

I don't. Kimmage does.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Kimmage is someone who has made a living out of connecting both things, namely cycling and doping, so it's no wander he's now taking shots at Alberto.

Doped cyclists have made Kimmage a rich man you know. It's no wander he wants the "pest" to persist. His main motivation is money. Money, money, money. If he has to take cycling into the gutter in the process is something he's learned to live with.

 

[Benotti69]

For someone who's made a living out of connecting both things, namely cycling and doping, it's no wander he's made those comments.

Doped cyclists have made Kimmage a rich man you know. It's no wander he wants the "pest" to persist.

what consitutes a rich man? How much is kimmage worth? What car does he drive? How many properties does he currently own?

He works for the Sunday Times in London, but I imagine he is still Living just outside Dublin and not actually living in London. Rich people dont work for newspapers, they may write the odd article as a guest writer but are not working as journalists.

So you got any proof or are you shooting the messenger instead of blaming Contador?

 

[BotanyBay]

Kimmage is someone who has made a living out of connecting both things, namely cycling and doping, so it's no wander he's now taking shots at Alberto.

Doped cyclists have made Kimmage a rich man you know. It's no wander he wants the "pest" to persist. His main motivation is money. Money, money, money. If he has to take cycling into the gutter in the process is something he's learned to live with.

Kimmage is "rich"? The guy wrote a book in 1992 that barely sold, and he does columns for the Times of London. That's hardly "rich".

Trust me, he could earn far more by kissing-up and being a "good boy".

 

[Señor_Contador]

what consitutes a rich man? How much is kimmage worth? What car does he drive? How many properties does he currently own?

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure a lot more than me. And I'm, pretty sure his motivation to slander cyclists, at this point, is merely monetary in nature.

He works for the Sunday Times in London, but I imagine he is still Living just outside Dublin and not actually living in London. Rich people dont work for newspapers

Whaaaaaaaat?! Is you foh real?

So you got any proof or are you shooting the messenger instead of blaming Contador?

I'm not blaming Contador because he's got nothing to be blamed for. YOU might think he does, I certainly don't.

What is really a shame is that a rather large % of cycling reporters/writers/commentators make more money than the cyclists themselves. Heck, I'd say that at least 65% of the people involved in cycling make more money than the cyclists themselves, so pardon me if I get on the side of cyclists once in a while.

 

[hrotha]

Isn't Contador's salary alone enough to put up a fairly strong pro tour team?

 

[Benotti69]

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure a lot more than me. And I'm, pretty sure his motivation to slander cyclists, at this point, is merely monetary in nature.

so you make an outrageous statement without proof. Great!

Pretty sure? How about you tell us what you make and then we can tell you what a top journalist makes. Or you can contact the NUJ (national Union of Journalists) in the UK and ask them.

Whaaaaaaaat?! Is you foh real?

You ever worked for a newspaper? I have. Editors may make a lot of money but Kimmage is not an editor. If Kimmage wanted to make money he'd be writing books on Armstrong and his miracles

I'm not blaming Contador because he's got nothing to be blamed for. YOU might think he does, I certainly don't.

well love is blind! but he's tested positive for a banned substance.

What is really a shame is that a rather large % of cycling reporters/writers/commentators make more money than the cyclists themselves. Heck, I'd say that at least 65% of the people involved in cycling make more money than the cyclists themselves, so pardon me if I get on the side of cyclists once in a while.

Yes and it is time the cyclists take control of their sport. Best way is to stop the doping and dictating their terms of their sport.

 

[Wallace]

What is really a shame is that a rather large % of cycling reporters/writers/commentators make more money than the cyclists themselves. Heck, I'd say that at least 65% of the people involved in cycling make more money than the cyclists themselves, so pardon me if I get on the side of cyclists once in a while.

Sponsors leave the sport because of the bad publicity from all the positives, fewer sponsors, less money, lower salaries for the average rider. If riders would stop doping--and DS and managers stop pushing them to dope--then the sport would be healthier and there would be more money for everyone involved. Another good thing would be if obvious dopers were punished quickly and given longer bans. If AC had received the punishment he so clearly deserves when the test results came in, then this would all be in the past and we'd be talking about the exciting season to come.

 

[Altitude]

Kimmage is "rich"? The guy wrote a book in 1992 that barely sold, and he does columns for the Times of London. That's hardly "rich".

Trust me, he could earn far more by kissing-up and being a "good boy".

His book actually sold pretty well, and still sells. I'd say he does pretty well for himself.

How would he make more money kissing up? Nobody would hire his fat a$$ as a DS.

Don't take this post to mean that I'm defending Contador by the way.

 

[Señor_Contador]

so you make an outrageous statement without proof. Great!

Listen gumbah, you guys are doing the same when you say that Alberto Contador doped. so I'm just dumbing it down and returning the same rhetoric to you.

Pretty sure? How about you tell us what you make and then we can tell you what a top journalist makes. Or you can contact the NUJ (national Union of Journalists) in the UK and ask them.

You ever worked for a newspaper? I have. Editors may make a lot of money but Kimmage is not an editor. If Kimmage wanted to make money he'd be writing books on Armstrong and his miracles

Oh please! Like Kimmage is not getting a lot of publicity from dragging cycling through the mud!

well love is blind! but he's tested positive for a banned substance.

Yeah, but testing positive for something does not mean you doped. It only means you've tested positive.

Yes and it is time the cyclists take control of their sport. Best way is to stop the doping and dictating their terms of their sport.

Doping has always been present is modern cycling and all sports. It's not a question of eradicating doping. It's a question of managing doping. This was well established until people like Kimmage started popping up telling us about what we already knew and blasting cyclists left and right.

 

[webvan]

"managing doping", that's what guys like AC do and then one day they make a mistake and they get popped, and start crying like little babies.

You'd think that the Landis fiasco would have taught him a lesson...probably just a case of his lawyers milking him for cash and keeping him hoping he'll get off on a technicality, which he won't and the longer he refuses to take it like a man, the harder it will be for him to come back, physically and psychologically.

 

[BotanyBay]

"managing doping", that's what guys like AC do and then one day they make a mistake and they get popped, and start crying like little babies.

You'd think that the Landis fiasco would have taught him a lesson...probably just a case of his lawyers milking him for cash and keeping him hoping he'll get off on a technicality, which he won't and the longer he refuses to take it like a man, the harder it will be for him to come back, physically and psychologically.

$600/hour lawyers want their clients to fight, appeal and keep fighting. And they offer what AC needs: Hope. And they know he needs it.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Sponsors leave the sport because of the bad publicity from all the positives, fewer sponsors, less money, lower salaries for the average rider. If riders would stop doping--and DS and managers stop pushing them to dope--then the sport would be healthier and there would be more money for everyone involved. Another good thing would be if obvious dopers were punished quickly and given longer bans. If AC had received the punishment he so clearly deserves when the test results came in, then this would all be in the past and we'd be talking about the exciting season to come.

And who writes the "bad publicity"?

 

[Altitude]

Yeah, but testing positive for something does not mean you doped. It only means you've tested positive.



Doping has always been present is modern cycling and all sports. It's not a question of eradicating doping. It's a question of managing doping. This was well established until people like Kimmage started popping up telling us about what we already knew and blasting cyclists left and right.

Right-- he tested positive and so he should be sanctioned accordingly.

You accept that doping is widespread in cycling yet you believe that Aldirto was not doping? Fascinating.

 

[Señor_Contador]

"managing doping", that's what guys like AC do and then one day they make a mistake and they get popped, and start crying like little babies.

You'd think that the Landis fiasco would have taught him a lesson...probably just a case of his lawyers milking him for cash and keeping him hoping he'll get off on a technicality, which he won't and the longer he refuses to take it like a man, the harder it will be for him to come back, physically and psychologically.

No, "managing doping" means 1) drastically reducing the amount of tests, 2) no testing done while you're on vacation or out having fun, 3) introducing the 3-strikes system: you test positive conclusively 3 times and you get suspended, you test positive 6 times and you're given a 2-year ban (no positive tests are ever made public, only to the team directors and the person involved), 4) any reporter who writes about doping and cycling is not invited back, 5) cyclists are FORCED to monitor their health to make sure whatever they're taking is not ruining their health, 6) starting salary for a cyclist is 100k and 7) no, the cyclist is not to tell WADA where the f*ck they are. WADA sends an appointment request and the cyclist is to show up within a reasonable amount of time.

 

[Wallace]

And who writes the "bad publicity"?

Ultimately, the cyclists who get caught. You think journalists shouldn't report the news? Or only the news you want them to report?

Contador tested positive, A & B, for a banned substance. As Kimmage points, out, there's a very good explanation for the drug being there in small quantities, given that it was found on a rest day.

Contador's defense is that it's from meat that he has in no way ever shown to have that drug. The WADA went to the butcher and the farm, and found no traces of clen. Seems like case closed to me.

 

[SaftyCyclist]

Even if Contador had ingested the clen accidentally, he still had an advantage, when an overall time difference of 0.001% decides a Tour, even tiny advantages make a difference, so with knowledge or without, he gained that advantage. But I think most people have accepted the reality of what happened to get that trace of the substance in his body, it's nothing to do with steak, the farmers will kick-off big time if he pushes that story any further, he'll not be allowed to damage their industry for his own greed.

 

[flicker]

No, "managing doping" means 1) drastically reducing the amount of tests, 2) no testing done while you're on vacation or out having fun, 3) introducing the 3-strikes system: you test positive conclusively 3 times and you get suspended, you test positive 6 times and you're given a 2-year ban (no positive tests are ever made public, only to the team directors and the person involved), 4) any reporter who writes about doping and cycling is not invited back, 5) cyclists are FORCED to monitor their health to make sure whatever they're taking is not ruining their health, 6) starting salary for a cyclist is 100k and 7) no, the cyclist is not to tell WADA where the f*ck they are. WADA sends an appointment request and the cyclist is to show up within a reasonable amount of time.

I like what you say. Also mobile blood banks, like savings and loans. For a small percentage the banks could add a little extra!

 

[Wallace]

No, "managing doping" means 1) drastically reducing the amount of tests, 2) no testing done while you're on vacation or out having fun, 3) introducing the 3-strikes system: you test positive conclusively 3 times and you get suspended, you test positive 6 times and you're given a 2-year ban (no positive tests are ever made public, only to the team directors and the person involved), 4) any reporter who writes about doping and cycling is not invited back, 5) cyclists are FORCED to monitor their health to make sure whatever they're taking is not ruining their health, 6) starting salary for a cyclist is 100k and 7) no, the cyclist is not to tell WADA where the f*ck they are. WADA sends an appointment request and the cyclist is to show up within a reasonable amount of time.

What you've written here means that either you have no idea how sophisticated doping is now, or that you think cyclists should dope and that it's none of our business. If it's the latter, that's fine, but most fans and a lot of cyclists would disagree with you.

 

[hrotha]

No, "managing doping" means 1) drastically reducing the amount of tests, 2) no testing done while you're on vacation or out having fun, 3) introducing the 3-strikes system: you test positive conclusively 3 times and you get suspended, you test positive 6 times and you're given a 2-year ban (no positive tests are ever made public, only to the team directors and the person involved), 4) any reporter who writes about doping and cycling is not invited back, 5) cyclists are FORCED to monitor their health to make sure whatever they're taking is not ruining their health, 6) starting salary for a cyclist is 100k and 7) no, the cyclist is not to tell WADA where the f*ck they are. WADA sends an appointment request and the cyclist is to show up within a reasonable amount of time.

Why do you want to essentially legalize doping, when you seem to think doping is not much of a problem, since a clean Contador can win three Tours in four years? Landis, Pereiro, Armstrong, Pantani, Ullrich, Riis (I won't mention Indurain in case that causes you to explode or something) were dirty. Surely those antidoping tests have improved things to the point where your knight in shining and clean armour Contador could dominate the Tour. So why go back now?

 

[Wallace]

Why do you want to essentially legalize doping, when you seem to think doping is not much of a problem, since a clean Contador can win three Tours in four years? Landis, Pereiro, Armstrong, Pantani, Ullrich, Riis (I won't mention Indurain in case that causes you to explode or something) were dirty. Surely those antidoping tests have improved things to the point where your knight in shining and clean armour Contador could dominate the Tour. So why go back now?

I see his point: if you think that cyclists have every right to put whatever they want into their bodies, as free citizens and adults engaged in a free market activity, then it doesn't matter whether Contador doped or not. It's none of our business. It's a consistent and clearly stated point of view.

 

[hrotha]

I see his point: if you think that cyclists have every right to put whatever they want into their bodies, as free citizens and adults engaged in a free market activity, then it doesn't matter whether Contador doped or not. It's none of our business. It's a consistent and clearly stated point of view.

No, he's saying Contador didn't dope. Therein lies the beauty of this.