- Aug 13, 2009
haha, lovely.Wallace said:Thanks for the link RR. Great piece. Favorite Ashenden quote from the interview:
"Armstrong asking Saugy how the EPO test works is a bit like walking into a bank and asking the manager to show how the lock on the safe operates. But in the case of Saugy already knowing that Armstrong had suspicious results, I’d extend that analogy to having a balaclava in one hand when you approached the bank manager."
MA: First, please don’t use the word donate during this interview. Call it a pineapple, call it a bazooka, call it anything you like but please don’t characterise it as a donation.
You know, it’s an aspect that truly puzzles me. In most walks of life, if an authority was found to have accepted a secret payment from someone it polices and for whom it had grounds to suspect had flouted their rules, there would be an uproar. Where sport is concerned, the public seems to shrug its collective shoulders in resignation. Perhaps we’ve been desensitized by Olympic bribery scandals, match fixing or the whole FIFA fiasco. But in my view, anyone with a moral compass should be outraged that the people who took Armstrong’s money under those circumstances continue to cling to office.
in-friggin-deedBut there is an additional layer where the UCI is concerned, because nowadays the UCI only pays for about 15% of their antidoping budget. The remaining 85% is contributed by the teams, race organisers and the riders themselves. The UCI are essentially just administering the program, not paying for it. It beggars belief to think that the UCI would take the rider’s money, but reserve a right to decide which of them got a warning and which of them got targeted then blasted out of the sport.
If the teams and race organisers are happy to keep paying their dues under those circumstances, they should be ashamed of themselves. It’s on issues like that Bradley Wiggins and Cadel Evans should be taking a stand on behalf of the expendables.
good point.python said:...
But was showing new angles in the uci corruption prior to that formal investigation helpfully to kimmage's cause?
Mrs John Murphy said:I think we're seeing more and more how the traditional media is being bypassed and left behind.
The reality is that Andy Shen is a smart guy - pretty much smarter than most people involved in cycling reportage.
Yes, but considering that most of CN has spent the last month in therapy after the USADA report, I don't want to be too harsh on them. It must really suck for them to have spent the last 15 years pimping themselves out to Armstrong and sucking on his teat for copy. Now all they have is trying to be the man on twitter, sucking up the the UCI, cats and being permanently offended and writing sucky puff pieces.blackcat said:thats not much of a compliment to Andy. I think we can do better than that. Chapeau Andy. Not a fanboi of The Daily Show and Jon Stewart, but I think the comparison is apt. I am more a Colbert man. And Sarah Silverman woman. She should get her own gig.