Interesting Pinotti Interview

[luckyboy]

Nice interview with Pinotti on the front page - http://www.cyclingnews.com/features...terview-with-italian-cyclings-voice-of-reason

Talking sense about Di Luca + Zirbel's cases. And he talks a bit about the UCI + Armstrong, which is more than most other riders would.

Oh, he's with Bikepure too. Thought it was him.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Hard to take him seriously when he's riding for HGH. Why no questions about working with and for old dopers like Zabel, Holm, Aldag etc?

The environmentalists have coined the phrase 'greenwash' to describe things that are claimed to be environmentally friendly but which aren't. This interview is 'dopewash'

 

[luckyboy]

Yeah his team history isn't great. Don't know who you would have to ride for to be taken seriously.
I don't like to dismiss riders just because of the team they ride for though, some of the backroom staff are questionable to say the least anyway.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Yeah his team history isn't great. Don't know who you would have to ride for to be taken seriously.
I don't like to dismiss riders just because of the team they ride for though, some of the backroom staff are questionable to say the least anyway.

I just think that the interview highlights the problems - the elephant in the room is studiously avoided by the interviewer. It's a softball interview unfortunately.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I just think that the interview highlights the problems - the elephant in the room is studiously avoided by the interviewer. It's a softball interview unfortunately.

Don't expect 'hardball' from cycling media. I think that's too much to ask. At minimum, this site is on the right side of the doping story. They report it objectively and in a timely manner. Their language is much more deliberate and objective than a velonews or rodale press.

Expect the big stories to come from well outside cycling media. There are no passive concerns about losing advertisers and readers over taking a sensible doping stance outside cycling media.

 

[Berzin]

I just think that the interview highlights the problems - the elephant in the room is studiously avoided by the interviewer. It's a softball interview unfortunately.

The interview is complete and total BS. First Pinotti claims that he never saw anyone doping or anything of the sort with his own eyes.

Then he says that after the Festina Affair doping became a matter of individuals, not systematic and team-driven. So how the hell would he know the latter if he never witnessed the former?

No organized, team-administered doping after the Festina Scandal-really Marco? Lets' see-

1998, Festina Scandal. 1999, "The Tour of Redemption" and sevens straight years of organized, systematic doping at US Postal/Discovery/Astana.

Freiburg, Dr. Fuentes, etc. One organized doping scandal after another, with riders and teams implicated and/or caught out entirely.

Marcoi Pinotti, another useless apologist for the cheaters in his sport.

Daniel Friebe-You believed in him [Armstrong] before that?

Marco Pinotti-Here’s the thing [long hesitation]. As long as you don’t have proof, you always hope. I hoped. But there I thought, blimey, everything people said, the rumours…it was all confirmed, albeit not from a legal point of view. Now all I know, I read in the newspapers, and when I read about this investigation in the United States, I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Exactly, Pinotti could have been challenged time after time on those claims, but instead Friebe rolled over and let Pinotti tickle his tummy.

It's the same with David Millar claiming he saw nothing at SD when he was there.

Friebe really is a ****poor hack.

 

[Benotti69]

it made me angry when he said there "there is no point now", so let him keep 7 doped TdF wins. FFS, there is every point to take them off him, off Contador or Landis, off whoever has been shown to have doped to win. I suppose Pinotti thinks Marion Jones should have kept her Olympic titles too.

Pathetic Pinotti, absolute Omerta, ok to talk about Gunderson now while they are building the gallows.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Hard to take him seriously when he's riding for HGH. Why no questions about working with and for old dopers like Zabel, Holm, Aldag etc?

The environmentalists have coined the phrase 'greenwash' to describe things that are claimed to be environmentally friendly but which aren't. This interview is 'dopewash'

I know you have a thing for the media (and I would by in large agree with that) but what team does Pinotti go to where he won't be working with 'old dopers'?

The interview is complete and total BS. First Pinotti claims that he never saw anyone doping or anything of the sort with his own eyes.

Then he says that after the Festina Affair doping became a matter of individuals, not systematic and team-driven. So how the hell would he know the latter if he never witnessed the former?

No organized, team-administered doping after the Festina Scandal-really Marco? Lets' see-

1998, Festina Scandal. 1999, "The Tour of Redemption" and sevens straight years of organized, systematic doping at US Postal/Discovery/Astana.

Freiburg, Dr. Fuentes, etc. One organized doping scandal after another, with riders and teams implicated and/or caught out entirely.

Marcoi Pinotti, another useless apologist for the cheaters in his sport.

]Daniel Friebe-You believed in him [Armstrong] before that?

Marco Pinotti-Here’s the thing [long hesitation]. As long as you don’t have proof, you always hope. I hoped. But there I thought, blimey, everything people said, the rumours…it was all confirmed, albeit not from a legal point of view. Now all I know, I read in the newspapers, and when I read about this investigation in the United States, I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago.

To the blue - the same way most of us have, he read it.
Where does Pinotti make apologizes for doping or even Armstrong? He said quite the opposite - I don't know of any current rider who has said that they believe Armstrong has doped.


(Perhaps one of the mods could separate the Pinotti interview posts in to the new thread on Pinotti)

 

[Mambo95]

Here's the joke about the Clinic (or the Asylum as it's known elsewhere):

1. You denounce riders for never speaking out or mentioning doping.

2. Then one of the good guys, like Pinotti, gives a candid interview, saying what he genuinely thinks about things.

3. The reaction the Clinic is to attack him, everything he says and call him a doper.


What exactly is it you people expect from riders? Most of you are crazed obsessives. You're like Kurtz's camp, you've lost all perspective

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

In what way does maintaining omerta, claiming that he never saw anything and trying to pass of the Armstrong investigation with 'why investigate something from a long time ago' (which might as well be a PR press release) make Pinotti a 'good guy'.

He's not a good guy, he's a hypocrite.

 

[Mambo95]

it made me angry when he said there "there is no point now", so let him keep 7 doped TdF wins.
Pathetic Pinotti, absolute Omerta, ok to talk about Gunderson now while they are building the gallows.

From a cyclists point of view, there is no point. In 1999-2005, there would have been a point. For the Clinic, sure there's a point. You have LA bloodlust.

Pinotti's point is that it's like government enquiries. You can investigate as much as you like why a wrong-doing happened, but ultimately the problem is that the wrong-doing was allowed to happen in the first place.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Here's the joke about the Clinic (or the Asylum as it's known elsewhere):

1. You denounce riders for never speaking out or mentioning doping.

2. Then one of the good guys, like Pinotti, gives a candid interview, saying what he genuinely thinks about things.

3. The reaction the Clinic is to attack him, everything he says and call him a doper.


What exactly is it you people expect from riders? Most of you are crazed obsessives. You're like Kurtz's camp, you've lost all perspective

Where have I called Marco a doper (actually he is one of the few riders I would be confident to back).

Or did you just generalize everyone in The Clinic, which would mean you have actually lost all perspective and can only see posts that don't conform to your view?

P.S. What do you mean "You People"?

 

[Mambo95]

In what way does maintaining omerta,

People like you fling out the word 'omerta' all the time. Do really know what it means (in the cycling sense, not the mafia). It means not saying that there is doping in cycling. I hate to break this to you, but every associates cycling with doping.

What you mean by 'omerta' is why don't these cyclists speak to the press about these unfounded (true or not true) rumours that I've picked up.

What you expect is for a clean rider to go in front of a camera and spout all of the rumours they've heard without proof. Would you stand up at work, without prompting and say everything you may have heard.


(PS Marco, I know you look at this forum from time to time, so if you see something particularly libellous, just sue them. Not CyclingNews themselves, but the individual poster or the moderators. It's a UK website, so the law's heavily in your favour. Once they realise the environment you have to operate in then maybe they'll be sympathetic to your position)

(PPS Can you win Romandie for me, you are my GC pick on another website)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

In what way does maintaining omerta, claiming that he never saw anything and trying to pass of the Armstrong investigation with 'why investigate something from a long time ago' (which might as well be a PR press release) make Pinotti a 'good guy'.

He's not a good guy, he's a hypocrite.

Omerta is not saying anything about anything
That is far from what Pinotti has done. Again he is the only current rider I know who has publicly said he believes LA doped.

Also - you often berate (quite rightly) the 'media' for not asking questions, how they misrepresent views or ignore the obvious.
But then you completely misquote Pinotti by saying 'why investigate something from a long time ago' when he actually said "I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago." While I don't quite agree with his view its certainly very different from what you suggested he said.

 

[Mambo95]

Where have I called Marco a doper (actually he is one of the few riders I would be confident to back).

Or did you just generalize everyone in The Clinic, which would mean you have actually lost all perspective and can only see posts that don't conform to your view?

P.S. What do you mean "You People"?

Why take this personally? Where was I individually picking on you? (OK my post was after yours, that's just the way it is). You, I agree with (generally). I was commenting on the general vibe of the Clinic - a place that hates dopers, but hates successful clean riders even more.

(Edit see from your more recent post that we're generally on the same page)

 

[sniper]

I must agree with John Murphy. The interview sounded like omerta to me too.
If he's really the anti-dope-crusader the article pretends he is, he could have distanced himself from LA and other doped riders much more explicitly, which he didn'T really do (barring what he says about Di Luca).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why take this personally? Where was I individually picking on you? (OK my post was after yours, that's just the way it is). You, I agree with (generally). I was commenting on the general vibe of the Clinic - a place that hates dopers, but hates successful clean riders even more.

(Edit see from your more recent post that we're generally on the same page)

I wasn't taking it personally - I was merely pointing out that you paint with a broad brush.

If The Clinic had such views as you say 'we' do then threads would be nice and small as everyone would be in agreement. There would be no need for moderators and your friends would say that it was a boring place because that doesn't allow alternative views.
Do your friends know you spend a lot of time in the Asylum?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Omerta is not saying anything about anything
That is far from what Pinotti has done. Again he is the only current rider I know who has publicly said he believes LA doped.

Also - you often berate (quite rightly) the 'media' for not asking questions, how they misrepresent views or ignore the obvious.
But then you completely misquote Pinotti by saying 'why investigate something from a long time ago' when he actually said "I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago." While I don't quite agree with his view its certainly very different from what you suggested he said.

As regards to the first point - at the same time he tries to minimise it, by describing it as being in the past and that something should have been done about it in the past but implicitly saying not to do anything about it now. If something was wrong in the past then it is still wrong. Just because a wrong should have been dealt with in 1999 does not make it wrong or pointless to seek to correct it in 2011.

Pinotti's argument exactly the same arguments that are put out by anyone who doesn't want anything investigated. It is designed to make those who do think the past matters seem like an extremist or fundamentalist who is only concerned with the past. Remember McGwire 'I'm not here to talk about the past', or Tony Blair telling people to 'move on'.

Second point - I was paraphrasing and interpreting as I saw his remarks and should have been clearer.

 

[blutto]

....hats off to Marco Pin. for recognizing greatness and having a balanced picture on cycling today...of course having a higher education like Mr. Pinnotti might give an edge in objectivity.......thanks to cyclingnews for giving Mr. Pinnoti a podium to share his views on cycling past and present... hopefully Mr. Pinnotti will upon retirement, seek a place in the sporting bodies such as the UCI, or WADA or CONI... of course I am biased as I was always a fan of Gimondi, and the great Belgian and Italian riders of the 60's,70's.

....and let us not forget...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y40UjVlRAWg&feature=related......apologies to Roger DeVleminck and Eddy Plaenkaert for having to be here......such great riders, rode with Gimondi too......I think Gimondi rode for Salvarani or Bianchi...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tPIdlySNXw&feature=related

Cheers

blutto

 

[Mambo95]

Do your friends know you spend a lot of time in the Asylum?

I don't spend that much time here. I prefer the racing forum. But I recently got caught out by "Mellow Velo" cheating with you against my true love (another forum) - MV's a slapper too I hasten to add.

 

[md2020]

It is interesting that he talks about his disdain for DiLuca and the hypocrisy of that situation, but he's way too dismissive of the past. Here's a guy who has been overshadowed by dopers his entire career and ostensibly has lost tons of results (and salary) because of doping. Why isn't he more ****ed at guys like Armstrong who perpetuated and dominated that environment?

 

[Duartista]

It is interesting that he talks about his disdain for DiLuca and the hypocrisy of that situation, but he's way too dismissive of the past. Here's a guy who has been overshadowed by dopers his entire career and ostensibly has lost tons of results (and salary) because of doping. Why isn't he more ****ed at guys like Armstrong who perpetuated and dominated that environment?

Exactly how angry does someone have to be at dopers to prove that they are clean? Perhaps, instead of dope tests, riders should just be shown a picture of Armstrong. An insufficient display of rage would count as a positive test.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

As regards to the first point - at the same time he tries to minimise it, by describing it as being in the past and that something should have been done about it in the past but implicitly saying not to do anything about it now. If something was wrong in the past then it is still wrong. Just because a wrong should have been dealt with in 1999 does not make it wrong or pointless to seek to correct it in 2011.

Pinotti's argument exactly the same arguments that are put out by anyone who doesn't want anything investigated. It is designed to make those who do think the past matters seem like an extremist or fundamentalist who is only concerned with the past. Remember McGwire 'I'm not here to talk about the past', or Tony Blair telling people to 'move on'.

Second point - I was paraphrasing and interpreting as I saw his remarks and should have been clearer.

Fair enough - and I agree with you that it should be investigated and seen right through to the end.

As to MP's comments "I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago. I wouldn't agree with the first part, but I would agree that investigations should be done at the time (and it shouldn't be outside agencies having to do the UCIs job)

As to the Blue - sorry, no.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

McGwire when he was called to testify about taking steroids he told the committee that he wasn't here to talk about the past. When Tony Blair was confronted about the Iraq war and the lies told he told people to 'move on', this is a leitmotif with people who have something to hide and a reason to not have the past investigated.

With Pinotti's past (SD, Lampre, T-Mob/HGH) I can understand why he might not want people digging around.

DDL, like Vino and Ricco is an easy target to attack, why is he so angry about dopers coming back into the sport but silent about working for ex-dopers like Holm and Aldag?

I find any claims by riders to not know what is going on in their teams pretty laughable, Millar who had his best year post ban at SD, had absolutely no idea about Mayo, Ricco, Piepoli etc, Pinotti never saw anything untoward...