Creed article?

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Chickensheet Interview

I'm sorry, but that Creed interview is the largest piece of guano I've seen from CN in god knows how long. What does Creed want us to know?

a) he didn't dope. Gee, a cyclist taking pains to let people know he never took any peds. Whoa--there's a new one.

b) he never saw anyone dope. Great. So he's letting everyone know he is of no use to anyone trying to clean up the sport. Kind of means he is, effectively, on the side of the dopers.

c) the reasons why he didn't dope are complex (fear, lack of talent, not enough $), but the main thing is, he understands why people dope and would never be so naive as to take a moral stance against anyone who doped or dopes. See above.

Creed comes off as a nice guy who is taking huge pains to be sure he doesn't say anything that could offend or upset anyone. Ultimately, what he means is: if you're trying to clean up the sport, don't talk to me, because I have nothing at all to say on the matter.

Silence=support of the status quo. Maybe he hopes he can get a nice job as a ds or working as support staff for a pro team? He certainly is letting everyone know that making any kind of trouble about drugs in cycling is the last thing on earth he's interest in.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
NashbarShorts said:
All due respect, you have GOT to be kidding us w/ that post.

Have you never read/seen the Puerto evidence regarding Tyler?? The fax coversheet for payment request from Fuentes is addressed TO HAVEN. Fax'd to the front desk of a nearby hotel, to be picked up by the lovely and demure Mrs. Hamilton.

If you guys don't think the wives of the top pros are "in on the game", you have got to be joking. The man was injecting himself w/ all sorts of things including ESTROGEN, for frick's sake. You think a spouse isn't going to notice something like that?? :eek:
I figured Haven must have known. How else would Tyler have gotten her blood, vampire style? What I am saying she probably had been informed she should not be caught. She must have been embarassed. Was it in their pre-nups that she should have compatible blood type to Tyler?
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
flicker said:
I figured Haven must have known. How else would Tyler have gotten her blood, vampire style? What I am saying she probably had been informed she should not be caught. She must have been embarassed. Was it in their pre-nups that she should have compatible blood type to Tyler?
I knew TH was nicked for autologous (other person's) transfusion, but I did not know they ever identified it as his WIFE'S. Is that true?? :eek:
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Wallace said:
I'm sorry, but that Creed interview is the largest piece of guano I've seen from CN in god knows how long. What does Creed want us to know?

a) he didn't dope. Gee, a cyclist taking pains to let people know he never took any peds. Whoa--there's a new one.

b) he never saw anyone dope. Great. So he's letting everyone know he is of no use to anyone trying to clean up the sport. Kind of means he is, effectively, on the side of the dopers.

c) the reasons why he didn't dope are complex (fear, lack of talent, not enough $), but the main thing is, he understands why people dope and would never be so naive as to take a moral stance against anyone who doped or dopes.
You forgot one other:

d) when riders get caught, they deny it simply b/c they are "embarassed" about it. It is not b/c there is any sort of 'omerta'. That is simply fantasy. If you can't understand that, you simply need to "hang out for a couple of beats". ;)
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
NashbarShorts said:
You forgot one other:

d) when riders get caught, they deny it simply b/c they are "embarassed" about it. It is not b/c there is any sort of 'omerta'. That is simply fantasy. If you can't understand that, you simply need to "hang out for a couple of beats". ;)
e) I need a job, so I'll work for a team that uses PED or not.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
lean said:
huh? who's sanctioning creed or suggesting any punishment whatsoever? whether he races clean or dirty he still has to make sense if he chooses to speak publicly and you should expect a bike racing forum to discuss such matters. i generally respect your posts dr m but this feels like grandstanding.



you're getting some wires crossed. i addressed the topic of confessions b/c there was a reference to landis. confession and apology should occur after someone tests positive, their names appear on blood bags, etc. they should be complete and to the point. that has nothing to do with creed. creed wasn't slammed by me but some other posters had strong words for him. take it up with the right poster.



not really, PED use violates the rules of sport for obvious reasons. rationalizing it or ignoring it is a questionable practice.



i agree that this is exactly what creed's wants us to take from it. i also think it's ok for us to examine his logic.
Maybe I misread you point from the earlier post but you did write:
"or in creeds case some missing pieces to a completely functioning moral code".
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
flicker said:
Is Haven babeage?
She's attractive.


flicker said:
Is Tyler mad at Lance?
You see the depression diagnosis?

I can't say whether he is mad at Pharmstrong.

What we do know is that TH is hugely competitive.

TH has been shown to be a fraud.

Pharmstrong has gotten away with everything short of murder.

Tyler feels compelled to always put forth this image of the "nice guy."


I would bet that TH would love to knock Pharmstrong's teeth out.

I would bet that the conflict of his inner thoughts and his outward appearance is killing TH.

I've been around long enough to believe I'm in the ballpark on this one.
 
Aug 3, 2010
1
0
0
Wallace said:
I'm sorry, but that Creed interview is the largest piece of guano I've seen from CN in god knows how long. What does Creed want us to know?

a) he didn't dope. Gee, a cyclist taking pains to let people know he never took any peds. Whoa--there's a new one.

b) he never saw anyone dope. Great. So he's letting everyone know he is of no use to anyone trying to clean up the sport. Kind of means he is, effectively, on the side of the dopers.

c) the reasons why he didn't dope are complex (fear, lack of talent, not enough $), but the main thing is, he understands why people dope and would never be so naive as to take a moral stance against anyone who doped or dopes. See above.

Creed comes off as a nice guy who is taking huge pains to be sure he doesn't say anything that could offend or upset anyone. Ultimately, what he means is: if you're trying to clean up the sport, don't talk to me, because I have nothing at all to say on the matter.

Silence=support of the status quo. Maybe he hopes he can get a nice job as a ds or working as support staff for a pro team? He certainly is letting everyone know that making any kind of trouble about drugs in cycling is the last thing on earth he's interest in.
Reading all the responses it appears that "some" have the notion that Creed needs to call people out, name names, make Landis type allegations. Like it or not it is not his job to clean up cycling. That is what WADA and USADA are for. He gets paid to race his bike. Michael has defined what HIS moral definition is, may not be yours or the guy next to you. Nothing wrong with that, simply disagree with him. Very few of the posters here with a couple of exceptions even have a clue what that level of Pro Cycling imposes on the cyclist physically or mentally. The statement "Silence=support of the status quo." is such a Bull S*** reply. Just because Creed didn't rip every known doper and promise to avenge those that were wronged make him a bad guy ? Get real, you want Heroes and Villains buy a flipping comic book.
Do you think he would like to see the sport completely clean ? I'm sure he would. Conducting a Salem type witch hunt in cycling serves no purpose other that satisfy the needs of a bunch of Freds that are clueless and want their beloved sport put back on their pedestal, next to Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and David Millar.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Phildog said:
Reading all the responses it appears that "some" have the notion that Creed needs to call people out, name names, make Landis type allegations. Like it or not it is not his job to clean up cycling. That is what WADA and USADA are for. He gets paid to race his bike. Michael has defined what HIS moral definition is, may not be yours or the guy next to you. Nothing wrong with that, simply disagree with him. Very few of the posters here with a couple of exceptions even have a clue what that level of Pro Cycling imposes on the cyclist physically or mentally. The statement "Silence=support of the status quo." is such a Bull S*** reply. Just because Creed didn't rip every known doper and promise to avenge those that were wronged make him a bad guy ? Get real, you want Heroes and Villains buy a flipping comic book.
Do you think he would like to see the sport completely clean ? I'm sure he would. Conducting a Salem type witch hunt in cycling serves no purpose other that satisfy the needs of a bunch of Freds that are clueless and want their beloved sport put back on their pedestal, next to Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and David Millar.
most never wanted it on a pedestal as it obviously was never there in the first place due to the vicious nature of the first races where the organisers of races never even rode a bike but were selling papers or whatever and used these 'feats of sporting human endeavour' to do that. Obviously some riders took help in whatever form they could and that has continued through to the modern day. Most would like to see guys ride on their own talents and use those talents intelligently.

As for Creed, he cant participate in a dirty sport while wishing for it to be clean by keeping shtum about it can he? that serves no purpose for the rider,sport or fan! The more riders that speak out about it the more it will get cleaned up. Imagine if half the peleton turned on LA when he chased Simeoni,we might have a different situation, but no the sheep followed the shepherd. If Creed doesn't want to go with the flock he has to stand up and cry wolf as loud as he can in order to be heard. To be heard he needs to do more than say i don't dope. Sad state of affairs for Creed and any rider wishing to get a fair crack at pro cycling.

I am not condemning Creed, but i hope he names names with some evidence to help clean it up sooner rather than later. Maybe he is and this is his way of declaring it. I am not judging him and i commend him for talking about doping, which is in the current climate sticking one's head above the parapet, but if he is gonna do that he might as well jump on top of it and tell all he knows.

Goodluck to Michael Creed in the future.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Phildog said:
Reading all the responses it appears that "some" have the notion that Creed needs to call people out, name names, make Landis type allegations. Like it or not it is not his job to clean up cycling. That is what WADA and USADA are for. He gets paid to race his bike. Michael has defined what HIS moral definition is, may not be yours or the guy next to you. Nothing wrong with that, simply disagree with him. Very few of the posters here with a couple of exceptions even have a clue what that level of Pro Cycling imposes on the cyclist physically or mentally. The statement "Silence=support of the status quo." is such a Bull S*** reply. Just because Creed didn't rip every known doper and promise to avenge those that were wronged make him a bad guy ? Get real, you want Heroes and Villains buy a flipping comic book.
Do you think he would like to see the sport completely clean ? I'm sure he would. Conducting a Salem type witch hunt in cycling serves no purpose other that satisfy the needs of a bunch of Freds that are clueless and want their beloved sport put back on their pedestal, next to Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and David Millar.
Yo 'dog,

The point I made, which I'll stick by even at the cost of being accused of being a 'Fred' (God, the pain...) is that despite the home-spun spin he put on his logic, which certainly made him seem (calculatedly, I'd argue), very sympathetic, what resulted was just another old fashioned/old school piece of moral obfuscation.

“So, do you want me to write the truth or do you want me to write what you want people to think about you?” the interviewer bravely asked--and then got exactly what he purportedly didn't want. It's clear from the interview that Creed is, as stated, "too intelligent to be a bike racer." He's clearly a lot more intelligent that the interviewer--and more intelligent than his defenders.

Yo 'dog. You got played.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
Phildog said:
Reading all the responses it appears that "some" have the notion that Creed needs to call people out, name names, make Landis type allegations. Like it or not it is not his job to clean up cycling. That is what WADA and USADA are for. He gets paid to race his bike. Michael has defined what HIS moral definition is, may not be yours or the guy next to you. Nothing wrong with that, simply disagree with him. Very few of the posters here with a couple of exceptions even have a clue what that level of Pro Cycling imposes on the cyclist physically or mentally. The statement "Silence=support of the status quo." is such a Bull S*** reply. Just because Creed didn't rip every known doper and promise to avenge those that were wronged make him a bad guy ? Get real, you want Heroes and Villains buy a flipping comic book.
Do you think he would like to see the sport completely clean ? I'm sure he would. Conducting a Salem type witch hunt in cycling serves no purpose other that satisfy the needs of a bunch of Freds that are clueless and want their beloved sport put back on their pedestal, next to Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and David Millar.
I do not mean to be rude but I do think that parts of your mentality as revealed in this post are a big part of why pro cycling is in such a sad state right now.

First of all, in regards to Creed's own moral definition, that's all well and good but one must also take into account the moral definition of society as a whole as well as the official rules of the sport. The official rules have always stated that doping is cheating and is against the rules and the public as a whole in overwhelming majority would like to watch the racers race clean. So when you state that Creed has his own moral definition it comes across as the pro peloton once again having a different set of morals than the public. And again, I don't think anyone cares if the pro peloton doesn't see doping as cheating because everyone else does.

The second problem with your post is the way you belittle the fans as clueless Freds who don't understand the sport blah blah blah. Pro cycling is one of the only sports I have ever seen where the athletes behave in such an arrogant manner toward the fans. Most other sports have unwritten codes where by the athletes and the leagues in which they play honor and respect their fans and their wishes because they know ultimately that is who pays their salaries. In cycling perhaps part of the issue is that fans aren't directly buying stadium tickets but regardless if there is no demand from viewers of the sport then sponsors will not fund it. So it is arrogant and self-defeating behavior to belittle the fans and what they want to see from the sport.

The third problem with your post is attempting to disavow any personal responsbitiy from Creed to do anything whatsoever about doping. That is a very weak cop-out. By definition if one is involved in a corrupt and/or illegal system and does or says nothing about it then one is tacitly supporting the status quo. As Creed is doing. Granted I understand he wants to keep earning his paycheck in cycling and therefore does not want to rock the boat (which is how Omerta works) but that does not absolve him of any personal responsibility. At minimum he will be painted with the same broad brush that many are painting the sport of cycling with these days; it has the label of the dirtiest sport in the world for a reason. Not many people have much respect for pro cyclists as individuals these days which is really quite sad, but they have done it to themselves and they must lie in the bed which they've made.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
BikeCentric said:
The second problem with your post is the way you belittle the fans as clueless Freds who don't understand the sport blah blah blah. Pro cycling is one of the only sports I have ever seen where the athletes behave in such an arrogant manner toward the fans. Most other sports have unwritten codes where by the athletes and the leagues in which they play honor and respect their fans and their wishes because they know ultimately that is who pays their salaries. In cycling perhaps part of the issue is that fans aren't directly buying stadium tickets but regardless if there is no demand from viewers of the sport then sponsors will not fund it. So it is arrogant and self-defeating behavior to belittle the fans and what they want to see from the sport.
Cycling is one of the few sports where one can interact with the professionals and doesn't have them closeted away behind security gates at a training ground with uber-security. Try going training with Chelsea or Man Utd if you believe otherwise.
Additionally, that sport has utter contempt for testing and its stars treat tests accordingly - remember Rio Ferdinand's "forgotten" test? Rio got 8 months in December 2003 so missed a mere 4 months of the domestic season and I doubt he lost a penny in pay. Had he been a cyclist it would have been an automatic 2 year ban and fired to boot.

The third problem with your post is attempting to disavow any personal responsbitiy from Creed to do anything whatsoever about doping. That is a very weak cop-out. By definition if one is involved in a corrupt and/or illegal system and does or says nothing about it then one is tacitly supporting the status quo. As Creed is doing. Granted I understand he wants to keep earning his paycheck in cycling and therefore does not want to rock the boat (which is how Omerta works) but that does not absolve him of any personal responsibility. At minimum he will be painted with the same broad brush that many are painting the sport of cycling with these days; it has the label of the dirtiest sport in the world for a reason. Not many people have much respect for pro cyclists as individuals these days which is really quite sad, but they have done it to themselves and they must lie in the bed which they've made.
Thanks to a massively hypocritical press, who dare not criticise Football, Athletics, Basketball, Baseball & NFL. When OP kicked off as the 2006 World Cup reached its climax, no one criticised FIFA for deciding not to conduct blood testing due to it being "too expensive". This was in a year that saw FIFA turn over £562M and make a profit of £187M, yet they can't afford it? More like they can't afford the fallout that would ensue. Hell they wouldn't even sign up to WADA until they were threatened with exclusion from the Olympics. WTF?
It was interesting that OP seemed to screech to a halt as soon as Fuentes was asked about Barca & Real Madrid. 200 athletes were supposedly on his books of which 50 or so were cyclists. What about the 150 other sportsmen and women?
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Phildog said:
Reading all the responses... Michael has defined what HIS moral definition is...
It's great you read all the responses, but did you read the actual ARTICLE? :D Creed does NOT offer a moral definition, AT ALL. He clearly states that he believes doping is not a moral decision.

I think the reason a lot of ppl have posted is b/c we view that as a TOTAL COP-OUT. Call dopers good, bad, nice, nasty, whatever. But don't say cheating doesn't have a moral component to it. That is ridiculous. Like I've posted earlier, Creed seems a lot more intelligent/animated in other interviews. So, don't know if this was an interview scrubbed by CN, or perhaps (as another poster mentioned), it was a timid interview by a guy who thought he had something to say.. but then realized he is defacto unemployed right now and wants to find a ride for next season.

That is understandable, but to suggest anyone who thought the interview was weak is just a "Fred"?? Pfffft.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Creed being thrown under the bus on twitter as we speak by a certain John its_cleanuptime.
Apparently used EPO and got tips on how to gear up from Jonathan Vaughters.
Makes for a nice rereading of this thread.
 
Mar 27, 2014
202
0
0
There are a number of areas where posters have touched on why doping and riders attitudes in cycling and why these are so different in cycling and why other sports are not the same. For me it is exactly because of the fans, As said before the fans control other sports, if the fans turn on a football star, as real madrid fans did on ronaldo a month or so ago after some poor performances, the club is likely to sell or bench that star. Because fans pay to come and see their players play for them. So the player pulls his socks up and starts playing again or is sold on the back of a poor set of performances and his value goes down and so does his earning power.
This is the same in other sports as well basketball, NFL, etc etc. The big difference in cycling is that the fans who are most ardent supporters of cycling do not influence anything,

The UCI don't care about fans they care about money and power, and this does not come from the fans.
The teams don't care about the fans; they care about the sponsor who is going to provide the 20 million it takes to run the team and the riders who will pull in the performances to secure that sponsorship.
The race organisers don't care they only care about the TV networks who will pay for the coverage for the thousands of armchair fans at home on the couch.
The bike manufacturers don't care about the fans because most fans are cyclists and most cyclists are tight and don't spend money and already have bikes. They only care about the idiots with more money than sense who will go and buy the latest carbon fibre road bike because the guy who won the tour rode one, even though he is probably 90kg too heavy to ride a carbon fibre bike.

So who cares what the real fans think, no-one. Hence why is there no discussion about moral code or breaking omerta or any other type of clean up. Because cycling from day one has included cheating, just like the rest of society, and as we as a global society look sideways at cheating in life because we do not care unless it directly affects us; just look at the financial crisis that no-one gave a monkeys about for ten years until it hit everyone in the pocket; then they were screaming for the bankers to be strung up by the privates. So society looks sideways while the cheats prosper in cycling.

And the only people getting their blood pressure up over it is the fans who would like a level playing field, primarily because their favoured rider can't win in a doped one.

Hence why we currently have a war between the rest and the Skybots which has just replaced the war between the rest and the lance fanboys and when sky moves on and someone else comes along that will replace the current war.

Maybe that is why there will always be these benign articles and interviews, because really apart from a few people on message boards who else really cares.
 
Re:

sniper said:
Creed being thrown under the bus on twitter as we speak by a certain John its_cleanuptime.
Apparently used EPO and got tips on how to gear up from Jonathan Vaughters.
Makes for a nice rereading of this thread.
I'm going to try to keep this as neutral as possible. If you do a search on google "twitter its_cleanuptime" you'll get the anonymous source of the controversy. Joe Papp then outs the name on one of the images. Adam Myerson apparently has some direct information and has made the right choice to let it be.

Anonymous source naming names with a little more precision than Matt DeCanio.

Good to see how clean cycling is in the U.S. :mad:
 
Re:

robertmooreheadlane said:
The UCI don't care about fans they care about money and power, and this does not come from the fans.
The teams don't care about the fans; they care about the sponsor who is going to provide the 20 million it takes to run the team and the riders who will pull in the performances to secure that sponsorship.
The race organisers don't care they only care about the TV networks who will pay for the coverage for the thousands of armchair fans at home on the couch.
Actually, imagine the UCI as an "umbrella" getting a part of all sources of revenue. The promoters and teams pay big fees to the UCI, the UCI taxes what little prize money there is, and there really isn't any alternative. The latest changes to the calendar and general structure of the sport increase the UCI's revenues at the expense of every other party involved in pro cycling.

Hein gave a lengthy interview that showed what he was always working on was securing media rights so the UCI could properly package their events for broadcast. It was about managing the image of a sport, not the integrity of a sport.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
0
0
Re: Re:

DirtyWorks said:
sniper said:
Creed being thrown under the bus on twitter as we speak by a certain John its_cleanuptime.
Apparently used EPO and got tips on how to gear up from Jonathan Vaughters.
Makes for a nice rereading of this thread.
I'm going to try to keep this as neutral as possible. If you do a search on google "twitter its_cleanuptime" you'll get the anonymous source of the controversy. Joe Papp then outs the name on one of the images. Adam Myerson apparently has some direct information and has made the right choice to let it be.

Anonymous source naming names with a little more precision than Matt DeCanio.

Good to see how clean cycling is in the U.S. :mad:
Joe's list needs to be made public. More good would come out of its release than the USADA reasoned decision ever accomplished. Racing in the US was a sh*t show for a number of years. If the list was released, the US/ CANADA would have about 20% of its current total of WT/Pro Conti riders, once the dots were connected.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Race Radio on twitter attacking the messenger rather than addressing the message.
Oh well.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
sniper said:
Race Radio on twitter attacking the messenger rather than addressing the message.
Oh well.
Its not THE race radio... jeebus
it is.
Third tweet down from the top.


Not talking about genius Race Radio.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
I was thinking similar:

Damiano Machiavelli ‏@DaMachiavelli 15h15 hours ago

@TheRaceRadio @wellchuffedrob From masking hatred of LA by pretending to fight doping to defending Creed. That is a Walsh-like transform, RR
 
A couple of things that need to be clarified regarding the RR slam-a-thon:

1. This is the content of the post that RR wrote:
@its_cleanuptime You lied about Kayle and Creed and @Vaughters Had Hct tested https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/554073374230474753 … You may want to question your 'source'
I understand that Kayle says it didn't happen, and Vaughters' Hct has been documented, but you're free to choose not to believe that, but that's your agenda.

2. I have it on pretty solid authority that those screen shots that involve Creed are from Lance's phone. You guys wanna talk about agenda, ask yourself why Lance would be getting someone to post screenshots from his phone? Why doesn't he have the ball to do it openly himself? What does he see as the benefit for doing so? Maybe my souce is wrong, but I really don't think so, he hasn't been wrong about anything else he revealed in the past, so hammer away on the wrong people once again, then ask yourself what your agenda really is, while you're questioning agendas.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY