McQuaid: Landis and Hamilton are Not Heroes.

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 19, 2009
941
0
0
rhubroma said:
Interesting take from His Royal A$$hat. So let me get this straight: it's alright to commercialize on Wonderboy-Cancer Jesus and to have protected your cash cow until there was no other choice but to throw him under the bus; however, opening the first major cracks in the cycling facade of omertà is evil - and of course doing wrong to the sport?

It's alright to write a book, just so long as you don't commercialize on it too much, as apparently Millar didn't do (who is still racing and hence employed)? It's not ok, though, to write one with earth shattering news that actually causes a sensation and makes up for the lost income, because you were unceremoniously thrown out of the environment by the system you now denounce?

It's ok to tell the truth, so long as it is only damaging to yourself? Anything that touches the sport's governance, however, is only for mendacious and thoroughly opportunistic reasons?

Let me specify that I don't consider Floyd and Tyler "heroes," which is something else. Yet between idol worship and anathema there exists an objective and infinitely more fair and actual assessment of what they have achieved. In light of his moral casuistry, the only scumbag here is McQuaid.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-landis-and-hamilton-are-far-from-heroes
Hear, hear!

For a top official of a sporting organization to call whistleblowers "scumbags" is extremely low.

He's the scumbag. He's taking his plays straight out of the LA PR playbook.

Turn it black and white. Demonize or lionize. No in between.

I agree. Landis and Hamilton are not heroes, and I very much doubt they see themselves that way. They are repentant cheats who have finally done the decent thing.

So Fat Pat, sue me: McQuaid is a clown and an a$$hat, and no better than Gadaffi. He runs a banana republic.
 
Apr 1, 2009
330
0
0
Zultronova said:
Landis could have a case to sue McQuaid for calling him a 'Scumbag'.:D Though I would agree that Landis and Hamilton are not heroes. But the sport needed all this, if it is to have any chance of a better future.
taking money from people to fund a legal case in which you are clearly guily = scumbag
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
FignonLeGrand said:
taking money from people to fund a legal case in which you are clearly guily = scumbag
Stating that you were wrong, apologising and that you will repay that money negates him being a scumbag!
 
Mar 22, 2010
908
0
0
Mike and mike, ESPN, Just Shut Up Award for Pat McQuaid

Sorry if this is being discussed elsewhere, there is so much stuff going on in so many places on this board right now it's kind of hard to keep up with the duplication of conversations.

Mike and Mike just laced into Pat McQuaid for his comments about Armstrong (and to be clear, they went out of their way to make it plain they weren't defending Armstrong) regarding Pat's comments that there is no place in cycling for lance Armstrong and McQuaid's phony pomposity. They said that with 20 of the 21 podium finishers being tied to doping scandals in the 7 tour wins, cycling is EXACTLY the place for Armstrong to be. The implication being that McQuaid has essentially turned the sport into a wh0reh0use and now is feigning this outrage.

Unfortunately, the only time cycling gets frontpage publicity here is when it's about dope which to me is the real crime.

Lance makes it about Lance, espn makes it about dope, it never gets to be about what makes it so great to the rest of us who care.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
Robert Millar weighs in

http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/robert-millar/the-bare-minimum

Robert Millar on the UCI, Armstrong and the mismanaging the EPO era

General classification leader Stephen Roche and best climber Robert Millar atop the podium after stage 11 at the 1987 Giro.

view thumbnail gallery
This Monday it was the UCI's turn to be stood in between the rock and the hard place. Ironically, in a dilemma not that different to the one faced by Tyler Hamilton and Co years ago, the UCI faced a decision which was going to be criticised whatever they did. So they did what they have been doing for too long now: they produced the bare minimum, they gave the political answers, dodged the hard questions and hid behind USADA's reasoning. Realistically, they had no choice but to accept the evidence put before them because any other challenge or inspection opened them up to even more criticism. And yet by doing the minimum those questions will still come. We still want the answers to the questions they don't want to hear.
The UCI can deny there was any link between the Armstrong donations and the suspicious test results and Pat McQuaid can try to place all the blame onto the riders for the blood doping and EPO abuse but everyone is beginning to see beyond that defence. The "It wasn't me it was them that did it" excuse has already been made famous by Virenque during the Festina affair and we all know how that one turned out .
1998 was the warning that the 50% limit chosen by the UCI two years earlier was an open invitation to dope to that level. The teams of the period, as teams had always done, expected the rules to be pushed and organised themselves as they thought fit. The UCI said it was 50% to protect riders’ health and just ignored the sudden emergence of the 75kg climbers. Festina were the unlucky ones as it could have been any of the teams – any one of them – and the bizarre strike of that year’s Tour just confirmed it. They weren't protesting that they were being cheated by Festina, they were protesting that their world had been found out.
At the last Tour de France I rode, a quick poll of my friends and colleagues in the peloton revealed that EPO was available to everyone regardless of the team budget or ambition. They weren't happy about it as the difference was no longer a question of how good an athlete you were, it was that plus how good your doctor was with the new drugs. The arrival of EPO and HGH meant the competition was as much about chemical warfare as it was about how fast you could race a bike. Of course those teams in at the very start of the substance abuse held a head start for the first few years, but eventually the lesser teams caught up and everyone could ride up a mountain at 30kmh with their mouths closed
Want to know who was juiced? That's easy – just ask to see their blood levels . Before EPO, the haematocrit norm would have been around 40-42%, gradually reducing as a grand tour went on. Then suddenly everyone's jumped to 50% or more and stayed there for weeks at a time. There hadn't been a step forward in human evolution, the only thing that had changed was the arrival of what Laurent Fignon called the new Super (French for high octane fuel) and those willing to supply and administer it.
So the riders found themselves in the situation of go to 50% and be a good professional or get blasted every day and at the end of the year it'll be bye-bye. When it's your dream job, you aren't yet mature enough to have a strong moral compass and are surrounded by an unhealthy environment there aren't many people who are going to stand up and shout that this is wrong. Add to that the ridicule that would be unleashed upon anyone who told the real truth and you have the perfect ingredients for the omertà. These are as much excuses as they are reasons. I doubt any of the riders placed in the 50% dilemma liked the idea of risking dying in their sleep, obliged to have one set of medication to see them through the racing day and then another set to get them through the night in case their blood got too thick or they were dehydrated. They didn't become bike riders for that reason.
After Festina, it was the supposedly the new era but the UCI limits were still the same and the problem moved even more into the shadows. The risk of longer bans or prison for the guilty didn't deter the preparers, it just made them smarter. Now we know what that meant: micro-dosing, blood transfusions and serious planning to avoid the testers.
Ask yourself would you have a blood transfusion outside of a hospital environment? No neither would I. I'd be scared even in a hospital given the stories of contamination but it seems some people thought this was acceptable to be competitive, to prove their point, to dominate. You have to have serious issues if you think blood doping is OK.
Cycling was bad enough when it was amphetamines and cortisones as the weapons to be deployed in times of desperation, and you were lucky to get out of that period with your self-respect and health intact, but organised preparation of whole teams with the collusion of doctors, coaches and management is criminal. It isn't cheating, it's playing with people’s lives.
What the UCI have done during the EPO era has been far from enough, they have let down a generation of fans, riders, sponsors and supporters. They and the people behind the 50% farce have been lucky that there weren't deaths. The UCI have been dragged forward by one scandal after another and now the social media generation has cried enough. It's no longer a carefully selected group of people asking if they think it was alright for Armstrong to be invited to respond to a dubious test result. It's all of us shouting: What ? And you took donations from him afterwards? And you thought that was OK? And maybe he asked how you reached those results and you thought he was being helpful? And it's still a 50% limit today despite the evidence that it isn't normal?
This mess is as much down to what the UCI hasn't done as much as it is the fault of all those who supplied, advised, facilitated and expected the use of EPO and blood doping.
Thankfully, the young riders of today have seen it's wrong and they dare talk about because they can they are allowed to talk about it and the old omertà can't stop it .
Now there's the opportunity to sort out the problems, to have the victims and the perpetrators come forward and give evidence. Punishments might be needed but they have to be appropriate. I thought six months was reasonable for those involved in the Armstrong/US Postal affair but the reaction from Lefevere to fire Leipheimer and the Sky threat of sacking everyone is only going to discourage what needs to heard.
There has been progress these last few years but much like the historic revolutions they have been led by those not willing to put up with the unacceptable and not by the institutions.
If the UCI wants to stay (in charge) then things are going to have to change and they could do well to start with the difficult questions.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
alberto.legstrong said:
. . .
Mike and Mike . . .
Who are Mike and Mike?

But back OT - this is the last straw for me with McQuaid. I have not invested in getting him out of the UCI, as I didn't think it worth the effort. I figured he would have no choice but to change. Now, though, I think he has ultimately demonstrated that he is not capable of running the UCI, or protecting our sport. He is actively proving Rabobank right.

So, EVERYBODY. Here is what we can do!

1. Sign the petition> http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1062686#post1062686

2. We need a list of the UCI members. I've seen the list of the UCI members - those people who actually are responsible for electing McQuaid. His "bosses", after a fashion. Would somebody please post that list, or a link to it, so everybody can look up who represents their country?

3. When you get the list - email or write to your UCI reps.

4. Post this same request on other boards you are a member of.

5. Contact your local bike shops, and local bicycle clubs. Tell them they can help by doing the same - send a letter to their UCI reps, and spread the word.

I apologize that I do not have the time for a few days to look up the UCI reps myself.

Please help. This is enough, and enough is too much. Let's inject some spinach, and make sure we get some change at the top.

ADDED: The UCI list is here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=19076
 
Oct 30, 2010
177
0
0
ultimobici said:
Alright folks! Been away a few weeks. Did I miss anything?

Robert Millar. Is this the same Robert Millar who wrote an obituary in 'Cycle Sport' magazine to his team doctor saying something along the lines of 'he always made sure he looked after the riders health, didn't always follow the rules but had our best interests at heart' etc. ? Must have been around 1993-94 or so. I remember it cause it was pretty obvious what he was saying even without reading between the lines.

Some of us remember these things, Mr Millar.
 
Oct 30, 2010
177
0
0
Baroh1488 said:
Will you put this up in it's own thread? If it sounds like Father Ted, looks like Father Ted and walks like Father Ted.... ****ing hilarious interview.
Down with this sort of thing.

Careful now.
 
Markyboyzx6r said:
Alright folks! Been away a few weeks. Did I miss anything?

Robert Millar. Is this the same Robert Millar who wrote an obituary in 'Cycle Sport' magazine to his team doctor saying something along the lines of 'he always made sure he looked after the riders health, didn't always follow the rules but had our best interests at heart' etc. ? Must have been around 1993-94 or so. I remember it cause it was pretty obvious what he was saying even without reading between the lines.

Some of us remember these things, Mr Millar.
And where's the contradiction, when his point is that the new wonder PEDs radically altered the sport while the UCI looked the other way as if they were just like the older PEDs?
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
Markyboyzx6r said:
Alright folks! Been away a few weeks. Did I miss anything?

Robert Millar. Is this the same Robert Millar who wrote an obituary in 'Cycle Sport' magazine to his team doctor saying something along the lines of 'he always made sure he looked after the riders health, didn't always follow the rules but had our best interests at heart' etc. ? Must have been around 1993-94 or so. I remember it cause it was pretty obvious what he was saying even without reading between the lines.

Some of us remember these things, Mr Millar.
He was referring to the late 80s into 90/91 iirc. What exactly are you insinuating?
 
Dec 30, 2010
391
0
0
rhubroma said:
Interesting take from His Royal A$$hat. So let me get this straight: it's alright to commercialize on Wonderboy-Cancer Jesus and to have protected your cash cow until there was no other choice but to throw him under the bus; however, opening the first major cracks in the cycling facade of omertà is evil - and of course doing wrong to the sport?

It's alright to write a book, just so long as you don't commercialize on it too much, as apparently Millar didn't do (who is still racing and hence employed)? It's not ok, though, to write one with earth shattering news that actually causes a sensation and makes up for the lost income, because you were unceremoniously thrown out of the environment by the system you now denounce?

It's ok to tell the truth, so long as it is only damaging to yourself? Anything that touches the sport's governance, however, is only for mendacious and thoroughly opportunistic reasons?

Let me specify that I don't consider Floyd and Tyler "heroes," which is something else. Yet between idol worship and anathema there exists an objective and infinitely more fair and actual assessment of what they have achieved. In light of his moral casuistry, the only scumbag here is McQuaid.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-landis-and-hamilton-are-far-from-heroes


This first original post says it all and well .

i really didnt have to read any further , but glad just about all felt the same way .

IN my mind, the ones that should be banned for life are the ones that let it go on this far. The real hero will be the one that can bring down McQuack and Vernuggen and give life suspensions to the DS of the teams involved the management the doctors , anyone that oversaw any part of the doping procedure in the buses. etc. That would mean going to the top . Do Not start at the bottom and continuously throw the employee under the bus.

Point to note . In a factory setting a person gets caught for drinking on the job . do you send them to the gallows , do you fire them , do you ask them to not say anything , is it ok to be drunk on the job and accidentally run into a few people with a fork truck and explain that to their kids . Do they have rights .
Normally with a union shop , it goes to become a union/company matter and this results in usually a < go to rehab , go get help situation > where the employee is rehabilitated and re-enters the work force at some point .
The employee is rehabilitated after a suspension .

In Pro sports all of the sudden the nut is cracked in a different way. A lot of things are the same in the chances one gets , with one exception .
The Bosses and their dedicated team of specialists actually supply the dope . or administer the dope or open the channels to the dope train .
So that would be like a company leaving an open box of cold beer on the shop floor during a heat wave while your suited up and trying to weld something , or whatever your doing .

The ones accepting the bribes and the ones that are the directors the cover up artists , the presidents , CEO's , and all others that are included in the culture and feeding that culture should be doing the time , banned or
or suspended from any more involvement in the sport .

The very least , if the public is kind , is to allow these people to resign . The monies that they would normally get , should NOT be given out in forms of golden parachutes . Period .

LA would of never won 7 tour titles had everyone done their job and nailed the dope offences to the wall for all to see . LA would of had to take his 2 year penalty , and every other penalty in succession , and sooner or later it does get harder to train and win if you are not privy to a privileged drug testing , warning or system.

So basicly , Mcquak is just trying to protect himself when he says all the derrogatory remarks about Tyler or Floyd . That is what we all see .

I bet the poop goes even higher when major corporations are involved . That could be really nasty when the American publics trust has been once again deceived .
Which corporation has the most to lose , when it comes to donations . How high does it really go?
Answer that and you answer why it took so long to get to the bottom of this .

Something to think about .
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
ultimobici said:
He was referring to the late 80s into 90/91 iirc. What exactly are you insinuating?
Markyboy likes insinuation as long the insinuation is not at Sky ;)
 
stainlessguy1 said:
This first original post says it all and well .

i really didnt have to read any further , but glad just about all felt the same way .

IN my mind, the ones that should be banned for life are the ones that let it go on this far. The real hero will be the one that can bring down McQuack and Vernuggen and give life suspensions to the DS of the teams involved the management the doctors , anyone that oversaw any part of the doping procedure in the buses. etc. That would mean going to the top . Do Not start at the bottom and continuously throw the employee under the bus.

Point to note . In a factory setting a person gets caught for drinking on the job . do you send them to the gallows , do you fire them , do you ask them to not say anything , is it ok to be drunk on the job and accidentally run into a few people with a fork truck and explain that to their kids . Do they have rights .
Normally with a union shop , it goes to become a union/company matter and this results in usually a < go to rehab , go get help situation > where the employee is rehabilitated and re-enters the work force at some point .
The employee is rehabilitated after a suspension .

In Pro sports all of the sudden the nut is cracked in a different way. A lot of things are the same in the chances one gets , with one exception .
The Bosses and their dedicated team of specialists actually supply the dope . or administer the dope or open the channels to the dope train .
So that would be like a company leaving an open box of cold beer on the shop floor during a heat wave while your suited up and trying to weld something , or whatever your doing .

The ones accepting the bribes and the ones that are the directors the cover up artists , the presidents , CEO's , and all others that are included in the culture and feeding that culture should be doing the time , banned or
or suspended from any more involvement in the sport .

The very least , if the public is kind , is to allow these people to resign . The monies that they would normally get , should NOT be given out in forms of golden parachutes . Period .

LA would of never won 7 tour titles had everyone done their job and nailed the dope offences to the wall for all to see . LA would of had to take his 2 year penalty , and every other penalty in succession , and sooner or later it does get harder to train and win if you are not privy to a privileged drug testing , warning or system.

So basicly , Mcquak is just trying to protect himself when he says all the derrogatory remarks about Tyler or Floyd . That is what we all see .

I bet the poop goes even higher when major corporations are involved . That could be really nasty when the American publics trust has been once again deceived .
Which corporation has the most to lose , when it comes to donations . How high does it really go?
Answer that and you answer why it took so long to get to the bottom of this .

Something to think about .
Ok but you should also think about the role LA obtained within the sport, which e was to reside above it. In his case we are not merely talking about an 'ordinary' doper, but one who willfully cultivated an Al Capone Godfather position in cycling. For this reason he needs to be thrown under the bus first. Afterwards we can hope that those that bowed to His Majesty in the UCI will receive their just dues. Just as LA made cycling more visible globally, so he must visibly be vilified for the public to demand a change in the regime. Capito?
 
In light of McQuaid's comments on Hamilton and Landis, calling them "scumbags," his continued support of Riis, an admitted doper, who, however, did not break omertà and so continues to find cycling a lucrative and hospitable environment - and who also had major riders on his teams either implicated in doping investigations (Basso) or test positive (Contador) - is both perverse and farcical. Now I don't know whether the gross hypocrisy of it is a greater perversion or farce, if the insult to common intelligence is more perverted than it is farcical, but either way it is the fruit of someone who obviously isn't mentally sane.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-has-no-place-in-cycling-says-hamilton
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
rhubroma said:
Interesting take from His Royal A$$hat. So let me get this straight: it's alright to commercialize on Wonderboy-Cancer Jesus and to have protected your cash cow until there was no other choice but to throw him under the bus; however, opening the first major cracks in the cycling facade of omertà is evil - and of course doing wrong to the sport?

It's alright to write a book, just so long as you don't commercialize on it too much, as apparently Millar didn't do (who is still racing and hence employed)? It's not ok, though, to write one with earth shattering news that actually causes a sensation and makes up for the lost income, because you were unceremoniously thrown out of the environment by the system you now denounce?

It's ok to tell the truth, so long as it is only damaging to yourself? Anything that touches the sport's governance, however, is only for mendacious and thoroughly opportunistic reasons?

Let me specify that I don't consider Floyd and Tyler "heroes," which is something else. Yet between idol worship and anathema there exists an objective and infinitely more fair and actual assessment of what they have achieved. In light of his moral casuistry, the only scumbag here is McQuaid.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-landis-and-hamilton-are-far-from-heroes
put it how you want. hamilton and landis are far from heroes. they waited many years before confessing and trying to get most out their careers, including multiple comebacks. I have not much respect for them other then that they turned out right in the end.
 
Ryo Hazuki said:
put it how you want. hamilton and landis are far from heroes. they waited many years before confessing and trying to get most out their careers, including multiple comebacks. I have not much respect for them other then that they turned out right in the end.
When did I say they were "heroes"? In fact I specifically said I did not. At any rate, your tacit support of McQuaid makes you an A$$hat as well. :D:p
 
Dec 30, 2010
391
0
0
rhubroma said:
Ok but you should also think about the role LA obtained within the sport, which e was to reside above it. In his case we are not merely talking about an 'ordinary' doper, but one who willfully cultivated an Al Capone Godfather position in cycling. For this reason he needs to be thrown under the bus first. Afterwards we can hope that those that bowed to His Majesty in the UCI will receive their just dues. Just as LA made cycling more visible globally, so he must visibly be vilified for the public to demand a change in the regime. Capito?
Yes , sorry. Under the bus would be too good for him . More like steam rolled and flattened so there are no chances of more intimidation in the future .
I was more referring to the domestiques and other that are constantly caught up in the messes and have no way out . LA was the king pin and really hasnt felt it all until now .
( thanks for catching that .)
 
I Watch Cycling In July said:
"Another thing that annoys me is that Landis and Hamilton are being made out to be heroes. They are as far from heroes as night and day. They are not heroes, they are scumbags. All they have done is damage the sport."

McQuaid will never get it. It's not the poeple who tell the truth that damages the sport, it's the people who allow that truth to become a reality in the firts place. They are the scumbags. They damage the sport and they damage people in the process.

Landis and Hamilton are fallible human beings, not gilded heroes. When speaking out though, they must have feared ridicule and insults and being ostracized by their peers. I think their actions required courage, and that it's fair to recognize them for that.

I hope Landis feels a happy sense of achievement when he hears McQuaid say "Landis started it". (who says that after they are 10 anyway?)
I agree. McQuade is a grade A ******bag anyways, and NO ONE should believe the supposed "Donations" Wonder****** gave to UCI, were3 for anything OTHER than a payoff to make samples go away.

McQuade is a huge POS.
 
Aug 17, 2009
125
0
0
Yes, they are not heroes, but they are certainly not scumbags either. Landis and Tyler are on the way to rehabilitating their image. They are the fallen who have found some dignity and are rising-up. No doubt the load off their backs having spoken the truth is a huge relief. They cannot be ignored, denigrated or shut-down as scumbags.

Verbruggen and McQuaid are the scumbags. Tyler said it best, McQuaid is not fit for cycling. Verbruggen neither.
 
Dec 30, 2010
391
0
0
stainlessguy1 said:
This first original post says it all and well .

i really didnt have to read any further , but glad just about all felt the same way .

IN my mind, the ones that should be banned for life are the ones that let it go on this far. The real hero will be the one that can bring down McQuack and Vernuggen and give life suspensions to the DS of the teams involved the management the doctors , anyone that oversaw any part of the doping procedure in the buses. etc. That would mean going to the top . Do Not start at the bottom and continuously throw the employee under the bus.

Point to note . In a factory setting a person gets caught for drinking on the job . do you send them to the gallows , do you fire them , do you ask them to not say anything , is it ok to be drunk on the job and accidentally run into a few people with a fork truck and explain that to their kids . Do they have rights .
Normally with a union shop , it goes to become a union/company matter and this results in usually a < go to rehab , go get help situation > where the employee is rehabilitated and re-enters the work force at some point .
The employee is rehabilitated after a suspension .

In Pro sports all of the sudden the nut is cracked in a different way. A lot of things are the same in the chances one gets , with one exception .
The Bosses and their dedicated team of specialists actually supply the dope . or administer the dope or open the channels to the dope train .
So that would be like a company leaving an open box of cold beer on the shop floor during a heat wave while your suited up and trying to weld something , or whatever your doing .

The ones accepting the bribes and the ones that are the directors the cover up artists , the presidents , CEO's , and all others that are included in the culture and feeding that culture should be doing the time , banned or
or suspended from any more involvement in the sport .

The very least , if the public is kind , is to allow these people to resign . The monies that they would normally get , should NOT be given out in forms of golden parachutes . Period .

LA would of never won 7 tour titles had everyone done their job and nailed the dope offences to the wall for all to see . LA would of had to take his 2 year penalty , and every other penalty in succession , and sooner or later it does get harder to train and win if you are not privy to a privileged drug testing , warning or system.

So basicly , Mcquak is just trying to protect himself when he says all the derrogatory remarks about Tyler or Floyd . That is what we all see .

I bet the poop goes even higher when major corporations are involved . That could be really nasty when the American publics trust has been once again deceived .
Which corporation has the most to lose , when it comes to donations . How high does it really go?
Answer that and you answer why it took so long to get to the bottom of this .

Something to think about .
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Only one day after i wrote the above , there is an article by Mercer , stating many of the same concerns .
Also another article regarding just how high up the attempted coercion went .
I believe there is even more . Wait for it .

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mercier-the-uci-must-get-rid-of-pat-mcquaid

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-armstrongs-influence-extends-beyond-sport

If something isnt done soon with the top brass , that have contributed so much crap to this ultimate scandle , it will start hurting the cycling industry itself , very soon .
All of the progress that has been made in getting people back on bikes and a healthier lifestyle will be wiped out again . The last thing we need again is lack of enthusiasim regarding riding and sales in the industry.
 
I don't know if this already surfaced on this forum, but couldn't find it. As I mentioned a few days ago in one or two threads, I was very happy with the reaction of Marcel Winters, chairman of the Dutch cycling federation, that he wanted an investigation in the UCI and clarification of the matters touched upon in the USADA report.

Pat McQuaid was asked about this in the press conference on Monday afternoon, I think in a one-to-one interview afterwards. His reaction: "Let the head of the Dutch cycling federation look after Dutch cycling. I am elected to be head of cycling worldwide and I will continue to do that".

http://pauwenwitteman.vara.nl/Fragment-detail.1548.0.html?&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=27651&tx_ttnews[backPid]=116&cHash=5cd6fa3d8200e263ce85d2a07d7047a9 approximately 1:50 - 2:03.

I knew the UCI was bad, but it's such a pity that we're at a point that could be a turning point and the UCI is doing everything to stop it :(
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY