Kimmage on Contador

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Nov 30, 2010
797
0
0
Benotti69 said:
...
His father commented about Greg Lemond having to wait for Hinault during a TdF and Roche Snr's comment was he NEVER would have waited for his team mate.
Visentini found out Roche Snr's attitude to the team mate concept the hard way.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
True - but his name was brought up in the piece and he should be (and was) offered the right to reply. So, why refuse to comment on a rider (Contador) getting suspended?
Because Roche didn't miss out on the Top 10 because of Contador. It's the UCI job to clean up this sess pit. Roche needs his work place to kept safe by his governing body.*

The question is - how many of us would speak out against a fellow employee? Maybe Roche has being doing his part in other ways? He doesnt need to tell the world about his workforce. He can that directly with his management.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
True - but his name was brought up in the piece and he should be (and was) offered the right to reply. So, why refuse to comment on a rider (Contador) getting suspended?
Errm, why not? WTF has this got to do with Roche. Kimmage was out of order here.
 
Jan 20, 2011
352
0
0
Not really. Roche is paid for an opinion in a newspaper. Contador is the second (after Menchov ;))biggest piece of news in professional cycling. To not offer an opinion on it isn't doing his job.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Benotti69 said:
Kimmage says that if riders want to ride in a clean peloton it is time to stand up and be counted. Roche Jnr has aligned himself to the bike pure people and is a columnist in an irish national newspaper.

http://bikepure.org/riders-and-teams/pro-riders/nicolas-roche-ag2r-la-mondiale/

he called out his team mates actions which he felt was unfair, why not doping?
One could ask JV the same general kinds of questions. Yet JV is the golden child. Untouchable. Beyond criticism.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
BotanyBay said:
One could ask JV the same general kinds of questions. Yet JV is the golden child. Untouchable. Beyond criticism.
i am hoping Kimmage interviews JV this year again and this time asks him flat out doping questions like last time and doesn't accept the talk around it like last time.

But i imagine JV would't agree to it.
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
And as has been pointed out earlier, Nicholas has had no problem calling out Gadret and Bennati for other things in his column.
Also he is like Cavendish in that he has no problem condemning Ricco and Rasmussen - but they're easy targets. So yeah I think PK has a point - he needs to show some initiative and say that he is annoyed with AC and Moquera. Be a leader like Cavendish and others haven't had the balls to do, with their a** licking of certain riders.
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
Well I believe if Kimmage interviewed JV in the morning he would get crucified by Paul. Paul knows alot more about Vaughters and that team than he did in 09. I am sure Floyd has has very interesting stories to tell him about Allen Lim and the hypocrisy of Slipstream in general. We are all fooled by Garmin - even someone as cynical as Paul. I believe he won't let this slide.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
thehog said:
Because Roche didn't miss out on the Top 10 because of Contador. It's the UCI job to clean up this sess pit. Roche needs his work place to kept safe by his governing body.*

The question is - how many of us would speak out against a fellow employee? Maybe Roche has being doing his part in other ways? He doesnt need to tell the world about his workforce. He can that directly with his management.
You mean ex-emplyee - AC has been sentanced by his own Fed.

Maybe Roche is doing his bit - but why not comment on the issue?
As for the UCI - well his Dad is in the 'WorldTour Council' and his agent is the son of the President of the UCI, so he should be all right there.

ferryman said:
Errm, why not? WTF has this got to do with Roche. Kimmage was out of order here.
Nothing - but now that he has been mentioned why refuse to talk?
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Kimmage says that if riders want to ride in a clean peloton it is time to stand up and be counted. Roche Jnr has aligned himself to the bike pure people and is a columnist in an irish national newspaper.

http://bikepure.org/riders-and-teams/pro-riders/nicolas-roche-ag2r-la-mondiale/

he called out his team mates actions which he felt was unfair, why not doping?

The problem is if these riders are going to speak out, then they've got to have something to back it up. They're not anonymous posters on a website, they're well known cyclists.

It's easy to say they should speak out, while maybe only one person on here is willing to use their real name (Mr Webster).

If I was in their position I would want to keep well out of these things and get on with my own cycling. How many of us make a stand like that in our regular lives. I certainly don't.

If you denounce riders for not speaking out, but are not willing to say exactly who you are yourself, then it's an empty criticism.
 
Benotti69 said:
Kimmage says that if riders want to ride in a clean peloton it is time to stand up and be counted. Roche Jnr has aligned himself to the bike pure people and is a columnist in an irish national newspaper.

http://bikepure.org/riders-and-teams/pro-riders/nicolas-roche-ag2r-la-mondiale/

he called out his team mates actions which he felt was unfair, why not doping?
Doping in general yes but to expect a young Pro to come down on Contador is, as we both know, not going to happen. His upset with a teammate over a bike related incident is totally different and you also know that:rolleyes:

Leave Roche alone on this mess:(
 
May 3, 2010
603
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
The UCI does not make a decision on the sanction - that is up to the Spanish Fed (RFEC) to do.

The UCI and/or WADA can appeal to CAS if they feel the judgement is too lenient.
Also Contador can appeal to CAS if he feels it is too harsh - which is whar he has said he will do.
Please educate me. As far as I knew the spanish fed only makes a proposal or recommendation. I thought the UCI made the final decision on the sanction?

If not that makes no sense. No wonder why there is an inconsistency in bans.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
offbyone said:
Please educate me. As far as I knew the spanish fed only makes a proposal or recommendation. I thought the UCI made the final decision on the sanction?

If not that makes no sense. No wonder why there is an inconsistency in bans.
You've just been educated ;)
It works as Maserati says it does.

EDIT:
But I also need to be educated:
The UCI can ban racers from certain races, can't they?
and ban certain teams from riding, say, the TdF, right?
 
Aug 14, 2010
44
0
0
And such people are meant to push things forward? If the solution is to come from guys like Kimmage, I guess I like the problem better. It's all very nice if at this point his job is about repeating "anti-doping" few times every hour and sharing his simple-minded thoughts that you can find in thousand versions all over the internet. But for some guys it's still cycling and perhaps they want to achieve, even if it's under conditions that aren't fairylike (and why would any of them, being clean or dirty, want to get results through disqualification of his rivals, is beyond me). I don't have to think twice about who, for me, deserves more respect. Hence I find sickening the way Kimmage speaks about Contador and Schleck. He knows cycling culture, the pressure and countless other factors, painting them as pure evil, plus making it seem like it's all black and white and riders do something wrong unless they risk everything and speak up- only stresses that it might be better for cycling if someone with more complex view started to voice his opinions as loudly.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,399
0
0
I don't doubt there would be an outrage, but not on what 50 picograms? That is in my opinion not a real dope catch, though the plasticizers make it odd that no one has reacted.

The 'outrage' wont happen cause of 50 picograms but from a positive EPO, or whatsoever, test.

Only thing I've heard from riders was Gesink saying: If he doped he gets to deserve a ban, if its really due to bad meat its a bad thing.
 
Apr 7, 2009
176
0
0
Havetts said:
I don't doubt there would be an outrage, but not on what 50 picograms? That is in my opinion not a real dope catch, though the plasticizers make it odd that no one has reacted.

The 'outrage' wont happen cause of 50 picograms but from a positive EPO, or whatsoever, test.

Only thing I've heard from riders was Gesink saying: If he doped he gets to deserve a ban, if its really due to bad meat its a bad thing.
Good points. I always found it strange that they busted Floyd for Testosterone and not EPO or blood doping. Same thing for Contador - such a miniscule amount that couldn't be performance enhancing. If the statement had been made that the Clen was evidence of Blood Doping, that would be one thing.

It seems like some big fish being caught with tiny hooks...
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Havetts said:
I don't doubt there would be an outrage, but not on what 50 picograms? That is in my opinion not a real dope catch, though the plasticizers make it odd that no one has reacted.
The problem the the plasticizers is that it has never been confirmed by any cycling authority (nor should it be, as the test wasn't ratified at the time). As far as I know, only the NY Times has really mentioned it. As such, it exists only as a rumour, and I'm sure many a clean cyclist has heard a false rumour about themselves.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,399
0
0
Well, the tiny hooks all added up can catch the fish. And that I think is what is happening, Contador being on Fuentes' list, Manolo Saiz (sp.?) being caught with a load of dope when Contador was on his team and now the Clenbuterol. It all adds up and I think the UCI thought it was enough.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
ferryman said:
WTF has this got to do with Roche. Kimmage was out of order here.
Agree.

Why does Kimmage care what Roche thinks?
I bet Roche does not care what Kimmage thinks.

"Me Me Me. Look at my framed copy of Me on L'Equipe front page"

Maybe Alberto and Kimmage should BOTH leave the sport...
Good riddance.
 
Jun 12, 2010
1,234
0
0
Mambo95 said:
The problem is if these riders are going to speak out, then they've got to have something to back it up. They're not anonymous posters on a website, they're well known cyclists.

It's easy to say they should speak out, while maybe only one person on here is willing to use their real name (Mr Webster).

If I was in their position I would want to keep well out of these things and get on with my own cycling. How many of us make a stand like that in our regular lives. I certainly don't.

If you denounce riders for not speaking out, but are not willing to say exactly who you are yourself, then it's an empty criticism.
Hi Mambo. I use my own name because I`m no longer involved or wish to be involved in elite or pro leval competetion. Therefore I`ve no fear of it coming back on top of me and TBH enjoy the freedom not giving a feck who I upset anymore.
Despite that I still have to post in riddles and be carefull naming names. Just because I know what I saw doesnt mean a defamation court will agree.
As a pro and before that at Elite amatuer leval I payed the price of being frank and open in my views on many things including doping and to a large extent hasened my own retirement when only 28.
Nic Roche?..well it aint about keeping food on HIS table is it?..he`s totaly Omarta.;)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY