feel sorry for the Chicken.

May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Yeah, well, Rabo shut down him and the team doctor responsible.

Nobody hired either of those two again, right? Right? Right?!? :(
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
blackcat said:
u gotta feel for the Chicken

Kyllingen fra Tølløse. In 2007 I was baying for his blood along with everyone else. But in retrospect (and especially in light of this year's Tour) it was highly arbitrary and deeply unfair to kick him out of the Tour, so close to a dominant victory (over Contador), and then blackball him from his chosen career - solely because of a dispute over his whereabouts! Granted, this was only one year after Landis, but that just means the Chicken was paying for Landis's positive as though it were his own!

The Chicken was single-minded about his racing and training, apparently, and I've read that he's a particularly nice guy; but he had zero media skills, from what I could tell, and not much charisma. Nothing for ASO and UCI to sell. I think these organizations prefer, indeed demand, a rider who is marketable in and around at least his own region. (They'd take another string of Armstrongs if they could get them. Or make them.) They didn't see this in the scrawny climbing savant called the Chicken.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Maxiton said:
Kyllingen fra Tølløse. In 2007 I was baying for his blood along with everyone else. But in retrospect (and especially in light of this year's Tour) it was highly arbitrary and deeply unfair to kick him out of the Tour (when he was in yellow, over three minutes ahead of Contador and only four stages away from victory), and then blackball him from his chosen career - solely because of a dispute over his whereabouts! Granted, this was only one year after Landis, but that just means the Chicken was paying for Landis's positive as though it were his own!

The Chicken was single-minded about his racing and training, apparently, and I've read that he's a particularly nice guy; but he had zero media skills, from what I could tell, and not much charisma. Nothing for ASO and UCI to sell. I think these organizations prefer, indeed demand, a rider who is marketable in and around at least his own region. (They'd take another string of Armstrongs if they could get them. Or make them.) They didn't see this in the scrawny climbing savant called the Chicken.
Is he the kind of guy who would use his friends to unwittingly smuggle doping products into another country in a shoebox?
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
MarkvW said:
Is he the kind of guy who would use his friends to unwittingly smuggle doping products into another country in a shoebox?
Well, yeah, I didn't say he was a saint. Just screwed.

Edit: Although frankly I had totally forgotten about that; but I still think he was treated too harshly, given the context and the lack of a single adverse drug test.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Maxiton said:
Kyllingen fra Tølløse. In 2007 I was baying for his blood along with everyone else.
so was he. Very meta support.

Is this the type of fans we know have for blood dopers?
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Someone whom the powers that be can point at and say, "See, we told you we're tough on doping." Not from a big nation, not particularly charismatic, an easy scapegoat. Not that he didn't deserve to get the boot, but what's good for the chicken should be good for the rooster.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
blackcat said:
so was he. Very meta support.

Is this the type of fans we know have for blood dopers?
:confused:

pedaling squares said:
Someone whom the powers that be can point at and say, "See, we told you we're tough on doping." Not from a big nation, not particularly charismatic, an easy scapegoat. Not that he didn't deserve to get the boot, but what's good for the chicken should be good for the rooster.
Exactly my point. When it looked like they were taking a broom to cycling and cleaning up at least the most egregious bits, I said, Good, get rid of this drug abusing bum who takes us all for drooling idiots. But in light of this Tour (and, with a little more distance on it), I think this dedicated, monkish, talented rider, doping though he was, got seriously shafted. I mean, he got a life time ban in everything but name, or just short of it. And for exactly the reasons you say, and no other reason.

(The shoebox thing was irresponsible and in poor taste, but we're talking artificial hemoglobin or some such, not heroin.)
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Tour 2007 = Rasmussen/G. Leinders = comedy capers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeozGnELNJ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nc0Uru4FxU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM5slCaEUZc

Why feel sorry for a donkey who tried to be faster than Pantani?
I assume he felt that if: Bjarne, Jan, Marco, Roberto and Lance could do it, so should he.

From our viewpoint it's absolutely warped, but from those who raced during those years it surely will have looked rather "grey".

And let's face it, nobody really tried to stop it. Not the teams, not the UCI. Rasmussen actually didn't get caught by any dope control (only two years later they could detect dynepo).

For the record, it's good he was caught. But it's a huge scandal that the fraude by the team management was without consequence. De Rooij, Breukink and leinders, long if not Life-time bans! It's absolutely ridiculous that only Michael was punished.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0


Q. What's different from today?

A.1) Only one (1) Rabobank rider.
A.2) Looks good on the bike.
 
Maxiton said:
Kyllingen fra Tølløse. In 2007 I was baying for his blood along with everyone else. But in retrospect (and especially in light of this year's Tour) it was highly arbitrary and deeply unfair to kick him out of the Tour, so close to a dominant victory (over Contador), and then blackball him from his chosen career - solely because of a dispute over his whereabouts! Granted, this was only one year after Landis, but that just means the Chicken was paying for Landis's positive as though it were his own!

The Chicken was single-minded about his racing and training, apparently, and I've read that he's a particularly nice guy; but he had zero media skills, from what I could tell, and not much charisma. Nothing for ASO and UCI to sell. I think these organizations prefer, indeed demand, a rider who is marketable in and around at least his own region. (They'd take another string of Armstrongs if they could get them. Or make them.) They didn't see this in the scrawny climbing savant called the Chicken.
You hit it with charisma... He wasn't intended to win. i.e. he just wasn't the UCI's Chicken. No fault (other than doping) of his own. OOC?
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Franklin said:
I assume he felt that if: Bjarne, Jan, Marco, Roberto and Lance could do it, so should he.

From our viewpoint it's absolutely warped, but from those who raced during those years it surely will have looked rather "grey".

And let's face it, nobody really tried to stop it. Not the teams, not the UCI. Rasmussen actually didn't get caught by any dope control (only two years later they could detect dynepo).

For the record, it's good he was caught. But it's a huge scandal that the fraude by the team management was without consequence. De Rooij, Breukink and leinders, long if not Life-time bans! It's absolutely ridiculous that only Michael was punished.
Few points:

* how about Vino getting caught that Tour? He was also too good to be true that Tour.
* why don't those cyclist keep it a little bit real? When u overdo it u will get caught
* no life time bans mean the cancer will stay in cycling. Breukink is DS now, Leinders is buddy boy with Wiggins, de Rooij even works for the Dutch Cycling Union if I'm correct.

We might say cycling is quite incestious, or is that too harsh?

Maybe Rasmussen was the scapegoat, but come on, Rasmussen as GT winner? That would have meant the death of the sport in my opinion. A midtable sized climber who at the age of 33 suddenly hits top form, destroying the field on the climbs? Just as believable as the sudden rise of a certain Chris Froome.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Few points:

* how about Vino getting caught that Tour? He was also too good to be true that Tour.
* why don't those cyclist keep it a little bit real? When u overdo it u will get caught
* no life time bans mean the cancer will stay in cycling. Breukink is DS now, Leinders is buddy boy with Wiggins, de Rooij even works for the Dutch Cycling Union if I'm correct.

We might say cycling is quite incestious, or is that too harsh?

Maybe Rasmussen was the scapegoat, but come on, Rasmussen as GT winner? That would have meant the death of the sport in my opinion. A midtable sized climber who at the age of 33 suddenly hits top form, destroying the field on the climbs? Just as believable as the sudden rise of a certain Chris Froome.
Oh I fully agree. I do not think he was singled out, especially considering the fait of those who came after him. Besides, the hanging of Basso (ideal posterboy for cycling after Lance) should have warned them the jig was up.

But I do understand the peloton's reasoning in this. I disagree, but it makes sense from their point of view.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS