Benotti69 said:
Yeah, sure the sport is now clean so sponsors are running away from it as they dont want their products associated with clean atheltes????
Soon all that will be left is bike related sponsorship!
That itself would be momentous change.
What changed? The only thing that changed is teams have got better at logistics to enable doping. Take BMC, their boy Ballan gone for 2 years, already forgotten by Och and no mention of how he stood by Ballan. Yeah the culture of doping sure has changed. All the outrage being tweeted by riders and DS at Ballan for doping when the sport has cleaned up. It is DEAFENING.
1. Thank you for fully agreeing with me as I stated explicitly some things have not changed.
2. For example the firing of Breukink even though his implication was overturned by a court. Which is kinda special wouldn't you say?
3. We have teams like Sky being grilled by press and fans alike and they do not get away from it. There have never been so many press releases and other outings of being clean*. It's the biggest issue in cycling nowadays!
4. It's clear that key managers as Richard Plugge are committted by both sponsor as team by running a clean team. And no that does not mean we can trust guys like him, but the consequences of deceit are much bigger for these guys. (See what happened with his predecessors)
* And before you waste time erecting a strawman, let me stress for the millionth time I do not believe every guffaw and certainly do not think everything is ay-okay. My disgust for Brailsford is easy to find on this forum. He's clearly has a long list of easy to proof lies.
Facts are hard to come by in a sport that does not give a sh!t about the culture of doping and has till Sept'13 enabled it for it's chosen sons and pi$$ed on others.
Facts are always to be found: Here are some you will like (no sarcasm)
1. We know most TdF winners are implicated in doping. FACT
2. We know that consequences for structured dpoing have become severe even for management. Leinders, Bruyneel, Breukink, De Rooij. FACT
3. We know that detection has gotten better (see Clenbuterol) FACT
And there are many many more (destruction of Lance, lies of Brailsford, proof that contamination does happen, etc. etc.). Now interpreting those facts is so hard. We cannot deny the culture of pro-cycling has changed, at least on the outer layers. We also know that a lot of crap is still going on.
But claiming we know for sure? Well, I have a bit lower opinion of my own clearvoyant skills. I
think it's still (highly!) unlikely we yet saw a clean GT winner. But unlike pre 2009, we don't have direct evidence yet (direct rumors, stories of teammates, involvement in scandals etc.). That's remarkable...
Where did i call pro cyclists monsters?
You have little or any compassion for a rider whose guilt is still not proven and is suffering a severe depression. In fact we still do not know the circumstances.
I find that pitiful behavior. Even an ogre as Lance is still a human being with rights. Now if we look at Jonathan Breyne (who is an utterly different category as Lance) deserves at least our benefit of the doubt as long as we do not know the details.
Until riders take control of the sport they are going to be treated badly. There have been exceptions, but the majority are treated like crap.
Yes and that's wrong.
The amount of suspicion and hate can be a mighty roadblock for an open iscussion how to get out of the pit. More and more restrictions and test is not feasible (expensive) and is
perhaps not neccesary. Education, sanctioning DS'es and doctors (especially the second category deserves a thorough weeding, if only for morals) could be much more productive than yet again spitting on riders. Yet most discusion here (even in the Sky thread)is how Rogers, Froome, Contador, Rodriquuez etc. are cheaters (sometmes worse characteristics are used). So here in the clinic our focus keeps returning to the riders and how immoral they are.
But again the culture to dope has not gone. It cant the same people are still there doing what they know best.
But again, point out where I say that.......
This is a strawman and you should know by now, considering I stressed this every post lately due to the incessant anger my posts react. Funny that because when I posted the Leinders files I was quite a darling here.
To sum it up:
1. Nobody knows the exact state of cycling. It's "somehwere between nothing changed" and "it has improved". For both arguments there's a lot to be said.
2. I never ever claimed things are fine.
3. I am one of the strongest critics of doctors in the clinic.
4. I'm one of the biggest critics of the amount of rotten team structures and the DS"es who just can go on (Hello BMC!)
5. I am a firm believer in basic rights: no judging people before the facts are known.
6. I'm dead set against turning the burden of proof around.
7. One strike out suggestions have no parallel in civilian life, unless we look at heinuous crimes.
8. If rules become so dificult that it will affect athletes life too much, we are on the wrong road. That wil cause subterfuge and frustration.
9. There is a practical limit which can be accomplished by testing. Costs are a major factor. That's not simply the union's being incooperative (though there's certainly that!). If anti-doping is affecting the money left for youth categories, tourist rides etc. we are on the wrong track. Competitive cycling is more than just the top categories.
10. The above can be summed up that the only way out of this can be arranged by a culture shift. Changing culture by punishment(=repression) won't yield good results. There's a ton of literature about that
I don't think that my psition is making me part of the "defenders" (a charge made just yesterday) or makes me somehow being a naive guy who thinks everything is okay. Unless the only real anti-dopers is carrying a pitchfork and torch and everyone else is just a facilitator.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram