The Hitch said:
A few points you seem to be missing.
1 since Kittel has not clarified why he has gone after this particular rider so hard, nor given any explanation, implicit or explicit, why other riders smashing out similar (read far more impressive) performances do not provoke such a reaction from him, then we have every right to question why he went after this rider
Again, you expect him to call out performances YOU find suspicious, not what HE finds suspicious - and several others it seems.
2 The wording of the tweet. Hes not saying – I am suspicious. Hes not saying like Kimmage – there are a lot of questionmarks. He is not asking how.
He is straight up accusing the guy of doping. In about as hard and upfront manner as possible for a 140 character post.
Well, if he hasn't the evidence, he shouldn't have done it. There is talk of highly visible weird marks on the arm. Maybe that was both obvious and the final straw, i don't know.
And frankly, the less euphamism and sarcasm, and more straightofrward speaking, the better. It may be a minority opinion in here, but sarcasm get's damn all done.
But in the end, I'm not actually making a point about Kittel. If he's wrong, he lives with consequences. No-one is suggesting he's lying about his suspicions, He clearly suspects. And he said so.
I'm making a point about the Clinic. About the constant bleating, and yes, sometimes it's bleating, that X, Y, Z won't speak out on doping - then someone does, and many of the same guys rush to shut him up. Why? Because he hasn't fingered the guy or the team THEY want him to.
I.E. it's not about truth, it's about picking favourites. And that's low, cynical hypocrisy.
3 You accuse posters of critiscising Kittel's tweet based on their own models and thought proccess, and not Kittel's , yet proceed to do the exact same thing with your own post.
You accuse bennoti and others of thinking in terms of like and don't like. Hes not happy that they go after Sayer cos he likes him but thinks its ok to go after froome who he doesn't like.
Maybe thats how you approach theses issues, that doesn't mean thats how everyone else does it.
The 'inconsistency' speaks for itself. You're either FOR speaking out, or you're not. Anything else is clearly evidence of favouritism, and you can't realistically be anti-doping on a partial basis.
A pretty obvious variable you are ignoring is the money one. Sayer is small fry. Russian amateur is small fry. Vuelta Costa Rica podium is small fry.
These people get paid a few grand, slightly more than subsistance level, probably half of it in vouchers for whatever the part time sponsor they represent is selling, and the only people who give a **** are their immediate family.
Guys who win the Tour, the Giro, the Worlds, The Vuelta, PR, MSR, LBL, GDL, RVV, paris nice, Tirreno, etc etc etc, get million dollar contracts, get fame cum heroworship amongst the considerable worldwide population of cycling fans/ National hero and global celebrity status if its the tdf.
Not to mention the fact that cheating someone of victory in the tour of turkey or costa ricca or the u23 tour of siberia, is a lesser crime then doing it on the big stage.
No. It's the same crime. It's doping.
Listen very carefully.
I. don't. give. a. dam^. how much money is involved. It is irrelevant. You either are a cheat, or you're not.
Thinking otherwise is the kind of bullsh*t that leads to an entire peleton getting juiced because even 'workaday' riders need to 'feed their families'.
No. if you can't earn the money honestly, get another job. Now, when it comes to financial punishments, sure, take wealth and status into account. But in basic terms. You cheat, you're out. Gone. and if a rider has evidence, he says so and if possible brings it to an authority that will do something. End. Of.
Anything else is hypocrisy. It's not being anti-doping - it's just not liking the 'other' teams stars. And that is pathetic beyond words.
Oh and its a matter of record that governing bodies have thrown nobodies to the wolves in order to cover up the big names.
I would appreciate evidence on this 'matter of record'. I don't find it impossible to believe at all, since McQuaid and even more so Verbruggen are scum. And if so, it's disgusting.
But it does not justify deriding omerta, and then telling a rider to shut up because the person he fingered isn't famous enough, or the right person, for your liking. 2 wrongs not making a right, and all that...
So to me it seems perfectly logical that people roll their eyes evertytime some no name gets all the heat (in this case for doing absolutely nothing that 10 other guys considered heroes have not done). And something that doesn't have to have anything to do with nationality or like and dislike.
When sayer starts to win the PN, Romandie, Dauphine, tour and olympics on 1 half year long peak, and a whole national press + army of posters take on an agenda of shoving all the suspicion surrounding that under the carpet, im sure the reaction will be far stronger.
So, don't squeal on a doper unless he's a Skyborg, is that the test now?
jesus wept. Whataboutery squared.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram